toioo_
Lad

•YALE-^MVlEISSinnf- • ILIlIBISAKy •

A Star of Hope for Mexico

BY
CHARLES WILLIAM DABNEY
President of the University of Cincinnati

/

Reprinted From
The Outlook, March 22, 1916
and
Commerce and Finance, March 29, 191

A STAR OF HOPE FOR MEXICO
By Charles William Dabney, President of the University of Cincinnati, in The Outlook

What can we do for Mexico? In the first place,
we can try to understand her. We cannot expect to
help Mexico effectually until we first understand her
people and their history, institutions, and aspirations.
What, then, does the history of Mexico teach us?
What, for example, is the meaning of the series of
revolutions which have been going on in that country
for the last hundred years?
These revolutions, including this last long one, have
all, at bottom, been phases of a blind, misguided
struggle of a strong, ignorant people for liberty.
They sprang from a desire of the common people to
realize the benefits of democracy, whose catchwords
had reached even to them, but whose terms they only
vaguely understood. They constitute a contest against
a feudal system approaching slavery. They were
chiefly, although not entirely, the strivings of an op
pressed people to win for themselves and their children
a small place upon the soil of their native land.
These blind efforts have failed of their ends largely
because of the ignorance of the people and the lack of
true and unselfish leaders. There has never been a
middle class in Mexico to supply leaders for the
people in their struggles with the feudal lords. Or
ganized public opinion is the bnly basis for democratic
government, and this has never existed in Mexico.
The only newspapers are controlled by the Govern
ment, by the landlords, or by the big corporations.
There are no real political parties. The only politics
are wholly personal, and the only political organiza
tions are gangs formed to advance the interests of
leaders whose names they bear. There are no political
campaigns to educate the voters, but only processions
and rallies intended to impress them. There is, in fact,
no free political discussion of any kind. Elections in
Mexico, consequently, are either farces or frauds.
Organized public opinion and the free discussion
of political affairs so necessary to free government
cannot exist where the masses of the people are ig
norant. The only solution of the Mexican problem,
therefore, will be through the establishment of public
schools which will educate the people to know their
rights, and train men to lead them in their struggles to
win these rights.
Most people think that the largest part of the
Mexican population is a mixed race of Spanish and
Indian blood. The Mexican census is inaccurate and
incomplete. As Mexicans of any intelligence desire
to be considered as having European blood, the re
turns with regard to parentage or race cannot be relied
upon. The best authorities tell us that the mestizos, or
people of Spanish-Indian blood, are not over forty per
cent., and that the people of pure European blood are
certainly not twenty per cent, of the whole. The peo
ple of pure and mixed European blood together con
stitute thus only about sixty per cent., or six million, of
the fifteen million souls in Mexico to-day. The nine
million Indians, more or less, constitute some fifty
aboriginal tribes in various stages of semi-civilization
— and some still in savagery — distributed all over the
country from Sonora to Yucatan. This vast area of
Mexican territory contains only about twenty persons

to the square mile. Were it populated as densely as
portions of the United States, Mexico would support a
hundred million people. Vast arid regions render this
impossible, but it could readily support four times its
present population.
The Spanish invaders and their later followers
brought a marvelous mixture of blood into Mexico.
Spain was the great melting-pot of the Old World's
peoples — Iberian, Roman, Celtic, Vandal, Goth, and
Semitic — and sent all these strains to mix with the
hundreds of Indian races supposed to have come orig
inally from Asia. If the blending of a variety of
strong bloods makes a great people, Mexico should
be a powerful nation.
The Mexican people have always been sharply di
vided into an upper and a lower class, there being
practically no middle class, and no room for one under
the present agrarian system. The peons and Indians
— people without land of their own — make up perhaps
eighty per cent, of the population of Mexico, or twelve
millions out of the fifteen.
In judging this people we must also take' into con
sideration the experiences through which they have
passed in the centuries since the Spanish conquest.
After the army of Cortez had swept the country and
divided the land and the surviving Indians among his
followers, they and their successors, the Government
and the Church, combined to suck all the life-blood
they could out of the people. Aside from ineffective
protest, the Church acquiesced in this exploitation or
openly shared its proceeds, although it did soften its
worst horrors. The material resources of the country
were partially developed. Cities and haciendas were
established and mines opened, but the wealth from
both farm and mine was poured into Spain.
Under Spanish dominion the education of the peo
ple of Mexico was resisted and retarded by many
powerful influences. The landlords, the mining and
lumber companies, preferred ignorant laborers because
they were easier to exploit. The peon was a mere
unit of physical force, a "hand," and they wanted to
keep him such. All employers, therefore, united to
keep him in ignorance. Monastic and other religious
organizations flourishd, but they did little to educate
the people. The theologians even questioned whether
the natives had intellects like other people, and the
whites and mixed-bloods came to be spoken of as gente
de rason — people with reason— as distinguished from
the Indians, who were supposed to have none. By
farming out taxation and selling grants and privileges
the viceroys, governors, and other Spanish officials
added their burdens to those of the State and Church,
and the unfortunate people bore them all.
The social organization, consisting only of the ex
ploiters and the exploited, though somewhat fluid at
first, under this government soon hardened into tradi
tion. Life for the poor man was without incentive or
hope, and for three centuries the history of the Mexi
can was the dead level of uneventfulness. Under such
conditions ten generations labored and passed away.
Such experiences inevitably made a deep and lasting
impression upon the character of the people. They

