to the high schools, and on the part of the colleges and universities because the pupils of the high schools are not well qualified to enter them. All of which shows that American pedagogy, having cut secondary instruction in two, finds it difficult to fit the two pieces together.

OPINION OF PRESIDENT ELIOT, OF HARVARD.

It is interesting to observe that this eminent educator decides in favor of our French system of secondary instruction; and it is especially to be noted that in reaching his conclusions, which are so favorable to European methods, President Eliot makes his comparison between the common and universal methods of our 300 lycées and colleges, and what is a rare and exceptional type in the United States, the programme of the Boston grammar schools and the Latin school. He says, "The French programme is decidedly more substantial, that is to say, it calls for greater exertion on the part of the pupil than the American, introduces the children earlier to serious subjects, and is generally more interesting and stimulating to the intelligence." In France the child of 8 studies a foreign language, English or German; in America he does not begin such studies before the age of 13, when the most propitious time for learning foreign languages is past. Then, at 8 years the French boy begins his history, which is presented in a peculiarly attractive and instructive form, that of the lives of great men. The American boy does not begin history until he is 13, and he is launched at the start into Greek history. On the other hand, the American programme gives three times as much arithmetic as the French, and yet it does not appear that the French are less skillful in handling figures than the Americans. The French scholar also begins natural history earlier than the American, and the subject is better presented to him. The French scholars generally are of the age prescribed by their plans of study, which is not the case with Americans. At the Boston Latin School, while the plan of studies is designed for pupils from 11 to 16, the real age is from 13 to 18.

So far we have repeated what the Americans themselves have criticised in their secondary instruction, but our study will show, on the other hand, whatever of good there is in the efforts already made and the results obtained. In the first place, there is the long duration of secondary stadies, during which young people of both sexes receive a liberal education, designed to be an instrument of general culture for developing the faculties and character. Then the comparatively late period of conpleting secondary studies-21 or 22 years of age-is a good rather than an evil, and it seems evident that a complete education, intimate and profound, which must penetrate into the marrow of the souls, subjected for a long time to the intellectual and moral discipline of its liberalizing influence, must result from such a long-continued course of training, lasting even to majority. Why say anything of what everyone knows already-the material conditions under which American secondary instruction is developed? Every where sumptuous high schools, like palaces, are established in the cities within reach of all the children of the people, while, by way of contrast, the colleges are situated in the country in the midst of verdure and groves, far from the unhealthy excitement of the feverish life of cities. This is found in every State of the Union. Everywhere are comfortable, sometimes elegant, and at any rate spacious, buildings, and often in the colleges there are rich libraries of 50,000 volumes like those of universities; besides, also, laboratories and museums which offer the greatest resources for personal research or artistic culture. The high schools have no dormitories and their pupils live at home, but even in the colleges where the contrary system prevails there is the greatest freedom. While offering the students the advantages of the common refectory and rooms in the dormitories, these college authorities allow them freedom to live in private houses if they prefer to do so. But those who sleep and board in the college are nevertheless treated like day pupils (externes) or, as it is expressly stated, like gentlemen, and they are constantly reminded that they are responsible for their own actions. Sometimes even

collegians help to form a council of administration, which acts with the official authorities in maintaining order and decorum. Education of the character is the principal care, and to this end associations and societies of all kinds are encouraged, not only athletic clubs, but literary societies, where the young men practice debates and learn to conquer the timidity of their age and speak in public. There are also musical and singing societies, and in some institutions there is a general meeting of professors and students every week, in which, under the form of lectures, readings, etc., the effort is made to develop elevated sentiments and cultivate the minds of the scholastic community.

EXTENT AND FLEXIBILITY OF THE PROGRAMMES,

What strikes us especially in this investigation is the organization of intellectual training in the United States, comprising both the extent and richness of the programmes and the flexibility and elasticity of the studies. Strictly speaking, the authorities in charge of American secondary instruction do not themselves choose the different subjects of which their programmes are composed; it is rather the pupils who make the choice. They are offered a great variety of studies which, taken together, would make a veritable encyclopedia; the scholar who can not take all decides in favor of such and such a study, according to his tastes and aptitudes. It is like a richly served table, supplied with dishes of every kind, which is set before the student, who sits where he pleases and helps himself to whatever he wishes. How far removed from the uniform and tyrannical regulations of secondary instruction in Europe is all this. The general rule in America is for each student to choose for himself. The road is pointed out to him-in fact, two or three-at the end of which a different baccalaureate awaits him. But even to reach the same end and attain the same degree students can take one route or another, as best suits them; can concentrate their attention on some subjects and neglect others, and, in short, act in full freedom, and consequently work with more spirit and succeed better in studies which are voluntarily undertaken and which they have chosen in preference to others. We do not hesitate to say that the system of elective courses which is more or less practiced in the secondary schools of America confers upon these schools a character of vitality to which our lycées can not pretend, because our pupils are all constrained to follow the same course of instruction, without regard to their different intellectual capacities or social destinations. And it is to be noted that this liberty of choice allowed to young Americans does not carry with it, as might perhaps be expected, an abandonment of classical studies, for the Latinists are quite numerous. Greek-Latin instruction, too, is in esteem and holds its place through public opinion, nursed by the leaders of education, who, in spite of the practical and utilitarian tendencies of a commercial and industrial nation, understand the value of the old humanities and, so far from consenting to sacrifice the classics upon the altar of science and practical arts, defend and maintain them with as much conviction and enthusiasm as the humanists of the old world.

