have been clouded, and who have been discouraged and made wretched, driven to despair and drunkenness - perhaps utterly ruined by their daughters' extravagance in dress.

Even this is not the worst. Fondness for showy dress is seldom satisfied. The desire grows stronger with indulgence. It becomes more exacting and more extravagant; and, to get the means of indulgence in it, many daughters of what have been respectable families, are driven upon that street which leads. to ruin, wretchedness, and death.

I know what is commonly said in defence of emulation that it is a natural impulse, and cannot therefore be a wrong one. It is a natural impulse. It acts wherever two or more persons of the same age are together engaged in similar pursuits. Its natural action is, on the whole, harmless and healthful, while kept within bounds by wise control; but, like the appetites, it is strong enough without being excited.

I have briefly shown what I know to be its effects, upon many of one sex in our schools. Repeatedly, within the last few years, earnest appeals have been made to the school committee, asking that the evils of which I have been speaking might be mitigated by not allowing the schools for girls to open before nine or ten in the morning, thus giving the elder girls opportunity to get the best part of their education at home, by assisting their mothers in household duties, and giving the younger ones time to get the elements of a real education by learning the early use of the needle, and by assisting in or doing those little things. which little children can do. These appeals seem to have been made in vain. Meanwhile, overwork in the schools has been going on; many of the teachers in the girls' schools have been kept on working beyond their strength; and the opportunities for the most necessary part of a thousand girls' education have been forever lost.

The lessons in almost all the schools are too long. Too much is required. The years which are devoted to school are the very years in which a healthy bodily constitution, on which the welfare, usefulness, and happiness of life will depend, ought to be formed, and this can be done only by abundant exercise of all the limbs in the house, or, still better, in the open air and in sun

shine, and by wholesome food, with sufficient sleep, and freedom from anxiety.

A good education is not gained by learning many things poorly; but by learning the few most important things thoroughly and well.

G. B. E.

ABSTRACT OF SOME INFORMAL REMARKS, MADE BY PROFESSOR AGASSIZ, AT A PRIVATE MEETING OF THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF THE AMERICAN SOCIAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION.

I WISH it to be distinctly understood, that what I have to say to-day upon the subject of education is general, not special. It alludes to the hope of the future; and in speaking of the defects of education in America, I criticise no given school or system of schools, no university or institution of learning.

I believe that a reform is needed, both in our school and college system, but I do not expect to produce any immediate effect, or indeed to excite much interest, far less to influence any established organization. I only hope that frank and searching discussion may lead to amendment, not at once perhaps, but hereafter.

First, I wish to speak of the want of connection between our separate schools and colleges; their intellectual isolation, each standing upon its own basis, without mutual co-operation. This system is not only, as I believe, less efficient than one of mutual alliance and support, but it is also wasteful and costly. Not only is there no co-operation between different universities; there is no exchange between the separate departments of one and the same university, although, in many instances, they properly include kindred subjects. Why should not professors from the Mining school or the Zoological school in Harvard, for instance, give lectures in the Agricultural schools; or those of the Agricultural schools supplement the instruction given in the Mining and Zoological schools? The students in all these different departments would thus be brought under a greater variety of impressions. It is not well for students to have always one and the

He can

same teacher, however good his instruction may be. hardly fail to impress his own individuality and his own predilections too strongly upon his class. A variety of teachers in the same or like branches of instruction not only induces competition among the instructors themselves, but it makes the pupil more independent, awakens his thought, leads him to compare and discriminate.

