schoolroom and the faithful performance of its tasks, it is clearly as much his right to read it as to use any other means for the same purpose. Let him claim upon all occasions the reading of the Bible as a necessary factor in his discipline of the school, and he will silence every gainsayer who has any reasonable conception of the rights of constituted authority. Again we constantly find men in private and public stations-men reputed moral and religious who deeming some new law unnecessary or oppressive disregard or wilfully break it. Thus a law often fails of a fair trial and becomes a dead letter. Thus the school system of this State, and doubtless of others, has never been fully carried out in many counties, and is pronounced a failure by those who know nothing of or have helped to defeat its legitimate work. The worst feature of this matter is the fact that these men thus become examples and teachers to all the young about them of disregard to all authority. Now were some simple outline of the responsibilities of citizenship taught in every schoolroom, and enforced by the simple reading of appropriate selections from God's Word, by a teacher who himself believed it, the true basis of all legitimate, constituted authority, there would be more justice in presuming every man to know the law, and we should more seldom find men, considered reputable, ignoring its authority; or neglected boys starting on a career of crime by committing some act of the real nature of which they had at best but the faintest conception.

Dr. Bascomb, of Wisconsin University, endorsed Mr. Roe's position as to the Bible. He wanted the Bible in every school but not by compulsion. Prof. Pennell, of St. Louis, agreed with Dr. Bascomb as to the use of the Bible.

Rev. Dr. Dunn, of Iowa, wanted to know whether a person versed in moral science ever went astray. He declared that Prof. Webster, the murderer of Parkman, had low views of moral science. He was well acquainted with him.

Dr. Tappan said he had known the foremost boy in a class in moral science to be the worst boy in it.

The discussion was closed by remarks from the President.

Second Day's Proceedings.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 3.

The Department met at the same place, at 2 P. M. The chair appointed Dr. E. T. Tappan, Prof. Campbell, and Dr. Bascomb, a committee to nominate officers. Lieut. Schenck, of Iowa, then read the following paper on

MILITARY SCIENCE AND TACTICS IN OUR UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES.

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen:

I have had the honor of receiving an invitation from the President of this Association, to address you to-day, upon the subject of the introduction of Military Science and Tactics into our Universities and Colleges, as a part of

their regular curriculum; a subject to which my attention has but recently been called, and one of so much importance, that it is with many regrets that I cannot offer you more solid and valuable information thereupon.

In this age, and with our present knowledge of human nature, and of its relations to past history, it is not necessary to multiply arguments to prove that the millenium has not yet, nor is it likely soon to come; that our wars are not ended, and consequently it is now, as it ever has been, absolutely necessary continually to prepare for war, and it may be considered as an axiom that every man who is to take a prominent part among his fellow-citizens in the affairs of this nation, under our peculiar constitution and laws, should have more or less knowledge of military matters, and generally the more the better. For the safety of our country, and the benefit of humanity, this necessity exists, to the end that, when war does come-as it surely will -science and knowledge may end it quickly, thereby saving millions of treasure, thousands of the lives of our bravest and best citizens, and avoiding miseries beyond the power of human calculation. It is certain that the opening of the late war would have been far different, if in every state, there had been many, who thoroughly and alike understood even company, regimental, and brigade organizations and tactics, and appreciated the principles which are established as the fundamental ethics of the military art, discriminated, at least theoretically, the distinction between strategy, logistics, and grand tactics, and even considered how far political policy or political objectives, should initiate or shape a conflict.

Military science, or as it is sometimes called, the Art of War, is, and has been since earliest ages, one of the most important and comprehensive studies undertaken by man.

In his last annual message to Congress, the Father of his Country says: "Whatever arguments may be drawn from practical examples, superficially viewed, a thorough examination of the subject will evince that the Art o War is both comprehensive and complicated, that it demands much previous study, and that the possession of it, in its most improved and perfected state is always of great moment to the security of a nation."

The brief space of human life avails little in working out the great problems of this science; but, as with all others, the piled-up aggregate of human knowledge and experience supplies the foundation upon which the student must begin the superstructure of his military education, and from the earliest ages it was deemed indispensable for success in arms. It is only the disciplined and instructed mind which, as a rule, leads armies to success. This culture of the soldier can not be acquired in even military schools alone, but must be perfected in that greatest of all schools, experience in the camp and on the battle-field, and in the constant study of the campaigns of all great captains.

