difference between water and rail rates makes a decided difference in profit to the farmer. Canal rates have fostered low charges, and increased the wealth and population of the State until its passenger traffic, its mail and express goods, and such high-priced articles as demand rapid transit, are now sufficient to support the railroads. From now on, each carrier in its own department of business of transportation is conducive to the success of the other. That is sure to be the result when the operation of each is according to fairness and justice. The canals of Ohio can never destroy its railroads, neither can the latter by any honest methods relegate canals to non-use and abandonment. While in later years their financial returns have not equalled those of former days, yet, in the capacity of which we write, they have been of incalculable value to the people. The time will yet come, with encouragement and good management, when the canals of Ohio will pay as they did thirty years ago; they may not return the revenues of that day in dollars and cents, but they will be self-sustaining, with all their incidental value as factors in the commercial world.

The establishment of the school system of Ohio was contemporaneous with that of the canals. Neither could have been accomplished without the other. The opposition to both was wide-spread and aggressive, but the friends of the respective measures associated their interests and thereby succeeded.

Those who were opposed to internal improvements, opposed popular education. Very natural. The spirit of the strict constructionist that could see no power in the Legislature that would enable it to build up the

material interests of the State, of course could not but object to the education of his neighbors' children. But the growth and progress of the nineteenth century demanded popular education. The primary duty of the State is to see that its citizens are educated. The early statesmen of Ohio contended for that common education which places within the reach of every child, rich and poor, the means by which that child may become capable of discharging the duties of citizenship. Yet as self-evident, almost, as this proposition is, it had opponents in the first days of Statehood. The New England element and its descendants throughout the State warmly advocated the common school system, and were among its most effective supporters. It was opposed largely by the anti-improvement party and the occupants of the school lands and those otherwise interested in them. The latter class did not desire to see any legislation which would make them account more strictly for their possession of lands, the income of which was destined for school purposes. So old fogyism and self-interest marched arm in arm in opposition to popular education.

If there was one idea that was as distinctly declared in the ordinance of 1787, as that against slavery, it was that of education for the people. "Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." So reads the third article. A provision of similar import was incorporated into the Constitution of 1802. But no system or idea of common schools was decided upon until more than twenty years after. The Governors from Edward Tiffin in 1804, to Jere

miah Morrow, in 1823, bombarded the Legislature annually in their messages on the necessity of educated citizenship. Nothing looking towards a system of schools was even attempted until 1819, when Ephraim Cutler, a son of Dr. Manasseh Cutler, introduced a bill providing for the establishment and support of common schools. It never became a law, and the subject was dropped until it was again agitated by Caleb Atwater, a member of the House of Representatives from Pickaway county, who brought the matter before the Legislature, in December, 1821. The result was the appointment of a committee, with Mr. Atwater as Chairman, to which was referred all questions concerning schools and school lands. In a report, which the Chairman with pardonable pride claims to have written himself, the committee recommended that the Governor appoint seven commissioners "to collect, digest and report to the next General Assembly a system of education for common schools, and also to take into consideration the state of the funds set apart by Congress for the support of common schools." A joint resolution to this effect was passed on the 31st day of January, 1822. On the same day, and within a few minutes, the law providing for the construction of canals passed. The same message from the Senate to the House of Representatives announced the success of both measures. So closely allied were the friends of each, and so uniformly did they work together.

The appointment of this Commission can be said to be the first practical step towards a system of common schools in Ohio. The seven Commissioners

were Caleb Atwater, John Collins, James Hoge, Nathan Guilford, Ephraim Cutler, Josiah Barber and James M. Bell. Mr. Atwater was made chairman, and his whole energies were directed with love in his work. Governor Trimble, who appointed the Commission, was a firm friend of all measures, especially this one, looking towards a school system, and he therefore selected for the work men who were enthusiastically friendly to the cause of popular education. The result was that Mr. Atwater had the fullest support of his colleagues in the development of his favorite plans.

In Caleb Atwater's Commission was born the common school system of to-day. Although beset with difficulties, obstructions, and oftentimes denunciations, they worked faithfully all through the summer and fall of 1822. Thousands of letters were written, pamphlets to educate a popular sentiment that was not altogether friendly, were distributed, and every avenue of information or knowledge painfully trod. Mr. Atwater afterwards, in his quaint "History of Ohio," writing of his labors, said:

"The Chairman was directed to collect all the systems in use in all the states; and to consult by letter or otherwise all our most distinguished statesmen, scholars, teachers and jurists on this matter. In pursuance of this order, he opened a correspondence with not a few such men in all the old and many of the new states. This correspondence occupied all his time during the three following months of September, October and November, until early in December, 1822, when the board again assembled at Columbus. During all this time not a dollar had

been advanced by the State to this board, nor was there a dollar in the state treasury to spare for any object."

The Legislature which assembled in the winter of 1823-24 was opposed to internal improvements and school legislation. The report of the Commissioners therefore fell on stony ground. It was simply received with thanks. But the friends of education were not discouraged, and during the canvass for the succeeding General Assembly, the Twenty-third, they agitated with great success the questions of common schools and canals. The result was the election of a Legislature that stands in the history of the State as one which accomplished more for the public good and posterity than any which preceded or succeeded it. Its work relative to internal improvements has been referred to; on the day following the canal legislation, February 5th, 1825, "An act to provide for the support and better regulation of common schools" was passed. It was a wonderful step forward, crude and imperfect as it may appear from our advanced educational standpoint of to-day. It was the first law that authorized a general tax for the education of all. It provided for a tax of one-half of a mill to be levied by the County Commissioners upon the county duplicate for the use and maintainance of common schools. Under its requirements examiners were to be appointed by the Court of Common Pleas, and no teacher could be employed without their certificate. The law was a command to the people of Ohio to educate their children. It was filled with careful details looking towards the establishment of a system of schools which were to be, in the language