When the universities came into existence in the early thirteenth

century social conditions were about as bad as can well be imagined.

The incursions of the Goths had rubbed out all the old Roman law and

the customs of the various nations had been obliterated in the

disorder of the migration of the nations, when might absolutely made

right. Gradually out of the inevitable lawlessness of the Dark Ages

the Church, by her beneficent influence, brought the beginnings of

{418} law and order so far as barbarous peoples could be lifted up. In

the sixth century there was nearly everywhere in Europe social chaos.

During the next centuries came the gradual uplift. Christianity in

Ireland did much even in the preceding century, and then helped in the

regeneration of Europe in the succeeding centuries. Charlemagne helped

greatly, as his name chronicles, and Alfred, well deserving of the

name the Great, carried on his work. In the tenth century everywhere

the dawn of better things was to be seen. In the eleventh century

organization of civil rights begins to make itself felt; in the

twelfth century the universities were coming into existence; and then

with the thirteenth century there was a great rejuvenescence of

humanity in every department, but, above all, in the social order.

Under feudalism men had no rights of themselves except such as were

conferred on them by some external agency. In the thirteenth century

the essential rights of man begin to make themselves felt and find

confident assertion.

It is not hard to trace the steps of the development. Magna Charta was

signed in 1215. The First English Parliament met in 1257. The

representative nature of that parliament became complete in the next

twenty years. The English Common Law was put into form about the

beginning of the last quarter of the century and in 1282 Bracton

published his great digest of it. The principle there shall be no

taxation without {419} representation, our own basis for the

Declaration of Independence five centuries later, was proclaimed as

early as 1260 and was emphasized by the great Pope Boniface VIII at

the end of the century. Early in the century, the great Lateran

Council decreed that every diocese in the world should have a college

and that the Metropolitan Sees at least should have such opportunities

for post-graduate study as we now call universities. The first great

Pope of the century, Innocent III, laid the foundation of a great City

Hospital in Rome and required that every bishop throughout the world

should have one in his See and that the model of it should be that of

the Santo Spirito Hospital in Rome. Leprosy was an epidemic disease

among the people, somewhat as tuberculosis is now; measures were taken

for the segregation of lepers, leper hospitals were built for them

outside of the town, and these great generations solved a problem in

hygiene as difficult as is ours with regard to tuberculosis.

Above all, the rights of the people were assured to them. At the

beginning of the century probably the most striking thing among the

population of the various towns, if a modern had a chance to visit

them, would be the number of the maimed and the halt and the blind. We

would be apt to wonder where were the industrial and manufacturing

plants responsible for all this maiming of the people, and look in

vain for the belching chimneys of factories or trains. It was {420}

another form of selfishness that produced cripples in the twelfth

century. Punishment was by maiming. For offences against property a

man lost an eye, or a hand, or a leg. Very often the offences were of

a kind that we would resent punishment for in the modern time. If a

man were caught poaching on a nobleman's preserves of game, and

sometimes it was the hunger of his children that drove him to it, he

lost a hand. For a second offence, he lost an eye. For failures to pay

various taxes, if the offence were repeated, maiming was likely to be

the consequence. All this was in as perfect accordance with law as our

fellow-servant or contributory-negligence doctrines. So that the

sight of the maimed person might deter others from following this

example of recalcitrancy, it was hoped that these cripples would not

die, though in the imperfect surgery of the time they often did.

Always the selfish pleasures of the upper classes so-called, when they

are thoughtless, mean the loss of all possibilities of happiness for

the lower classes. The ways of it all may be different from age to

age, the results and the responsibility are always the same.

In the thirteenth century all this was changed. St. Louis of France

sent one of his greatest noblemen who had unreasonably punished

student poachers on a penitential pilgrimage to the Holy Land and

inflicted a heavy fine, and all notwithstanding the protest of the

most powerful nobles {421} of his kingdom whose rights were invaded.

How we do always hear about the invasion of the rights of the

entrenched classes. In England men, even men without any patent of

nobility or clerical privilege, began to have rights and others had

duties towards them. Above all, men were given opportunities to bring

out what was best in them. The great cathedrals were built, the great

monasteries, some of the greatest castles, some of the fine colleges

at the universities. Many of the municipal buildings were erected in

the glorious architecture of the times. At these men were employed in

what is probably the happiest work that a man can do. They had the

chance to express themselves in the beautiful achievements of their

hands. The village blacksmith made gates, and locks, and bolts, and

hinges for cathedrals that are so beautiful that all the world has

wondered at them ever since. The stained glass is the finest ever

made. The illuminated books are beautiful beyond description, the

handsomest of all times. The needlework of the vestments stands out as

the most beautiful in history. The men and women who did these things

were happy in the execution of beautiful works of art, and as the

population was only scanty a large proportion of them were closer to

beautiful things than the world has ever known.

Blessed is the man who has found his work. These men had found their

work and were happy. Instead of going out to the deadly routine of

{422} work they did not like, but that they had to do, because they

must earn enough so as to get bread enough to eat for themselves and

family, so that they might live and go out and work once more

to-morrow and to-morrow, and so on to the end of recorded time, the

workman dreamt of the beauty that he might express; went out hoping to

achieve it; failed often but still hoped, and hope is life's best

consolation; came away reluctantly, thinking that surely he would

accomplish something on the morrow. It is the difference between mere

routine work and the handicraftsmanship that satisfies because it

occupies the whole man. Is it any wonder that our workman is

discontented; is it any wonder that the England of that time should be

called merry England and the France and Italy gay France and Italy?

All this organization of the workmen was accomplished by the

university men of the time. They were mainly clergymen, but they had

in them not only the wish, but the faculty to help those around them,

and so there arose the beautiful creations of that time in art,

architecture, literature and political freedom which did so much for

the masses of the people. There were more students at the universities

at the end of the thirteenth century to the population of the various

countries of Europe than there are at the present time. That seems

impossible, but so do all the other achievements of the thirteenth

century,--their cathedrals, their arts and crafts, their {423}

universities, their literature,--until you go back to study them.

There is absolutely no doubt about these statistics. These university

men were trained to self-government and to the government of others in

the university life of the time. They took that training out with

them, not for selfish purposes alone, but for the help of others. What

they accomplished is to be found in the social uplift that followed.

There is scarcely a right or a development of liberty that we have now

that cannot be found, in germ at least, often in complete evolution,

in the thirteenth century. The Supreme Courts of most of our states

still make their decisions following the old English common law which

was laid down in that century.

But it will be said, while so much was done for the workman, have we

not heard that his wages were a few cents, almost nothing, and that

his hours were long and he was little better than a slave? Only the

first portion of this has any truth in it. He did get what seems to us

a mere pittance for his day's wages. As pointed out by M. Urbain

Gohier, the French socialist, when he visited this country to lecture

a few years ago, the workmen of this time had already obtained the

eight-hour day, the three eights as they are called, eight hours of

work, eight hours for sleep and eight hours for themselves. Besides

they had the Saturday half-holiday, or at least, after the Vesper

hour, work could not be required of them, and there was more than one

holy-day of {424} obligation every two weeks, on which they did not

work, and on the Vigil of which work ceased at four o'clock. As for

their wages, by Act of Parliament they got fourpence a day at the end

of the century and this does not seem much, but the same Act of

Parliament set the minimum wage and the maximum price that could be

charged for the necessities of life. A pair of hand-made shoes could

be bought for fourpence, and no workman can do anything like that for

a day's wage at the present or usually for more than double his daily

wages. A fat goose cost but twopence halfpenny, and when the father of

a family can buy two fat geese for his daily wages, there is no danger

of the family starving. Our wages are higher, but the necessities of

life have gone up so high that the wages can scarcely touch them.

In the parliament that passed these laws the greater proportion were

college men. I suppose probably three-fourths of the members of both

houses had been at the university. Now that the question of the

abolition of the House of Lords is occupying much attention, we

sometimes hear of it as a mediaeval institution. It is spoken of as an

inheritance from an earlier and ruder time. I wonder how much the

people who talk thus know about the realities. They must be densely

ignorant of what the House of Lords used to be. At the present moment

there are in the English House of Lords 627 members, only {425} 75 of

whom do not owe their position directly or solely to the accident of

birth. Even about half of this seventy-five can only be selected from

the hereditary nobility of Scotland and of Ireland. In the Middle Ages

it was quite different. Until the reformation so-called the Lords

Spiritual formed a majority of the House of Lords. They consisted not

only of the bishops but of the abbots and priors of monasteries and

the masters of the various religious and knightly orders. This upper

chamber of the olden time was elected in the best possible sense of

the word. They were usually men who had risen from the ranks of the

people and who had been chosen because of their unselfishness to be

heads of religious houses and religious orders. There were abuses by

which some of these Lords Spiritual obtained their places by what we

now call pull, but the great majority of them were selected for their

virtues, and because they had shown their power to rule over

themselves had been chosen to rule over others.

They were men who could own nothing for themselves and families, and

in whom every motive, human and divine, appealed to make life as happy

as possible for others. They were all of them university men. Compare

for a moment the present House of Lords with that House of Lords and

you will see the difference between the old time and the present. No

wonder England was merry England, no wonder historian {426} after

historian has declared that the people were happier at this time than

they have ever been before or since, no wonder men had leisure to make

great monuments of genius in architecture, in the arts and in

literature. No wonder the universities, in the form in which they have

been useful to mankind ever since, were organized in this century; no

wonder all our rights and liberties come to us. Great generations of

the university men nobly did their work.

