fact clear that in urging the importance of technical education and industrial drawing I place its consideration not alone on the grounds of its special or exceptional character, but rather on the basis of its great and economical value in general education and in practical life.

As the subject of education has been so much discussed of late, and as there is such a contrariety of opinion offered concerning what its features and aims should be, it may be wise to take a few soundings, in order to see where we are.

For the purpose, then, of getting at a few points of general agreement, let me ask, What is understood by education, and particularly by public education? I think the answer that would come to such a question, especially from the States to which I have referred, which have taxed themselves $70,000,000 for its support the last year, would be, that edu cation is the fitting of youth for the occupations of adult life and the duties of good citizenship; and it seems to me that we should have in such an an-‘ swer one that practically covers the whole question; and yet, simple as this answer is, self evident, indeed, as it appears, I observe in the discussion now going forward that it is extremely difficult for educators to defend the present system of education, particularly against the charge of its want of practical character, in any way that commends itself to the common mind by its explicitness and clearness.

I am aware that very many eloquent and scholarly essays have been written in behalf of the present system; but the discussion has been beclouded by the use of many phrases not understood by the public, such as "the developing of the mental and moral faculties of youth," "the broadening of their intellectual powers," and others of that sort; while the virtues of "disciplinary studies" and "culture studies" are also enlarged upon. By such treatment, the direct and simple object of education has become enveloped in an æsthetic mist of fine phrases to such an extent that it appears to plain and honest minded folks as decidedly too much set up in character and as hardly belonging to the toiling masses. Consequently, it is being vigorously attacked for its apparent want of practicality on the one hand and its undue expensiveness on the other.

As an educator and as an advocate of the broadest possible education for all classes, I am glad to see these attacks made. Every true educator should welcome them. We cannot have too much discussion, and one of the effects of this present widespread interest, I have no doubt, will be the explosion of many educational theories which are now so boldly advanced, the abandonment of the present narrow and over literary schemes, and the establishment, on a firm basis, of a system of education which shall meet the needs of the workingman and the mechanic, the producers of industrial wealth, and which shall prepare others to appreciate the skilled products of the country.

When the people see clearly and understand intelligently the close relationship of the practical education offered them to success in all

conditions of life, they will not suffer it to be hampered or curtailed for want of sufficient support.

It is, perhaps, the first duty of educators to make clear the practical features of the educational ideas they advance. Holding this opinion, I beg to submit to your consideration some general points in regard to the scope and character of public education which I regard as fundamental.

I assume it agreed that public education in this country must tend toward a preparation for the occupations of adult life and the performance of the duties of good citizenship. This being granted, our first step is to see what the general occupations of adult life are, for which education can be an elementary preparation, and, second, what are the duties of good citizenship which elementary education can promote.

In the first place, then, let us take a broad view of what the general occupations of adult life are:

First. We have those who are engaged in producing food and raw materials of industrial arts, animal, vegetable, and mineral. These are the producers of natural wealth.

Secondly. We have those who are engaged in using the raw materials produced by the first class, as a basis on which to expend their skill and taste in the manufacture of objects for the comfort and pleasure of mankind. These are the producers of industrial wealth.

Thirdly. We have those who are engaged in trade, finance, and transportation. These are the distributors of the wealth produced by the first two classes, but are not themselves the producers of wealth.

Fourthly. We have those engaged in military, naval, and political service. These are persons employed for the protection of social and political order.

Fifthly. We have those engaged in the professional occupations, such as lawyers, clergymen, physicians, and teachers. These are employed in ministering to the legal, religious, physical, and educational wants of all classes.

Sixthly. We have those engaged in personal or domestic service.

You will observe that it is the persons engaged in the first two classes of occupation that are the real producers of wealth, while the others are maintained by occupations growing out of its distribution or by professional or political occupations growing out of the necessity for protection to the whole social and political organism.

In the educational discussions of the day we do not see sufficiently realized the changes in the relative numbers of persons in these six classes that have been made in recent years; nor are educators sufficiently alive to the necessary changes in the scope of public education thereby entailed.

What, then, are these changes? If we examine this classification closely, we shall find that these changes have their origin in and are

principally based upon the transformation that has taken place, within the last few years, in the second group of occupations, those of the industrial classes. These changes have been enormous; I might say sufficiently so as to completely revolutionize the old relation of these classes to one another. A slight examination of the material and political condition of any one of the leading States to-day shows that its material and political power is centring about its industrial classes, and that, as these flourish or decline, so all the other interests of the State flourish or decline. Indeed, it is a well established economic truth that industrial wealth, in other words a healthy condition of the industrial occupations, is absolutely necessary to the success of all other occupations.

So clearly is this fact recognized by the five great European nations, England, France, Germany, Austria, and Italy, that to-day they are in earnest competition with one another to develop to the utmost the industrial productiveness of their people.

Let me for a moment digress to make a statement in regard to what industial development consists of. In a manufactured product we have two elements, the raw material and the skilled labor which has been put upon it. Take, for instance, this piece of steel. Its value is, perhaps, three cents. As yet skilled labor has hardly touched it. Fabricated into this form, we have a surgical instrument which is worth ten dollars. Now, what makes the difference in price between these two pieces of steel? The simple fact that skilled labor has been applied to this one and not to the other; and it is the skilled labor, therefore, which gives it its chief value. Take this piece of cotton cloth for another illustration. You have here eight cents' worth of raw material in cotton. This material has been fabricated by many processes, until there has been produced this piece of cloth, worth one dollar and a half.

