learn those things which nature intended it should learn, and in the doing of which it may acquire the greatest possible skill. Then will be produced in our nation an intellectuality in texture firm, in kind varied, in utility greatest.

The Indians and the Chinese do not constitute an integral part of our Republic. Neither race is a factor in any State government, hence its education should not be made an expense to the State. The Indian is neither a producer nor a tax-payer; he is a beneficiary, dependent for his living upon wild game or public charity. For the past two centuries he has been driven westward from the wilds of Maine, New York, Ohio, Michigan, and Illinois, until now the General Government must instruct him in the industrial arts until he may become self-supporting, or the State to which he has been driven must care for him. Is it any more the duty of Nevada to care for the Indians within its boundaries than it is for New York to care for them? If the citizens of any State are obligated to feed, clothe, and educate them, because of the nearness of their temporary dwellings, then it may some time seem incumbent upon the people of the West to drive back the Indians east of the Mississippi, whence they came.

While the Chinese are not natives of the soil, still under a commercial treaty with China our Government encouraged their immigration hither, not in the interest of Oregon, California, or Nevada, but in the supposed interest of the whole nation. The Chinese build no homes, make no permanent improvements; they respond hardly at all to the demands of any State in return for its protection. If the Government owes nothing to the resident Chinese aliens of its own importation, surely no one State owes them anything. At this very hour there is not a State, city, or town in all the West that is not devising means for self-protection against this Mongolian invasion. The Nation, too, admits its mistake by a retraction of its former policy. Now, who should bear the burden already inflicted-the Nation, which made the mistake, or that very small portion of the Nation which suffers from it, that sparsely settled western coast? Because of the accident of birthplace and residence should the youth of our race in the West in the least degree be deprived of educational facilities that a race wholly foreign to our civilization may be benefited? I believe that to educate the Chinese youth, as well as the Indian youth, is the duty of the Government. It may be economy, or it may be far-seeing statesmanship, for the Government not to recog nize the necessity of special provision for the education of each of its races, but I think otherwise. Other matters, in my judgment of less moment than that of inquiring into the educational needs of the races and of supplying those needs year after year, consume the attention of our law-makers. Alas, too true is it that the Government at Washington sits too high on its pedestal of indifference looking down on our educational system. Were this not true, long since Congress would have made direct appropriations for education, such appropriations resulting

chiefly in the interest of the negro, Indian, and Chinese races. Educational bills of this nature may not be more constitutional than bills to relieve fire sufferers and water sufferers, but they are equally humane. Such bills in the interest of race education may not be more popular with the masses than bills granting railroad subsidies and authorizing the expenditure of moneys for river and harbor improvements, yet education affects, as nothing else does, the head, heart, and life of the Republic. At the present crisis in our educational development, nothing could be more conducive to the progress of civilization and the stability of good government than a few millions expended as national aid for the education of the races almost wholly neglected in the distribution of school funds, and comprising 8,000,000 of our people.

In a government of the people there is neither beauty nor utility without education. In a government where all men are created free and equal, all men should have opportunities for an equal education. In a government of races there should be an equality of educational privileges, regardless of the political strength of each race. If the gov ernment be based on education, instead of being a weapon of defense, the free ballot never should be permitted by a free people to become an instrument for the government's destruction. If in education dwells the life of the government, then the government should protect its own life by educating all of its races. If education is the bulwark of American liberty, then all the races within our borders should be fortified with such an education as that behind which they can serve their country best. Great as may seem the emancipation of a race from servitude, incomparably greater is the emancipation of a race from ignorance. Let there be obliterated from among the races all that caste which now comes from illiteracy, then the Nation will develop unity in its variety, strength out of its weakness, a co-education as broad as the universe.

Mr. Young's paper was discussed by Hon. JOHN W. KNOTT, of Ohio, who said: We cannot have schools in which the races can be educated together. If we owe the Chinese anything in the way of education, it is because the Christian view of our relations to mankind as a whole requires such action. There is no race that is not susceptible of culti vation. It is possible to secure the cultivation of all races. Amalgamation is not wise and should not be encouraged.

The Hon. A. P. MARBLE, of Massachusetts, said:

The race question is local and transient. In one part of the country, where the Germans are numerous and seek to introduce their language, opposition arises to the Germanizing process; Irish ascendency is feared in another place; negro influences in another; the Chinese and Indians in another. In the North we do not fear negro ascendency; in the Northeast we do not so much dread the Mongolian. A broad view will render the race question less formidable. The power of absorption in this great country is immense; it has not yet been exhausted; and time and custom have a mollifying influence.

Forty years ago in my own city there was an African school. The children of the first families would not go to school with children of color. There is no evidence that this reluctance was caused by fear that the colored people would outstrip the white. The opposition came from mere prejudice. At the present time in that city children go to school together, with as little regard to the color of the skin as of the hair or eyes. Children of African descent, in some proportion greater or less, attend the schools of every grade; and in the veins of several teachers there mingles one-fourth or one-eighth of African blood. The only criterion by which they are judged is brains and moral character. Now if forty years will accomplish so much in Massachusetts, eighty years will do it in South Carolina; for we will not admit that we are more than forty years in advance of our sister State.

As to amalgamation, I think we need not be alarmed about that. The Creator has always taken care of that; and He may be trusted with that concern in future. The Anglo-Saxon is a vigorous race, and it has a mixed origin. The Douglas blood was good in Scotland; and though shaded in America it still has power. As a rule, white people will not choose to marry colored people, unless they are prohibited. Then they may in a few cases desire it.

