felt to be great in the same circumstances in which other men consciously fall short, or abide in the commonplace. If, then, greatness can, as a rule, be localized, if great men do take an appreciable growth and gradually separate themselves from those with whom they have so much in common, it is well for us to look on and watch the process whenever we have the opportunity, not in idle curiosity, not for imitation, but for the better understanding of our own times, and of ourselves. We cannot afford to ignore or to underestimate contemporary greatness. We cannot afford to lose the immediate effect of present ideal upon the actual, the effect of the exceptional of to-day upon the common.

By common consent the foremost quality of greatness is originality. I do not propose to stumble over the definition of originality. It does not consist in thinking away from men, but rather in thinking toward truth, fact, reality. To differ from others does not make one original. That may be mere divergence of opinion, a falling out to the right hand or the left. Originality is, that difference of the one from the many which can be measured on a straight line toward the truth. Originality is not remoteness from men; it is nearness to reality. It declares itself with unmistakable genuineness in the investigator who forces his way through tradi tions and theories into the presence of facts which have been waiting his coming, in the poet who lives at the heart of the common humanity, and uncovers the glory of that inner life, in the prophet whose conscience clarifies his mental vision, and gives him the advantage among men immersed in time, of the everlasting certainties, in any master of men who can divine motives, interpret events and organize for results according to his insight.

That virtue of originality," Ruskin. says in his grand impatience, "which men so strain after is not newness, as they vainly think, it is only genuineness. It all depends on the single glorious faculty of getting to the spring of things and working out from that. It is the coolness and clearness and deliciousness of the water fresh from the fountain head, opposed to the thick, hot, unrefreshing drainage from other men's meadows."

I should put without hesitancy as the first essential of greatness, authority, the compelling force, the force which puts the original idea or purpose into the

event. Authority is not expressed in mere assertiveness, and it has no certain equivalent in influence. Influence does not always force a conclusion. Authority is that power, it is the only power, which deals with those hesitant and unwilling forces which are so often necessary to progress. Authority does not always declare itself in leadership. There are times when leadership is impossible. Men will not be led, they will not respond to the summons, or even to the challenge to duty. At such times the authoritative element often appears to clearest and finest advantage. The man who possesses it remains the master of himself, and so of his time. He refuses to surrender or compromise his purpose, he refuses to lower himself to the commonplace, he resists the depressing and deadening influences about him, and finally accomplishes in men who come after him what he could not accomplish through his contemporaries. The authoritative man is as clearcut a figure when he compels a halt in the dull, heavy, deadening tramp of a race or of an age, as when he heads the march to freedom.

One other essential quality of greatness is beneficence. No merely destructive person, whether in war, politics, or literature, can be termed great. The only question which we should wish to investigate before passing judgment on any one of destructive method would be-was his method necessary or legitimate? was he the rebel, the skeptic, the iconoclast, in the interest of freedom and truth? Give the term what range you will, allow the widest interpretation, be tolerant of motives and methods, but do not surrender this more than any other ingredient or factor of greatness; do not make greatness a synonym of force, not even in the shape of intellectualism.

It is not necessary that these constants of greatness should exist in equal proportion in a given case. Naturally one quality will predominate. But each lends something to the other. They may be transposed, one may be cause and another effect. Beneficence may stimulate originality, or it may be the outgrowth and result of the originating intellectual impulse. And authority in its highest exercise implies both originality and benefi

cence.

I deprecate the merely critical attitude. of the schools toward contemporary greatness. Criticism is wholesome to those

who give and to those who receive, if it is intelligent and wholesome; but its office at best is secondary. The educated mind should be sympathetic, appreciative, discerning. A great man, despite his faults, is the greatest possession of an age, next to a principle or a truth. Through him the student interprets the collective life of his time; through him he reads history in the making. Whoever is ignorant or intolerant of the greater life about him, let not the scholar be guilty of blindness or of injustice. And so far as he may affect public opinion, let him teach by word and by example the lesson of respect and honor, appreciation and support.

ONE

GOOD READING.

NE of the gravest mistakes educators have made is the elimination of the thorough drill in reading from the higher grades of our public schools. Until recently they have taught that good reading is a very desirable accomplishment, and many of them still adhere to their former opinions, though reading, as an art, has been eliminated from the curriculum of many schools. The latter class of educators believe that the careful drill in reading accomplishes several objects in addition to excellence in reading, viz.: that it teaches language and expression, aids the art of composition, secures correct pronunciation as well as distinct enunciation, and thereby assures a clear utterance, such as the audience can hear. In our non-reading schools visitors can hear few pupils recite, because they mumble or speak so rapidly and indistinctly that understanding them is out of the question. The thorough reading

drill will correct this evil. The following

facts show that the evils of discarding reading are beginning to appear:

1. College professors criticize our public schools for sending to them so many students who are deficient in ability to express their thoughts, and in spelling. In part the reading drill will correct this. Twenty years ago there were more good readers than there are to-day, and fewer college students deficient in fundamental culture.

