Dear Mr. Mann,
Recently it has come to my attention that the education of our country’s young men has fallen to the Europeans. While I respect the venerated educational institutions of Europe, I believe that the Republic would benefit greatly from citizens educated within our own country. As you well know, “the principle of patriotism stands in need of the reinforcement of prejudice, and it is well known that our strongest prejudices in favour of our country are formed in the first one and twenty years of our lives.” This need to reinforce strong prejudices (which will in turn strengthen the Republic) cannot be met by professors who themselves were educated in and therefore loyal to European schools of thought. No, instead we need men learned in American history and imbued with American pride. These learned men can then in turn educate others in a uniformed manner, producing a homogenous population with the same ideals and dispositions.
A uniform educational system is especially important in those parts of the country which house men who originate from many different nations. Pennsylvania comes to mind on this front where Dutch men live alongside German men, toiling in time to feed their families and yet holding differing ideals on the proper form of government and their individual place within society. Left uneducated in American ways, these differences will continue to flourish, first with their sons, then their grandsons, until eventually those neighbors will hold such disparate opinions that no reconciliation or cooperation between them will be possible.
No sir! For the strength of the union and the prosperity of the Republic I implore you and your likeminded brethren to establish with all due haste an educational system which is not only centered inside our own country but which also emphasizes the strong American values that serve as the foundation of the Republic.
Dear Mr. Rush,
I was pleased to receive your letter and energized by your obvious passion for the issue of education. I have several thoughts to add to the matter and they read as thus:
I, much like yourself, believe that an educated citizenry is the key to a strong republic. A strong republic is based on the principles of equality and “educationbeyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer of the conditions of men – the balance-wheel of the social machinery.” Only through education can a man devise the ability to resist the whims of another man whose interest is not for the public good but only for himself. An educated public leads to a strong republic.
Unlike the finite luxury of wealth, education is boundless. If one man possesses more than his share that does not impede another from gaining his own piece. On the subject of wealth, education is the most vital ingredient for improving individual and national wealth. Who among the producer class has not received his share of education and who among the producer class does not work to shore up the economic strength of the nation, either directly or inadvertently?
I too sir, see the advantages of national education within our own land. I would argue that a key responsibility of our government, as vital to national well-being as security, is providing quality education for all citizens. Common School that utilizes a standard curriculum for “all the rising generationmay become the most effective and benignant of all of the forces of civilization.” Common School steeped in secular instruction on historical, economic, and political matters is the answer then, to your plea for a more educated citizenry.
Dear Mr. Mann,
I appreciate your prompt and eloquent response to my correspondence. However, I would like to address one key point in your idea for Common School and that is religion. Although only a small part of your correspondence, your expression of a secular education troubles me for several reasons and they are as follows:
First, “the only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.” Only through religion can we establish a virtuous educational system that will add to the prosperity of the Republic. In your previous correspondence, you seemed quite concerned with the individual condition of man. While I agree that no man given the option between wealth and poverty should choose poverty (I certainly would not), a strong and prosperous Republic is the surest way to engender prosperity for its citizens.
The problem, sir, seems not to be a difference in our foundational ideals but instead a difference in how we propose to implement those ideals. We both agree (overwhelmingly I might add) that education for all citizens is vital to the security and success of our Republic. However while you propose a secular education, I propose an educational system steeped in religious principles and while I prefer those principles to follow the New Testament, I do assert that any religious principles are better than none. You say, sir, that you wish education for all citizens so that they may live as equals. I say to you that every man is equal under the Lord; only through a Christian education system will all citizens learn those divine principles of “humility, self-denial, and brotherly kindness” those principles necessary to ensure a thriving republic.
Dear Mr. Rush,
I must disagree with your reasoning for a religious-based educational system detailed in your last correspondence. In order for Common School to flourish in a society and benefit the Republic, it must be nonsectarian, that is, not affiliated with any group private nor public. If beholden to any entity other than the Republic that wishes only to promote the well-being and prosperity of its citizens, Common School could not impart a well-rounded, balanced, and nuanced education onto its pupils. Image if you will sir, the skewed view of commerce or government if taught in tandem with the principles of religion. This would not produce an intelligent and free citizenry but instead a citizenry beholden to those whom preach religious doctrine. Would this not be as detrimental to our society as a citizenry beholden to a king? No sir, I implore you to see reason. A secular system is the only educational system that could flourish in these United States.
Political partisanship is another point I would like to bring to your attention. Much the same as an educational system steeped in religious doctrine would benefit only those few religious leaders with power, an educational system slanted towards one set of political beliefs would create a perpetual ruling class of men. Imbedding political partisanship with our country’s education system would allow these men to stamp out any opposition to their power at the early age of school children. By the time a young man reached maturity, his political beliefs would be so well-formed for the majority opinion that no competing ideology, however credible, would survive in our democratic system. Competing ideals is what this Republic was founded upon and to eliminate that hope would be akin to eliminating the Republic as we know it. Therefore my dear Mr. Rush, I stand firm with my proposal of secular education; only by assuring that no system is beholden to any group or faction can we ensure the most beneficial education for all citizens.
Works Cited
Rush, Benjamin. “Thought Upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic. The School in the United States: A Documentary History. ed. James W. Fraser. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2001.
Mann, Horace. “Twelfth Annual Report.” http://news.genius.com/Horace-mann-twelfth-annual-report-to-the-secretary-of-the-massachusetts-state-board-of-education-1848-annotated. Accessed October 25, 2014.
