language in it, and a more pronounced native character than the popular speech itself. Such a fact must be telling in its influence.

Nor is it aside from the truth to assert, that our Protestant English pulpit has, in the main, illustrated and is illustrating such an order of English. The list of English preachers from old Hugh Latimer on to Jeremy Taylor and Smith and Henry, and Robert Hall, and on to such American names as Mason, Nott, Summerfield, and Edwards would substantiate such an assertion. It is gratifying, both in a professional and philological point of view, to note that no better English is spoken or written at the present day than that in use by the educated clergy of England and America. In accounting for this result the English Bible may be assigned the first place. So potent, indeed, is this influence, that many an illiterate evangelist, with whom the only text-book is the Bible, has by the sheer education of the Bible itself as a book developed a plain, terse and copious vocabulary.

In every course of theological, literary, and linguistic study, as in every discussion of the popular speech, there should be included a thorough study of the Christian Scriptures in their manifold influence on the vernacular. The Bible is the book of all books.

The English Bible is the book of all English books. Whatever may be true of merely technical terms, the vernacular of the English peoples is the language whose best expression is found in the English Bible versions. The best elements of our literary and our daily diction are from this sacred source, and here, as nowhere else, lie the solid basis and the best guarantee of the permanence of historical English.

It is mainly by reason of the influence of this English Bible that the language which we love has become the accepted language, the world over, of modern progress, of Protestant Christianity, and of the rights of man.

T. W. HUNT.

ARTICLE III.-INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION.

THE idea of industrial education comes strangely enough from a semi-barbarous nation. Russia started in a scientific manner to attend to the development of her internal resources by sending commissioners to study the systems of technological education of Western Europe. These men searched Europe for ideas. These ideas they carried to Russia, and in Russia one sees all European technological education epitomized. The whole plan of the new education in Russia may be seen in the two schools of technology at Moscow and St. Petersburg.

At Moscow, for the first three years of thirty-two weeks each, the boys are in school fifty-five hours a week. Of these fifty-five hours they spend during the first three years fourteen hours, and during the second three years ten and one-half hours in a workshop. They see good work done by skilled mechanics, and they are taught to do good work themselves. The same is true to a great extent at St. Petersburg. In Chemnitz, a Saxon town of ninety thousand inhabitants, technical education is conducted partly by the state and partly by corporations. The Royal Foremen school there proposes to give to future millers, dyers, tanners, and to young men who propose to become foremen or managers in weaving and spinning mills, or in machine building establishments, the opportunity of obtaining the theoretical knowledge for their future career.

At the Royal Building school in Dresden, which has a two years' course, those who can only learn the essentials of building receive a good training and become expert and intelligent carpenters. France takes the lead in attempting to provide some substitute for the almost extinct apprenticeship system. The first trade schools in France were established in 1872 and 1873. Since then they have had many imitators. In 1885, out of one hundred and seventy-four primary schools in the city of Paris, ninety-five were provided with workshops. In France, Belgium, Austria, Holland, Sweden, and Finland, the workshop is a part of the school building. The International

Congress on Commercial and Technological education, recently held at Bordeaux, unanimously agreed that it was desirable that manual work should be rendered obligatory in primary schools of all grades. The Royal Commission on Education of England has issued recently a circular to school managers asking: "Would you commend the introduction into your school of practical instruction in any of the industries of the district, or in the use of tools for working in wood or iron, or for girls in the domestic duties of home?"

The facts above mentioned have been cited to show roughly that the idea of industrial training has been very rapidly assuming shape in the minds of European educators. The economic situation in our own country is so different from that of Europe that of course the question here must be considered irrespective of what has been done elsewhere.

Industrial labor presents a problem which is at present insoluble, i. e., industrial education is yet in its infancy; it has had time to develop none but the most meagre results. Years must elapse before definite figures as regards actual results can be produced to an extent sufficiently large to possess statistical value. It is, however, possible to comprehend pretty clearly the present drift of things. For purposes of convenience industrial schools will be divided into four classes. First, the schools of applied science and technology; second, the so-called trade schools; third, manual training schools; fourth, public schools into the regular curriculum, of which manual training has been incorporated.

