the amount of fencing he does for the common inclosure, and his portion of water by the work he performs on the main canal dug for purposes of irrigation. He obtains his land title from the national government and his water certificate from the local court. There is no bondage in the system, either of a social, religious, or political character; but it is one that deserves the commendation of every rational observer, and would obtain the admiration of the world if properly understood.

The Mormon system is a practical embodiment of the Christian precept, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself." It is not to be expected that an imperfect people will perfectly live by a perfect principle. But it is held up before them, not merely as a sentiment to admire, but as a commandment to obey, a standard which they may reach by steady improvement. Therefore they are helpful to each other as well as worshipful to God, and while each individual is owner of his own accumulations, co-operation for the general welfare is deemed a religious duty. Union is urged and mutuality of interests cultivated. But the agency of each human being, and his personal responsibility and accountability to God for his individual actions, and the doctrine that the height of a man's eternal glory will be proportionate to his elevation and perfection of character, are made the spur to his achievements, and not any priestly force or lurid terrors or threats of present or prospective torment. Mormon co-operation is voluntary, Mormon union is that of common belief and purpose and oneness of spirit and intent. It is strange that people who have no words of admiration too strong for the Christian injunc tion to perfect unity and love to one's neighbor as a matter of sentiment, should find fault with the Mormons and think them unworthy of the blessings of free government because they endeavor to carry those injunctions into actual every-day life.

Captain Dutton admits that "there is no enforcement, in the strict sense of the word;" that "force is not necessary," and that "it would not be employed if it were." And yet he talks of "the arbitrary and capricious rule of a dictator," and declares that "suffrage is a farce," and that "the Mormon is told by his bishop for whom he must vote, and he obeys." It is evident

that the gallant officer, like nearly every non-Mormon who writes on this subject, advances his own theories or repeats what he has been told, instead of relating what he has seen and explaining what he really understands. No one will dispute with him that "large communities and important interests can be safely regulated only by fixed laws, which must have the stable. character of statutes." They have never been regulated otherwise in the Territory of Utah, and would not be under the government of the proposed State. The statute books are the witness of the first assertion, the Constitution recently offered to Congress gives proof of the other

The gentleman's attempt to explain the establishment and decease of the "United Order," to which he has added the ancient name of "Enoch," is to be classed with his other endeavors to enlighten the public on something he does not comprehend himself. Some years ago societies under the name of the United Order were organized in a few settlements, on the principle of communal labor. But the "wealth, land, labor, and capital" were not, as he asserts, "to become the property of the church, and to be managed at its discretion." Each society managed its own property, and was a distinct organization. When these societies. disbanded, the land reverted to its original owners, and each shareholder received his proper proportion of the assets. "general bankruptcy " ever occurred in the history of Utah, and it is doubtful if any one but Captain Dutton ever heard or thought of such a catastrophe.

On examination, it appears that the gentleman's objections to the admission of Utah as a State are in that condition which he describes as the result of the establishment of the United Order. He probably had no intention to misrepresent. He has given the Mormons, who have undertaken the movement for Statehood, due credit for sincerity. He says, "Quite probably they are willing to make large promises to secure independence, and with every intention to keep them." He also admits, in effect, that the polygamy question, a mountain in the eyes of the public, is but a molehill in reality, which the monogamous Mormons, who hold the political power in Utah, have undertaken to dispose of, if permitted. His supposed union of church and state, self-per

petuating hierarchy, land-distributing bishops, surrender of real and personal property to the church, etc., are myths. And there is not a community of equal numbers in the United States that possesses, in a higher degree, the essential qualifications for the duties and responsibilities of free government, than the people who have transformed the sterile and arid wastes of the Rocky Mountains into fertile fields, smiling gardens, and inviting spots for the enterprising capitalist as well as the hungry political adventurer.

It cannot be said that the Constitution under which the monogamous citizens of Utah are asking admission into the Union does not provide for "a republican form of government." It contains the best provisions for this purpose to be found in the later constitutions of the several States. It forbids the union of church and state, a religious test for voters or office-holders, the teaching of any denominational or sectarian doctrine in the public schools, the rejection of teachers on account of religious belief, and discrimination against foreigners as to rights of property. It provides for a uniform system of taxation, equality of all citizens before the law and at the polls, a secret ballot, freedom of speech and of the press, and the punishment of bigamy and polygamy by a maximum penalty of a thousand dollars' fine and three years' imprisonment.

