The last reason for accepting or tolerating the University； its work at home， or in its surroundings， develops gradually and more or less broadly according to necessities. - In 1815， there were 22，000 primary schools of every kind； in 1829，[23] 30，000； and in 1850， 63，000. In 1815， 737，000 children were taught in them； in 1829， 1，357，000； and in 1850， 3，787，000. In 1815， there was only one normal school for the education of primary teachers； in 1850， there are 78. Consequently， whilst in 1827， 42 out of 100 conscripts could read， there were in 1877， 85； whilst in 1820， 34 out of 100 women could write their names on the marriage contract， in 1879 there are 70. - Similarly， in the lycées and colleges， the University which， in 1815， turned out 37，000youths， turns out 54，000 in 1848， and 64，000 in 1865；[24] many branches of study， especially history，[25] are introduced into secondary instruction and bear good fruit. - Even in superior instruction which， through organization， remains languid， for parade， or in a rut， there are ameliorations； the State adds chairs to its Paris establishments and founds new Faculties in the provinces. In sum， an inquisitive mind capable of self-direction can， at least in Paris， acquire full information and obtain a comprehensive education on all subjects by turning the diverse university institutions to account. - If there are very serious objections to the system， for example， regarding the boarding part of it (internat)， the fathers who had been subject to it accept it for their sons. If there were very great defects in it， for example， the lack of veritable universities， the public which had not been abroad and ignores history did not perceive them. In vain does M. Cousin， in relation to public instruction in Germany， in his eloquent report of 1834， as formerly Cuvier in his discreet report of 1811， point out this defect； in vain does M. Guizot， the minister， propose to remove it：
"I did not find，" says he，[26] "any strong public opinion which induced me to carry out any general and urgent measure in higher instruction. In the matter of superior instruction the public， at this time， . . . was not interested in any great idea， or prompted by any impatient want. . . . Higher education as it was organized and given， sufficed for the practical needs of society， which regarded it with a mixture of satisfaction and indifference."In the matter of education， not only at this third stage but again for the first two stages， public opinion so far as aims， results， methods and limitations is concerned， was apathetic. That wonderful science which， in the eighteenth century， with Jean-Jacques， Condillac， Valentin， Hally， Abbé de l'Epée and so many others， sent forth such powerful and fruitful jets， had dried up and died out； transplanted to Switzerland and Germany， pedagogy yet lives but it is dead on its native soil.[27] There is no longer in France any persistent research nor are there any fecund theories on the aims， means， methods， degrees and forms of mental and moral culture， no doctrine in process of formation and application， no controversies， no dictionaries and special manuals， not one well-informed and important Review， and no public lectures. Now an experimental science is simply the summing-up of many diverse experiences， freely attempted， freely discussed and verified. Through the forced results of the university monopoly there are no actual universities： among other results of the Napoleonic institution， one could after 1808 note， the decadence of pedagogy and foresee its early demise. Neither parents， nor masters nor the young cared anything about it； outside of the system in which they live they imagine nothing； they are accustomed to it the same as to the house in which they dwell. They may grumble sometimes at the arrangement of the rooms， the low stories and narrow staircases， against bad lighting， ventilation and want of cleanliness， against the exactions of the proprietor and concierge； but， as for transforming the building， arranging it otherwise， reconstructing it in whole or in part， they never think of it. For， in the first place， they have no plan； and next， the house is too large and its parts too well united；through its mass and size it maintains itself and would still remain indefinitely if， all at once， in 1848， an unforeseen earthquake had not made breaches in its walls.
II. Educational monopoly of Church and State.
Law of 1850 and freedom of instruction. - Its apparent object and real effects. - Alliance of Church and State. - The real monopoly. -Ecclesiastical control of the University until 1859. - Gradual rupture of the Alliance. - The University again becomes secular. - Lay and clerical interests. - Separation and satisfaction of both interests down to 1876. - Peculiarity of this system. - State motives for taking the upper hand. - Parents， in fact， have no choice between two monopolies. - Original and forced decline of private institutions. -Their ruin complete after 1850 owing to the too-powerful and double competition of Church and State. - The Church and the State sole surviving educators. - Interested and doctrinal direction of the two educational systems. - Increasing divergence in both directions. -Their effect on youth.
The day after the 24th of February 1848，[28] M. Cousin， meeting M. de Remusat on the quay Voltaire， raised his arms towards heaven and exclaimed：
"Let us hurry and fall on our knees in front of the bishops - they alone can save us now！"While M. Thiers， with equal vivacity， in the parliamentary committee exclaimed： "Cousin， Cousin， do you comprehend the lesson we have received？ Abbé Dupanloup is right."[29] Hence the new law.[30] M.