With the schools of applied science and technology it is not proposed to deal at length. Their object is to investigate the material resources of the country. They fit for professions, engineers, architects, geologists, chemists, metallurgists, and specialists of various other types.

To the so-called trade schools only so much mention will be given as will show that they have not been overlooked. A trade school, according to General Walker, is a school whose object it is to train actual workers in industry for what it is presumed will be their own individual work in life. Schools in France, Holland, and Switzerland, pursue this method. But, accepting the definition as above given, there is, so far as I

have been able to discover, in the United States no example of a trade school which is supported at state expense. The only schools of any kind, supported by private endowment or otherwise, which set out to teach trades, are certain evening schools in New York City. Of course this statement must be qualified by omitting under it law, medical, engineering, and normal schools. These are supported by the state in numerous cases. There must be omitted also West Point, Annapolis, and the Agricultural schools, many of which, like that at Manhattan, Kansas, have an extended course of manual training. The Worcester Free School has received more or less aid from the state. The question of supporting at public expense a trade school ought not to be a difficult one for American educationists to solve. Such a school would be perfectly contrary to the genius of American institutions. The state's duty is to teach only such branches of knowledge as will promote public welfare. It has never been demonstrated that the education of children for especial trades will beneficially affect the majority of tax-payers. Taxes are not yet low enough to justify the state in calling upon Peter to aid in educating Paul's children for a special trade.

A trade school supported by private endowment is more defensible; but it is questionable if the time has yet come for it in America. In the large cities of Europe the choice of the young must be curtailed. Space is limited. Population is dense. This situation, however lamentable, must be accepted. It is the part of wisdom to prepare the children of many foreign countries for the work which they will, by necessity, be called upon to perform. But the situation in this country is so different that any argument in support of trade schools, deduced from their apparent success in France, must be fallacious. A trade school, pure and simple, even supported by private endowment, is in the United States an experiment the wisdom of which is problematical for three reasons.

There is reason in the complaint of skilled laborers that their wages will be reduced by the increase, due to trade schools, of the number of workers in especial trades. It is claimed, and with some show of justice, that men who have had education in their trade given them should not be placed upon an equality

with men who by their own toil have obtained that education for themselves. In the one case the ability possessed by the trade worker represents effort and self-denial on the part of some one else. In the other case whatever power the man has, has been paid for by his own individual exertion.

Again, it is questionable whether men who are educated by private endowment are as good a class of workers as are the men who have paid for what they have obtained. The situa tion is very analogous to that suggested by the private endowment of theological and legal schools. There can be little doubt that certain law and divinity schools graduate men who are not fit for the work lawyers and clergymen should do. So with trade schools, the fact that education for a trade can be had for nothing tends to attract men who are not fitted for skilled laborers, and who would not attempt to enter the ranks of skilled labor if it cost them any thing to do so. They do it because it is the easiest thing to do, not because it is the best.

Finally, economists tell us that, at a given stage of the arts, natural laws tend to establish in a country's industrial situation an equilibrium as regards the pursuits of men. Just so many individuals can for instance make hats, so many can make shoes. If now trade schools augment each year the number of hat makers or of shoe makers, an artificial, arbitrary factor has been introduced into the industrial situation, a factor which is regulated by men's whims rather than by economic laws. The effect will be to disturb a natural equilibrium and to substitute a second equilibrium which is unnatural, and hence a source of pain to a portion of the world's population.

Of the manual training schools, the best example is furnished by the Workingman's School of New York City, established in 1879. It is conducted under the auspices of the United Relief Workers of the Society for Ethical Culture. This is a private charity. In its curriculum it covers the years covered by an ordinary grammar school. The course is eight years. Manual education begins in the first year with the children of seven years of age. They work first on clay and the exercises are very simple. Small pieces of clay are cut out into geometrical forms. Upon the surfaces of the pieces are carved other geometrical forms. Thus are