important of all the teaching was obedience. They were to obey the men of the family in all cases.

Rousseau had little effect on the education of women, for during the eighteenth century a number of academies for girls were established in England. This was the beginning of secondary education for women. France was slower to grasp the meaning of education for women. Through the influence of an educationist, M. Duruy, an educational act was passed in 1869, establishing primary schools for girls in communities of five hundred inhabitants. In 1879 a law was passed to establish training colleges for both male and female teachers. These were the first teachers' training colleges established for women. The following year Jules Ferry founded a number of secondary schools for girls, taking them from convents and putting them in public schools. These were called Lycées or Communal schools, and offered the same course as the boys' schools but the course was two years shorter. During this period the first industrial school was started by Pestalozzi at Neuhof. There the girls were trained in domestic duties and needlework. The girls were also taught weaving and spinning. They were practised in conversation and in memorizing the Bible before they were taught to read and write. This was the beginning of education for poor girls. Later Fellenberg's wife established a school for poor girls. After this Fellenberg established a school for the middle classes in Switzerland.

In the American colonies the girls were given a domestic education. In Virginia the girls were taught handwork and music and probably some of the rudiments in the dame schools or by private teachers. Until 1825 the girls were admitted to the elementary schools only. In that year a public high school was established at Boston. Thus began secondary education for girls in America. During the same year Emma Willard established her female seminary at Troy, New York, and in 1837 it was chartered. It made no pretensions to collegiate rank.

In 1822 Catherine Beecher founded a girls' school at Hartford, Connecticut. Even after these schools were established there was still much objection to the education of girls outside of the home.

When it had been proved beyond a doubt by the academies and seminaries for women which sprang up during the earlier decades. of the nineteenth century, that sex differences were not of so much importance in education as had been supposed, it was not a long step to the establishment of institutions of a still higher grade for women. Some of the academies added a year or more to their courses of study, and took on the more pretentious name of college or seminary. At the same time many new institutions made their appearance.

The colleges for men, too, since the public secondary schools demonstrated the entire feasibility of coeducation, opened their doors to women. In 1870 the men's colleges comprised 69.3 per cent of the whole number for men and women together; in 1880 they had fallen to 48.7 per cent; in 1890 to 34.5 per cent; in 1900 to 29 per cent. As the result of all the movements in the direction of the higher education we have today three classes of institutions admitting women: (1) Colleges for women upon distinct and separate foundations; (2) women's colleges affiliated with universities for men; (3) coeducational institutions, in which both sexes have equal privileges.

SUMMARY.

We find that the Greek and Roman peoples realized the need of a domestic education for women. Plato, Erasmus and Martin Luther were the three early advocates for the education of women. M. Duruy was leader of the movement in France. Pestalozzi, by founding his industrial school, started universal training for both rich and poor, boys and girls alike. Men became broader through education and began to have visions of educated women, and so the field for their education was broadened.

CONCLUSION.

It has taken centuries for the people to realize that the principle of Plato in his Republic was true. The first people to accept it as a whole were the Americans; first to lead the world in democracy and first to lead the world in education and the uplift of womanhood. The struggle has been a hard one but it is worth while, for as womankind is uplifted so will the world be uplifted.

A Critique of the U. S. Bureau of Education

C. L. STAPLES, PH. D., CLERK IN THE RESEARCH DIVISION, BUREAU OF FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC COMMERCE,

N

WASHINGTON, D. C.
I.

¤œ:† OT a critique of the staff, the few specialists, the several statisticians, the small number of translators and editors, or the scant force of clerks, is the drift of this article. Rather is it an attempt at criticism, both destructive and constructive, of the network of the U. S. Bureau of Education. For the institution at Washington, that is theoretically at the head of the systems of education in the 48 statesundoubtedly the greatest and best system of democratic education in the world-is little more either in power or in organization, than an educational spider web. Not the men of the Bureau or their accomplishments are on the rack, but rather the organization, the skeleton that forsooth directs education in this country.

Just as a business man of an evening, knowing naught of either the characters or their deeds, picks up a novel to read, so the bill entitled H. R. 14,078 came to hand. It is the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Bill, dated January 20, 1919. On a scant two pages, 100-102, the regular appropriations for the educational leadership of this great country are made! Little attention or thought is given to the National regulation of education in America. In business and in government, amalgamation, combination, and unification, with a strong centralized authority, is the vogue all over the world today. But in education, disintegration, stagnation and "small potatoes" seems to be the policy that has been deemed best for this, the greatest democracy of all history. We shall first review the principal appropriations of the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Bill, comparing the value of the various departments and their respective appropriations. The sums in excess of $500,000 are given in the following table:

Every June, along with the roses, come the elaborate graduation exercises of all the myriad schools and colleges from Maine to California. The eloquent Commencement orators, with pedagogical fervor, ring out the dictum that education is the basis, must be the basis, of any enduring democracy. The glory that was Greece but is no more, the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, the chaotic and impotent condition of Mexico and China are all, on the Commencement platform, attributed to a lack of universal and progressive education of all the people.

Education is preached as one of the most important elements

in our civilization. Yet among the 23 largest appropriations, ranging from $26,288,000 for collecting internal revenue to $582,000 for district courts, the U. S. Bureau of Education does not appear. What, do you ask, is the appropriation for the supervision of education all over the U. S. A.? The sum is so low we are ashamed to mention it. Education is not a major but a very minor activity of the U. S. government. Our Uncle Sam is so poor that he can squeeze out only $186,960 for the National direction of the greatest system of education in the whole world.

If education is not, what, forsooth, are the important elements in our national regulation? The foregoing table shows that it has been voted that the Patent Office shall have $1,413,000; that is, the supervision of patents throughout the country is eight times more important than the supervision of education. The Bureau of Standards gets $1,357,260; that is, government scientific standard research is seven times more worthy than the oversight of children. Foreign commerce receives $910,510; that is, exports to foreign countries are five times more worthy of stimulation than the systems of education in the 48 states. Inspection of steamboats takes aboard $972,950; that is, it is five times more important to give steamboats the "once over" than to have medical and sanitary inspection of our children in their schools. The Mall office buildings in Washington draw $673,230; over three times. the appropriation given to the Bureau of Education.

The national supervision of education, then, in point of fact, is not one of the major functions of the U. S. government. Yet educational leaders, as college presidents, institute lecturers, and other pedagogical orators, proclaim education as the only lasting basis for the endurance of a democracy, the government of the people, by the people and for the people. But the relative appropriations of Congress cry to heaven it is not so. What, prithee, is the rank of the U. S. Bureau of Education? The table to

follow will show that it has been evaluated by the bill H. R. 14,078 as the 45th relative important function of the government down from the top: