not simply to condemn and suggest, but frequently, very frequently, to commend. His teachers care more for his praise than for that of everybody else, and his hearty approval of what he has seen and heard in the class arouses all the cordiality and gratitude of a teacher to whom such words may seldom come except from him, and who is always liable to be under the fire of adverse criticism from patrons of the school. Intellectual effort is dwarfed by the shadow of disfavor, and flourishes in the warm sunshine of genial approval. I venture to hope that the superintendent in a small city will know what is going on in the classes from observation rather than from reports; that he will, therefore, have no occasion to burden his teachers with a marking system, or to occupy their time making out reports when they ought to be teaching or resting, and that he will know the progress of his classes from personal inspection rather than by the results of stated examinations.

He will know many of the children more or less intimately, and may guide the career of many pupils of the high school who will come to him for advice. His suggestions may induce many girls and boys to continue study and to pursue a college course who would otherwise never do so. In the same connection he may influence the conduct of parents, and lead them to make exertions to give their children the benefits of higher education. The smaller the place, the more intimate may be his relations to parents and children, and the more powerful the direct influences which he may exert. He must necessarily be the arbiter of misunderstandings and disputes. Controversies between principals and teachers, teachers and children, the school and the home, will all come to him for settlement. They will often demand all his diplomatic skill, partly because he is not called in until all the premises have been laid, and a very pretty quarrel prepared before he hears anything about it, and therefore he must correct the mistakes of others before he can restore

peace and harmonious relations. He can never go far wrong in these cases if he bases his final decisions on his ideas of absolute justice. There is no reversal of a judgment rendered because it is right, and which makes no concession to a temporizing policy.

In a small system of schools the superintendent must of necessity be, to some extent, a man of affairs. He must know intimately all the questions coming before the committee, or board of education, and be prepared to advise concerning them. The theory that he should engage only in duties pertaining to the selection of teachers, instruction, and supervision of schools is very fine as an academic proposition, but it fails in practice. However well-meaning the board may be, it is composed of men whose thoughts are given to other subjects, and who occasionally turn from their regular vocations to discharge their duties as trustees. It is impossible, under the circumstances, for them to carry the school work continuously, without guidance in almost every particular, and the

superintendent is the only man in a position and with the knowledge to direct their councils.

One of his most weighty duties in connection with the board will be properly to direct the construction of new buildings or the repair of old ones. The great advance in schoolhouse architecture and construction in recent years has been due largely to the efforts of the superintendent. The local architect usually knows nothing of the special features of schoolhouse construction. The questions of floor space, air supply, ventilation, lighting, seating, are either not known at all, or are illy understood by him. Hygienic questions of schoolhouse architecture are vital, and the superintendent ought to know them. It is precisely the same with many other subjects. The board is willing and anxious to do these things right when they are plainly indicated. It should be cordially confident of the competency of the superintendent, if it is to rely on his advice. and sustain his leadership.

If the superintendent is not known outside of the schoolhouse, much of the influence he should exert in the community is lost. He ought to be a leader, or at least one of the leaders, of thought in his community and a maker of public opinion. His character and attainments should dignify his office and justify confidence in himself. His integrity should be unquestionable. Judicious in his relations with others, he should be fearlessly independent of political, social, and religious influence in all things demanding his decision. His career should entitle him to the

respect of all men, and every movement directed toward better conditions for mankind, whether physical, moral, or intellectual, should enlist his sympathy and receive his ardent support.

Humani nihil a me alienum puto.

ALCOHOL PHYSIOLOGY AND SUPERINTENDENCE

PROFESSOR W. O. ATWATER, WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY, MIDDLETOWN, CONN.

In discussing the topic assigned me on your program, I understand it to be your wish that I consider especially what should be taught in our schools about alcohol in its physiological relations. Allow me a word at the outset regarding the more general scope of instruction in physiology. In planning a course of study in this as in any other subject careful consideration must be given to the several parts in order that the whole may be well considered and well balanced.

One thing I wish to urge is that we should tell our pupils more about the economy of food and nutrition, and since physiology already takes all the space there is for it in the curriculum, I would suggest that

some things now found in a good many of the text-books be omitted to make room for what might be taught about the demands of our bodies for nourishment, and how to supply them to the best advantage of health and purse. This would make a more substantial foundation for the special instruction about alcohol in itself. To make room for this in the already crowded curriculum I would suggest that some minor and more technical parts now taught might be omitted.

In illustration of what might be taught about the laws of nutrition let me call your attention to the leaflets which you will find on the seats you are occupying. These have been furnished by the United States Department of Agriculture, thru the kindness of Hon. James Wilson, secretary of agriculture, and Dr. A. C. True, director of the Office of Experiment Stations. They will give you a hint of the purpose, plans, and some of the actual results of a series of investigations which are being carried on in different parts of the United States under the authority of Congress for the purpose of learning more about the economy of food. Let me also call your attention to these specimens, which are duplicates of those in the food collection of the United States National Museum. They illustrate the chemical composition of the human body and of the foods which nourish it. From the leaflets you may infer that already a large amount of information has been obtained regarding the chemical composition, digestibility, and nutritive values of our food materials, the ways in which they nourish the body, the dietary habits of people of different classes and regions, the more common errors in our food economy, and the ways in which we may select, prepare, and use our foods so as to make our diet less costly, more palatable, and more healthful. The museum specimens suggest one of the ways in which some of these facts may be explained and thus made most useful. The leaflets and specimens indicate some of the many ways in which our government, in response to a public demand, a demand which comes especially from teachers, economists, and philanthropists, is gathering and disseminating knowledge of those things which require the most exact research for their discovery, and which, clearly discerned and rightly taught, take hold on life, form the most useful part of education, and can become sources of the truest inspiration.