The report of the committee of ten, appointed by the National Educational Association makes it evident that there is a tendency to give a large place to what may be called modern instruction-the physical sciences, natural history, geography, history, and modern languages-in opposition to the preponderance hitherto given to classical instruction-Greek, Latin, and mathematics-which Americans call "old and venerable subjects." There is no danger of breaking with Latin. If there is anyone who would like to "deliver us from the Greeks and Romans," as there are in France, it would seem as if there would be no hope for him in America. The Americans manifest almost a religious veneration for the classical humanities; but they also feel, and very sensibly, the need of strengthening the course of positive and scientific studies.

Of the diverse subjects of study in the high schools and colleges we can only give M. Compayré's remarks on Latin, Greek, and history. He says: "Despite the movement which is making itself felt in America, as everywhere else, toward modern

and scientific studies, Latin has remained in practice one of the fundamental studies of the high school. And in theory nearly everyone recognizes its importance as an instrument of intellectual discipline. What strikes us at first is the late period (i. e., about 15 years of age) at which, according to the traditionary usages of Europe, American scholars begin Latin. The two essential points in the study of Latin as it is understood in secondary schools of the United States are reading the Latin text and Latin composition. The latter is only used because it is regarded as an excellent means of penetrating the secrets of Latin construction more thoroughly, learning the meaning of the words and remembering the forms and inflections of nouns and verbs; of giving, in short, a better understanding of the rules of syntax. Now this is what one must know in order to be able to read a Latin author easily, which is the object sought. The pupil is therefore exercised in composition not in order that he may acquire the useless talent of writing Latin, but in order that he may surmount all the difficulties which he meets in reading the text. It can not be denied that Latin and Greck studies in America are conceived in a somewhat narrow spirit. I do not dispute the advantages which may follow from studying only one author and only one work of that author. [The programmes show that Cæsar's Gallic Wars and the Eneid are the only Latin books studied the first two years in the high schools.] It was the method of the middle ages when there was hardly more than one book studied in each faculty. But how much more liberal is the modern method which introduces the scholar to all the productions of Greek and Latin genius, and opens to him the treasures of classical antiquity! Is there not danger that by restricting as much as it does the list of authors to be read and explained, American pedagogy may transform a rich study, which is fertile above all others, into a mechanical and sterile routine? The conference has, however, declared that the selection of Cæsar's Gallic Wars is most unfortunate, as the work is too difficult for beginners and uninteresting from its too exclusively military character. Its vocabulary also is limited by the nature of the subject."

The committee of ten also points out that Latin is not to be studied merely to understand the meaning of words and the form of construction, but also in order to enter into the spirit of Latin literature, and so gain an idea of the thoughts and sentiments of a people who have contributed so largely to the civilization of the present day. Accordingly they recommend certain works of history and criticism in which modern authors treat of Cicero, Caesar, and Virgil, and their times.

To sum up, the features which distinguish elementary instruction in Latin in the high schools of America are, the beginner is brought in contact with diflicult authors sooner than with us; composition is considered more useful and is more generally practiced than [written] translation; grammar is only taught as an adjunct to the explanation of the text or when translating English into Latin; the number of authors studied is very limited, and, what is remarkable in a land of absolute freedom of choice, the same authors are used everywhere.

GREEK.

The number of scholars in the high schools who take Greek is very small, not over 3 per cent of the school population, and of this small number Massachusetts alone has one-third; and this small number does not carry its study very far. The students of Greek are those who are fitting for college, and the council of ten does not deem it desirable that the study should be extended. While the Greek classes of the high school correspond in degree pretty nearly to those in which French boys begin their Greek, the age of the American scholars is greater than that of the French by three years. The books studied are the Anabasis and the Iliad, and the conference has protested against the exclusive use of the Anabasis as not sufficiently important. The beauties of Homer are not celebrated in France with more conviction than in America, as shown in these words: "The prospect of reading Homer is no small inducement to pupils to study Greek; in schools where children have been

enconraged to read translations of Homer the number beginning Greek has been considerably increased. The Homeric poems appeal to the pupil's imagination and arouse his interest in the life and thoughts of the Greeks," and the "Odyssey deals with fairyland, enchantment, and human effort."