-d

1 1

not only widened the social chasm, they weakened and
debased the man, making submissiveness a habit and
resistance impossible. With no motive in life except
to eat, drink, and propagate his miserable kind, the
common Mexican became idle, sensual, and brutal, the
spirit of manana ruled his life, and a profound fatal
ism locked his spirit in death.
Under the system of repartimientos the lands were
originally divided among those who merited well of
the Crown, and the native people were seized along
with the land and made to work for the new owner as
slaves. This system was so grossly abused that it had
to be abandoned, and then a more polite way of accom
plishing the same thing was introduced. This was the
plan of encomiendas, under which a certain number of
Indians were "commended" to the landowner, to be
civilized and Christianized by him. He promptly en
slaved the whole lot, binding them to his land, which
they could not leave so long as they were in debt.
This system had for the proprietor all the advantages
of slavery as it existed in the United States, without
its obligations.
Many efforts were made to abolish this system, but
without success. The missionaries from the old coun
try denounced it, some of the viceroys condemned it;
but it was profitable to all governing classes, and it
kept the Indians in order. Working was good for the
souls of the peons. Left to themselves, they would.
wander about the country, gamble and fight. So even
the priests were brought to think well of the plan.
The land yielded a living easily. In that fine climate
the simplest houses and fewest clothes sufficed. Why
should the priests trouble themselves to educate the
Indian? He was happy as he was. After a genera
tion or two of monks had passed away the local
churches came under the control of a native priest
hood almost as ignorant as their parishioners. The
ceremonies of the Church degenerated into the crudest
formalities wrapped in the crassest superstitions de
rived from previous Indian practices. There were a
few private schools for the sons of the rich, a few
institutes for professional training, and a few semi
naries for priests, but no public schools, no school-
houses, no teachers, and no funds provided to educate
the masses. Occasionally there was a parochial school
in which the catechism and the lives of the saints were
taught by rote, but these schools rarely ever taught
the children to read. Under these conditions the
people drifted gently down the stream of years in
contented ignorance.
As is always the way, the social distinctions between
chiefs and common Indians, between Spanish land
lords and peasant mestizos, settled down upon the
criterion of wealth. Most of the Indian caciques
dropped into the lower class, as did the unsuccessful
Spanish. The descendants of the hidalgo, as well as
of his soldiers, failing to acquire lands or mines, slid
down the social scale along with their half-blood kin
into the great conglomerate mass of poor at the bot
tom. The constituents of this mass became each year
more and more indistinguishable. By the time of the
national emancipation, therefore, a population of five
or six millions had been stratified into an upper and a
lower class, and of the total at least nine-tenths be
longed to the lower class. All elements are repre
sented in the upper class ; all bloods are found in the
lower class. The Mexican people are practically one.

