less impulse to commit literary theft. If literary effort is to end thus, it can assuredly be neither pleasant nor profitable.

It is certain, however, that many people have found in writing a consolation and joy, and have written in such a fashion that their compositions have been a consolation and a joy to other people. The question is, How did this come about? The answer, if answer there is, will be found in the early compositions of great writers and in the pages of their biographies.

A partial, but tolerably careful, examination of these sources of information has pretty well convinced me that nearly all writers who have been noted for their manner of saying things have begun to learn the art of composition by a process closely analogous to our prevailing methods of teaching Greek and Latin composition. Consciously or unconsciously they have formed their style by a close study and imitation of former writers. They seem to have begun to write, in the first place, because they had been charmed by something which they had read and had been filled with the thought: "How glorious it would be to write like that!” Spenser's Eclogues bear witness to his love for Virgil, Shakespeare's earlier plays to a great admiration for Marlowe, Pope's Pastorals to a sort of Theocritean-Virgilian frenzy, and Wordsworth's Borderers to a boyish enthusiasm for Shakespeare. Tennyson has left on record the statement that for a time his whole care was to write like Byron. Macaulay was successively the slave of Scott, Cicero, and Burke. Carlyle formed his style by imitating his father's conversation. Nor has this method of composition been practiced by boys alone. Some great writers have never laid it aside. Virgil's obligations to Homer, Milton's to Virgil, Pope's to Horace, and Johnson's to Juvenal are cases in point. The ramifications of the practice are infinite. Every successful versifier for the college paper is a devotee of Dobson or Praed, and the prize story in the college magazine bears unmistakable evidence of being an echo of Howells or Kipling.

The idea that I would impress upon you, then, is this, that here, perhaps, we have a true principle of teaching the art of composition, and that perhaps, with the same method, the average boy and girl, under careful instruction, may learn to do passably well what extraordinary men and women have learned by themselves to do surpassingly well.

ments.

The range of subjects that can be treated in the manner suggested is practically unlimited, or is limited only by the range of our literature and the unspeakable wisdom of the committee on college-entrance requireI can mention only a few, but those few will each stand for a class and will suggest countless others. The description of the village of Raveloe in Silas Marner, for instance, may be made the basis for a description of the pupil's own town. John Burrough's Roof Tree will give him a standard by which to evaluate the domestic architecture that

he sees.

The character sketches in Goldsmith's Deserted Village and in the prologue to the Canterbury Tales will inspire him to draw pictures of his parents, his companions, the strangers who cross his path, and perhaps his teachers. Tom Brown's School Days will enable him to describe his own with fine feeling and insight. If he is of a satirical frame of mind, Johnson's London may rouse in him a wish to excoriate the faults of the city in which he lives, especially if he lives in Chicago. But perhaps the best of all fields for work of this kind will be found in the essays and the biography of Macaulay. The vigor and the perspicuity of his style are well within the grasp of the beginner. His unsullied life, his devotion to literature, and his fine simplicity, both as man and author, afford perhaps the best of all examples that we can hold up to our boys to prove to them that a man may cry over Homer and not be a milksop, and read Plato in the original and not be a pedant. His fascinating letters and journals, freer and simpler in style than his essays as they are, are often sufficient of themselves, without suggestion from a teacher, to set a bright boy to work upon similar efforts descriptive of his own experiences. His essay on Addison may well suggest a similar essay on Irving, his life of Pitt a life of Lincoln, or his description of the trial of Warren Hastings a description of the debate between Webster and Hayne. Best of all, and most interesting of all, an attempt may be made to finish his incomplete life of Frederick the Great as he himself would have finished it.

I have reserved perhaps the most important consideration until the end. It is this, that exercises of the sort I have mentioned improve, not only the ability to write, but also the ability to read. No one knows, and no one can know, how hard or how charming it is to write well until he has tried. No one can understand the glory of the simplest of our masterpieces until he has tried, and tried again and again, to reproduce their dignity, their simplicity, the naturalness of their style, their freedom from hypocrisy and from cant. It matters little whether success or failure, in the narrower sense, attend one's efforts. Not failure, but low aim, is crime, and in the broader sense one cannot fail. Provided an honest effort be made, no matter what is put down in black and white, the harvest of purer taste, riper judgment, deeper reverence, and keener delight in things high and good is sure to follow. It may be said, not as a paradox, but as a truth, with reference to this principle, that it is better to have writ and failed than never to have writ at all.

The conclusion which I would emphasize, then, is that for the matter of our compositions we ought, generally, to look to life, and for the manner, generally, to literature. In doing this we shall effect a closer union between our work in composition and our work in literature, shall combat a present widespread tendency to separate the two into distinct courses, and shall discover that the closer relationship thus developed

teaches people not only how to write, but also how to read, more skillfully. Finally and perhaps this is most important of all—it will be seen that the question which we have just been touching upon is part of a much wider and deeper question, and that, do what we may as teachers of composition, we must not expect that our disciples will make any distinct step forward in the power to write until they have made a corresponding step forward in the power to see, to feel, and to know.