There may be practical difficulties in the way of such co-operation, and I do not suggest any way of meeting them; indeed, I have none in my mind. I only point out what seems a defect, viz. the absence of concerted action. Another economy of men and means might be gained, by giving a certain preparatory instruction, needed alike by the students in the various departments, to classes made up from the different schools of one University. Why should there be elementary courses in the Agricultural school, the Industrial schools, the Mining school, the Zoological and Geological schools of one University, when one course of elementary instruction would cover all, or might easily be so organized as to cover all? This system calls for a greater number of trained teachers than can be provided, and the consequence is a mediocrity of instruction, as well as an unnecessary expenditure. Mr. Philbrick has spoken of the school tax as disproportionately small. I am as anxious as he can be, that the State should contribute with the utmost liberality to these objects; but I think we are also bound to see that the means are expended with the utmost economy. A system of co-operation would be, in my belief, an economy of strength and efficiency, as well as of means; a saving of men as well as of money. The next point is that of the selection of teachers themselves. I lose no opportunity of seeing schools, and learning all that I can about them. The result of my inquiries is this: that a great number of teachers are appointed, without much reference to their being good teachers. They are chosen because they are well recommended, because they are needy and deserving, because they are bright and showy. Very few are appointed on the only true grounds: because they are familiar with the thing they have to teach, and because they intend to devote their lives to the cause of education.

This last point is an important one. I think the preference

should be given to the applicant who is resolved to make teaching a profession, and devote his or her life to it, over one, even though more gifted, who takes up teaching, as many young people do, as a stepping-stone to something else. The man or woman who chooses any pursuit with the intention of making it a life-long work, will do better in it, even with less natural aptitude, than the person who adopts it for a short time, as a matter of expediency or experiment. No less important than a resolute, sincere purpose is an intelligent preparation for the work. One great defect in our teachers is, that they are too much inclined to avail themselves of the appliances by which teaching is made easy. Nothing is more fatal to good teaching; let the teacher make use of text-books, manuals, and the like, to simplify tasks for his pupils, as far as he thinks judicious, but he should train himself to an absolute independence of them, rather than an easy use of them. An intelligent teacher will no more lean upon such supports, than a well man will walk with crutches.

The best remedy for this trouble would be the providing of higher instruction for teachers. Am I unjust in saying, that even the Normal schools are not up to the needs of the time? Finally, the compensation of teachers is insufficient. We cannot expect the best minds, even when their preference would lead them that way, to devote themselves to a pursuit which is less remunerative than almost any other. These are a few of the points I have wished to bring forward for discussion to-day, and I will not occupy more of your time, for I am more anxious to hear what others have to say, than to press my own views. On another occasion, I shall take up the subject of what is taught, and what should be taught.

EVERY boy born into the world should be in the way of maintaining himself in honest independence. No education which does not make this its first aim is worth anything at all. There are but three ways of living, as some one has said, by working, by begging, or by stealing. Those who do not work, disguise it in whatever pretty language we please, are doing one of the other two.

Froude.

THE PROFESSIONAL SPIRIT IN THE TEACHER.

In a general view, including all the instruction given in the various schools and colleges in our country, we may say there is such a profession as Teaching. But it requires a more than American elasticity of speech to claim that Teaching in public schools, as now existing through the whole country, has risen to the dignity of professional work. One of the most surprising changes wrought by the late war was the call to the young women of the Republic to assume one of the most responsible posts of service in our civilization, - the working post of instruction in the common schools. Practically, the common-school teachers in the United States are now women between the ages of seventeen and thirty-five. In the country schools they are virtually the sole occupants of the field. In all the Western cities they are gradually taking the places of men; and one of the most popular superintendents of schools in that region, Mr. Rickoff, controls the school system of Cleveland by a small committee of male superintendents, leaving the working principal of every large school-house a woman. In this direction we are drifting everywhere; for no large body of highly educated American men can be long held to the work of instruction in common schools against the fierce competitions and temptations of our new industrial and professional pursuits. And when we consider how hard it is for a dozen women anywhere really to do anything persistently according to the method of one man, we shall confess that a good deal of the masculine "supervision" in American schools consists in a genial, cultivated gentleman drawing a high salary, and spending his days in the charming society of a bevy of quick-witted young women, who speedily discover his "blind-side," and quietly "supervise" him while they "keep school" according to their own ideas of the occupation.

The most vital question, then, concerning the methods oI our public instruction, one that underlies all consideration of special methods, is: to what extent are these young women teachers cultivating a professional spirit? And here must confess to a mighty misgiving concerning multitudes of

we