288 Repokt 8.A.A. Advancemkxt of Hciknce. 



uriHeeinly wrangle \sliieh fur the last few years has raged round the 

 various Education Bills which have been introduced into tlie English 

 Parliament. I dogmatise only so far as to sa}'^ that the child is in the 

 first place the property of tlie State rather than of this or that religious- 

 body, and that if religion is to come within the school-room walls, it 

 shr)uld do so only to inculcate a wide and gentle tolerance. The eco- 

 nomic aspect of the case is, however, simply this, that the system by 

 which all children shall be best trained to the service of the State 

 -must in the future be so elaborate and so costly, that none but the 

 State will be able to bear the burden. Hitherto the burden has not 

 been fully borne, the child has suffered, and therefore the State has 

 lost in efficiency through the confusion of the issues of religion and 

 education. 



Possibly this cause is really dependent upon the second, for a 

 dislike of philosophical systems appears to be one of the inherent 

 prejudices of the English mind. To deal with difficulties as they 

 arise rather than to seek for deep-seated causes and so secure their 

 permanent removal, to regard all systems as temporary expedients 

 rather than lasting solutions — in a word, to compromise — seems to be 

 the basis on which many of our greatest national concerns are con- 

 ducted. There is at least this of good about it, that it marks a 

 profound belief in the national destiny, but as a practical settlement 

 of the most important of social problems, its wisdom is open to doubt. 



Tlie enormous wealth of England seems again to have played no 

 inconsiderable part in hitherto determining its educational methods. 

 In no country in the world has there been so large a proportion of 

 wealthy people. There has grown up in consequence a considerable 

 leisured class who, unfortunately for themselves, know fiom childhood 

 that they will never be called upon to work. It is this class that has 

 determined the charactt>r of our public schools. AVith many excellent 

 ideals, and as many ineffective methods, their general tendency has been 

 to turn out a type of which we may say that the few best could not be 

 better, the average might have been immensely improved, and the worst 

 could not be worse. The large association of English public school 

 boys with colonial police forces spe;dvs for itself. When we add to 

 these causes a certain mental indiscipline, which seems to be one of 

 our national characteristics, anfl is perhaps flue to the absence of 

 general military training, we get a sufficient explanation of our 

 slowness in establishing a scientific system of education, and in thus 

 promoting a higher nati(mal efficiency. 



To counteract these influences, however, there lia\ e come into plaj' 

 two forces greater still, which in the last quarter of a century appear 

 to lie at the root of the gi-eat progress which has undoubtedly been 

 made. These are 



(1) The influence of Darwinism. 



(2) The force of commercial competition. 



These two together have sounded the trumpet note that has to 

 some extent awakened the national conscience by an appeal for more 

 efiFective national methods. 