The classes differ only as they have enjoyed oppor
tunity and have used it. The only differences are in
possessions or in traits resulting from opportunity or
the long want of it.
In studying the last one hundred years of Mexico's
political development one must keep this dark back
ground in mind. These conditions, as well as the
nature of the people and the institutions fastened upon
them by their conquerors ,must all be considered in
interpreting the period of liberation which opened for
Mexico, as for all Latin America, in the early years of
the ninetenth century. In all our judgments of Latin-
American people, present as well as past, let us be
fair and remember who they were and what they have
suffered. Anglo-Saxons are inclined to be too con
ceited and arrogant. We should remember, for ex
ample, that the Latin conquerors preserved as slaves
the native races, instead of killing them off or driving
them out, and we should also remember that it was not
the makers of Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights,
but the founders of the Inquisition, who gave the Lat
in-Americans their first governments.
The desire for enlightenment everywhere and always
follows the struggle for liberty. So we find that the
intellectual movement in Mexico received its first great
impulse from Hidalgo in 1810, and progressed through
out the century by ebb and flow as the political revolu
tions came and went. Though each political uprising
awakened the minds of the people, the actual progress
of enlightenment under the conditions described was
necessarily very low. After experiences such as the
people of Mexico had endured it was not possible for
mere political liberation to transform them in a day or
a decade into intelligent, self-governing citizens. Many
of them were still semi-civilized Indians, and nine-
tenths were absolutely ignorant at the opening of this
era. What had been three centuries in the making
could not be undone in one hundred years.
The general movement for freedom in Latin Amer
ica was awakened by the successful war for inde
pendence of the English colonies in America and tre
mendously stimulated by the French Revolution. The
times were then ripe in Europe, and the prepared peo
ples seized the opportunity to win new liberties. But
the people of Latin America were not ready ; the op
pression of centuries had trained them so long to sub
mission that they were dazed in the presence of the
opportunity. When Napoleon paralyzed Europe, the
shackles fell from Mexico almost without her knowing
it. Thus Mexico got her independence too soon and
too easily. The clock of destiny struck too early for
her. For years the people of Mexico had been restless;
they wanted something better, but they did not under
stand this thing called independence, with which the
world was ringing. Mexico in the nineteenth century
resembled one of her ancient volcanoes. The fierce
heat lay smouldering within her rock-bound sides ; an
occasional upheaval, accompanied by a few deep mur-
murmgs, relieved the pressure temporarily, but the
central fires remained smothered. The great eruption
did not come until the middle of the century.
Some weeks ago the Pan-American Scientific Con
gress concluded its second meeting in Washington.
The one note that ran through all the papers and ad
dresses at this Congress was the unity of America and
the duty of its different peoples to stand together.

It is interesting to trace the origin of this idea of
unity in the support of free government throughout
America. Such ideas grow with the years, and it is
not possible that exactly this conception of the duty
of the various nationalities to each other and the
world should be held by any American in these early
days. But the root-idea that America as a whole
stood for the right to self-government had existed in
the minds of the seers for at least a hundred years.
This was the covenant preserved in the American ark,
and to the defense of this covenant all Americans were
forever dedicated. This was the continental thought
of the men in 76, and this has been the inspiring prin
ciple in every declaration of independence published
on this hemisphere. As far as I have been able to
learn, the most significant early expression in Latin
America of this idea of Pan-Americanism was in the
plan of the Spanish revolutionist Miranda for the
Grande Reunion Americana, a secret society organized,
1800 to 1810, for the purpose of uniting the people of
Central and South America in a struggle for inde
pendence. Undoubtedly Father Hidalgo, the first Mexican
liberator, had heard of Miranda. "El grito de Dolo
res," the cry from the City of Sorrows, as the inde
pendence call of Hidalgo was designated, was the first
utterance in Mexico of this Pan-American idea. This
call was, "Long live America! Death to bad govern
ment!" Hidalgo did not say, "Long live Mexico!
Death to Spain!" but "Long live America," Pan-
America, the anticipated home of good government,
as opposed to the Old World, the home of bad govern
ment. History tells us that he declared for the inde
pendence of Mexico as a part of self-governing Amer
ica. Like our Declaration, it indeed was the demand
of an oppressed people for the right to govern them
selves, but it was also an expression of the ideal of
Pan-America, destined to be the hemisphere of demo
cracy. Desperately angered by the interference of the Gov
ernment with his efforts to teach the people letters
and industry — for he had been instructing them in
reading and figures and training them to rear silk
worms and to make pottery — Father Hidalgo, of
Dolores, on a September Sunday morning in 1810
summoned his pupil horticulturists and potters, forced
the village prison, liberated the political prisoners,
rang the parish bell, and called the people, in the
name of Him who came to bring all men abundant
life, to declare themselves free. Thus was sounded,
by a, representative of the Saviour of men, the Liberty
Bell of Mexico. The spirit of the first democrat was
moving his people.
The beginnings of this century-long struggle have
been recited for the purpose of emphasizing the fact
that these were genuine uprisings of a people seeking
liberty and opportunity, although seeking it blindly,
and for the purpose of explaining the occasion for
the next great proclamation of Pan-Americanism.
Iturbide sought to gain support for his selfish schemes
by declaring that there was on foot a plan for the re-
establishment of Spanish authority in Mexico which
it was his duty to prevent. Whether any such scheme
existed is doubtful, but the belief that it did had an
important influence in bringing the support of the
United States to the new Republic. In his Message of
December, 1823, President Monroe, therefore, made