2. A clergyman says, that as a consequence of discontinuing reading in the schools of his town, no member or graduate of the high school is called upon to read in public. The different denomina

tions have entertained frequently, and two or three parties, not members or graduates of the high school, but who have given much attention to reading, and perhaps to elocution too, are called in for readers. He has inquired of reliable parties in several other towns, and finds the same to be true there.

3. A Sunday-school teacher having a class of young men, most of them graduates of the high school, says that they are such poor readers that he not only has to correct their halting manner of reading the Bible, but actually has to tell them how to pronounce some common words.

4. A school committee recently rejected a young applicant for a school on the ground of poor reading and spelling. And this evil will be ten times worse in ten years, as time will aggravate it, unless the drill in reading is restored to its former place.

5. A teacher of nineteen years' experience in a New England city says, "The worst of all fads is that of discontinuing reading in schools. Already the evil is manifest in the high school, and parents are complaining that their children are poor readers and spellers."

6. A merchant, hearing parties speaking of reading being discontinued in many schools, remarked, "That will account for this fact: the young fellows who apply for places in our stores cannot write a decent letter; poor use of language, poor spellers, and know not how to use capital letters. It would not be so if they were well drilled in reading."

THE CARLISLE SCHOOL.

er many to see Gen. Fitzhugh

HE commencement exercises drew to

Lee, who led the Confederates on the way to the Gettysburg battle-field. Gen. O. O. Howard was seated on the platform by his side. Many old residents in Carlisle told of the bursting of shells around their houses 33 years ago. The United States had barracks on the hill and these were burned; the land was made the site in 1879 of the now famous Indian industrial school.

The Carlisle Indian industrial school is now generally acknowledged to be most successfully solving the Indian problem. It is located on ground once owned by William Penn, and the deed from his

heirs is in the possession of Captain Pratt, of the school. It is the oldest and most prosperous of the government industrial schools. The approach to the grounds is by the old stone guard-house, part of the barracks built by the captured Hessians during the Revolutionary war, and used for a time by Washington and his troops during the "whiskey insurrection." The Carlisle barracks were originally established in 1757 as an outpost against the Indians, and now cover 27 acres of ground.

Captain Pratt, the superintendent from the start, had served eight years with his regiment fighting the Indians in the Indian territory, much of the time in command of Indian scouts. In the Indian war of 1874-75, he had charge of Indian prisoners at Fort Sill, and took 74 of the worst of them to the old Spanish fort at St. Augustine, Fla. Some of the younger ones were put under school influences, and showed so much aptitude for learning and such a desire to remain in the East for more education, that through private aid this was accomplished. Seventeen of them were put under the care of General Armstrong, at Hampton, who was so much pleased with the experiment that he asked the Interior department for 50 more. Captain Pratt and his wife went to Dakota and brought them in from the Sioux tribes.

Captain Pratt obtained Carlisle barracks, and went West among the Indians and brought back 82 boys and girls, whom he put under the care of Mrs. Pratt, went back and brought a second lot of 57 Kiowa, Comanche, Cheyenne, and Arapahoe children, and opened his school November 1, 1879. It has steadily grown, until this year there are in attendance more than 700 students from about 50 different tribes. The plan is to teach the pupil some industry at the same time that the literary education is in progress. is a sight worth seeing to pass through the many workshops and look on the Indian youth busy learning the trades of carpenter, blacksmith, shoemaker, harnessmaker, buggymaker, tailor, printer, seamstress, and other trades.

One of the leading features of the Carlisle school is the outing system, which puts out between four and five hundred students each year during vacation on farms and in families, to learn farming and housework. Two or three times as many students as can go out are applied

for each year, so successful is this system. The earnings of the pupils last year amounted to nearly $24,000, which money belongs to them and is a great stimulus to individual effort and a desire to escape from tribal thraldom. Economy is encouraged and a savings bank system is carried on, in which the students deposit their money on interest. Each student has his own bank book, and the amount now on deposit is over $15,000.

There is a popular impression, which even finds expression in the halls of Congress, that the graduates of Carlisle and similar schools mostly relapse into barbarism after they leave the school. But carefully-kept records show that this is not so. Of all the graduates from the school at Carlisle it may be said that only one of them has turned out badly, a remarkable statement, but verified by the records. It has not been possible thus far to show that any of the graduates, and but few if any of those who have been at the school even half the time required for graduation, are living in crime or hopeless degradation. With the present, six classes of graduates have gone out from Carlisle, and many of these are already filling responsible positions well in various walks of life. Some of the girls have become accomplished professional nurses in New York, Philadelphia, and other cities, a profession for which nature seems to have peculiarly fitted them.