Young men, you are graduating from a college that is literally a

lineal descendant of those old-time universities. You have had the

training of heart and of will as well as of mind that was given to

these students of the olden times. You have been taught that the end

of life is not self, but that life shall mean something for others as

well as yourself, that every action shall be looked at from the

standpoint of what it means for others as well as for yourselves, and

that you shall never do anything that will even remotely injure

others.

You are not only going to lead honest but honorable lives. You are

going to be true to yourselves first, but absolutely faithful to

others. They are telling a story in New York now that, perhaps, some

of you have heard. It is of the young man who had graduated at the

head of his class at the high school and delighted his old father's

heart. He kept up the good work, and came out first in his class at

college. Then, when {427} he led a large class at the law school, you

can understand how proud the old gentleman was. Tom came home to

practise law in a long-established firm where there was an opening for

him. Some six months later he said, one day, to his father, "Well, I

made $10,000 to-day," and the old gentleman said, "Well, Tom, that is

a good deal of money to make. I hope you made it honestly." The young

man lifted his head and said, "You can be sure that I would not make

it dishonestly." "That is right," the old man said. "Tell us how it

came about." Then Tom told how he knew that a trolley line was going

to run out far from town and that he had secured an option on some

property through which it was going to pass. "You know old Farmer

Simpson out on the Plank Road?" he said. "His boys have left him and

gone to the city; he cannot work his farm any longer himself, and he

cannot hire men for it, and he wants to get rid of it. I got positive

information yesterday through one of our clients that a trolley line

is going out through that farm. When I went out to see the old man he

knew me at once, spoke about you, and when I offered to try to sell

the farm for him and suggested the advisability of signing an option

on it to me at a definite figure, so that I may be able to close the

price with any one who wanted it, he signed at once at a ridiculously

low figure because, though, as he said, he did not care to sign the

papers for lawyer folk, {428} he knew I was different. I have got the

farm at so low a price that $10,000 is the smallest profit I can look

for. I think I will get that profit out of the company for the right

of way, and then I will have the rest of the farm for myself. It will

make a mighty nice country place."

Then there was a pause. The old gentleman did not lighten up any over

the story, as Tom seemed to think he would. After a minute's silence

the old man said, "Well, Tom, that was not what I sent you to college

and law school for, to come out here and take advantage of my old

neighbors. I thought that you would be helpful to us all, and that

there would be more of happiness in the world because of your

education. You may call that transaction honest, and perhaps it is

legal, but I know that it is dishonorable. Tom, if you don't give

Farmer Simpson back his option I do not think I want you to live here

with me any more. Somehow I couldn't feel as if I could hold up my

head if ever I passed Farmer Simpson and his wife, if you did. You may

act as his attorney if you will and take a good fair fee for it, but

you must not absorb all the profits just because the old man is in

trouble and is glad to trust an old neighbor's son."

Of course Tom's father was dreadfully old-fashioned and out of date.

Of course there are some people who will say that this sort of thing

is quixotic. Now, this sort of thing is what higher education should

mean, and does mean, in a {429} Catholic college. Your principles are

not taught you for the sake of exercises of piety, nor attendance at

religious duties. These you have got to do anyhow, but they are meant

to inflow into every action of your life and to make the basic

principle of them all, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

You are graduating from a Catholic college with high aims, you have

had many advantages, more than are accorded usually in our time to men

of your years in the training of heart and will as well as intellect,

and much is expected of you. You are rich in real education and a

stewardship of great intellectual and moral wealth is given over to

you, and you must be better than others and be, above all, ever

helpful to others. Your education was not given for your benefit, but

for that of the community. Your neighbors are all round you. See that

at the end of your life they shall all be happier because you have

lived. If you do not do so you shall sadly disappoint the hopes of

your teachers and, above all, you shall be false to the trust that has

been confided to you.

Pass on the torch of charity. Let all the world be dear to you in the

old-fashioned sense of that dear old word charity, not merely

distantly friendly in the new-fangled sense of the long Greek term

philanthropy. Be just while you are living your lives and you will not

have the burden of philanthropy that so many rich men are now

complaining of in your older years, and, above all, {430} you will not

have the contempt and aversion of those who may accept your bounty,

but who know how questionably you acquired the means of giving it and

are not really thankful.

I have done but for just one word. Be just and fear not. If you will

be just in your dealing with men, you will have no need for further

advice and no need for repentance. I thank you.

