LETTER OF PROFESSOR HART, AND THE EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS CONCERNING PEALE'S GRAPHICS, AS TAUGHT IN THE HIGH SCHOOL OF PHILADELPHIA IN 1840-1844. 228 SOUTH BROAD STREET, PHILADELPHIA,

November 22, 1875.

DEAR SIR: In reply to your inquiries respecting Rembrandt Peale, the artist, and his system of graphics as used in the Philadelphia high school, and as projected for the other public schools in this city, I take pleasure in saying what I know. The facts which I am about to give have never before been published, being gathered partly from the manuscript records of the board of education, partly from my own manuscript notes made while principal of the high school, and partly from memory.

Mr. Peale, had two ambitions, which seemed to govern his whole life. One was to paint a Washington which should be worthy of the subject and which should command the confidence of his countrymen; the other was to inaugurate a system of teaching drawing which should make it as cheap, as elementary, and as common as reading and writing. To this end he thought out a plan which was first used in the Philadelphia high school, Mr. Peale himself giving the necessary instruction, at a salary almost nominal, as compared with the value of the services of an artist of his distinction ($500 a year for three hours daily of continuous instruction). His object, however, was not to get pay for his labor, but to have the opportunity of showing the feasibleness of his scheme. The proficiency of the students of the high school in this branch was the common remark of all intelligent educators who visited the institution. Having given the method a trial of two years in the high school, Mr. Peale then offered to the controllers to superintend without charge the introduction of the system into the lower elementary schools, provided the controllers would give the necessary authorization. This generous offer met unexpectedly with a harsh rebuff from some of the members of the board. Their idea of drawing evidently was either that of the fashionable boarding school or that of the scientific engineer, something for advanced pupils only, something elaborate and costly, belonging to the highest order of schools, not to the primary school. The proposition of Mr. Peale was violently assailed, his methods were criticised, his whole scheme was denounced as that of a charlatan.

At Mr. Peale's request a committee of investigation was appointed, and the whole matter was canvassed with care, the committee not only examining for themselves the results of his system as tested in the high school, but obtaining the opinions of professional experts, educational and artistic. The result was the approval and adoption of his scheme, but not with a unanimous vote, and the opposition to the scheme on the part of the minority was so persistent and so annoying that after a few months trial his heart sickened and he gave up his darling project in despair. He also, a year or two later, resigned his position in the high school, but his system was long continued there, and with the happiest results. Mr. Peale's connection with the high school began in January, 1840, and ceased July, 1844.

The elements of Mr. Peale's system, as explained by himself, were mainly these: (1) The eye should be trained from early childhood to recognize the elements of form, and the earlier this training of the eye begins the better for the education of all the perceptive faculties. The training of the eye to see form, and of the hand to imitate it, should go on hand in hand, the training of the eye, however, slightly preceding that of the hand.

(2) In order to learn thus to see correctly the forms of objects with the eye, and to imitate them truly and readily with the hand, we should begin with the simplest elements of form, taking but one at a time. The child should learn, for instance, first to see the direction of a straight line, and then to make another straight line in the same direction; that is, to draw a straight line parallel to another straight line. In other words, parallelism was the first thing which the eye was trained to recognize and the hand to imitate. Next, the child might be trained to see, that is, to judge by the eye, when a line is divided into equal parts, two, three, or more, and then be trained to copy what he thus sees; that is, by the hand and without mechanical aid, to divide a

line into two, three, or more equal parts. These exercises might then be extended to lines in all the various directions, horizontal, perpendicular, oblique, &c. The eye and hand having acquired the necessary accuracy and readiness in thus seeing and making simple lines, might next attend to their combinations, as constituting figures. So, step by step, the system proceeds until the most complex forms are mastered with

ease.

(3) According to Mr. Peale's system, writing should be treated as a branch of drawing, writing being, in fact, only drawing the forms of the letters. Drawing, then, as a school study, should precede penmanship. The facts observed in the high school proved incontestably that those pupils who had gone through Mr. Peale's elementary course of graphics learned penmanship more rapidly and became better penmen than those who had not enjoyed this preliminary training. I have never known classes turn out such uniform examples of good penmanship as those who went through Mr. Peale's system. The boys of the Philadelphia high school were promoted in all the commercial establishments of the city for their good writing.

(4) Mr. Peale insisted much upon these two points: (a) the scholar should first copy patterns and afterwards copy from nature; (b) he should first learn free, off-hand drawing, afterwards mechanical drawing.

(5) The elementary training of the eye and hand in early youth is of incalculable value as a preparation for every kind of mechanical pursuit. Mr. Peale's idea was that the elementary drawing book (graphics, he called it) should be as cheap as the spelling book, and should be studied at the same time. A mechanic who is thus from childhood familiar with his pencil, and who can sketch the form he sees, or invent new forms as readily as he can read and write, is more productive as a laborer, and always commands a higher price than one who has not this skill. Could Mr. Peale's idea have been realized in a great mechanical and manufacturing city like Philadelphia, I have no doubt it would have added millions annually to the productiveness of its artisans. Thirty years ago I expressed the belief, and I am willing still to abide by the record, that such a system as Mr. Peale's, fully and fairly carried out, would have been worth more to the city pecuniarily than the entire cost of her system of public schools.

