To the Society at large we would put forward this view that the principles urged above are deserving of careful consideration in making any forward move. The quality of the teaching given in our schools is in a measure in the hands of Friends; they have raised admirable buildings in many places—these are a small matter compared with the character of the staff. The freedom of the teacher, which is an indispensable condition of excellence is a gift they can grant or withhold. And that we who are responsible for the term of school life may have the best chance and the best reward, we would press upon Friends the need of laying foundations and awakening interest in the days of childhood, and of turning to best account the powers of those who go forth from our schools.[123] SUMMARY [Sidenote: Summary of Cox’s position] This chapter treats of the attitude of Friends towards education. At the beginning there is presented a criticism of S. H. Cox, which is a concrete example of the type of criticism referred to in these pages. Following this there are presented the educational views of several Friends,—Penn, Barclay, Benezet, Woolman, Whitehead, Crouch, Tuke, and Thomas Budd, in order that the reader may judge of the truth or error presented in the criticism. The chief points made in Cox’s criticism are: (1) hostility of the Quaker system to classical education, (2) general hostility of the Friends to colleges and seminaries of learning, and (3) that the “light within” was sufficient without any education. [Sidenote: Summary of points maintained by certain Quaker leaders]