When we consider that "half the struggle for life is a struggle for food;" that "half or more than half the earnings of the wage-earner is spent for the nourishment of himself and family;" that not only a man's power to work, but also his health, are largely affected by his food; that some of our most skilled hygienists are telling us that a large part of the disease which embitters life and hastens death is due to avoidable errors in diet; that more harm comes to the health of the community from erroneous habits of eating than from the habitual use of alcoholic drink; that economists, philanthropists, and divines are urging more and more

earnestly the need of attention to such subjects-are we not justified in asking if a little more room cannot be found for it in the school curriculum?

THE PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTION OF ALCOHOL

I now come to the main division of my subject--the physiological action of alcohol, and what is and should be taught regarding it.

The laws of nearly all our states, I believe, require that the curricula. of our public schools shall include physiology, with special reference to the action of alcoholic beverages. Such legislation would be impossible without a public sentiment back of it. Whether or not this legislation has assumed the most rational form, or whether the people at large understand exactly its purpose and to what degree the hopes of its pro moters are being fulfilled, it is not my desire to discuss. The facts I desire to urge are two: First, it is the law, and, as such, our duty as teachers is to obey it as long as it stays on the statute books; second, there is a wide difference between the teaching of this subject in many schools and in many text-books on the one hand, and the teaching in the colleges, universities, and medical schools, and by the leading physiologists of the world, on the other. It is this most unfortunate disparity which I ask especially to consider. If the one body of doctrine is correct, and the other to a greater or less extent incorrect, as I personally believe it is, you, as teachers, as school superintendents, as the leaders in our education, are interested to know it. Here, as I understand it, is the reason for the title which your secretary has given to my subject, "Alcohol Physiology and Superintendence."

If the alcohol physiology now being taught in our public schools as a branch of science is scientifically correct, then it cannot be pedagogically or ethically wrong, and there is little reason for my discussing the subject. today. But if it does not tally with the most reliable conclusions from scientific observation and experiment; if what is taught as truth is halftruth or partial untruth; if doubtful theories are set forth as settled facts; if a rule of conduct is based upon an unsound theory; if the attempt is made to improve the morals of the men of the future by a wrong teaching of the boys of today that educational policy is pedagogically and ethically wrong and ought to be altered.

OPINIONS OF LEADING AUTHORITIES

The physiological action of alcohol is very complex, and the views of physiologists generally regarding the different details are naturally divergent. Let us take, for instance, the much discussed question as to whether alcohol is food or poison.

First of all we must have a clear understanding of what we are talking about. A given substance taken into the body may act in a variety of ways. Meat, beefsteak for instance, which is universally called a food,

supplies the body with material to build up its tissues, repair its wastes, and furnish it with energy in the form of heat to keep it warm, and muscular power for work. It also has an action upon the nervous system which is not yet fully explained, but may perhaps be called stimulative. Taken in excess it may be injurious; its action is then pathological. Being thus injurious, it might under these circumstances be called poisonous. Arsenic is sometimes taken as a medicine, and as such is believed to be useful, tho we do not know exactly how or why it is so. But arsenic has no value whatever as nutriment, and therefore cannot be called in any sense a food. In more than minute doses it is deleterious or fatal. It is a true poison. There are certain vegetable products which, fed to animals, supply nourishment, but at the same time are injurious, so that they cannot be used for food. Chemists have analyzed some such substances, and found ingredients which are nutritious and others which are injurious. That is to say, some substances are clearly foods, some are clearly poisons, some act in both ways. How, then, shall we class alcohol? What I shall attempt to show you is that the results of the most valuable scientific research and the opinions of the leading physiologists of the world unite in saying that it may be either food or poison, or both, according to circumstances.

Alcohol is not like the meat or the seed, a complex material made up of different ingredients. It is a simple chemical substance. Nevertheless it has very different actions. A chemist can analyze the seed

and separate the parts which are nutritious from those which are poisonous. But he cannot do this with alcohol. When the physiologist experiments upon its action he has to take it as a whole. This complicates the experimenting and makes the interpretation of the results difficult.

When we come to consider the dietetic use of alcohol, however, we must take into account, not only its direct value for nutriment, but also its indirect action, as, for instance, its effect upon digestion. So likewise, when we consider its pathological effect, we must take into account its indirect action upon the nervous system. Indeed, if we are going to study the subject at all thoroly, we must recognize many subdivisions. Since we cannot go into the details here, let me briefly summarize what appear to be the views of leading physiologists of the world.

What do the authorities say in answer to the question: Is alcohol food? Of course, the answer depends first of all upon the definition of "food." But people may properly differ as to the definition, and it is not worth while to quibble about what may be left to the dictionaries. Let us then go back of this and ask: What do the specialists say as to its nutritive effect?

If we study the views held by the physiologists and pharmacologists in this country and in Europe who are regarded by their fellow-specialists