The testimony of the experts who were invited by the controllers to express their opinion of Mr. Peale's system is worthy of record. I give it entire. The gentlemen examined were Mr. Sully, the well known artist; Captain Moering, of the Austrian military engineer corps, who was then spending the winter in Philadelphia; Mr. Morris, an eminent civil engineer; Mr. Samuel V. Merrick, the great locomotive builder; Mr. Towne, partner of Mr. Merrick, and lately founder of the Towne School of Science; Mr. McMurtrie, artist; Professor Kendall, teacher of perspective in the school; Professor Frazer, teacher of mechanics; Professor Becker, teacher of writing; Professor Frost, teacher of composition; Professor Hart, principal of the school; and Professor Bache, formerly principal of the school, afterwards Superintendent of the United States Coast Survey.

(1) Should instruction in drawing commence with drawing by the eye or with instruments? It should by all means commence with drawing by the eye.

(2) Should instruction in drawing commence with perspective and drawing from models or with drawing from patterns? The pupil should copy patterns first, and models afterwards.

(3) In learning to draw from patterns should a beginner commence with complex forms, or with straight lines and simple geometrical figures? - The pupil should begin with straight lines and simple forms first, and afterwards go on to those more complex. To begin with complex forms or with models is to attack all the difficulties of drawing at once. It is like attempting to read before knowing the alphabet, or to run before knowing how to walk.

- Accurate percep

(4) What are the things chiefly aimed at in learning to draw? tion of the true forms of objects and skill of hand in imitating what is seen. (5) Is the progression of exercises as given in Peale's Graphics adapted to facilitate the pupil in acquiring this accuracy of eye and freedom of hand? More so than anything that I have ever seen.

(6) Does the practice of enlarging and diminishing drawings, as recommended by Mr. Peale, give any facility in training the eye and hand? — It does. No one who has not tried it is aware of its importance in this respect.

(7) Does the subsequent practice of drawing in perspective from models facilitate in training the eye and hand? — Undoubtedly. It completes the training already commenced by copying from patterns.

(8) Would this training of the eye and hand be gained with as much ease and certainty by beginning to draw from models before copying patterns? — I should think not.

(9) Can this training of the eye and hand be gained with as much ease and certainty by beginning to draw from models before copying patterns? — It cannot. (10) Is a person who begins to learn to draw with instruments likely to acquire habits of eye and hand that will impede his progress in becoming an expert draughtsman-The eye becomes accustomed to rely entirely upon the measurement of rule and compass and the hand becomes stiff and mechanical in its movements. It is with the utmost difficulty that these habits, when once contracted, can be shaken off.

(11) Does a person who has learned to draw by the eye alone experience any facility in learning to draw afterwards by instruments? - The person who has acquired accuracy of eye and the free use of the hand can use instruments with much greater dexterity than if he had not enjoyed this previous training. In fact, perfection in the use of instruments cannot easily be acquired without previous training of the eye and hand.

(12) Does learning to draw by the eye give any facility in learning to write? - I have never seen the experiment tried, but cannot see how it could be otherwise, as writing is only one form of drawing.

(13) What is your opinion of the propriety of connecting drawing and writing? — I think it an admirable plan.

(14) Would it be of advantage to every young person, whatever his intended occupation, to learn to draw? - Without doubt.

(15) Is the time given in the high school to this department (less than two hours a week) sufficient to extend the course of instruction advantageously to any other branches of drawing than pencil drawing from patterns and models? I should think not.

(16) If a boy learn pencil drawing from patterns and models in the manner proposed by Mr. Peale can he, without difficulty, after leaving school, learn its application to the various mechanic arts? - With the greatest ease.

(17) Do the specimens herewith submitted evince any proficiency in off-hand drawing?-I think the lines are drawn with remarkable correctness and truth. Indeed, I am surprised, not with their finish (for they are unfinished), but with the freedom and skill of hand and the accuracy of eye which they evince on the part of those who have given so little time to the subject.

(18) Could these specimens have been executed by persons ignorant of the principles of drawing? Unquestionably not.

(19) Could they have been executed with equal facility and accuracy without previous training of the eye and hand in drawing from patterns? - They could not.

S. Ex. 209-2

(20) If the boys who executed these specimens continue to receive two lessons a week for a year to come will they by the end of that time probably have become so far proficient in pencil drawing as to be able to apply it to the various arts of life? - I think they will.

(21) Wherein does Mr. Peale's system differ from the system generally practised?Not so much in its principles, although it contains some new and important principles, as in the simplicity of its arrangements and the perfection of its details.

OPINION OF CAPTAIN MOERING.

(1) Should instruction in drawing commence with drawing by the eye or with instruments? - By the eye.

(2) Should instruction in drawing commence with perspective and drawing from models or with drawing from patterns? - From patterns, as the lines represent definite forms, and can be understood by the eye; this may seize the outlines of models, marked by shade and light, when more experienced and practised.

