and picturing savage and barbarous life before passing to the historic nations; giving the probable reasons for the early development of a fairly high civilization in the great sub-tropic river valleys of Africa and Asia minor; and then proceeding to show how the present economic, political or religious institutions of the United States are indebted to those early civilizations; showing how the torch of civilization has been passed on from one people to another, variously modified in the transition, until today the descendants of the barbarous hordes that inhabited central Europe in the first century of the Christian era have achieved in Europe, America and Australasia, the highest civilization the world has yet attained; showing that the art of each people and each period reflects, as it is the expression of, the feeling of (the dominant element of) the people of that time, and that progress in science is progress in the (intellectual) interpretation of the habits of the universe, or, as we usually say, of the laws of nature; showing then how art and science have reacted on the moral ideas of people and changed their political and religious usages as well as their industrial system. At the conclusion of the course there should be an attempt to sum up the results of the moral insight gained by us at the end of these centuries of progressive civilization, so that a high and yet a sane and serviceable ideal of the true, the good and the beautiful may uplift the hearts of the young people. The meaning and importance of the social sciences-of economics, political science, ethics, æsthetics and philosophy--should be indicated at least. This course should be given by lectures and auxiliary conversations; or rather, throughout by talks. Good books of reference, as well as charts and maps, should be at hand and should be referred to by the teacher, and pupils should be encouraged to make use of them. As regards books to be read in connection with the course, such works as Myers's History of the Eastern Nations and Greece and other books of that scope would probably be more attractive and useful than such a brief compendium as Myers's General History, on the one hand, or very elaborate special studies, on the other. Mrs. Sheldon-Barnes's General History is full of valuable suggestions for one conducting such a course as is here proposed. Historical novels should be recommended to make the course vivid; and if it should be necessary, as a means of interest ing the pupils in them, a few hours in the year might be devoted to readings by the instructor from the best passages of some of these novels. Attention should be directed to the literary monuments, and good translations of these should be at hand. There should be occasional readings from such writers as Homer, Thucydides, Livy, Commines, Froissart, from Fénélon's Télémache, from Chaucer, Swift, Bunyan, and the ballad literature, as well as from the less literary remains of an earlier day, such as the monkish chronicles (and the early writings of Egypt and Babylonia-Assyria should be similarly used). The poems and romances of early times should be given some attention. Marco Polo and Sir John Mandeville might be compared with Münchäusen on the one hand, and with Livingston and Stanley on the other. The course should be so arranged that the ground could be covered in four days a week, leaving every fifth day for exercises of an auxiliary character,-readings and discussions, perhaps debates on historical questions, plays, recitations, etc. But in the discussions and debates care should be taken that the standards of today be not unfairly applied to a different stage of culture, with different conditions, possibilities and needs. Debate should be used, not to intensify prejudice against this or that people, person or line of conduct, but rather to awaken sympathy with different phases of life and with unaccustomed points of view. Pupils should be encouraged in a friendly rivalry to see who could bring to the class from the library the most interesting illustrative matter; they might hand in to the teacher a brief statement of what they had found, bearing on the history of the people or period then under discussion; and the best of these (or occasionally those which showed the most effort) might be presented to the class. Excursions, visits to museums and monuments, etc., would also occasionally have their place, so far as these would not interfere with the work in the other departments of study pursued by the pupils. But all the outside reading, preparation for discussion, etc. should be optional. Federal Aid to Military Education in Colleges BY THOMAS MARSHALL SPAULDING, FIRST LIEUTENANT, "T HE government of the United States, like most federal governments, has had no policy with regard to education." This is the statement, made in 1911, of the president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. And immediately after, in speaking of the Morrill Act of 1862, he characterizes it as "largely an accidental measure," "enacted without any thinking of a careful sort as to the effect that the educational agency thus created would have." The passage of the Morrill Act was the most important step ever taken by the federal government in aid of education. If no adequate consideration was given to the probable results of this measure, other legislation on such matters is likely to have been largely controlled by chance. Such legislation may have been productive of considerable benefit, but usually with an undue expenditure of money or time or effort; and it is well, at however late a date, to undertake the "thinking of a careful sort" which may