It would be futile to attempt the introduction into our civic institutions, of any but the simplest and most practical principles of this comprehensive science, and we will pass to the consideration of Tactical instruction and its relations to discipline, physical culture &c.

Tactical instruction in the schools of the soldier, company, battalion &c., is within the scope of almost any educational institution, from the common school to the greatest university in the land; provided of course that the proper instructors can be obtained. By some it is held that this instruction

should be confined to the common school. So far as the mere drills and physical training are concerned, such a step may be wisely followed, but only with the view of attaining greater perfection in the higher institutions, as with any other form of education.

In some of the most military states of Europe, the age at which military education should begin is placed at from twelve to fourteen years, on account, no doubt, of the very active demand for soldiers. In England, however, (whose institutions more nearly resemble our own) and to a certain extent in France also, the earliest age at which a student should enter a military college is placed at sixteen, the average being seventeen, as in this country.

This is about the age when most young gentlemen enter upon a collegiate course, and it will no doubt be found that the same rule respecting the proper age for beginning military studies and exercises, will apply equally as well in civic colleges; as young men when entering upon new studies when they can understand their importance and bearing, are likely to pursue them with far more energy and interest than if they had begun them at a very early age, before being alive to their importance. Again, before this age, but few boys are sufficiently developed to be able to handle even the light cadet musket, or to take part in many of the exercises. It is true that they might be taught many of the principles of discipline, which can not be begun too early. Military discipline consists in the observance of a number of minute particulars which, to the novitiate in arms, have no apparent object, but which form the links of a beautiful and connected system; the habits of duty, self-restraint, order, punctuality, and obedience to command, in fact, the great laws which govern systematic and successful labor in each and every avocation of life, and are no more confined to the prefession of a soldier than that to the lawyer or minister of the Gospel. But the sentiments and habits of a free country necessarily produce amongst its citizens more restlesness under restraint than is to be met with in the subjects of a monarchy, and this spirit is constantly manifesting itself, and generally, never for much good. The perfection of discipline as regards the soldier, is the grace, the precision, and address with which he performs certain evolutions, and to arrive at this perfection, long and continued practice is essential, and as it is quite evident that the time necessary for this purpose cannot be taken from the avocations of our citizens, after they have arrived at the age of manhood, the only alternative is to devise a system of military instruction which shall engraft on and form part of the ordinary education of youth, not of a few here and there, but of every boy in this land, who is expected to arrive at man's estate and perform the duties of a good citizen. It might be said beyond this, that legislators, educators, and influential citizens at the bar or in the pulpit, having some understanding of such principles would weigh more carefully every tendency to war, and hesitate long before challenging or inviting its issues.

They would, least of all, coquette with such a contingency, in order to catch some popular fancy of the passing hour, in which neither national existence nor honor is in peril. None know so well as the educated soldier the terrible meaning of war, nor so coolly study the chances of the desperate game which when once begun must be won. The American people can probably or, at least I might more properly say, could, before the accumulation of the

immense debt entailed by the late one, more readily meet the demands of war, than any other, but at the same time always the most reckless disregard of all those elements which should teach us the economy of blood and treasure, and all of our past history proves that when peace obtains, the customs of war pass almost entirely away, and then instinctively ensues a wilful and almost entire neglect of all those elements, which without prejudice to the conditions of peace, would economize the waste of future war, through preparation for its primary objective-training men to fight together.

Neither Federalist, Republican, nor Democrat have ever proposed to attain this end by the establishment of a large standing army. Hamilton, the incarnation of Federalism, says: "One great engine to effect the abridgement of the power of the people, would be a large standing army, maintained out of our own pockets." All parties in their turn had recourse to "provisional" armies; when war seemed imminent, or was actually upon us, all trusted chiefly to the great National defence, the militia, and we can see how well the state and Federal legislatures heeded the wholesome exhortations of the founders of our government, and the lesson of our first seven years of war.