{431}

NEW ENGLANDISM

{432}

"It isn't so much the ignorance of mankind that makes them

ridiculous as the knowing so many things that ain't so."

--Josh Billings, _writing as "Uncle Esek" in the "Century."_

{433}

NEW ENGLANDISM [Footnote 27]

[Footnote 27: The material for this was collected for a banquet

address in Boston on Evacuation Day, 1909, before the Knights of

Columbus. It was developed for various lectures on the history of

education, in order to illustrate how easy it is to produce a

tradition which is not supported by historical documents. In its

present form it appeared as an article in the _West Coast Magazine_

for July, 1910, at the request of the editor, Mr. John S. McGroarty,

with whom, more years ago than either of us care to recall now, I

had learned the New England brand of United States history at a

country school.]

There is a little story told of a supposed recent celestial

experience, that seems, to some people, at least--perhaps it may be

said without exaggeration, to most of those alas! not born in New

England--to illustrate very well the attitude of New Englanders, and

especially of the Bostonese portion of the New England population,

towards all the rest of the world and the heavens besides. St. Peter,

the celestial gate-keeper, is supposed to be disturbed from the

slumbers that have been possible so much oftener of late years because

of the infrequent admissions since the world has lost interest in

other-worldliness, by an imperious knocking at the gate. "Who's

there?" he asks in a very mild voice, for he knows by long experience

that that kind of knocking usually comes from some grand dame from the

terrestrial regions. The reply, in rather imperative {434} tone, is,

"I am Mrs. Beacon from Boston," with emphasis on the Boston, "Well,

madam," Peter says in reply, "you may come in, but," he adds with a

wisdom learned doubtless from many previous incidents of the same

kind, "you won't like it."

Of course, the thoroughgoing admiration of New England people, and

especially of Bostonians, for all that is New England, and, above all,

all that is Boston, has been well recognized for a long while and has

not failed of proper appreciation, to some degree at least, even in

New England itself. To Oliver Wendell Holmes we owe that delightful

characterization of it in the "Autocrat of the Breakfast Table,"

"Boston State House is the hub of the solar system. You could not pry

that out of a Boston man (and _a fortiori_ I think it may be said out

of a Boston woman) if you had the tire of all creation straightened

out for a crowbar." James Russell Lowell expressed the same idea very

forcibly in other words in some expressions of his essay on "A Certain

Condescension in Foreigners," that have been perhaps oftenest quoted

and are dear to every true New Englander's heart. Of course, he meant

it a great deal more than half in jest, but who of us who know our

Down Easterners doubt that most of them take it considerably more than

half in earnest? Their attitude shows us very well how much the

daughter New England was ready to take after mother England in {435}

the matter of thinking so much of herself that she must perforce be

condescending to others.

Lowell's expression is worthy to be placed beside that of Oliver

Wendell Holmes for the guidance of American minds. They are keys to

the situation. "I know one person," said Lowell, "who is singular

enough to think Cambridge (Mass.) the very best spot on the habitable

globe. 'Doubtless God could have made a better, but doubtless he never

did.'" It only needed his next sentence fully to complete the

significance of Boston and its academic suburb in the eyes of every

good Bostonian. "The full tide of human existence may be felt here as

keenly as Johnson felt it at Charing Cross and in a larger sense."

Of course there is no insuperable objection to allowing New Englanders

to add to the gayety of nations in this supreme occupation with

themselves, and we would gladly suffer them if only they would not

intrude their New Englandism on some of the most important concerns of

the nation. But that is impossible, for New Englandism is most

obtrusive. It is New England that has written most of the history of

this country and its influence has been paramount on most of our

education. It has supplied most of the writers of history and moulded

most of the school-teachers of the country. The consequence has been a

stamping of New Englandism all over our history and on the minds of

rising generations for the better part of a century, with a {436}

perversion of the realities of history in favor of New England that is

quite startling when attention is particularly directed to it.

The editors of the "Cambridge modern History," in their preface,

called attention to the immense differences between what may be called

documentary and traditional history. They declare that it has become

"impossible for historical writers of the present age to trust without

reserve even to the most respected secondary authorities. The honest

student finds himself continually deserted, retarded, misled, by the

classics of historical literature, and has to hew his own way through

multitudinous transactions, periodicals, and official publications in

order to reach the truth." Most people reading this would be prone to

think that any such arraignment of American history, as is thus made

by the distinguished Cambridge editors of history in general, would be

quite out of the question. After all, our history, properly speaking,

extends only over a couple of centuries and we would presumably be too

close to the events for any serious distortion of them to have been

made. For that reason it is interesting to realize what an unfortunate

influence the fact that our writers have come mainly from New England

and have been full of the New England spirit has had on our American

history.

Education: How Old The New · 第 24 / 26 段