unfortunately have been omitted in the beginning. By a series of acts of Congress the federal government has committed itself to the policy of assisting military education in schools and colleges not under federal control. This is done in two ways: by the detail of army officers as instructors of military science and tactics, and by the loan or gift of arms, equipment and ammunition. The authorized number of institutions thus aided has been increased by successive enactments until at the present time 100 officers of the active list-or, if retired, drawing active pay and allowances-are allowed upon this duty, besides an indefinite number of retired officers and non-commissioned officers who receive no compensation from the United States other than their regular retired pay. Rifles and infantry equipment are loaned to all these institutions; cavalry equipment and field guns to some of them. Ammunition and target supplies are furnished to the total value of $30,000 annually. What with the value of the ammunition expended and the accoutrements worn out in service, and the compensation to retired officers in excess of their regular retired pay, the cost to the government is considerable,-trifling, to be sure, in comparison with the two and a half millions annually appropriated for agricultural and mechanical education, but regarded by itself by no means negligible. Now what return is derived from this investment? Clearly the army itself is not benefited; on the contrary, it suffers the loss of a number of its officers who are withdrawn from their normal duties. The gain, then, if not to the army, must be to the country at large; let us see wherein it consists. One advantage to the nation is perfectly obvious. Our army always has been, is now, and presumably always will be, insignificant in size, and any war of the slightest magnitude will require it to be tripled,-perhaps increased twentyfold. This means a tremendous number of recruits to be assimilated and made into soldiers; if some of them have even the rudiments of military training the process will be shortened. Such training for young men in schools and colleges may be of exceptional value in time of war, for it is from the educated class that the officers of the volunteer army, like the leaders in any other undertaking, must chiefly be drawn. "The chief motive for the insertion of the military-drill requirement in the Morrill Act", says (November, 1913) the dean of the engineering college of Ohio State University, "was probably to strengthen our feeble military preparedness by the creation of a body of educated citizen soldiery which in time of war would become an asset of great importance to us. It was evidently inspired by the serious shortage of persons fit to become officers in the Civil War, which was then in progress, and the terrible suffering of our troops, due to the incompetence and inexperience of their officers." Here the argument for military instruction in schools is generally ended. (It must be borne in mind that we are not considering the disciplinary and cultural value which this study, like every other, possesses in greater or less degree.) But there is another benefit, less apparent, less definite, but none the less real. Hitherto it has been generally ignored by both the educator and the soldier, but fortunately both are now beginning to turn their attention to it. I mean the dissemination among the educated men and women of the United States of that general, untechnical knowledge of the military system, the military policy, the military strength and weakness of our country, which should be as much a part of the mental stock-in-trade of every good citizen as are opinions on the tariff or the trusts or public sanitation or the liquor traffic. Assuming that federal aid is to be given at all,—and, wisely or not, this seems to be definitely settled,-it is the degree of attainment of these two objects that must measure the return on the government's investment. Much will depend upon the attitude of the trustees and faculties of the institutions concerned; much, also, upon the character and abilities of the officers detailed. No general rules can be laid down for such matters, but each case must be dealt with individually. Officers unsuited to such work should of course not be detailed; or, if the unfitness is developed during the tour of duty, they should be withdrawn. Institutions failing to give adequate support to their military departments should forfeit federal aid in favor of other colleges willing to coöperate honestly with the government. But leave aside these special cases. We have two definite ends in view; what general rules can be laid down best calculated for the attainment of these ends? Some general policy should be recognized and faithfully adhered to. If the system is left to run itself there is no knowing what the eventual result may be. Analysis of the several acts of Congress bearing on the subject shows that there are but two conditions which an institution is required by law to fulfill in order to receive the governmental assistance already referred to: first, that it shall have "capacity to educate at the same time not less than 150 male students" (act of September 26, 1888); and second, that it give drill and instruction in military tactics (act of January 13, 1891). A regulation of the war department further provides that it shall have actually under military instruction a certain minimum number of male pupils over fifteen years of age. This number is 100 for distinctly military schools and colleges, and 150 for others, if an officer of the active list is to be detailed; 75 if an officer of the |