MRS. ELIZABETH B. PASSMORE: I understood Whitter Fulton to say that when he sinned it was he alone who was affected. My dear friend, we must remember that we all have an influence and we should do the best we know to set a good example for our fellow men.

MAHLON BROSIUS: Maybe it will not be amiss for a conscientious Republican to say a few words. We will agree with the speaker of this morning as to the evils of the liquor traffic, but we differ on the manner of treating the evil. Many of my friends are third party people, but I cannot see as they do. The liquor traffic as we have to deal with it cannot be suppressed by the people who are voting the Prohibition ticket. The Prohibitionists say we cannot compromise with evil, we must stop it. This is entirely too big a question to be settled all at once. I think best to compromise the evil and eventually eradicate it. The majority of the people do not want the traffic suppressed and as it is only when legal enactment is supported by moral sentiment that it is worth anything, a prohibitory law is of no present avail. One-third of the people cannot enforce a law which the other two-thirds do not want enforced. We know that either the Republicans or the Democrats are going to be successful. Now is it best for us to say, "Oh! these parties are both bad, so I'll stay at home and have nothing to do with them," or is it best for us, knowing that although bad they will be successful, to go to the primaries and help make the ticket as good as we can, by putting the best men on it? If we pursue the latter method we will have easy consciences, and if the affairs of the country go wrong it will not be because we did not do our best to make them go right.

HENRY S. KENT: I respect our friend for his sentiments, but I would like to ask him one question, does he think we prohibitionists have any idea of electing our candidates until we do get a majority? (applause.) We intend to go on educating until we get a majority and when our candidates go into office they will know it was a majority of this kind which sent them there, and they will know too that if they as do we

want them to do, the same majority will send them back again, and they will do it! It used to be said that slavery could not be abolished, but it was abolished, and so long ago that we must tell our grown up children about it. We must not only prohibit the doing of evil, but we must prohibit the temptation to do it.

MAHLON BROSIUS: It is said that one out of every six boys goes to a drunkard's grave. This is enough to make any man think, yet the Prohibitionists know that the obstacles they must overcome are almost insurmountable. I want the Prohibitionists and temperance men to hold themselves ready as a body to vote with any party which would guarantee or want to pass a law in favor of temperance. This would have a much greater influence than the Third Party has at present, for the number of this independent body would be much greater than that of the Prohibitionists at present, and the old parties would consequently have a much greater fear of it. The Prohibition party is a disturbing element between the other parties.

DR. I. D. JOHNSON: The gentleman who just spoke says the liquor traffic is in better shape than ever before. The consumption has increased from 2.5 gallons per capita before the high license law went into effect, to 16.5 gallons per annum at present. Is there less crime now than formerly? No, and this has all been brought about by the Republicans whom our friend so warmly indorses.

Some one asked to have the Norwegian system explained and MR. HINCKLEY answered that the idea of the Norwegian law is to take away the profits from the business, in other words to have a special commission to sell liquor at such a figure that it would produce no profit, and there would be no temptation for private individuals to go into the business. There is a movement on foot to ingraft this system in Massachusetts, so far as towns voting under our local option law for license are concerned. The majority of the people are I believe in favor of the experiment in this form. Many of the most influential of them are I know.

JOHN J. CORNELL: One of the speakers charged me with

overstating the case, but I think he understated it. The government charged 90 cents for every gallon of whiskey which it costs 10 cents to make. Counting 64 drinks to the gallon at 19 cents each it makes $6.40 or a clear profit of $5.40 for the dealer. It is necessary that the Prohibitionists get a majority and then the old parties will be deserted as rats desert an old ship.

JACOB HARVEY: In South Carolina I saw a trial of the Norweigan law, and I think it is an excellent thing. The dispensary is a wonderful check on the consumption of liquor, the government officials always parleying with the purchaser, and advising him not to buy. I was in a town there for six months and I never saw a drunken man. If we cannot prohibit the sale entirely, let us put it in such a shape that no man can profit by selling it, and then no one will want to ruin our sons. MR. HINCKLEY: The liquor men are much opposed to the adoption of the Norwegian System in Massachusetts, because it would rob them of their profitable business. Where put in operation it is claimed this system has reduced the consumption of liquor about one-half.

