Erfurt, Hildesheim, and Cassel. The following figures show what small amounts are collected in many rural communities: In the district of Ortelsburg 169 teachers receive salaries amounting to 127,000 marks; the rural communities in the district of Pillkallen pay 2,162 marks (80,000 marks are necessary for 106 teachers); Darkehmen pays 1,668 marks (61,000 marks for 79 teachers are required); Goldap, 1,461 (86,000 marks for 112 teachers); Oletzko, 1,860 (83,000 for 106 teachers); Lyck, 2,163 (93,000 for 117 teachers); Lötzen 722 (71,000 for 94 teachers); Sensburg, SGS (83,000 for 108 teachers). We see that in these districts of East Prussia the teachers' salaries are paid almost entirely by the State. Similar conditions exist in most of the Pomeranian country communities. The district of Demmin contributes 2,596 marks (88,000 marks are requisite for 105 teachers); Anklam, 525 (51,000 for 61 teachers); Pyritz, 1,377 (82,000 for 97 teachers); Naugard, 1,458 (87,000 for 105 teachers; Greifenberg, 966 (67,000 for 85 teachers); Regenwald, 568 (80,000 for 98 teachers); Belgrad, 2,319 (75,000 for 97 teachers); Rummelsburg, 1,008; Bublitz, 878; Bütow, 501; Lauenburg, 1,527. Similar and somewhat higher numbers are indicative of the conditions in the provinces of Saxony, Hanover and Hesse-Nassau. The western provinces show quite favorable results from country communities also. The following figures show how much communities in the country and landed proprietors owe to the relief afforded by the school law of 1888, not to mention the cessation of tuition fees. Country communities contributed in 1885 to teachers' salaries in the district of Königsberg 867,000 marks; in 1891 only 128,000; in Gumbinnen, during 1885, 613,000, but in 1891 only 44,000; in Danzig, in 1885, 392,000, but in 1891 only 92,000; in Marienwerder, in 1885, 622,000, but in 1891 only 144,000; in Stettin, in 1885, 172,000, in 1891 only 43,000; in Cöslin, in 1885, 206,000, but only 52,000 in 1891; in Stralsund, in 1885, 141,000, but in 1891 only 18,000; in Posen, in 1885, 602,000, but in 1891 only 176,000; in Bromberg, in 1885, 304,000, but in 1891 only 55,000. The equalization of expenditures in cities caused by the law referred to can hardly be compared with the foregoing figures. In most districts the expenditures of cities for teachers' salaries have increased, despite State appropriations, and only in few cases in proportion to the increase of population. In 1885 cities expended altogether for teachers' salaries 21,003,000 marks; in 1891, 22,295,000.

The sums paid for common schools are considerable. Official statisticians calculate an average of 29.74 marks, or $7.08, for every child. The accuracy of this calculation may be doubted. However, let us take for granted that the figures are approximately correct. Secondary educational institutions, with only 150,000 students, cost 31,500,000 marks, of which 14,500,000 are raised by tuition fees, so that each pupil still requires 113 marks ($26.89) additional. The Prussian universities, for about 12,000 students, require 7,500,000 marks State appropriation, an average of 625 marks ($148.75) per head. In comparison the demands

of elementary common schools are modest. Even the schools dearest to the people, the intermediate, are far more expensive than the elementary. Each one of their pupils costs 91 marks ($21.66), or about 50 marks after deduction of tuition fees.

The improvement of the common schools is, and ever will be, a question of finances. This the managers and councilors of the State administration know very well. The old adage is frequently quoted, Money which on schools is spent

Brings in the highest rate per cent.

PART II.-THE COMMON-SCHOOL TEACHERS OF PRUSSIA.