(3) In learning to draw from patterns should a beginner commence with complex forms or with straight lines and simple geometrical curves? With straight lines. (4) What are the things chiefly aimed at in learning to draw? — Accuracy of eye and freedom of hand. And why shackle a natural disposition for drawing by ruler and compass? Leonardo da Vinci only in after life became acquainted with the science of drawing after having practised it by intuition all the time before this period, and so have all the painters; in particular, Giotto and Correggio.

(5) Is the progression of exercises, as given in Peale's Graphics, adapted to facilitate the pupil in acquiring this accuracy of eye and freedom of hand? — It is.

(6) Does the practice of enlarging and diminishing drawings, as recommended by Mr. Peale, give any facility in training the eye and hand? - It does.

(7) Does the subsequent practice of drawing in perspective from models facilitate in training the eye and hand? - It does.

(8) Would this training of the eye and hand be gained with as much ease and certainty by beginning to draw from models before copying patterns? — It would

not.

(9) Can this training of the eye and hand be acquired by drawing with instruments alone? It cannot.

(10) Is a person who begins to draw with instruments likely to acquire habits of eye and hand that will impede his progress in becoming an expert draughtsman? He will be certain to acquire a stiff, cramped hand.

(11) Does a person who has learned to draw by the eye alone experience any facility in afterwards drawing with instruments? - A person who has first learned to draw by the eye can comprehend and acquire the use of instruments with tenfold the advantage of one who has not had this previous training. Even in linear drawing of architecture a practised eye can discover the ease of the off-hand draughtsman or the angular and rigid manner of the drawer by instruments.

(12) Does learning to draw by the eye give any facility in learning to write? — Undoubtedly. It assists one in drawing the form of any object, and writing is only drawing the forms of letters.

(13) What is your opinion of the propriety of connecting drawing and writing? In my country writing precedes drawing, and they sometimes go on together. But I have long been of the opinion that writing is very much injured by being taught before the pupil acquires that freedom of hand which is to be got only by off-hand drawing. In learning to write a boy is confined to small forms and his hand inevitably becomes cramped. Whereas, if a boy first acquires freedom and skill of hand, he can, at will, apply it to all forms, large or small.

(14) Does learning to draw by the eye facilitate materially any other branch of

nstruction?—I think it facilitates the study of geography and of all geometrical studies. A good eye is essential to the memory of geography and topography.

(15) Does learning to draw by the eye facilitate any of the mechanic arts?-Undoubtedly. It enables the artisan to design new patterns, &c., to catch more readily those designed by others, and to shadow forth again what he has seen.

(16) Would it be of advantage to every young person, whatever his intended occupation, to learn to draw? - Unquestionably.

(17) Is the time given in the high school to this department (less than two hours a week) sufficient to extend the course of instruction advantageously to any other branches of drawing than pencil drawing from patterns and models? — I should think not. I do not see how the pupils have made the proficiency which they have made in the limited time afforded. In the school in which I was educated we all drew two hours a day for three years at off-hand drawing (the Imperial Academy of Engineers at Vienna).

(18) If a boy learn pencil drawing from patterns and models in the manner proposed by Mr. Peale, can he, without difficulty, after leaving school learn its application to the various mechancic arts? He can.

-

(19) Do the specimens herewith submitted evince any proficiency in off-hand drawing? They exhibit very surprising proficiency for the time given to the subject.

(20) Could these specimens have been executed by persons ignorant of the principles of drawing — They could not.

(21) Could they have been executed with equal facility and accuracy without previous training of the eye and hand in drawing from patterns? They could not.

(22) If the boys who executed these specimens continue to receive two lessons a week for a year to come, will they, by the end of that time, probably have become so far proficient in pencil drawing as to be able to apply it to the various arts of life?—I should think they would. Indeed, I have no doubt of it. (23) In what manner did you yourself learn drawing? · In the school in which I was educated (the Imperial Academy of Engineers of Vienna) we first copied from patterns, beginning with straight lines and simple geometrical forms, and going on to those which were more complicated and difficult till we had acquired entire freedom of hand and accuracy of eye in seeing and delineating the outlines of objects. We then drew from models, and were instructed in drawing perspectively off-hand. When we had become expert in this, after the third year, we studied the theory and practice of geometrical perspective.

(24) What opportunities have you had for knowing the manner in which drawing is generally taught? I know the manner in which it is taught in Austria, in Germany, and Italy, and it is very símilar to the one taught by Mr. Peale; nay, I should call his method an improvement the introduction of which would be desirable in our schools.

(25) What is the method in which drawing is generally taught? — It is everywhere taught in the manner I have described. First, by copying patterns; secondly, by drawing from models; and, lastly, by the use of instruments in its application to military and civil engineering, fortification, architecture, topography, carpentry, machine drawing, &c.

(26) Wherein does Mr. Peale's system differ from the system generally practised? Chiefly in the simplicity and perfection of its details.

(27) Is the theory and practice of geometric perspective generally considered as belonging to the department of drawing or to that of mathematics? - It is always considered a branch of mathematics, and taught by the mathematical professor and not by the professor of drawing.

(28) Does geometric perspective generally precede or follow drawing by the eye and hand? Boys who study drawing are generally, and may be always, expert off-hand