to deliver the opening lecture. This was promptly done. Through the efficient co-operation of Mr. N. Murray, of the Johns Hopkins Press, who became the secretary of the institute, a course of twelve "Lectures for the People" was arranged for the winter season of 1879–80. In the opening lecture President Gilman explained the character of the proposed course, and suggested possible lines of development for the institute: (1) lectures, relieved by stereopticon illustrations and good music; (2) a local reading-room, with periodicals and illustrated journals; (3) a circulating library; (4) supplementary evening classes, with lessons in drawing, and the keeping of accounts, economy, co-operation, and the principles of busiHe suggested also the cultivation of flowers indoors, in yards and windows, as adding much to the pleasures of city life, with occasional exhibitions to stimulate rivalry. He expressed the belief that four or five such institutes as that at Canton might thrive in Baltimore. Many of these suggestions have since been carried out.

ness.

Among other university lecturers at Canton, from 1879 to 1881, were Professor H. N. Martin on "Some Uses of Plants"; Professor Remsen on (1) "The Air We Breathe" and (2) "The Light We Use"; and Dr. W. W. Jacques, now electrician of the Bell Telephone Company, on "Electricity," illustrated by experiments. Literary as well as scientific lectures were given. Professor J. J. Sylvester, one of the original lecturers in the Workingmen's College at London, and now professor of mathematics at Oxford, read some of his metrical translations from Schiller; Professor Albert S. Cook, now of Yale University, lectured on the life and writings of Shakespeare; and Dr. H. B. Adams gave an illustrated talk on Venice and the beginnings of modern commerce. Dr. S. F. Clarke, now of Williams College, illustrated the physical geography and political history of the United States by beautiful maps and charts. Mr. C. L. Woodworth, then a teacher of elocution. at the university, delighted his audience by dramatic and humorous readings. Vocal and instrumental concerts were occasionally given by the best available talent in the city. A

local reading-room was opened at Canton and flourished for some years in connection with a circulating library.

The lecture courses at the Workingmen's Institute in Canton, in East Baltimore, led directly to another interesting pioneer experiment. In 1882, a course of four lectures on biology was given by instructors in the biological department of the university to the employees of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, and to their wives and daughters. This course was supported by the late John W. Garrett, president of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, who paid the necessary expenses, and published-for free distribution among his employees-the four lectures given by the instructors, in a neat pamphlet of ninety-eight pages, with illustrations.' The subjects of the lectures were as follows: (1) "How Skulls and Backbones are Built," by Professor H. Newell Martin; (2) "How we Move," by Dr. Henry Sewell; (3) " On Fermentation," by Dr. William T. Sedgwick; (4) "Some Curious Kinds of Animal Locomotion," by Dr. William K. Brooks.

All the above work was in one sense University Extension, but it was never called by that name. M. Jourdain, in Molière's comedy "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme," after taking a private lesson, found to his surprise that he had been talking prose all his life. Perhaps our American colleges will discover some day that they have all been engaged in University Extension without knowing it.

Herbert B. Adams.

BALTIMORE, MD.

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY,

7 Baltimore: Friedenwald, 1982

III.

IMPRESSIONS FROM GERMAN SCHOOLS.

I am frequently asked what interested me most in my recent visit to the schools of Germany, and I invariably reply, “The teacher." The place which the teacher has made for himself in the educational system of Germany is certainly most impressive.

This place of responsibility and influence is not newly acquired. It is an inheritance from the past; a transmission of powers won by the courage, zeal, and intellectual strength of the teachers of three centuries. Beginning with the Reformation, -the time from which the present school system of Germany dates,--the teacher has filled a prominent place in all educational reforms. Witness the work of Luther, Erasmus, and Melancthon; of Trotzendorf, Wolf and Sturm; of Ratich, Comenius and Pestalozzi; and of a host of others, not only in promulgating new philosophies and methods of teaching, but in putting into practice new courses of study, in calling out for education the active interest of princes and people, and, wherever it was necessary, in shaping legislation relating to education both high and low. It is this inheritance of influence in educational affairs into which the German teacher of to-day has come, and most worthily, as I believe, does he use it and keep it.

He does not wait for writers of occasional and sensational articles to shape public opinion-writers whose criticisms of the schools rest on no knowledge of their condition and whose conception of their needs has not the basis of philosophy or experience. Neither does he allow newly-fledged members of school boards to initiate schemes of reform, which are meant to show their ability as reformers and to advertise their fitness for political preferment. The German teacher does not take his cue from such men, nor does he wait to take his cue from anybody. He prefers to have the first as well as last word in all questions of reform-whether it be in methods, programmes,

or organization. To him belongs almost exclusively the privilege of educating the public in school affairs through the public press. He uses professional association meetings, of which there are many, in discussing questions of reform; and he exercises the right of petition to the government all the more readily, because he knows that his petition will be heard.

The present notable measures of reform of higher education had their rise in associations of teachers who formulated their opinions in a monster petition of over twenty thousand signers to the Prussian Diet two years ago. Whether it was this petition which caused the appointment of the recent commission in Prussia, it is hard to say; yet there can be no doubt that the schoolmasters themselves began the discussion of the questions considered in the conference of last December, and the government's confidence in their ability to pass judgment upon the subjects presented was shown in the large number of school men appointed to serve on the commission.

The influence of the teachers in inaugurating reforms and in guiding legislation is due partly to the fact that they are, upon main issues of administration, clear and united, partly because they insist upon being heard, and partly because their action is pointed and systematic. I well remember the earnestness and point of a discussion carried on by a village association in Southern Germany. The association consisted of eight men-all the teachers of the town. The subject was manual training. Two or three meetings had been held previously, and the conclusions of the association were carefully noted in a series of statements, after being discussed and voted upon. These conclusions were to be sent to a higher body, which was to formulate all conclusions received, and print them in what is called a Year Book. Who can doubt that conclusions thus reached would and should have great weight in the councils of the nation?

Comparing the teachers' influence in Germany and in our own country, I am painfully impressed with the difference. In this country not only do teachers fail to make themselves felt, as they should be felt, in certain features of school legis

lation, but they frequently are obliged to give way to the politician in matters purely professional. What is the reason of this apparent want of influence on their part? We may attribute the prominence of non-professional leadership in educational affairs to our peculiar form of government. But is that the whole cause? Have the teachers of America asserted themselves as constantly and persistently as they should? Or, in asserting themselves, have they had the scholarship and professional training necessary to win the respect of intelligent men and to command attention to their claims?

The low standard set for teaching in most parts of our country is a source of weakness which I believe should be corrected, and the demand for improvement should come from the teachers themselves. For the sake of ourselves and our profession, but more for the sake of our schools and children, we should insist upon the State's demanding higher qualifications for teachers. So far at least we could follow with profit the example of Germany. The normal school course should be extended to three years, and larger opportunities should be given for professional practice. Graduation from such a course, or its equivalent, should be required for the position of teacher in elementary schools. Of the secondary school teachers there should be demanded, in addition to high scholarship, at least one year of professional training. When all this is done, the State or municipality should follow another example of Germany by giving to all worthy teachers a life tenure of their office. Then, and not till then, shall we have a profession of teaching in the sense in which it is recognized in Germany.

I have spoken of the teacher's influence in Germany in what may be called outside affairs. In the schoolroom, his personality is even more marked. Here one learns the secret of his power, which is that he is in earnest in carrying out a purpose. That is what most impresses visitors from abroad. They may not always think the purpose a good one, but the value of a well-defined purpose is clearly seen, especially when behind