300 History of Wake Forest College
as it had done in Michigan, Wisconsin and some other Western States.
Over against this view he set this second view:
On the other hand, there are those who believe that it is not wise for a State to
undertake functions which can be equally well performed by private or corporate
parties; that a State should maintain a system of public school instruction for the
children of all classes; that this amount of educational work by the State cannot be
done by private enterprise, and is justified on the ground of its necessity for the pro-
tection and preservation of the State, and on this ground alone; that the needs of this
common school system are so great and pressing, at least in the South, that the State
should spend all of its revenues which are available for educational purposes for the
supply of these needs; that larger and better results can be secured for education
under the voluntary system than under any other, and that the use of revenues
derived from taxation of all the people for the education of only a few is not in
accord with the genius and equity of free institutions.
In the remaining sections of the paper Dr. Taylor contends that this
second view rather than the first view correctly states how far a State
should undertake to educate, that support of public schools is the
proper function of a State, but higher education should be left to
private and corporate enterprise. This made it necessary for the author
all through his arguments to set the obligation of the State to support
public schools over against the obligation to support higher
educational institutions. He arranged his argument under three heads,
answering three questions
1. Is it right for a State to undertake to supply all the demand for
higher education within her borders?
2. Is it expedient for a State in the present condition of North
Carolina to undertake to do so?
3. Is it possible for a State to supply the kind of training for her
youth without committing itself to some special form of religious
belief ?
Dr. Taylor's argument brings a negative answer to each of these
three questions. It is possible here to follow his argument only in
brief. To the answer of the first question he devotes
Previous Page Next Page