In accordance with the power granted by the Constitution, Congress, in 1792, passed an act enrolling all able-bodied white male citizens, from eighteen to forty-five years, (with certain exceptions) and organized them; all the enrolled to provide themselves with arms and equipments, and in 1795, Congress authorized the President to call out the militia in prospect of invasion, insurrection, or to enforce the laws; this militia when called out to be subject to the rules and articles of war, and to serve only three months in any twelve. This last clause exhibits the jealousy of Congress; for this brief term of service had by the testimony of Washington and of his best officers, rendered futile any attempt to drill and discipline this Militia, and its consequent inefficiency had prolonged our Revolutionary contest, and well nigh lost our liberties. Under this system our armies again had to meet a foe, with but few educated soldiers and little experience in war; hence the years 1812 and 1813, excepting the sea-fights, were almost always annals of American defeats. The glorious souvenirs of Bunker Hill, Saratoga, King's Mountain, &c., were obscured by the pusillanimous surrenders at Detroit and Niagara, the barbarous massacres at Hampton and the river Rasin, and the disgraceful failures at Chryster's Field and La Cole Mill.

During this brief and brilliant campaign of 1814 and 1815, when our education in war was anew purchased at such fearful cost upon unsuccessful fields of blood, the full tide of triumph flowed on almost uninterruptedly, and the "Second War of Independence" closed in a blaze of victory. What might be called the third of such wars has taken place within your own day and generation. Your national cemeteries will teach you the cost of it in one direction, and the tax-gatherer will keep you constantly reminded of it in another. The failure of our military education and training resulted partially from the distaste of our people to the restraints necessarily imposed, the interruption of business, and probably most of all to the religious horror of war. To avoid them, the repetition of past errors, is most certainly our present duty. It is easy enough to point out and comment upon the faults of the past, but not so easy to suggest the proper remedies for the future.

We claim that it is absolutely necessary to impart to our youth some mili

tary knowledge and discipline, and that the next duty is to provide the necessary means to acomplish the end in view.

As each state has its own militia, governed by its own peculiar laws, it has been suggested that each provide its own State Military Academy; but after due consideration, the idea has been abandoned as altogether impracticable. Fancy each state with its military academy. Thirty-seven militia armies; governed by different laws and regulations, each officered by graduates from their State Academies; we should have them fighting for alma mater if not for State Rights or some other nonsense.

Uniformity of drill, tactics, &c., and if national feeling is to be maintained, and economy is to be considered, in order to secure the greatest advantages of military instruction, and to avoid converting our land into a military Babel, we must then depend upon our national military educational institutions for the more perfect forms of military education, and demand of all Universities and Colleges that they educate their students in such manner that they shall be enabled to fulfil all the duty of their citizenship, under our laws.

We cannot hope to imitate the examples of the military nations of Europe, nor is it necessary that we should, but we must fully meet this question as our circumstances require. In theory, every one of our citizens is as much a soldier as in the German Empire, but practically he is about as much a one as a wooden man. We have as good material as there is in the world, but it takes much time, and an immense waste in money and lives to convert it into the soldier.

In casting about for comparisons and examples, we naturally turn to our sister Republic of Switzerland, and at once find examples worthy of our due consideration.

Switzerland has no regular standing army in the true sense of the word, and like us, depends upon her militia for defence, and to insure its efficiency, the greatest care is exercised. They have found that it is absolutely necessary duly to educate the proper number of officers, but they go much further; regarding this branch of education as of the most vital importance to the safety and stability of the Republic, they give to every young man a more or less thorough course of military instruction, using for this purpose all of the public schools. Theirs, as well as our own is a government of the people, but the sacrifices which they make to educate themselves in the practice and art of war, shows how jealously they guard their liberties by being always prepared to defend them, and prove that they have a much higher appreciation of their liberties than our great American spread-eagle style of citizens can boast of.

The amount and thoroughness of military instruction in their schools vary somewhat in the different cantons, though in all the cantonal schools military instruction is given. Generally, all scholars, are organized into military companies, and officered from their own classes, but provided by the Government with special military instructors, and furnished with small muskets, rifles or carbines, suitable to the strength and age of the students (upon the same principle that our Government furnishes the cadet muskets and necessary equipments) or if organized into artillery corps, they are supplied with small side arms and field pieces, which they can wield without difficulty. For these arms arsenals are provided by the Government, and