LUNDY KENT: If this method does reduce the consumption one-half it would certainly recommend itself to our favorable notice, and if we can get it in effect it would be a step in the right direction. Our Judges would then grant licenses to reputable government officials and refuse them to the disreputable set who now sell liquor.

HENRY S. KENT: This reminds me of a fable I was taught when a boy, that I could catch a bird if I put salt on its tail. You can no more pass such a law as this than you can get prohibition. The whiskey men are not going to allow any law to pass which will take the profits from their business. It is not the Democrats or the Republicans, but the liquor party which rules our country.

DAVID FERRIS: For 50 years we have been experimenting with this liquor traffic and every experiment except prohi bition has proved a failure. In Maine nineteen-twentieths of the consumption of liquor has been abolished, and wherever

else it has been tried it has been a success.

Now that this has been proven true, why not join and make it a grand success here too. If there was any better way I would be in favor of it, but we know this to be good, and until something else is proven better let us all advocate prohibition.

JESSIE P. HANNUM: I was glad to see some of your prohibitionists melt down as much as they did on the amendment to the resolution. As J. WILLIAMS THORNE said, the first thing is to get the people educated to prohibition. If the prohibitionists were in power now we would have about the state of affairs we have at present only worse, for not only the miners would strike but the liquor men would strike and we would probably have war.

The Republican party is a party based on political questions. I do not consider the liquor traffic a political question; it is a moral one, and no one action will ever succeed in overthrowing it. Prohibition, moral suasion, high license, none of them alone can succeed. If the prohibitory law falls as far short of prohibiting as did the Mosaic Law it will come far from accomplishing its purpose. Even in Maine, Neal Dow himself admits that there are two thousand inebriates in the state. You must bear in mind no one thing will cure this evil. You censure high license, yet if you examine it carefully you will see it was only intended to cut the profits from the business. I want the tax on liquor made so high that it will be hard for any man to get drunk.

The vote was taken on the amended testimony and it was unanimously adopted.

MR. HINCKLEY then delivered the following address upon

EDUCATIONAL RECONSTRUCTION.

Dr. William T. Harris, certainly a weighty authority, says of what is known as The Report of the Committee of Ten, recently submitted to the public, that it is in some respects the most important educational document ever published in this country.

This committee of Ten, appointed at a meeting of the

National Educational Association, in July 1892, was composed of the following gentleman :

President Eliot, of Harvard, Chairman, William T. Harris, Nat. Commissioner of Education, President Angell, of the University of Michigan, Head Master Tetlow, of the Girl's High and Girl's Latin Schools, Boston, President Taylor, of Vassar College, Principal Robinson, of the High Schools, Albany, President Baker, of the University of Colorado, President Jesse, of the University of Missouri, Head Master Mackenzie, of the Lawrenceville School, N. J., and Prof. King, of Oberlin College. The duty of this Committee was to consider the work of Secondary Schools, and incidentally of Elementary Schools, as feeders thereof; to ascertain what revision of studies, both as to subject and time, if any is needed: and to report their conclusions.

Under the direction and control of this Committee of Ten, Nine Conferences were formed, consisting of ten members each, as follows: 1. Latin, 2. Greek, 3. English, 4. Other Modern Languages, 5. Mathematics, 6. Physics, Astronomy and Chemistry, 7. Natural History i. e. (Biology, including Botany, Zoology and Physiology,) 8. History, Civil Government and Political Economy and 9. Geography, i. e. (Physical Geogra phy, Geology and Meteorology.) The personel of the Conferences was most critically considered with a view to the best possible investigation of the work now done and the changes needed in each department, and each conference held sessions lasting three days. The document now published by the Government Bureau of Education, includes the report of the Committee of Ten and also the reports in detail of each of these nine conferences. I can only call attention to some of the more significant facts shown in the conclusions reached.

Ist. The Conferences were unanimous on nearly all the points made.

2nd. All wish the studies referred to them to begin in some form earlier than now. That is the studies of our Secondary or High Schools.

3rd. All are of opinion that every subject taught should