that epoch-making utterance warning European gov
ernments forever to keep their hands off the American
continent. The significance of the doctrine, under
stood originally to be for the United States only, we
are just beginning to appreciate in its continental
aspects. The events of the last two decades have
shown us the wisdom of this forgotten doctrine, which
now promises to be the foundation stone of the struc
ture of our Pan-American union. Buoyed up by this
declaration, the independent government of Mexico
set out upon a career which, though often in desperate
danger from violent reactions, has gone steadily for
ward. For the generation following, the evil genius of
Mexico was Santa Anna, who overthrew its consti
tutional guarantees and involved it in difficulties with
the United States, and then left it in a condition of
anarchy. Juarez, the little Indian of Oaxaca, was the most
unselfish, wisest, and bravest of all the Mexican
patriots. He was the real liberator of Mexico, and
the real founder of her school system. A Constitution
modeled after ours was proclaimed by him. A series
of laws known as "Reform Laws" were passed, guar
anteeing liberty of worship, separation of Church and
State, and equality before the law for priest, soldier,
and common man. A vigorous mortmain law aimed
at the immense holdings of the religious orders was
enacted. It is impressive to note that Juarez understood per
fectly the distinction between the rights of the Church
and the rights of the people. His struggle was not
against the humble parish priests, but against the
higher clergy and the far too numerous religious
orders. It was against the hierarchy, the successors
of the men who in the colonial days had been the
counselors of the kings, viceroys, and commissions,
and who held tenaciously to the idea that they ought
to share in governing the people, that Juarez fought,
and not against the Church of the people.
Though the early leaders in the movement for inde
pendence were earnest partisans of popular education,
and passed some elaborate laws for its establishment,
they failed to carry them out. Perhaps it was impos
sible at the time. The Constitution of 1824, copied
after the American Constitution, and establishing uni
versal democracy, was wholly unsuited to Mexican
conditions. The American Constitution was a com
pact entered into voluntarily by States having had
previous separate existences, and made up of Anglo-
Saxon men already trained in self-government. The
Mexican States had no such history and no such citi
zens. They were States only in name. The govern
ment had always been strongly and autocratically Cen
tralist, and to such a country and such a people the
American Constitution was absolutely unadapted.
The responsibility of self-government was conferred
upon an illiterate and untrained mass of people, a
large proportion of them practically slaves. When
they were freed from Spanish control, nine-tenths
were still under the heel of landlords. "No nation can
exist half slave and half free," said Lincoln. With
the masses still in serfdom Mexico made no progress
in democracy.
The struggles in Mexico since 1810 have been one
long contest between the forces of autocracy and
democracy. The various parties have borne many

