r Almshouses, or Prisons, or Houses of Refuge. In such a case
it need not be a matter of question with the Legislature whether the
charity is "sectarian" or not; whether it teaches Roman Catholicism, or
Protestantism, or the Jewish faith, or no faith. The only question with
the governing power is, "Does it do a work of public value not done by
public institutions?" If it does; if for instance, it is a
Roman-Catholic Reformatory, or a Protestant House of Refuge, or
Children's Aid Society, the Legislature, knowing that all public and
private organizations together cannot fully remedy the tremendous evils
arising from a class of neglected and homeless children, is perfectly
right in granting aid to such institutions without reference to their
"sectarian" character. It reserves to itself the right of inspection,
secured in this State by our admirable Board of Inspectors of State
Charities; and it can at any time repeal the charters of, or refuse the
appropriations to, these private associations. But thus far, its uniform
practice has been to aid, to a limited degree, private charities of this
nature.

This should by no means be considered a ground for demanding similar
assistance for "sectarian schools." Education is secured now by public
taxation for all; and all can take advantage of it. There is no popular
necessity for Church Schools, and the public good is not promoted by
them as it is by secular schools. Where there are children too poor to
attend the Public Schools, these can be aided by private charitable
associations; and of these, only those should be assisted by the State
which have no sectarian character.

Charities which are entirely supported by State and permanent endowment
are liable, as the experience of England shows, to run into a condition
of routine and lifelessness. The old endowments of Great Britain are
nests of abuses, and many of them are now being swept away. A State
charity has the advantage of greater solidity and more thorough and
expensive machinery, and often more careful organization. But, as
compared with our private charities, the public institutions of
beneficence are dull and lifeless. They have not the individual
enthusiasm working through them, with its ardor and power. They are more
like machines.

On the other hand, charities supported entirely by individuals will
always have but a small scope. The amount of what may be called the
"charity fund" of the community is comparatively l