Thus, again, we see that the principal element in the value of an article may be the skill and taste which have been expended upon an insignificant bit of raw material.

Then, it may be said that the ratio of increase in value made by skilled labor upon the raw material will be determined by the amount of skill and quality of the taste displayed.

This is precisely where a consideration of the industrial element in education becomes important. When we see what creates value in labor, and how little we have hitherto done by education to foster this element, it is time to overhaul the whole subject, using both spade and pruning hook in the operation.

To understand the full bearing and significance of this matter of technical education in art and science, we must consider its influence on human labor and industry; for be it remembered that this whole question is an economical one, not one of sentiment; it has as much to do with practical life and profitable labor as the employment of the locomotive in lieu of horses or the use of gas instead of farthing rushlights.

Let us for a moment, then, look at what constitutes the element of value in human labor.

Labor is the application of two powers: first, skill; second, force. The product is valuable in the proportion as it displays skill and without value in the ratio of its absence of skill. This is as true about the making of a watch, or a nail, or a pair of boots as about the performance of a difficult surgical operation. The skilled workman is the one who produces something of greater value out of the same material than the unskilled workman can, and with less waste of time and material. He is, therefore, a more profitable agent to employ than the unskilled, and his work being more valuable he receives a higher compensation for it, while his employer, finding a ready market, at high prices, for industrial masterpieces, makes more profit on the sale of them than on unskilled productions. The purchaser is better satisfied with the article and willing to pay a higher price for it than for one displaying no skill. So that the application of skill and taste in the production of an object gives (1) to the workman higher wages, (2) to the employer larger profits, and (3) to the purchaser more satisfaction than if the skill and taste had been absent. This is the prosaic and practical aspect of the question, its economical character.

There is another view I shall refer to, though not to enlarge upon. That may, if you please, be called the sentimental aspect, in contradis tinction to the practical one. It is this: That the workman whose taste and skill are employed is a happier man than if only his muscles are used in his work. His soul and spirit are engaged; the immortal part of him is influencing his labor, breathing into the work of his hands the very breath of the life that shall never die. Such a man was Raffaelle when painting the Sistine Madonna, transferring the image of his own beautiful soul to the canvas; an act of homage and praise to his Maker for life and happiness and a gift to all posterity of a "joy forever."

To the practical people who do not believe in sentiment, I would also like to remark that the Sistine Madonna is worth a good deal of money. What is true about the productions of one workman applies to all who are engaged in the industrial arts, and it is, therefore, equally true about a whole nation. The blacksmith and the maker of watch springs may work in the same material, steel; yet one may produce an object of small value out of a pound of the material, while the other produces many of great value out of a pennyweight of it. So it is with almost all the raw material of the arts, both fine and industrial. A piece of clay which is of less value than any coin in circulation becomes under the touch of Michael Angelo of greater pecuniary value than any coin that was ever circulated; a lump of common earth, that might have been made into a firebrick worth a penny, has been transformed by the great sculptor into a relic that its weight in gold could not purchase. Though the difference in relative values between skilled and unskilled

work is not so great in industrial art as it is in fine art, yet there is a difference, and it is invariably recognized and paid for.

It is hardly worth while to continue this argument, because no one can challenge it, and one illustration that is typical of thousands is enough. We must recognize its truth, and the value of its significance to us is determined by the proportion in numbers of our people employed in the manufacturing industries, and the amount of capital invested in them.

If we were a purely agricultural people, the loss we suffer from want of industrial skill would not be so great as to be formidable, nor would the danger to our commercial prosperity be so imminent as it is. But we are a manufacturing people, with very heavy interests involved in this question, and these interests can only be preserved and developed by investing them with taste and skill. In other respects our people are highly educated and have refined taste, and will not be satisfied with clumsy and tasteless objects, whether of native or foreign manufacture.

We have common sense and refinement enough to want things to look well and wear well, and unless native manufactures can be so made we do not buy them; hence the enormous importations of foreign goods which do satisfy our love of honesty and beauty by their skill and taste. You have only to go into the stores of any large city and inquire where the finest goods come from to find out why a good many native workmen are out of employment.

If the present condition of labor is thriftless and unprofitable, what should be done to insure its improvement? We know what other nations have done when suffering from the same cause. The first thing England did was to establish schools of art in the centres of manufactures; but that did little good, for their influence was too limited to improve public taste. The next experiment was to teach drawing in the public schools and train highly skilled teachers of art, and therein was found the true remedy. The public was taught at the right age for learning, in childhood, and the pupils of the public schools, whose taste had been encouraged by regular exercises in drawing, crowded the schools of art in the evenings as soon as their apprenticeships to trades began and practical life commenced. In 1851 there were nineteen schools of art in the United Kingdom; this year there are nearly one thousand schools of art and art classes, and of a much higher standard of success than in 1851, and industrial drawing is now taught in the national schools.

What has been done for art by the government and the people is insig nificant compared with what has been accomplished in scientific instruction during the last twenty years. The regular teachers of the day schools have qualified themselves to give instruction in art and science, and the national school buildings are used for classes. In consequence there are many thousands of science classes spread like a network all