Why, the Indians and the Chinese are our educational superiors, if the modern theorists, the industrial wing of our association, are in the right. Hand-education has long been in vogue with the Indians; we · ought to employ them as teachers in our industrial annexes. The Chinese excel in the use of tools and in every imitative art. Employ Indians and Chinese in the manual training schools and keep cool! The rest may be left to time.

Hon. J. W. AKERS, of Iowa, said: It is the duty of every State to educate its people. The Pacific States should adopt the same method with the Chinese as the South is wisely doing in regard to the colored race. So far as the public school problem is concerned, we should have no distinction of races in this work. Our duty is to Americanize all who come into our schools.

Hon. LE ROY D. BROWN, State commissioner of schools of Ohio, said: It is not wise to attempt to interfere with matters that belong strictly to the local authorities. The matter of mixed schools was one that the States have the right to adjust and should be left to them. The colored people of Mississippi and Alabama are themselves opposed to mixed schools.

President EASTON announced the following committees:

On Memorial of John D. Philbrick-W. E. Sheldon, Massachusetts; A. J. Rickoff, New York; R. W. Stevenson, Ohio.

On National Aid to Common School Education-M. A. Newell, Maryland; S. M. Finger, North Carolina; B. S. Morgan, West Virginia; Le Roy D. Brown, Ohio; J. Ormond Wilson, District of Columbia; J. W.

Akers, Iowa; John W. Dickinson, Massachusetts; Aaron Gove, Colorado.

FOURTH SESSION.

Thursday Morning, February 25, 1886.

The Department convened at 10 A. M., President EASTON in the chair. Prayer was offered by Rev. S. L. RUSSELL, of Alabama.

Hon. LE ROY D. BROWN, Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Educational Statistics, reported as follows:

At a meeting of this Department at Saratoga last July a committee was appointed to prepare a report on a plan for securing more uniform and more accurate school statistics throughout the United States.

The Hon. John W. Holcombe, of Indiana, the chairman of the committee, being unable to attend the present meeting, I have been requested to prepare and to present the following preliminary report:

PRELIMINARY REPORT ON EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS.

It is assumed that the desirability of securing uniform and accurate school statistics is very generally admitted by the members of this organization. It is also assumed that in the United States there is still lack of uniformity and accuracy in this direction.

Much good has followed the adoption of the report of the Committee on School Statistics, made at Detroit in 1874. That report has tended toward securing uniform laws regarding school age, taxation for school purposes, and the administration of school systems. The twenty-three blanks prepared by our honored Commissioner of the Bureau of Education, and distributed among the school superintendents of the country, have been of great service in the way of unifying and systematizing school reports. It is believed, however, that we can now safely proceed to define more closely some of the terms used in our reports, thereby securing a nomenclature which in time will be universally adopted and uniformly understood. Your committee hope in their final report, to be made at Topeka next July, to present some questions relating to school nomenclature for your consideration. In that report some attempt will be made to define such terms as Attendance, Belonging, Tardiness, Truancy, High School, Academy, Seminary, College, Normal School, and University.

Whether there shall be a change of school age in some of the States, and whether the change shall be from the present age to from 5 to 15, or to from 6 to 16, are also questions that will be discussed by the committee and the Department. The only question now presented is whether the term Intermediate should not be substituted for the term Grammar, as applied to the second four years of what is included in the elementary course of instruction. That this should be done is evident, for the reason that the term Grammar School is a misnomer. It

does not convey the idea of the school with clearness. While English is more successfully taught than ever before in the second four years of the elementary course, it is taught by use in conversation and composition chiefly, and not by the study of technical grammar in textbooks on the subject. It may be stated in this connection that the term Intermediate has already been substituted for the term Grammar in many of the schools of the country. In concluding this preliminary report, I have on behalf of the committee to recommend the adoption of the following:

Resolved, That the term Intermediate be recommended as a substitute in school reports for the term Grammar as applied to the second four years of the elementary course of instruction in public schools.

The report was adopted.

Prof. J. A. B. LOVETT, of Huntsville, Ala., then read the following paper:

NATIONAL AID TO EDUCATION.

In discussing National Aid to Education, we do not propose even to allude to the advantages of education to the individual as such, for this is a fact conceded by all intelligent people. It is the education of the masses in view of their relations to the Government as free citizens, to which we would call your attention.

The safety of any free government depends largely on the intelligence and virtue of the people, who are the original source of power. Just as the masses become intelligent and enlightened, do they value and appreciate the blessings of good government. A large mass of ignorant and illiterate people must ever be regarded as a dangerous element in any nation. Intelligent and virtuous citizenship is the one great aim of every wise and well-ordered government.

Now, if these several propositions be true, there can be no question of greater importance to those who administer the affairs of our country than the education of the people who constitute the Government. In a free government like ours, where we have manhood suffrage, we should have intelligence to so direct the voter that he may be independent and self-reliant. Next to the intelligent voter is a competent juryman. An ignorant voter is a mockery upon the name of a free government, and an incompetent juryman puts in jeopardy every interest of human life. Unrestrained ignorance is a dangerous element anywhere, and ignorance with legalized power is the one monster evil to be dreaded in our Republic.

There is a large voting population distributed all over this country who cannot read the ballots they cast. With national pride we all have written, "George Washington was the father of his country." True, George Washington was the father of his country, when our country was in its swaddling clothes. But in many respects the national paternity has changed. Our country has grown to full manhood, and