If but one foreign language should be required, history and politics can be properly amplified and a place be made for one year of commercial studies. The student who enters college with such an equipment, and with an interest in work roused in him, could not only complete a thorough technical education, but could also find time for other studies which would give him some perception of the nature of the complex problems of civilization. Give him this complement to his technical work late in his course and he will choose wisely and appreciate its cultural values.

An added necessity of postponement lies in the truth that new ideals of conduct as well as a new content of his studies must be presented. Those instilled to-day belong to a primitive world dominated by military rule; those of the future will be efficiency, economy, generosity, and service. These new virtues are a better antidote to greed and selfishness than those of the old morality. Efficiency overcomes nature's obstacles instead of natural human foes; it glorifies tact and skill above brute force. Saving is the renunciation of the present in favor of the future and so hands down to posterity greater benefits than the valor of ancient days could win for us. What has valor left us but ruined cities and desolated regions? What greater things can we leave posterity than capital to relieve toil, to beautify life, and to spread culture? Sacrifice is regenerated when transformed into service. In the members of a saving, serving group the good qualities of sacrifice are called forth without its old suffering and losses. Generosity is greater than sacrifice, for it is the enrichment of him who is helped by those whose efficiency enables them to aid without renunciation. This emphasis of industrial ideals must first come from the teacher. It is for him to be the embodiment of the new spirit until the poet, the orator, and the historian, breaking the bonds of tradition, relieve him of a task that is more theirs than his. Where the teacher leads they will soon follow. The poets of old sang of battles and heroes; to-morrow they will dwell on security, fidelity, co-operation, and above them all on generosity-for who is the hero but he who excels in generosity?

Of this new industrialism we may well be proud. It extends civilization, diffuses culture, and arouses new enthusiasm in the teacher. The college has stood for culture and for science; it must now stand for efficiency. To educators it seems less worthy to stop waste, to increase economy and to improve mental and physical adjustments than to investigate, to discover, and to cultivate. They sacrifice much in order to be scientific; and they delegate to inferior teachers the training for active life. Yet efficiency is our gravest industrial lack. Should not an education that supplies this lack be as ideal as any other? Yet even business men underestimate its importance because they confuse it with other advantages. We call ourselves an efficient nation because we can produce cheaply and abundantly. It is true that American industry has the advantage of natural resources, that we are an energetic people, and that no other race throws as much vigor into work. But vigor and resources are not efficiency; they are no more than the crude material out of which efficiency arises. We waste resources, we do not husband them. We exhaust energy in direct ways that crush obstacles instead of surmounting or avoiding them. After all we are a nation of bunglers who often dissipate and destroy where we should economize and utilize. We are aware of this when we have work done for us or watch others do it. Shall we cover truth with praises of natural resources and American energy, or shall we lift means to the level of the ends we seek? Education has to do with means as well as with ends, and the idealization of the one should be as complete and vivid as that of the other. Then normal schools, technical schools, and commercial schools will rank with schools of culture or of science, and their teachers will hold themselves well in the van of progress beside men of science and the promoters of culture. Efficiency and economy are great ideals whose import we are only beginning to realize. We should love them; we should strive for them; we should build them in the standards of the nation and in the characters of its people.

THE EDUCATED MAN AND THE STATE.

BY HENRY S. PRITCHETT.

Henry Smith Pritchett, president Massachusetts Institute of Technology; born Fayette, Mo., April 16, 1857; graduated Pritchett college; entered United States naval observatory, becoming assistant astronomer in 1878; member of several important astronomical expeditions; professor of astronomy Washington university, 1883; superintendent United States coast and geodetic survey, 1897-1900; author of many scientific papers.]

