EDITOR'S TABLE. 



555 



lished conventions, not to say fictions, of 

 the teaching profession, than if it were 

 whoHy dependent on the free response 

 of the public. 



Another objection that we make is 

 that tbe idea of using the proceeds of 

 taxation in aid of the movement gives 

 it too indeterminate a character. Prof. 

 Henderson's own language shows this. 

 " Onco established," he says, " these 

 district central offices of the Department 

 of Education might, with perfect pro- 

 priety, go a step further and provide, 

 under suitable conditions, for part of 

 the expense of an extension course 

 where the proceeds from the sale of 

 lecture-tickets were not sufficieot. "With 

 the people tLemselves directly creating 

 each center, electing their own subject, 

 choosing their own lecturer, and paying 

 for all or part of the local expense, I 

 really do not see how the movement 

 could become commonplace or merce- 

 nary in its character by being system- 

 atized under national auspices." The 

 words we have italicized are signifi- 

 cantly vague. Will it be pretended, be- 

 sides, that the agency disposing of the 

 Government grant would not have a 

 great deal to say as to the mode of its 

 application, and would not, in many 

 cases, override local choice as to sub- 

 jects and lecturers? If of two locali- 

 ties, both aspiring to the grant, one 

 fell in with all the views of the district 

 center, while another stood out for some 

 plan of studies of its own, can any one 

 doubt that the tractable locality would 

 have much the better chance of getting 

 it? Another point is that as soon as it 

 became a matter of distributing Gov- 

 ernment money, all kinds of local jeal- 

 ousies would arise ; and politicians 

 would appear upon the scene to de- 

 mand that their special localities should 

 not be neglected. "We incline to think 

 that, if Prof. Henderson could only be 

 brought into contact with two or three 

 average Congressmen wrangling over 

 what they would regard as a division 

 of the spoils, his confidence in the be- 



neficent influence of a subsidy would be 

 somewhat shaken. 



We do not know how our contribu- 

 tor arrives at the induction he puts for- 

 ward with so much confidence that 

 " the sum of American public infamy is 

 neither absolutely nor relatively so great 

 as the sura of American private infa- 

 my"; but we must be allowed to ques- 

 tion the value of the formula. We are 

 told that the Government is corrupt only 

 because the people are corrupt. There 

 is doubtless some general truth in the 

 statement ; but it ought not to be for- 

 gotten that one way in which the cor- 

 ruption of the people shows itself is in 

 taking money in taxes which they could 

 not get in any other way, and to which 

 they have no right. Appropriation-hunt- 

 ing has long since been reduced to a 

 science, and no one who has carefully 

 watched the politics of this or any other 

 democratic country can doubt that every 

 additional appropriation made by the 

 Legislature becomes to some extent an 

 additional corruption fund. Granting 

 even that the appropriation once voted 

 is honestly expended as a matter of ac- 

 count, the very granting of it in many 

 cases was an act of theft viewed from 

 one side and an act of bribery viewed 

 from another. The locality or interest 

 that clamors till it gets what it wants, 

 without regard to the general welfare, 

 virtually steals; and the combination of 

 politicians that procures the appropria- 

 tion aids in the theft for purposes of 

 bribery. To say, therefore, that such 

 money does not stick to the hands of 

 the officials who expend it is not saying 

 much. They doubtless, as Prof. Hen- 

 derson hints, are more or less compelled 

 to be honest — the dishonesty was per- 

 petrated in the passing of the vote by 

 which the money was obtained in the 

 first place. When Prof. Henderson tells 

 us that our officials are not so bad, and 

 that we should not be afraid of the 

 Government which is our own creature, 

 he misses the mark. We are not afraid 

 of the officials, whose functions are 