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION

SECRETARY'S MINUTES

FIRST SESSION. - MONDAY, JULY 11, 1898

(JOINT SESSION OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION) The meeting was called to order by President R. H. Jesse, of the University of the State of Missouri, in Columbian University Hall, at 3 P. M.

The first paper was presented by Dr. James M. Green, State Normal School, Trenton, N. J., on the questions: "Are there studies that, as constants, should be pursued in some measure in every course in the secondary schools, and in the freshman and sophomore years of college? If so, what are these constants, and what should be the minimum requirement in each in these six years?"

The paper was discussed by Professor Frank Thilly, of the University of Missouri; Principal Charles C. Ramsay, High School, Fall River, Mass.; Dr. Robinson, Rock Island, Ill.; J. M. Davis, superintendent of secondary schools, Iowa; Professor A. T. Ormond, Princeton University, and Dr. Green.

A paper on

"The Training of the High-School Teacher " was presented by Professor M. V. O'Shea, University of Wisconsin.

The paper was discussed by Professor Walter B. Jacobs, High School, Providence, R. I.; Miss Connolly, Washington, D. C.; Mr. Roberts, of Missouri; Professor B. A. Hinsdale, University of Michigan; Superintendent George V. Buchanan, Sedalia, Mo. The discussion was closed by Professor O'Shea.

The meeting then adjourned.

SECOND SESSION.-TUESDAY, JULY 12

The department was called to order by President Jesse at 3 P. M.

Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler, Columbia University, New York city, spoke on the subject: “Should the undergraduate curriculum of four years in colleges and institutions be shortened by allowing such freedom of electives in the junior and senior years that a bachelor degree and a professional degree may be obtained in six years?"

Dr. William B. Smith, Tulane University, New Orleans, La., continued the discussion of the question.

In the absence of Dr. Albert Shaw, New York city, Professor A. T. Ormond, Princeton University, spoke on the subject: "Should the undergraduate curriculum of four years in colleges and universities be shortened by reducing it to three years?"

The discussion was continued by President James H. Baker, University of Colorado,

and President William F. King, Cornell College, Iowa.

A paper was read by Professor B. A. Hinsdale, of the University of Michigan, on the question: "Is it possible and desirable to form a federation of colleges and universities in the United States similar to the Association of American Medical Colleges ?"

The subject was discussed by Mrs. Ellen H. Richards, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Professor Taylor, University of New York.

Professor A. T. Ormond moved that a committee of five be appointed to report next year on a practical plan of effecting a national federation of colleges and universities, and to offer recommendations with reference to the same. The motion was amended to make the committee consist of the present officers of the Department of Higher Education, together with Professor B. A. Hinsdale, University of Michigan, and President James M. Baker of Colorado University. The motion was carried.

Moved by Professor W. H. Black, Missouri Valley College, Marshall, Mo., that the colleges and universities of the United States be notified by the secretary of the Department of Higher Education that the question of a national federation is being investi. gated and to be voted upon at the next meeting of the association. The motion was carried.

The nominating committee reported the following nominations for the ensuing year:
For President-Dr. R. B. Fulton, chancellor of the University of Mississippi.

For Vice-President — Dr. Elmer E. Brown, professor of pedagogy, University of California,
For Secretary-Dr. G. A. Tawney, professor of philosophy, Beloit College, Wisconsin.

JOSEPH SWAIN,
A. T. ORMOND,

Committee.

The report of the committee was adopted.
The department then adjourned.

G. A. TAWNEY,

Secretary pro tempore.

PAPERS AND DISCUSSIONS

ARE THERE studieS THAT, AS CONSTANTS, SHOULD BE PURSUED IN SOME MEASURE IN EVERY COURSE IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOLS, AND IN THE FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE YEARS OF THE COLLEGE? IF SO, WHAT ARE THESE CONSTANTS, AND WHAT SHOULD BE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IN EACH IN THESE SIX YEARS?

BY DR. JAMES M. GREEN, STATE NORMAL SCHOOL, TRENTON, N. J. All our theories of education should follow a careful observation of the experiences a youth is likely to meet in life, and what will best fit him for those experiences. So trite a statement as this would seem out of place, were it not for the fact that many theories of education yet seem to be formed from an ideal of what should be, rather than a realization of what is; or are the results of some ambitious efforts at invention. It was not left for man to create the human race, and he can scarcely hope to invent any new laws concerning its development, but must content himself with supplying the conditions for that development.

In forming any scheme of education, we must not lose sight of the fact that our temporal existence is not all of life, but the conclusion is