velopment; but, variously modified by material considerations or culture, environments, by wealth and ancestry, it has yet certain well-marked functions, and falls into classes fairly discriminated.

Its origin, its aims, its methods, all mark its kinship with institutions below rather than above it. It appears as the completion of the one system rather than an introduction to the other. Viewed from the side of its organization it prepares for life, not for learning; it fits for industry, not study. And yet it seldom loses sight altogether of the end of culture. If the two ends are one, or if the means to those ends coincide, then will the function be single. With a somewhat homogeneous organization, however, it frequently exercises very diverse functions.

That, in the one view, the demand for industrial training, for business courses, studies in government, economics, etc., has not always been an intelligent one, goes without saying; but whether a rational or instinctive insight, the intimate organic relation of the high-school with the grades below, has emphasized with many the impression that the system is all one; that, for the people, by a large majority, the highschool is a finishing school, and, as such, should be adapted to the immediate and pressing and understood wants of the people.

On the contrary, there is discernible a marked educational tendency toward centralization. No part of our educational policy is better defined than the constant, generous governmental support and encouragement accorded to institutions of learning. The conviction grows, in a most wholesome way, that every child of every Commonwealth should have access gratuitously, and without needless restriction, to every grade of education, from the most elementary to the most comprehensive, which public wealth can buy; that no step shall be wanting; that no part shall be left wholly to chance or to private enterprise. Each stage of the system should fit itself to its neighbor. The elementary must not attempt the work of the high-school, nor this of the college;

no more must gaps be left between. This is the State's ideal. As a matter of fact, circumstances determine more or less of modification. In sections where other secondary agencies fail, and the college spirit prevails, the high-school becomes the legitimate fitting school.

The attempt to give permanence and system to this relation of the high-school and the university has worked out in what is called the diploma system in Michigan, the HighSchool Board in Minnesota, and commissioned high-schools in half a dozen States.

(1.) Michigan High-Schools.

Dating from 1837, the University of Michigan was authorized to establish, in the State, branch schools, to be under its direction, with uniform courses of study and tributary to it. In three years seven such branches had been established. The reason assigned twelve years after for their decline was that "they were not able at the same time to perform the functions of a common school and those of a branch of the university."*

Nevertheless, as the years went on, the Superintendents Mayhew and Gregory and Shearman, and President Tappan, favored a closer union of the academies and public schools on the one hand, and the university on the other. In 1870 it was recommended by the faculty of the university that a "commission of examiners" be appointed who should visit annually such schools as desired it, giving certificates to those pupils who were successful in examination, which should admit directly to the university. The year following a plan very similar was adopted. Pupils have since been received upon the diplomas of accredited schools. In 1876 there were eight such high-schools; four years later there were sixteen. Since 1884 the same conditions have been extended to, and accepted by, certain schools in New York, Illinois, Minnesota, and California. The experiment in

* "Report of Regents of the University," 1852.

1

Michigan is wholly voluntary, having its origin and its development in the readiness of both lower and higher schools to co-operate for their mutual advantage.

(2.) Minnesota High-Schools.

Seven years ago (1881) the State of Minnesota attempted to effect a similar union by legislation. A “High-School Board" was constituted for the encouragement of liberal education in the State. Through this board the law provides for the rendering of pecuniary aid to such schools as shall have "regular and orderly courses of study, embracing all the branches prescribed as requisite for admission to the collegiate department of the university." The New York plan is similar to this, the distribution of funds being made and certificates given by the "Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York.”*

(3.) Commissioned High-Schools.

Following the experiment in these States, and especially in Michigan, as the first attempt, the idea has been adopted in Indiana, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and perhaps other States-not always, unfortunately, with careful guards thrown about its application, like those in Michigan and Minnesota.

Since 1881 graduates of approved high-schools in California have been admitted to the State University; and since 1878 graduates of the Hopkins Grammar-School, New Haven, to Yale. Dartmouth has for ten years had a like arrangement with local schools, and recently Rutgers.

Bibliography.

"Annals of the Boston Primary School Committee," by J. Wightman, 1860 (comprises the history of primary education for a large part of New

* For a general discussion of this subject, see "Relations of High-Schools and Colleges,” in “Proceedings of National Educational Association," Chicago, 1887, p. 282.

England, and is of general interest); "Courses and Methods for Primary, Grammar, and Ungraded Schools," J. T. Prince, 1886; "District Schools," J. O. Taylor, 1834; "Graduating System for Country Schools," A. L. Wade, 1881; 'The Kindergarten in America," Steiger, 1872; "The Kindergarten in the United States," by Kate B. Ford, “Michigan School Report," 1877, p. 287; "Lectures in the Training-School for Kindergartners," Miss E. P. Peabody, 1886; "Reports of the St. Louis City Schools for 1875-'76, 1876-'77, and 1878-'79," by Dr. W. T. Harris, on the "Philosophy of the Kindergarten" and the "History of the System in St. Louis"; "The High-School and the College," C. W. Tufts, "New England Journal of Education," February 12, 1885; "Relation of Secondary Education to the American University Problem," A. F. West, 'Proceedings of the National Educational Association," 1885; “The Function of the High-School as a Factor in Public Education," H. H. Morgan, "New England Journal of Education," vol. xii, No. 24; "Report on Preparation for College," "Proceedings of the National Council of Education," 1884, p. 36; "City School Systems in the United States," by J. D. Philbrick, 1885.

CHAPTER XX.

EDUCATION IN THE SOUTH.

THERE are three well-defined periods in the educational history of the South: 1. The colonial period; 2. The antewar period; 3. The period of reorganization.

During the first of these, if the systems of Massachusetts and Connecticut be excepted, parts of the South were even better supplied with the means of education than most colonies North. This means only that throughout this period and for almost the entire country the only established agencies were private and parochial schools, and these, in the early days of Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia, were superior. The reorganization came a quarter of a century later in most of these States than in the North and West.

1. The Ante-war Period.

In the second period began the educational divergence between the two sections. The South perfected existing institutions, adapting them to the peculiar social and governmental conditions. The North founded new ones—the public free schools. The colleges and academies and denominational seminaries met the common want of the financially independent planter, and, for anything more, sons were sent to the North or abroad. It was estimated in 1855, by eminent authority,* that for many years before the war the South paid annually to the North for books and education not less than five million dollars. And yet in most States something had been done looking toward common schools; but it was done half-heartedly, as will appear, and in the midst of the most unfavorable conditions. To those familiar with these conditions and the prevalent social and ethical standards, the common sentiment concerning public schools can not seem strange.

Georgia as early as 1792 had taken steps for a high-grade school in each county, and in 1821 appropriated two hundred and fifty thousand dollars to their maintenance. Two years later a like fund was set apart for the use of the elementary or "poor schools." Beginnings were made in Virginia for a literary fund in 1810, and a decade later in Kentucky. Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee made appropriations of land. Seven of the States-Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, and South Carolinaapplied their shares of the surplus revenue in whole or in part to education. This alone aggregated three and a half millions, and under favorable conditions would have been a powerful factor in their school administration. Maryland as early as 1825 had a State School Superintendent and others later. Georgia, North Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky each spent annu

* J. B. De Bow, “Review,” vol. xviii, p. 664.