statute providing for a system of free schools. Yet a free school system did not exist in the State till twenty years later. The men who made the first law have informed me that they knew at the time that there were to be no free schools, but that they intended the law to serve as an advertising agency in the East. By this means they intended to induce people who believed in free schools to come to the Territory. They hoped that the time might come when free schools would exist. What student of original sources of history would interpret aright this statute if he had no source of information but the statute itself? We learn from actual politics that a positive statute sometimes expresses an ideal, a hope, or an aspiration; sometimes it is an advertising agency. Some laws do not express anything intelligible even to the wisest of those who make them. Some laws may be accounted for only by the fact that restless men are confined to a room several hours in a day for certain months in a year with nothing to do but to make laws. Suppose now a student who, ignorant of actual politics, should undertake to construct a history out of the bare statutes of a nation. A knowledge of politics is essential to the correct reading and the correct writing of history. The per fect historian will be in politics, but he will not be of that part of politics which toler. ates the perverting of the facts of history. There has been in the world for thousands of years an ideal of a society all of whose members are lovers of the truth. From this society all who love or make a lie are excluded. According to this ancient Christian ideal it is the duty of man to have his mind ever ready to believe all truth. The actual Christian of history has not fulfilled this ideal. He has been subject to prejudices as have other men. The Christian has found it to be comparatively easy to preserve a truth-loving and a truthtelling spirit while dealing with some of his own states of mind; but to preserve the same spirit while dealing with the present evil world has been too much for him. To preserve his integrity he has been inclined to withdraw from the evil world and to occupy himself in the contemplation of an unseen world. The stress of politics has induced the Christian to obscure and practically to obliterate his ideal by dividing truth into departments which he calls higher and lower, essential and nonessential. When a lower truth seems to be in conflict with a so-called higher truth, the lower truth does not receive fair treatment. As an incident to the rapid advancement of physical science this ancient Christian ideal has been restated and has received a new name. The men who are devoting their lives to the advancement of science are dependent at every stage upon the testimony of others. One observer can see only a small part of the phenomena which he is obliged to treat. The select world of scientists has ruthlessly cast from their midst all scientific blunderers, deceivers, and liars. They will have only those who have the scientific spirit. By this they mean those who at all times maintain a truth-loving and truth-telling habit in the observing and the reporting of phenomena. The scientist would usually assent to the theory that what he calls the scientific spirit is applicable to every sort of knowledge. Stated in this form it is identical with the ancient Christian ideal. But the scientist, like the Christian, has not been able to realize his ideal outside of a limited field where the motive for lying is almost wholly lacking. The scientist wrecks his high ideal the instant he enters politics and history, where beliefs and not external phenomena are the dominant factors. Here falsehood and deception seem to be great social forces, and they appear to be susceptible to a beneficent use. If the scientist follows appearances in politics as he does in physics, he becomes naturally a Machiavellian, and recognizes lying as a great political force. The stress of politics causes the scientist, like the Christian, to divide knowledge into departments. In the study of matter he maintains a truth-loving and a truth-telling spirit. But in the study of the relations of man to man in society, deception and lying are admitted as a working hypothesis though the scientist is careful to say that this sort of knowledge is not scientific, and that the pursuit of it lacks something of the scientific spirit. It will be observed that the scientist is strong where the Christian is weak, and that the Christian is strong where the scientist is weak. The one in dealing with external phenomena; the other in dealing with beliefs, with self-knowledge, with unattained ideals. The historian, for his own ends, must do what neither scientist nor Christian has yet been able to do; that is, he must maintain a truth-loving and a truth-telling spirit in the field of active politics. It is the high mission of the historian to mark out a way in which all lovers of truth may unite in removing the lie from politics. With this achievement the apparent conflict between history and politics would cease. Without this achievement history can not be wholly trustworthy, or wholly trustworthy history will not be believed. Without this achievement there can be no political science worthy of the name. Without this achievement man will continue to be a victim of force, and will gain political wisdom chiefly through suffering. |