No one connected with the government of the United States in any executive capacity can fail to see that the government of this country is passing rapidly into the hands of educated men. The population of the country at this time is approximately 80,000,000 people. The number of college trained men is perhaps less than 1 per cent of the population. From this small percentage, however, are filled a majority of those legislative, executive, and judicial places of the general government which have to do in any large way with shaping its policy and determining its character. Not only in the ordinary positions of the government service is this true, but the government is calling more and more frequently upon the educated man for the expert service for which his training is supposed to fit him, and this not only in the relation of scientific experts, but in all other directions in which the government seeks the advice and the assistance of trained men.

On the other side of the Pacific a commission of five American citizens has undertaken the most delicate, the most difficult, doubtless the most thankless task in the establishment of civil government to which any group of our citizens has ever devoted its unselfish efforts. It is a significant fact that a majority of that commission are college professors.

The presence, in constantly growing numbers, of educated men in government service means also the displacement of an increasing number of poorly trained men. It is the old story of the untrained against the trained man, and to-day the world recognizes that the day of the untrained man has gone by. In the service of the government, as in all other fields where in

telligence and skill are factors, the educated man is displacing from the higher places the one who has no training or who has a poor training. Whether wisely or unwisely, whether for good or ill, it may be accepted as a fact that the government of this country is passing rapidly into the hands of the educated man. It is a matter of the highest practical importance to inquire whether the man who is coming into this power is worthy of it, and whether the training which he has received in the college or in the technical school is given with any purpose of fitting him for this trust.

Before approaching this question it may be well to call to mind the attitude of the government of the United States and of the state governments toward higher education and toward scientific investigation.

Notwithstanding the crudeness of our legislation, it is still a fact that congress and the state governments of the United States have been generous in gifts to higher education and to scientific work. The gifts of the general government have come from the sale of public lands. To the separate states has been left, heretofore, the power to lay taxes for the support of institutions of higher training. It is difficult to bring together the data for a trustworthy statement of the value of all these gifts, but they aggregate an enormous amount. At the present time the federal government is devoting millions annually to the work of the scientific departments of the government. At the very beginning of organized government in Massachusetts the question of education was one of the first with which the state concerned itself. principle of state aid to higher education, then recognized, has been since that time accepted by the general government and by every state government. In New England, Harvard and Yale and other foundations of higher learning are now dependent upon private endowments, yet almost every one of these has at one time or another received state aid. Harvard was in reality a state institution, having received from John Harvard only $4,000 and 320 books. And while the more generous gifts to New England colleges have come from private sources, they have never hesitated, in time of emergency, to come before the representatives of the people and ask for

The

assistance. These petitions have never been disregarded by the state. The American republic may fairly claim to have adopted and to have followed out Macaulay's motto, "The first business of a state is the education of its citizens." In no land and in no time has the state responded so quickly and so generously to the demand for higher education as in the United States of America during the last half century.

If this aid had been rendered by an individual, if one could imagine the spirit of the whole people, both state and national, incarnated in a personal intelligence which should take cognizance of the obligations of those whom the state had befriended, I can imagine that one of the most direct questions which such an intelligence would address to those who direct the education of the youth would be, I, representing the whole people, have given you freely of my national domain, the heritage of the whole people. I have founded and supported colleges and universities and technical institutions. What direct return has been made to me for this assistance, and have those who control the training of the youth kept in view their obligation to me and the dignity and the needs of my service?

The question is a perfectly legitimate and perfectly fair one. And, while it is easy to answer it in generalities, it is not so easy to give a reply of that definite sort which shall lead somewhither. The subject is too large and has too many ramifications to be discussed on this occasion in full. Perhaps the best I can do is to call attention to the importance of the inquiry itself and to the obligation which exists for a definite, full, and, most of all, an honest answer. In addition, I shall endeavor to point out certain directions in which, to my thinking, the ends of the government have been well served in our system of education, and certain others in which, it seems to me, we need improvement.

It seems to me that it may be stated as a general result that the state (using that term to characterize both the general government and the state governments) has been well served by the institutions of higher learning. It can be shown satisfactorily that in the main these institutions have not only served the general purpose of the diffusion of knowledge among