names and have had many confusing associations, but
have remained substantially the same two hosts — the
army, the Church, the landlords, and mine-owners on
the one side, and the mass of the people, for the most
part landless and moneyless, on the other. One phase
of this was the contest between the Centralists and
the Federalists. During this struggle the question of
which power, the national or the State, should be re
sponsible for education was earnestly discussed. As,
however, the political centre of gravity was constantly
shifting from one to the other of these conflicting
powers, nothing was decided and little done.
Another difficulty was the poverty of the treasuries
of both the States and the nation. Continuous revolu
tions had left the people in a wretched condition and
almost without funds. Haciendas, churches, and
towns were alike stripped of every form of wealth —
the people were bled white by war.
Such conditions gave the national government the
excuse to turn over the financing and control of the
schools to the States and the weak and impoverished
States proceeded immediately to pass the business on
to the municipios, which, like our New England towns,
covered large country districts. Nothing was accom
plished by this shifting of responsibility. If the nation
was bankrupt, the States were also exhausted; and,
if the States had no money, the towns from which they
derived their revenues were, of course, equally impov
erished. So that, even after the authority was given
them to establish schools, the towns were unable to
support the stupendous undertaking.
In face, however, of these tremendous difficulties,
some beginnings were made, which show how deeply
the people were concerned. It is a remarkable fact
that in the law promulgated by the State of Nuevo
Leon (1825) the principle of compulsory attendance
on schools was laid down. Professor Martinez, in his
"Review of Education in Nuevo Leon," Mexico
(1894), quotes this Constitution as commanding the
city government "to promote the proper education of
the young and establish endowed schools of primary
grade, to see to the due conservation and right gov
ernment of those already in existence, respecting al
ways the rights of individuals and corporations." The
same Constitution directs that in all villages primary
schools should be established, in which should be
taught "reading, writing, and the principles of num
bers, the catechism of the Christian doctrine, and a
summary explanation of the duties of citizenship."
It is only within the last few years that we have in
troduced instruction in civics in our schools.
Another great difficulty faced these early school
enthusiasts, and this was the lack of teachers. To
solve this problem the Mexicans seized upon the Lan
castrian system of teaching the elementary branches,
which was popular at the time in England and in
America. It seemed to suit their conditions exactly,
and, as a matter of fact, it did fit in with their im
practicable schemes. It was the old monitorial system
carried to the extreme. It proved a failure in Mexico,
as it did everywhere, though it did some good by call
ing attention to the duty of educating all the people.
Among the things for which the administration of
President Diaz should receive credit were the suppres
sion of religious persecution and anti-foreign demon
strations; the suppression of brigandage, always a
characteristic of Mexico ; the development of the natu

ral resources 01 the country, especially by the policy
of encouraging investments by Americans and other
foreign capitalists ; the consolidation and improvement
of the railways ; the partial abolition of peonage ; the
standardization of the currency; the encouragement of
education ; and the maintenance of liberty and equality
before the law.
Though at the beginning a sincere representative of
the masses of the people, Diaz, as his administration
went on, became more and more involved with the
upper classes. He has even been accused of being
unfriendly to public education. He certainly did not
wish to make education a national matter, and opposed
a proposition to establish a centralized system of
schools. In this he was right. The initiative in edu
cational matters, in elementary education especially,
should be left to the local authorities.
In spite of opposition from his own people, who
thought he was altogether too partial to foreign in-
vestors, Diaz pushed the policy of subsidies for rail
way lines, exemption of import duties on factory ma
chinery, and relief from taxation during specified
periods for productive industries. The result was
great improvement in the economic conditions of the
laboring classes, especially in the mining districts.
But the wants of the people began to grow with their
wages, and they began to question and to investigate.
For centuries they had expected nothing and were
resigned to a miserable lot, but now their very pros
perity made them restless. They commenced to in
quire why it was that a few men had more land than
they needed, while others had none, and why taxation
was so much heavier on the poor man than on the rich.
The Diaz Government found itself unable to solve
the problem of taxation and land tenure. Those efforts
proved a failure which sought to put a rate upon the
immense holdings of land that would make them un
profitable, and thus open them up for settlement by
the small farmers. The mere effort to do this caused
great dissatisfaction among the land barons, and its
failure bitter disappointment to the people. Such were
the elements that led up to the Madero revolution of
1911. The unfortunate Madero's part in this struggle is
well known. More truly than any one since Hidalgo
and Juarez, he represented the real people of Mexico.
While he made the land question the chief one in his
platform — much to his sorrow later, for he was totally
unable to do anything to solve the agrarian problem —
he also represented the aspirations of Mexicans for
education and equality. Like Hidalgo, he was a
dreamer. We admired his idealism and felt deep pity
for his weakness.
Enough has been recalled to show that this series of
Mexican revolutions has been one long struggle for.
liberty, for opportunity, especially on the land, and
for the right of self-government. It was a succession
of forward movements followed by reactions, but,
as is the rule in human affairs, a little progress was
registered by each effort.
Summarizing now the educational situation in Mex
ico at the present time, we may set down the following
propositions :
1. The present leaders of the people are thoroughly
committed to the cause of public education. The Con
stitutionalist party and its leader are pledged to the
development of the schools.

