Suchergebnisse

Within the past ten years, the educational program has undergone many changes. The school has come to realize the importance of the distinction between the mastery of school tasks and the learning that takes place outside the school, and the wise schoolmaster has come to see that both he and his teachers are not fulfilling their true function as instructors, guides and councilors of the youth unless they all help to organize and direct the many leisure activities of the pupil. The result of this new vision has been that the function of the teacher is changed, her responsibility has been broadened, to include the whole child. "Extra curricula activities have gained recognition among educators as a vital part of every school program intended to train the pupils to take their places in the democracy of the social order. Their place In the program is the result of a changed viewpoint as to what the aim of the school should be. An entirely new interest in the extra-curricula activities of the youth has been taken over by the school, and the attention of the world is directed a new interest to the youth, as the hope of civilization. There has been a fortunate change in attitudes, and all new tendencies of action have arisen, new emotions begin to sway youth, new ideas as to life begin to be formulated, and tends to become fixed, and serious thought is given to the conduct and qualities of teachers. Social attitudes and tendencies of importance in later life are inclined to become fixed through these activities. The rule of the group tends to become the rewards of regular school credit. Within the past eight years, the general social condition of America has increased the importance of extra-curricula! activities to the extent that the schools of the country have been forced to a greater degree to place them in the program of the schools. The purpose of this paper is to show that the extracurricular activities are developing to the extent of showing increasing importance to the rural as well as the urban school children, in helping them to live a less burdensome rural life.

During the past year, the state appellate courts have reviewed state legislation with a degree of restraint more marked than in the preceding year. The present attitude of the courts toward the work of legislatures may be in part the result of a change in court personnel. It is also both possible and probable that judges have been impressed by the more tolerant or liberal attitude of the United States Supreme Court. Finally, a few of the judges may have become aware of the fact that the times demand the relinquishment of an assumed judicial "supremacy" and the examination of legislative and administrative action under specific constitutional provisions in the light of social and economic realities. At all events, judicial review in the grand manner has given way to a more vigorous application of technical constitutional requirements. Courts are tending to emphasize procedure rather than substance; review appears to be at once more tolerant and more precise; decisions turn on narrower grounds, premises are less sweeping. When applied to state constitutions, this tendency means something quite different from what it means when applied to the national constitution.This tendency may perhaps be regarded as charged with possible evil results for the courts. Although state constitutions are, in most cases, so detailed and diverse that no actual diminution of the courts' discretionary powers need result, and although to a successful litigant it makes little difference whether a statute is invalidated for want of due process or for want of a proper title or enacting clause, it is difficult to conceive of many things that will bring the courts more quickly into popular disrepute than an exaggeration of constitutional technicalities.

THE editors of the Review of Politics have asked me to do something that is indicated by the title of this informal essay. It is something that I have long had in mind. Substantially I am asked to assess after the passage of almost twenty years the thesis laid down in The Pragmatic Revolt in Politics. Ordinarily the biography of a book or of a writer's ideas had better, in good taste, be left to others. But I hope that I may be forgiven some notes on the nature of that work, because of their relevance not only to this return to the subject, but because of their relevance as well to what seems to me to be a general change in scholarly attitude toward a central problem: the place of ethics and the place of science in that study which Aristotle named by one word, Politics. It is peculiarly a pleasure to contribute this revision of a position to a journal devoted to the high cultivation of that Aristotelian conception. The distinction already achieved by the Review of Politics is in itself a witness of the changed temper of contemporary thought to a deep concern with political values.

The brief period since 1935 has produced in the attitude of the Canadian Government and people towards national armaments and defence policy a change so sudden and striking as to merit the name of revolution. Observers who in the quite recent past had remarked the obstinate refusal of Ministry, Parliament, and public to pay the slightest attention to the apparatus of defence, have been astonished during the past three years by the energy with which the present Government (headed by a statesman who in three previous terms in office had shown no special interest in this phase of the national life) has attacked the problems of military policy, and by the vigour with which the Canadian electorate has fallen to discussing them.Students of the past, of course, are aware that Canada is merely running true to form. Her history is marked by an alternation of long periods when the national defences are utterly neglected with short violent interludes, arising out of sudden foreign complications, when the country awakes to the inadequacy of those defences and tries to make up for earlier inactivity by measures taken in the teeth of the crisis. In the light of this record, it is not surprising that a desperately perilous international situation has now forced the Dominion into one more military stock-taking. Nevertheless, the episode is arresting; and its possible ultimate implications for all Canadians are of such necessary interest that it may be worth while to record here the things that have been done, and to assess, in however imperfect and conjectural a fashion, the ideas that lie behind the new departures and the policies which they are designed to serve.

The word "Confederation" is often used in a restrictive sense to refer merely to the "British North America Act"; in this restricted sense, it refers to the constitution of Canada. In its broader sense, it should refer to the union of the entire population of Canada, grouped together, on the one hand into provinces, and on the other hand into Canadians of French and English descent, for the attainment, the development, and the protection of interests common to all, while safeguarding for each group, whether province or race, the rights and traditions peculiar to it. These two understandings of Confederation are indispensable for a better comprehension of the attitude of French Canada towards it.Two lines of thought as to the understandings, agreements, pacts, or contracts—call them what you like—which were satisfactorily or unsatisfactorily formulated by the British North America Act must be noted. While for the majority of Anglo-Canadian constitutional authors the pacts of 1864, 1865, and 1866 were primarily made between provinces, one of which happened to be populated for the most part by Canadians of French descent, for French-Canadian constitutional writers these pacts were at one and the same time agreements between the four original provinces on the one hand and between the two great races on the other hand. The fact that Sir George Etienne Cartier and other French Fathers of Confederation did not, at the time, foresee that at some future date the provinces of Canada other than Quebec would also be populated by an important number of French Canadians, and that they consequently directed all their efforts for the safeguarding of the rights of French Canadians to securing for the province of Quebec the largest possible amount of independence, does not, in our opinion, change the above views on the matter.