This is intended to be a presentation of comparative statistics relative to the position of Prussian common school teachers, women included. It is the custom of our time to deal with subjects impersonally. A "government" is praised or condemned when only an individual or several officials are meant. We speak of the "church" when we mean the clergy, and of the "school" when the question refers to teachers alone. This manner of expression is as just on the one hand as it appears open to objection on the other. By identifying officers with the institution whose representatives they are, the intention evidently is to characterize their full importance; a more significant background is thereby given to matters pertaining to them personally. On the other hand, we express ourselves impersonally when we do not desire to elevate the institution concerned. Knowing, however, that the institution in itself is a phantom, that it is and becomes something only through the persons connected with it, we speak most frigidly about its significance, but when occasion offers give the persons concerned with it a rebuff. Many speeches and publications overflowing with good will for the "school" manifest this temper. The present Prussian minister of education, Dr. Bosse, strongly emphasized the insufficiency of the teachers' salaries, and assisted the "school reformers" in city councils by telling them very distinctly and in plain language where and what the real force of the public system of instruction is. When he submitted his bill on the "Improvement of common schools and salaries of teachers, male and female" (the title was sufficiently expressive of the minister's meaning), he spoke as follows in his introductory speech, January 10, 1893:

The Royal Government has arrived at the conviction that a systematic gradation and a proportionate regulation and fixedness of the salaries of common school teachers, especially the increase just necessary for teachers in the poorer distrists, is altogether impossible under the provisions of the law of May 26, 1887. It recognizes more and more in this law—I am speaking advisedly-the danger of a standstill and the decay of a uniform development, not only of the system of compensation, but of our entire public school system. I shall confine myself only to the general conclusion that the law of May 26, 1887, leads, and must lead, to consequences which neither the Royal Government nor the Diet foresaw, or could have foreseen; to consequences which most seriously imperil the Prussian school system throughout.

ED 94-15

*

*

When Deputy Rickert demanded energetic efforts in behalf of the instruction in domestic economy, Dr. Bosse replied that he must first procure "daily bread" for the schools. He doubtless used the term in a different sense from the one applied above. Soon afterwards this debate was most forcibly exemplified. The city of Elbing, which has 59 teachers (among them 8 women) for 5,021 children, and pays most meager salaries, wanted to establish a school of domestic economy after the model at Marienburg. The minister refused his sanction, to the satisfaction of all true friends of education.

A great deal of insincerity attaches to efforts in behalf of schools, efforts that appear to teachers like the cat going around the hot broth in the tale of old. That is the one reason why teachers as a body oppose many "reforms" often more directly than by mere criticism. Yet teachers should be identified with current movements. In the midst of the stream they can always keep up with the current. They can also, if necessary, build a dam and turn aside the stream into a direction in which it will spread greater blessing. Some educational journals in Germany believe even now that they may and must ridicule reforms like instruction in domestic economy and manual training. They mean to reclaim the school for "general" education in Pestalozzi's name. Pestalozzi, however, united, as is known, his educational system most intimately with practical, useful work-spinning cotton. Outside reformers are often better disciples of Pestalozzi than their antago nists. For this reason it is no cause for surprise to hear that teachers with such views meet with strong opposition from the public, who judge the teacher's attitude in the same way in which the resistence of many ecclesiastics to religious reforms is judged. Teachers must not decline but accept what is of value, and admit what is new with the greatest generosity, and expose the shortcomings of what should have been accomplished. Otherwise they refute idealists without convincing materialists. Both are led to an unhealthy fellowship instead of soliciting the aid of the former, so that with their help they may take possession of more defensible positions.

"Impersonal" school advocates can not be told too often that their endeavors are unnecessary labor, if not dissimulation. "The teacher constitutes the school." Undoubtedly this is an aphorism, but aphorisms prove nothing. They are correct only if we add a long series of presuppositions, restrictions, and explanations, a condition which, of course, does not apply to imperative demands arising in public. Consequently public discussion becomes proverbial wisdom that is only half true and detrimental when an enrichment of general ideas, but not when a distinct action is aimed at, which is possible only by means of an agreement of a few well-instructed persons. Then there are catchwords which, when rightly used, strike like lightning. Such a one is the old phrase: "The teacher is the school." Most assuredly. The teacher in great measure truly makes the school. Where is there

an excellent school without a teacher professionally inspired? There Professional zeal, fidelity to the duty of vocation, and pedagogical tact, can partly overcome existing miserable conditions; whereas the most excellent external conditions can in no single part replace the missing good teacher. This fact is fully appreciated by the chief Prussian school authorities, as has been already mentioned. The minister of education, Dr. Bosse, has not only repeated and expressed in warmest terms how highly he estimates the personality of the teacher, but has also pointed to the sad circumstances that handicap the educator in the exercise of his official duties.