2. It is agreed that the initiative shall be left to the
local committees, the municipios, and the States, per
haps, with the supervision and direction from the na
tional Government, but with no centralized control.
3. The people are firmly determined that these
schools shall be, as they say, "free, lay (secular), and
compulsory." The leaders are intensely opposed to
Church control of the schools.
4. In organization the schools follow the French
plan rather than the American, the primary grades
being comprised within six years, four called "ele
mentary" and two called "superior." Since they were
left to the initiative of the local authorities, the schools
do not cover the field and vary much in excellence.
Some cities have fairly good schools, but the majority
of the country schools are poor. The instruction is
generally limited to the three R.'s, and is yery indif
ferently given by poorly trained teachers from the
lower orders of society. It is safe to say that three-
fourths of the people of Mexico are still illiterate.
5. Mexico has nothing that corresponds to our high
school. The institutos resemble the French lycees
rather than our American high schools. They may be
roughly described as a combination of grammar
school, high school, and the first two years of college,
with a few professional studies included. Opposition
to the Church has led the State authorities to oppose
the introduction of Latin and to substitute in its place
modern languages and elementary science, with the
result that the courses are very superficial. In addi
tion to the institutos are what are called "preparatory
schools," hardly distinguishable from the lower grades
of the institutos which give instruction in elementary
and secondary branches.
6. Normal schools have been established in most of
the States, and are attended for the most part by poor
boys and girls. It is unfortunate that, owing to the
prevalent aristocratic feeling, the sons and daughters
of the well-to-do do not go into the teaching profes
sion, with the result that it is looked down upon. One
reason for this is that the pay is small and the sons
of the rich expect to enter more lucrative callings, but
another reason is that the Church frowns upon the
secular normal school as the foundation of the whole
irreligious public school system, which is to her ana
thema. This pressure on the conscience of the re
ligious, combined with social ostracism, results ulti
mately in limiting the attendance to the poorest classes
of youth, who, with nothing to lose, brave all and go
to the State normal schools.
7. The universities in Mexico owe their origin en
tirely to the Church. The one of chief importance was
the University of the City of Mexico, established in
1551. Opened in 1553, it continued throughout the
colonial period and barely survived the revolution of
1810-21. From the beginning it was occupied pri
marily with theology and jurisprudence, its faculty of
letters being secondary. As the Church ceased to
dominate the government theology was dropped, and
only law and medicine remained. When later these
schools controlled the professional licenses, they be
came the football of politics. In this way the Univer
sity fell into disrepute. Once or twice it was sup
pressed, and finally it was dissolved into its constituent
parts, separate schools of medicine and law. One of
the last acts of the Diaz Administration was an at
tempt to revive the University of Mexico City, which,