In order to meet anticipated objections, it made the antipolygamy clauses irrevocable without the consent of Congress. This provision is viewed by some leading men as an unconstitutional surrender of State sovereignty, and by others as within the legitimate powers of the people, and as a compact with the national government which would be valid and capable of enforcement. But in either case the admission of Utah does not, and should not, depend upon that proposition. It may be expunged without damage to the instrument. The good faith of the citizens must, after all, determine the matter in controversy. That they are in earnest, no candid person familiar with the facts will attempt to deny. They are not, and never have been, polyg amists. Their reputation for sincerity and fulfillment of obligations and contracts cannot be excelled. All their material interests urge them to the course they have marked out. Their

lives of obedience to law, and their oath-bound promise for the future, are their guarantee of fidelity. They are not foolish enough to think they can play fast and loose with a government backed by the public sentiment of sixty millions.

Their religion enjoins obedience to constitutional law. It commands subjection to "the powers that be" until Christ comes to reign. It draws a sharp line of demarkation between the church and the state. It blends the destiny of its devotees with that of the government formed under the supreme law of the land. It declares the national Constitution to be divinely in spired. It announces the right of all people to freedom of faith and worship, and accountability for these to Deity alone. It proclaims the word of the Lord, but recognizes the voice of the people as the determining power in all matters of earthly government, both secular and ecclesiastical. These are among its fundamentals. They are to be found in the revelations that are regarded by the Mormons as divine. If there has been anything despotic or tyrannical or that has infringed in any way on the full liberty of the citizen in the past administration of Mormon affairs, it has not been a legitimate exercise of powers granted or permitted by the Mormon creed or inhering in its priesthood, but an excess of authority repugnant to the spirit and letter of the revelations on which the Mormon Church is founded, and which form its permanent guide and end of controversy.

I speak as a member of thirty-eight years' standing, and one familiar with its doctrines, teachings, and history. I know that what I state is true; and, understanding the situation, I do not hesitate to say that the "blunder" of this nation will not be in admitting into the union of States a commonwealth of frugal, temperate, industrious, and progressive citizens, who opened the Pacific slope to civilization, and have rendered possible the formation of several populous and wealthy States where desolation reigned supreme, but it will be in rejecting the offer of the lawabiding people of Utah to settle the only real question of difference between the Mormons and the country, and in spurning their just claims and earnest efforts because their religious belief is unorthodox.

CHARLES W. PENROSE.

WHAT SHALL THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS TEACH?

A RESOLUTION is reported as having passed both branches of the Massachusetts Legislature of 1886-87, which "requests the State Board of Education to consider the expediency of revising the entire course of studies in the public schools of the State," and to report to the next legislature. A prominent eastern Massachusetts clergyman is reported as having declared that he always refused to sign a petition for an additional study in the public schools, on the ground that too many studies are pursued in them already. On the basis of these texts, and of all beneath the surface of which they are the evident sign, I would offer some remarks in aid of clear and well-grounded thinking on the important question, What are the real essentials of publicschool education?

Here, adopting and expanding a famous saying of Lord Bacon's, we may say, reading makes a full man; writing makes an exact man; speaking makes a ready man. Also, thinking makes a wise man; feeling makes an active man; doing makes a practical man; and we venture to believe that this second triplet is as important as the first. The contrast between reading and thinking is the root of that between knowl edge, or acquaintance with facts, and wisdom, or the power to make good use of knowledge. The contrast between speaking and doing appears in the constant expressions, Will he do as he says? That is what he says, but what will he do about it? Writing, just because it is speech without the speaker, compels to especial exactness, to compensate for the absence of all the side streams of meaning that flow into spoken words from look and tone and gesture. Feeling, moreover, supplies the motive, according to which the end of doing is good or bad. Now, all these elements being a condensed summary of life, we declare the business of the public schools to be to start the young on the