insisted, by numbers of men of undoubted eminence and patriotism, that the present population of this great archipelago, according to the best information attainable consisting of several millions of people, speaking different languages, ranging from wild men of the woods through every grade of semi-civilization, with a small body of able and ambitious leaders, now waging war against the National Government is rightly included in Jefferson's category that government derives its only authority" from the consent of the governed." But what was the actual meaning of the Fathers in making this declaration? In the year 1776 there were probably not exceeding three millions of people inhabiting the thirteen British colonies, now the seaboard Atlantic States. Of these nearly one half million were negro slaves. A million and a half were of the female sex. Nearly one third were minors, from the cradle to twenty-one; and several hundred thousand Indians inhabited the Western wilds, afterwards brought under the new Government of the United States. How many of these people were referred to in this formula that " government derives its authority from the consent of the governed?" Were the negro slaves canvassed and their consent obtained to their condition of slavery? Were the Indians, who afterwards by relentless war were swept in a body from the Atlantic slope to the unsettled wilderness beyond the Mississippi? Has there been, until to-day, any real opportunity given the million and a half, at present thirtyfive millions, of the female sex to ascertain their opinion concerning the laws under which they live? Has Young America from the age of fifteen to twenty-one, beyond question more intelligent in all matters pertaining to government than half the people now living in the world, including the vast majority of the Oriental peoples, been thus canvassed and its consent obtained? There can be no doubt that at the time of the Declaration of Independence a large body, perhaps a fourth, a third, possibly a half of the men in these colonies were opposed to the revolt against the mother country. Was their "consent" obtained, either during the war or at the formation of the National Government? What proportion of the mature white men in these colonies, at the time they one by one accepted the Constitution of the United States, were legal voters, and in how many of these new States was there a property or other discriminating qualification for suffrage? The reply to questions like these brings us down to the hard fact that Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison and Monroe, all"Fathers" and participants in the great Declaration, were elected to the Presidency by what would to-day be regarded an insignificant minority of the white men of mature age.

Our Government originally made no pretence of obtaining the legal consent of any save a majority of the legal white voters, and that majority to-day is expanded to a plurality. Indeed, no attempt was ever made at national life to carry into practical application this formula of the Declaration either in regard to races of people adjudged incompetent for self-government, or classes like women or minors. The body of people, always the minority, which has decided the vital question of incompetency in our country, like every other, has always been a working majority of the more intelligent, forceful and generally competent men of the ruling race. The only attempt at a Republic founded practically on the consent of the masses was seen during a few months in the French Revolution, when an infuriated populace attempted to secure unanimity and "consent" by destroying all opponents to "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity"; the result being a reaction to the military despotism of Napoleon the First. There is doubtless a sense in which this Jeffersonian formula has a profound meaning; that it is the moral obligation of every nation to educate the lower orders of mankind in the direction of self-government, and extend full citizenship as fast and as far as the safety of society will permit. In our own country, at home, that limit even as far as the male sex is concerned, would seem to be already reached, both in regard to great multitudes of European immigrants in the North and of the freedmen of the South. The proposition that the holding of a colony of people, in the condition of millions of the Oriental races, with the ultimate object of their uplift through all the opportunities of modern Christian civilization, is a departure, from the American republican order of society and government or from the American ideal in any way it can be applied in the present condition of mankind, so marked and violent as to threaten a radical change in the national life, when analyzed is so absolutely visionary that it can be only accounted for by the loose habit of thought and indifference to the facts of human nature and life which are in themselves to-day the greatest peril of the Republic.

A. D. M.

FOREIGN NOTES.

PHILOSOPHY AT THE INTERNATIONAL CONGRESSES.

An international Congress of Higher Education, as already announced in these columns, will be held in Paris from July 30th to August 4th. Among the subjects suggested for consideration is that of the place of philosophy in a system of liberal education. The conditions that give special importance to this subject are reviewed by M. Boutroux, of the Institute, in a recent number of the Revue Internationale de Enseignement. He considers the effect that the positive sciences have had upon philosophic inquiry, especially in obscuring its true object and its original and independent character. "It seems,” he says, "that the time has come for an interchange of ideas upon the state of philosophy in view of the sciences properly so called, and in a more general manner, in view of other forms of intellectual activity. Since it is clear that philosophy cannot dispense entirely with science, and on the other hand that the conception of matter cannot come from without, it is necessary to determine the true relations between philosophy and the sciences, and the studies which may establish between them the relations upon which both depend. It is necessary to determine the studies which are essentially philosophic, and also those studies which should range themselves round this central group in a university course. It is important also, and still more difficult, to determine the extent to which philosophy should enter into the ordinary college course, or the course preparatory to the university (French lycée).

In view of these considerations, first of the general state of philosophy at this time, and second of the requirements of a course of philosophic study, M. Boutroux proposes the two following questions for the Congress of Higher Education: (1) What are the essential conditions for the study of philosophy in universities? (2) What should constitute the preliminary course in philosophy (the lycée course) ?