American teachers hardly recommend written translations of Greek any more than of Latin, but they place great stress on the merits of oral or written composition. These exercises are limited to the ideas and words of the lesson of the day, contained in the texts studied in the class room. The exercises of Greek composition are considered necessary to a complete understanding of the texts studied in the class. The object assigned to the study of Greek by the conference is thus defined: It is to teach the language of classic Attic prose by making the Attic grammar understood and by reading Attic texts, but the object is also to excite a taste for Greek literature by reading Homer. Reading, and cursory reading at that, is the great instrument for the acquisition of languages, according to the Americans. This reading is of course accompanied by explanations on questions of geography, history, and mythology suggested by the text, and these explanations are expressly recommended. Nevertheless, the progress of the student is measured by the number of lines or verses he has read. One teacher felicitates himself on his success and judges it by the fact that a few years ago his students only read three books of Homer, while later they could read five, and still later eight, and he hopes to go still further with them. The knowledge of grammar, in other words, is in no sense the final object of the study of Greek, but is only a means for reaching the real end, which is facility in reading a Greek text, ad as the student does not begin Greek until he has studied Latin for a year or more he is forced to rely upon his knowledge of Latin syntax to understand more easily and quickly that of the Greek.

[The author cites authorities to show that the same idea prevails in teaching modern langages. The teachers are recommended to confine themselves to instructing their pupils to read French and German readily without requiring them to write or speak those languages.]

HISTORY IN THE HIGH SCHOOLS.

The study of history has not obtained the importance it deserves in the secondary schools of the United States, only 27.31 per cent of the attendants of these schools having taken it in 1889-90. In later programmes it also occupies a subordinate place. In the high schools of Chicago, for example, there is no history until the third year, when general history appears. It then gives place to other studies. There is no ancient history for students of the general course and no national or modern history for students of the classical course, nor do the young scholars have any instruction in history before entering the high schools, and none in the grammar schools until the third year, when the history of the United States until the Administration of Washington is introduced. The child is therefore 13 years old before he learns the history of his own country. Is this not because the practical American, absorbed by his care for the present and future, is indifferent to a past which he disdains and can rot see the use of studying the Old World? The committee has made a remarkable report on this subject. Rarely have the importance of historical study and the influence which it exerts on the development of the mind, when properly directed, been better defined.

MORAL EDUCATION IN THE HIGH SCHOOLS.

These schools are attended by scholars who only come a few hours a day to follow a certain course of study, and they would seem to be above all and almost exclusively schools of intellectual education. Are they schools of moral education as well! The Americans say that they are and that they contribute with the church and family to form the morale of the young from 14 to 18 years of age. It is a universal testimony, says Mr. Huling, that the senior classes of the high schools show a manifest

moral improvement over the lowest classes. They have developed in reflection, conscience, and propriety. They have a sense of responsibility and duty, are less egotistical, and more devoted to goodness for itself. There is less lying and flirting, and a general progress in dignity and self-respect. Doubtless this moral progress is in the first place the natural effect of mental work. But the studies are not allowed to exercise their moral effect unaided. Every opportunity that instruction in history and literature can afford for forming the character is utilized, and advantage is taken of public exercises and religious or other lectures to impress the minds of the students with a high ideal of morality. Use is also made of private conversations adapted to the wants of individuals, and even the aid of parents is invoked to the the same end.

LATIN AND GREEK IN THE COLLEGES.

We find nearly the same authors studied in all the colleges. Except Virgil, which is a book of the high school, nearly all the great Latin prose writers or poets figure in the programmes. The aim of the instruction given is manifestly to teach the students to read Latin easily, and also to use the study of the text as a means to know the history of the manners and arts of the Roman people. The programmes of Greek instruction lead us to the same conclusions. [Gives Greek programmes of Oberlin, Amherst, and Williams.] The Greek authors studied in American colleges, it will be seen, are nearly the same as those used in France. The question is, are they studied in the same spirit? They are, assuredly, in some points. The Amhurst programme says: "It is our aim to give the student an exact appreciation of the style and thought of the Greek writers and open to him the treasures of wisdom and knowledge which their works contain." But what especially characterizes the American Hellenists is that they try to have a good deal of Greek read and read rapidly. Thus, at Oberlin, it is specified in the programme that "all the comedies of Aristophanes will be read" except certain ones which, for obvious reasons, are read only in part. Greek composition, like Latin, is not practiced after the freshman year, nor is Greek [written] translation regarded with favor any more than Latin. Cursive explanation of the text is the rule. We must add that the study of the Greek language is combined with that of the literature, institutions, manners, and art of Greece. At Williams, for example, while reading the Odyssey the principal Homeric questions are discussed, and while translating Lysias, the political and social circumstances alluded to in his orations are explained. The use of dictionaries of Greek antiquities is recommended, and Athens and Olympia are studied from the topographical and archæological point of view. In a word, the study of Greek is not limited to a dry apprenticeship to the language alone, but it penetrates into the genius of the Greek race and attempts to know its thought and life, and it is declared that the knowledge of Greek is an inestimable discipline for the mind and is at the same time an indispensable condition of the knowledge both of ancient and modern languages and literature