Undoubtedly every man, hence also every teacher, is in a great measure himself responsible for the part he takes in professional or in civil life. In educational work, much or little can be made out of natural powers. Self-discipline, self-stimulation, self-education, and selfrestraint do much to cover many outward deficiencies. But, with the majority, these stimuli soon decline, if legislation and administration of education do not do what they are bound to do to create an excellent universally well-equipped corps of teachers.

The efficient teacher can not be conjured up by magic like a Deus ex machina; when considered from purely personal individual worth, he is a product of all the influences brought to bear upon him during his youth at home and at school, during the time of his professional development and during his professional life. Excellent teachers are neither instantaneously created by bureaucratic mandate, nor are they brought forth by more or less seasonable effusions on the virtues of a teacher; but they are the result of long, continuous solicitude and provident care; a fruit maturing only long after the sowing. What Dinter long ago affirmed of the school question is true even now. Higher education for the teacher, better salaries and professional supervision are vital questions to-day more than ever before. Meanwhile in the political life of modern time are added full political freedom and a position of the professional body unobstructed by exceptional laws, i. e., in school administration, provisory care of schools, as well as in civil life.

In many respects we must consider the personnel of the teaching force in our solicitude for education. It may be of much greater importance to a school from what kind of a family the teacher comes, what kind of a wife he has, how he educates or rather can educate his own children, how his family dresses, keeps house and recreates, and what social position he and his family occupy than how the schoolroom is furnished, the schoolhouse built, the system of heating is arranged, etc. Conclusively, in everything the man as such makes the things, and excellence can be accomplished by excellent men only.

The statistics which furnish the material for the following showing can suggest nothing concerning the internal momenta of the teacher's personality. They necessarily deal with outward facts. But in this connection reference will be made beyond bare numerical material to causes and effects that can not be expressed in figures.

Individuals and professionals are not unjustly judged according to their family connection. Oftentimes unconsciously a value is set upon education at home, against which we certainly can advance no objections. It is evident that consideration is thus given to caste; but even such unpleasant things as family pride and class prejudice are partly justifiable.

What is the parentage of teachers in Prusia?

It is an old prejudice designedly nurtured by true friends that male teachers are recruited from the lower classes, and in this respect are not on a level with female teachers. This opinion has already become so firmly rooted that even teachers themselves express it in good faith, though not always opportunely and to the benefit of the cause. Statistics,' in so far as they refer to the personal and private relations of teachers require a different view of the case.

The official statements concerning the parentage of teachers generally distinguish 6 main groups: (A) Agriculture, cattle raising, foresters, and hunters; (B) mining, civil engineering; (C) commerce and transit; (D) domestic service; (E) imperial and State service, etc., and liberal professions; (F) without any profession or specified pursuit. Of these groups D and F need not be considered at all. Out of 62,272 male teachers they averaged between 202 and 854, and out of 8,439 female teachers, between 11 and 203. The remaining 4 groups are separated into 28 subdivisions, further distinguished by: (a) Independents, including business managers and superintendents; (b) auditors, commissioners, and supervisors; and (c) assistants and "hands." An attempt at social definition, we see, enters into very minute details. The following statement is a general result. The 62,272 male and 8,439 female teachers are descended as follows:

These numbers prove the already well-established fact that the majority-more than one-third-of common school teachers belong to the peasantry or agricultural class. In former times this was even more generally the case. Villages with small and moderately large farms were the best recruiting grounds of preparatory institutions; lately, however, they have proved less available. Railroads have brought cities closer together, and thereby opened to the peasant's son the gymnasium on the one hand and commerce and industries on the other. Military service, too, at present, engages a comparatively

The authority for the following statements are "Prussian Statistics, vol. 120; The Common School System of Prussia in 1891; Berlin, 1893."-Imperial Bureau of Statistics.