The considerations proposed for this section of the Congress of Higher Education are quite independent of the Congress of Philosophy, which is appointed for August 2d to 7th, under the presidency of M. Boutroux.

DISTURBANCES IN THE RUSSIAN UNIVERSITIES.

The revolt of the students in the Russian universities which took place in February last, has been the subject of serious consideration on the part of the government. The disorders affected all the universities, extending even to Siberia; and although there was reason to regard the outbreak as the result of concentrated action, no evidence of the fact could be secured. An investigation was ordered, and in view of the report submitted, the Emperor officially announced his dissatisfaction with the local and the university authorities for their want of restraining control and influence over excitable youth. Responsible ministers and other officers were ordered to take proper, even severe measures, to prevent a recurrence of the disorders. The

Emperor further reprimanded the riotous students in general terms, and more explicitly the local communities for their failure to co-operate with the government in suppressing the disorders.

Subsequently an official order was issued extending indulgence to participators in the riots, excepting the few whose presence in the universities should be deemed injurious by the rectors, and providing for the restoration of the majority of the students to their classes. This was necessary, as the work of the universities was virtually suspended.

The order was interpreted in some quarters as a partial victory for the students, but this view is not confirmed by later utterances. By a recent command of the Emperor the minister of war has issued a new regulation as to the military service of students. Students who are found guilty of having instigated riots will be subject to three years' military service. No exception will be made on account of extreme youth or for the sons of widows, who heretofore had the privilege of drawing lots, or even for the sick. It is, however, allowed that after one year of service the riotous students who have secured an exceptionally good record may be relieved of the penalty. After the completion of the service they may be restored to their universities and admitted to public careers.

Meanwhile, as a consequence of the conditions disclosed by the investigations, measures have been taken for improving the condition of students. An appropriation of $2,000,000 has been made to provide reading rooms, clubroom, and even bed-rooms in the institutions for students who deserve them, and detailed orders have been issued to rectors with respect to the means of maintaining stricter watch upon the students. These orders aim at establishing closer bonds between the professors and students by means of societies for intellectual, and even social intercourse, while at the same time students' societies are strictly forbidden. Through all these measures the spirit of arbitrary repression is manifest, even though there is a sincere effort to increase the material well-being of the students.

CRITICISM OF GERMAN UNIVERSITIES.

The Revue Internationale de l'Enseignement in a recent issue gives a brief summary of a critical survey of the German Universities by Professor Bernheim, of the University of Greifswald. The matter was presented in the form of a rectorial address, and is an expansion of the position set forth in a previous work by the rector on university education and modern demands. According to the review cited, Professor Bernheim holds that the German universities are not fully adequate to the demands of the hour. He discusses the problem under three topics: Relations of the universities to the State; their responsibilities and professional duties from the double standpoint of science and of education; the rival establishments.

Under the first head he considers the movement toward centralization which set in after the close of the Middle Ages, and the reaction against this movement, especially in Prussia. Thanks to this reac

tion, the universities preserved the power of directing the intellectual forces of the nation in the midst of political troubles and disorders. At present Professor Bernheim notes with apprehension the tendency on the part of the government to interfere more and more in the internal affairs of the universities; as a consequence, he says, "the professors are losing all power of initiative in spite even of the government efforts to prevent this effect." He instances the fruitless conference of the rectors held last year at Berlin at the instance of the government.

As a remedy for this evil Professor Bernheim urges annual conferences of representatives of the universities to be held independently of the state for the discussion of all matters pertaining to university life and work. From these conferences he believes would result a united and independent corporation of the universities such as existed in the Middle Ages.

In respect to the relation of the universities to science, Professor Bernheim maintains that while they have given ample recognition to pure science as an instrument of education, they have, on the other hand, failed to make adequate provision for the forming of men devoted to research, and more especially of experts in the practical application of the sciences (savants and practicians). They began the work in these directions by the creation of "seminars" and laboratory practice, but these have proved insufficient. Meanwhile great technical and commercial schools have been developed, and now rival the universities themselves. The university, he says, should find some means of drawing these within its own organization; otherwise while it will indeed remain par excellence the most perfect school of pure science, it will lose all direction and all influence over practical science.

Professor Bernheim recognizes the importance of the movement in France, which has resulted in several centers in the union of the university with high technical schools. This result he attributes in great part to the influence of the Revue Internationale de l'Enseignement, which he finds to be without an equal in any other country. A. T. S.

BOOK NOTICES.

READING: HOW TO TEACH IT. By Sarah Louise Arnold. Miss Arnold is well known as a successful teacher, writer and supervisor of schools in Boston. She has a happy faculty for seeing and saying the right thing at the right time. The importance of the theme upon which she writes in this volume can hardly be overestimated. She makes a careful study of the subject of children's reading, and makes many helpful suggestions to those who would acquire the art of teaching reading successfully. To study this book will inspire any teacher with a new earnestness that will give an added dignity to the daily tasks of the schoolroom. The book is daintily printed and bound. It is issued by Silver, Burdett & Co., Boston. Price, $1.00.