The United States government has been engaged in the work of killing Indians more than 100 years, and in the work of education to any considerable extent only about seventeen years. It is estimated that the average cost of every Indian killed in the last twenty years has been $100,000, and Captain Pratt declares "that during this period enough has been spent in Indian wars to have paid for the education and civilization of the Indians twice over." The government appropriation for the education of each Indian is $67 a year, but through the advantage of the system and economy of administration it costs only $140 a year at Carlisle. Captain Pratt says: "On an annual appropriation of $100,000 for support, I will undertake to educate 1,000 children annually."

Reduced to a brief statement, this means that it costs the United States $100,000 to kill an Indian, and $500 to educate him.

Of all the Indians admitted to Carlisle no tribe presented a more hopeless outlook than the Apaches from Arizona. They have long held a most unenviable reputation as the outlaws and Ishmaelites of all the Indians. But Captain Pratt's treatment has demonstrated that they are as susceptible of civilization as others. They are unusually active and valuable as workers. Dr. Montezuma, so long the physician of the Carlisle school, is a full-blooded Apache. When five years old he was carried off as a captive by another tribe, and never again saw his father or mother. A traveling artist bought him for $30 and sent him to school. He graduated from the Chicago Medical College, and after serving with distinction elsewhere and here, has settled as a regular practicing physician in Chicago, where he is meeting with much success.-N. Y. School Journal.

FRANCIS A. MARCH: TEACHER.

WHO

BY JAMES C. MACKENZIE.

HO shall do for Dr. March what Dean Stanley has done for Arnold, Ernest Renan for Bishop Dupanloup, Cotton Mather for Ezekiel Cheever, what Demmock did for Francis Gardner? Surely in a brief paper no adequate estimate can be made of one who is felt to be one of the notable teachers of this country. But we may rejoice that a worthy study of Dr. March's work at Lafayette will enrich our pedagogical and biographical literature in the near future. My present privilege is merely to suggest some thoughts that spring up almost unbidden.

One of his favorite authors, John Milton, in the tract on education, says, that all true teachers are natural, practical,

This is one of a series of addresses given at Lafayette College at the recent March celebration, to commemorate the seventieth anniversary of his birth and the fortieth anniversary of his work at the college. At the request of the alumni, Dr. Mackenzie's address was published in the college weekly, The Lafayette. We take pleasure in giving it a wider circulation in Pennsylvania. Its author, a graduate of Lafayette college who knows whereof he speaks, is at the head of the famous preparatory school at Lawrenceville, N. J., where his salary is said to be ten thousand dollars a year, one of the largest for educational service in the United States. We mention this to show the estimate pnt upon the work of Dr. Mackenzie himself.-Editor.

and noble. In theology the cry is "Back to Christ," and in education it is "Back to nature." This demand is but another form of the insistence that teachers must have natural gifts. If Carlyle be right, that the teacher is the modern priest, then he must be "called" and ordained, and the proof of his ministry is to be sought in his sympathy with nature and her processes. We have not at hand the record of Dr. March's life and work at Swanzey, Leicester, Amherst, and Fredericksburg, but we are sure the boys and girls whom he taught in those early years were profoundly impressed with his naturalness, practicableness, and nobleness. Certainly those of us who came under his influence here find it impossible to think of him without the possession of those Miltonic and altogether necessary qualities.

If we should go on to explain ourselves further, we would recall his great simplicity. I know of no writer whose style more perfectly reveals his character: simple, direct, noble-inestimable virtues in a teacher. In my day a man read a paper on some philosophical subject assigned by Dr. March. The performance was involved and prolix, so that the doctor asked the young man to state orally his ideas. Something in the old recitation-room over the treasurer's office, or something in the penetrating eye of the teacher, compelled simplicity and ungarnished truth; so that the young man's oral statement won the encomium: "Oh! but why didn't you say just that in your paper. There was nothing of the Jupiter Tonans of Dr. Taylor in Dr. Marchthe "majesty throned afar" which one feels impelled to approach in a borrowed or unreal garb. He was so ingenuous, open-minded, and tolerant of early ignorance, that nature's best was stirred in every pupil. What an encouragement it was to us in our first efforts at originality of any sort to be told that "there never was a pair of eyes made not worth looking through."

Any proper estimate of Dr. March's teaching will make much of his profound and wide scholarship. In every recitation, at every lecture, it is a first requisite that the teacher be known as thoroughly furnished. A minister may maintain himself by the purity and spirituality of his life, as well as by, or independent of, mere intellectual endowments or power to fertilize other minds. But not so the