however, failed during the subsequent confusion.
What can we say in conclusion? There must be a
way for the 'Mexican people out of their terrible situa
tion. What is their duty, and what is our duty as their
neighbor? It would be foolish indeed to propose,
at this time especially, a solution of the problem of
Mexico, but it is not foolish to try to learn what their
history teaches with regard to their needs and their
aspirations. The Mexicans must have, not only land, but an edu
cation. Though he has been struggling in his blind
way for liberty for a hundred years, for the want of
intelligence and of character he has failed to secure his
freedom. A thorough system of schools which shall
provide universal education is, without question, the
greatest need of Mexico.
Does the proposal of universal education for Mexico
seem absurd? Why is it more absurd than the pro
posal to educate the Cuban, the Porto Rican, and the
Filipino? It should not be more hopeless than the
education of the Indian or the Negro. No doubt it
will require a long time even to establish the necessary
schools. It will be the work of generations to qualify
the thirteen million ignorant people for intelligent citi
zenship, but education offers the only method of mak
ing men fit to be free.
Believing that the Mexico of the future must be
built by its people, and that they have little to contri
bute to its structure but their native intellectual and
spiritual abilities, I have sought to get a just estimate
of them from those who know them best. A native
Mexican who was educated in Massachusetts and who
has taught in the United States as well as his own
country, where he was head of a large college and
superintendent of public schools of a State, assures me
that the Mexican peon is the equal intellectually of the
Italian, the Hungarian, or any of the other immigrants
among us, and fully as capable of self-government. Ai
Protestant missionary teacher, who spent thirty years
in Mexico at the head of schools, and is now connected
with one of our universities, testifies that the Mexican
peon has all the qualities to make a citizen of a repub
lic if he were only educated and given a place on the
land. The superintendent of one of the large petro
leum companies of Mexico, who has used the peon men
for ten years, tells me that they are as teachable, in
dustrious, faithful, and loyal mechanics and laborers
as any men he has ever employed. The president of
the largest Mexican railway system, who has em
ployed these people for twenty years — as track laborers,
shop mechanics, locomotive-drivers, and conductors,
as well as depot agents and clerks — is warm in his
praise of the common Mexican, who, he declares,
needs only an education and a chance. Many other
witnesses might be cited to the same effect. In the
course of a wide inquiry into the character of these
people, the only pessimists found were among business
and professional men in Texas, New Mexico, and Cali
fornia, who have come in contact with the worst types
of Mexicans — the poor laborer seeking work, the bor
der trader, usually a smuggler, or the cattle thief and
bandit. Those who know him best and in his own
country believe the common Mexican has in him the
making of a man and a citizen.
In addition to elementary education and training for
citizenship, Mexicans, of all men, need industrial and
agricultural education. Although Father Hidalgo

started his revolution in protest against interference
with his industrial schools for the people, schools of
this type have made little progress. They are the great
need. Agriculture in Mexico and the mechanic arts
are very primitive. The rich man objects to manual
labor as beneath his dignity. Technical and industrial
schools are needed to overcome this sentiment. Prac
tically nothing has been done for agricultural educa
tion. In view of the richness of the soil and the other
resources and the need of men to develop them, indus
trial and agricultural education would seem to be one
of the most important tasks before the Mexican people.
Mexico has no college or university of the modern
type. She needs intelligent leaders, but she has no
institution to train them. One of the best possible
things, therefore, that could be done in Mexico, while
helping her to start her elementary, agricultural, and
industrial schools, would be to give her an independent
modern college of the type of Robert College, of Con
stantinople. The advantages that would accrue to
Mexico from a college of that type are too evident to
need argument Its influence on education, on politics,
on industry, and on morals would be all the greater
because of its independence. Only such an institution
can train Mexicans in a way to make them into the
wise, unselfish, and independent leaders the people
need. We have pledged ourselves to stand with the other
nations of the Western Hemisphere in making democ
racy a workable principle of government. Close to our

doors we have fifteen millions of people who, through
ignorance and the habits that come of ignorance, have
failed to differentiate liberty from license and: have
subordinated federalism to factionalism. Mexico can
not have a free and ordered government so long as the
great masses of its people are illiterate. A democracy
must be based on an organized public opinion, and
such a public opinion can be made possible only
through a system of education which, while it trains in
the industrial arts, also disciplines the character and
develops leaders of scope and vision. The best aid to
a man is to help him help himself. Our best aid to
Mexico would be to help that nation train itself.
In the wretched situation in which we find Mexico
at the present time there is one encouraging element.
In their dark night there is one bright star. It is the'
star which through the long and weary night of the
last hundred years has ever beckoned them forward.
This star is their desire for liberty and for education.
In spite of their ignorance, stupidity, and bi ufcalityythie-
is the one thing for which we must admire the com
mon people of Mexico. Through a century of strug
gle they have nurtured this desire for education, and
have been true to this ideal of self-government. How- ;
ever miserable their present plight, and however out
rageous their recent conduct, we must believe that,
holding stronger than ever to this desire and this ideal,
the people of Mexico are to-day nearer to the realiza
tion of their aspirations than ever before.

mi

mf