按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
nor can I admit； that these obligations extend to requiring the
fulfilment of the contract at all costs to the happiness of the
reluctant party； but they are a necessary element in the question； and
even if； as Von Humboldt maintains； they ought to make no difference
in the legal freedom of the parties to release themselves from the
engagement （and I also hold that they ought not to make much
difference）； they necessarily make a great difference in the moral
freedom。 A person is bound to take all these circumstances into
account before resolving on a step which may affect such important
interests of others； and if he does not allow proper weight to those
interests； he is morally responsible for the wrong。 I have made
these obvious remarks for the better illustration of the general
principle of liberty； and not because they are at all needed on the
particular question； which； on the contrary； is usually discussed as
if the interest of children was everything； and that of grown
persons nothing。
I have already observed that； owing to the absence of any recognised
general principles； liberty is often granted where it should be
withheld； as well as withheld where it should be granted； and one of
the cases in which； in the modern European world； the sentiment of
liberty is the strongest； is a case where； in my view； it is
altogether misplaced。 A person should be free to do as he likes in his
own concerns； but he ought not to be free to do as he likes in
acting for another； under the pretext that the affairs of the other
are his own affairs。 The State； while it respects the liberty of
each in what specially regards himself； is bound to maintain a
vigilant control over his exercise of any power which it allows him to
possess over others。 This obligation is almost entirely disregarded in
the case of the family relations； a case； in its direct influence on
human happiness； more important than all others taken together。 The
almost despotic power of husbands over wives needs not be enlarged
upon here； because nothing more is needed for the complete removal
of the evil than that wives should have the same rights； and should
receive the protection of law in the same manner； as all other
persons； and because； on this subject； the defenders of established
injustice do not avail themselves of the plea of liberty； but stand
forth openly as the champions of power。 It is in the case of
children that misapplied notions of liberty are a real obstacle to the
fulfilment by the State of its duties。 One would almost think that a
man's children were supposed to be literally； and not
metaphorically； a part of himself； so jealous is opinion of the
smallest interference of law with his absolute and exclusive control
over them； more jealous than of almost any interference with his own
freedom of action： so much less do the generality of mankind value
liberty than power。 Consider； for example； the case of education。 Is
it not almost a self…evident axiom； that the State should require
and compel the education； up to a certain standard； of every human
being who is born its citizen？ Yet who is there that is not afraid
to recognise and assert this truth？ Hardly any one indeed will deny
that it is one of the most sacred duties of the parents （or； as law
and usage now stand； the father）； after summoning a human being into
the world； to give to that being an education fitting him to perform
his part well in life towards others and towards himself。 But while
this is unanimously declared to be the father's duty； scarcely
anybody； in this country； will bear to hear of obliging him to perform
it。 Instead of his being required to make any exertion or sacrifice
for securing education to his child； it is left to his choice to
accept it or not when it is provided gratis！ It still remains
unrecognised； that to bring a child into existence without a fair
prospect of being able； not only to provide food for its body； but
instruction and training for its mind； is a moral crime； both
against the unfortunate offspring and against society； and that if the
parent does not fulfil this obligation； the State ought to see it
fulfilled； at the charge； as far as possible； of the parent。
Were the duty of enforcing universal education once admitted there
would be an end to the difficulties about what the State should teach；
and how it should teach； which now convert the subject into a mere
battlefield for sects and parties； causing the time and labour which
should have been spent in educating to be wasted in quarreling about
education。 If the government would make up its mind to require for
every child a good education； it might save itself the trouble of
providing one。 It might leave to parents to obtain the education where
and how they pleased； and content itself with helping to pay the
school fees of the poorer classes of children； and defraying the
entire school expenses of those who have no one else to pay for
them。 The objections which are urged with reason against State
education do not apply to the enforcement of education by the State；
but to the State's taking upon itself to direct that education；
which is a totally different thing。 That the whole or any large part
of the education of the people should be in State hands； I go as far
as any one in deprecating。 All that has been said of the importance of
individuality of character； and diversity in opinions and modes of
conduct； involves； as of the same unspeakable importance； diversity of
education。 A general State education is a mere contrivance for
moulding people to be exactly like one another： and as the mould in
which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the
government； whether this be a monarch； a priesthood； an aristocracy；
or the majority of the existing generation； in proportion as it is
efficient and successful； it establishes a despotism over the mind；
leading by natural tendency to one over the body。 An education
established and controlled by the State should only exist； if it exist
at all； as one among many competing experiments； carried on for the
purpose of example and stimulus； to keep the others up to a certain
standard of excellence。 Unless； indeed； when society in general is
in so backward a state that it could not or would not provide for
itself any proper institutions of education unless the government
undertook the task： then； indeed； the government may； as the less of
two great evils； take upon itself the business of schools and
universities； as it may that of joint stock companies； when private
enterprise； in a shape fitted for undertaking great works of industry；
does not exist in the country。 But in general； if the country contains
a sufficient number of persons qualified to provide