5

OverviewVersionsHelp

Facsimile

Transcription

Status: Indexed

-5-

these: the common defense of the members; the preservation of
the public peace, as well against internal convulsions as external
attacks; the regulation of commerce with other nations and
between states; the superintendence of our intercourse, political
and commercial, with foreign countries." (Page 136 - THE FEDERALIST,
edited by Lodge, G.P. Putnam's sons, 1888). Herein were named four
specific objects to be served by federal union; the idea was that
powers other than those named would be reserved to the states.
Now I am not one who fails to recognize that the relation between
federal government and states may change with the years. The
relation does change and it is not my thought that the concepts
expressed in THE FEDERALIST papers need remain the concepts of today.
But we now face this question: Is the problem of providing for
education so changed in its character that now it must be reckoned
not as a local but as a national problem; and must it be financed,
in part at least, from federal funds? If it must be done federally,
what will it cost in terms other than money?

There is very much in this inquiry about which we must think.
There is a drift to the concept that states, as states, are not
able longer to meet many functions of government as they should.
Education is not the only field that many times seems bigger than
state governments can solve. For example, marriage laws would be
simplified if federalized; corporation organization would be greatly
strengthened, it seems, if made a federal rather than a state
responsibility. It is obvious that there are many things which
might be better done by national rather than by state control.
But this following sentence from THE FEDERALIST says something

Notes and Questions

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page