Research of the education law conflict at the age of organizing process of national education system in France

它在法国国家教育制度之初就成为了一个法律冲突问题，这是一个教科书。究其原因，是因为即使在教育制度建立之后，天主教的影响也对义务教育持批判态度。天主教的政治立场是保守的。因此，义务教育得到了进步的共和党人的支持。然而，从当时的政治形势来看，义务教育甚至不一定与儿童的权利相对应。让·梅斯是征兵制度的支持者之一，他在1870年左右为义务教育制度而奔走。在他的讨论中，普选带来的邪恶据说是通过义务教育消除的。也就是说，共和国从义务教育制度开始就被捍卫，学校课本考试制度是在革命后引入的。但这些法律--吉佐定律(1833年6月28日)、1835年2月27日的条例和费卢克斯法(1850年3月15日)--都失败了。在第三共和国，这些法律引入了自由选择制度(Arret于1880年6月16日在小学实行，1881年10月13日在中学实行)。因此，从理论上讲，教材的选择已经到了教师自主判断的地步。在那之后，教员成为天主教家长批评的对象。然而，司法当局对此避而不谈，这与教育内容有关。他们将争论的焦点局限于正当法律程序上的缺陷存在。他们为天主教对教育的干预辩护。

It is a text book that it became a law conflict problem at the start of nations educational system in France. The reason is because the Catholicism influence took a critical attitude to compulsory education even after the establishment of the education system. The political position of the Catholicism was conservative. Therefore, Compulsory education was supported by republicans who were progressive. However, from the politics situation in that time, the compulsory education was not necessarily even to correspond to the right of children. Jean Mace that campaigned for compulsory educational system around 1870 was one of supporters of conscription system. And in his discussion, the evil by universal suffrage is said to be removed by compulsory education. Namely republic is defended from the beginning of compulsory education system.The school textbook examination system was introduced after the revolution. But it was failed by these laws, Guizot's law (on June 28 1833 ), Regulation of 27 February 1835, and Falloux'law (on March 15 1850 ). At the 3rd republic, free selection system was introduced by these laws (arret, on June 16 1880 at elementary school and Circulation on October 13 1881 at secondary). Therefore, titularly, textbook selection has come to the independent judgment of teachers. After that, tachers has become criticism object by the parents of Catholicism. However, the judicial authorities avoided that is related to the educational contents. They limited a point of argument to the defect presence on Due process of law. They defended the educationl intervention from Catholicism.