BuryHurvlt;r, f slitulei ,in' .Boone ]%WHflhip|t t1 ooflnJy; at a rwent action, by Davl 1 Delicliars:' “ LI am aware that Ibis' word grates harshly, upon an American ear. Numerous object ions are earnestly urged against it. it is asked: Is not-compulsory education., incompatible with parental and filial relations? Does not such n law interfere with the prerogatives and dutiesof u parent toward -his child, and should the civil authority go within the family circle, under any pretense? Rights more precious .thaii life bo-long to children. Protection, tood, raiment, and an education are inherent rights of every child. To furnish these is the highest obligation of every parent, from which inability alone can excuse. Jt is no discretionary power contered. It is a weighty obligation imposed. A parent who sends his son into the world uneducated, and without skill in any art or science, docs a great injury to mankind, as well us to his own family, for he defraudc ti e community of a usclnl citizen arid bequeaths to it a nuisance. Shall this obligation be made a legal duty? This question is assuming greater importance every year. It is pressing itself more closely upon the attention of the Legislatures, of diffcrnt StatcR. A few have responded affirmatively; others hesitate. Indiana can not remain silent much longer. Some moral obligations are enforced b}-legal sanction, which-others aro not. While little or no inconvenience is felt from the neglect ot a moral obliteration, the State will not interfero. But when its neglect bccomos the cause of great injuries, she will interfere for her own sake. It is both the right and duty of the State, to protect herself from mischief, and to do it by striking at the cause itself. Compulsory education under a somewhat repulsive name is one of the noblest rights of men, the right of every man to a good common school education. This is the fundamental law and champion of civilization. For if you would make a great and glorious nation, you must give the little ones, a thorough education.' Compulsory cdueation protects nine out of ten, who are educating their children, against the one who is cruel towards his children and the community, is counteracting what the other nine aro doing. It it is right to tax the property ot all, for the education of all, it is equally right to see that all are educated. Compulsory education is no compulsion on parents or guardians that wish to educate their children, it is to compel those who neglect it. The child must be sent to school. This is the duty of parents and guardiaus, but if they fail, it becomes the duty of the State. The lawinlimates 110 interference with parental rights. It guards the rights of the child, when the parent neglects it. To show that we need compulsory education I will Btate that by the census ot 1872, that the illiterate ot Indiana aggregate: One hundred and twenty-seven thousand ami fifteen; from ten years to twenty one, 26,67:1; from fifteen to twenty-one, 15,618. About 7£ per cent, of our entire population are unable to read and write. Also costs: ‘Ilf. 7-37 per C'lit.—Total Enumeration 031,539 fofl. 0-36 per cent. Enrollment- in neb'iol 459,651 Micli/4 99 per cent.—Av. attendance 295,125 Minn. 5*679 per ct.—Tuition Revenue *346 Ohio 5-74 per cent.—Tuition Revenue 9454 Tuition Rev. per capita daily attendance 735Special “ “ “ Enrollment.........218To u “ “ Enrollment..........306Do “ “ “daily attendance...; 456Total cost 14 44 Ennmmeratlon.... 5G1Do 44 44 44 Enrollment 8 €0Do ** ** “ Av. attendance.....12(3Common School Fund..........— $8,437,59347The census of the illiteracy of our State, is the best argument that I can brinir forward in favor ot Compulsory Education, .and that it has been tried in other States and counties, and found beneficial.Yours, D. Deuchars.