The Use of the Hyphen. Compound words, or those made up of two or more words, sometimes require a hyphen to connect their parts.

The following are the most important principles governing the use of the hyphen:

com

1. Permanent compounds, such as bookseller, penman, and shoemaker, are consolidated; while temporary pounds, such as good-natured, laughterloving, etc., require a hyphen.

2. Words regularly united, and usually known as compound words, should not be broken. Thus, railroad is a better form than rail road, red-hot is better than red hot, and well-being better than well being.

3. The hyphen is used to join the parts of compound words that do not sufficiently coalesce without it; as dew drop, curly headed, rosy-cheeked, forty-five, to-night.

4. The compounding of words is sometimes necessary to make the meaning clear. Thus, there is a well defined difference between a glass-house, a place for making glass, and a glass house, which is a house made of glass. So, also, the distinction between a live oak, a living oak, and a live-oak, a species of evergreen, is made clear by the use of the hyphen. So, also, the hyphen makes clear the distinction between a singing bird and a singing-bird, a dog's ear, and a dog's-ear, many colored goods and manycolored goods.

When part of a word is common to two or more consecutive words it should be left separate or be used with both words. Thus we may write of "the minute and the second hand of a watch;" better "the minute hand and the second-hand of a watch."

When several compounds occur together, it is usually best to combine them in groups; as "Cripple-Creek goldmines," "Broad-Mountain coal-fields."

A phrase used as an epithet or as a modifier is compounded and the hyphen used; as, a "never-to-be-forgotten" event, a "flower-bedecked" meadow, an "I-am-surprised" expression of counte.

nance.

When compounds are formed by the union of a possessive and the noun limited, if the meaning is literal, both pos

sessive sign and the hyphen disappear; thus, tradesman, doomsday, ratsbane.

When these same terms have not a literal meaning, as "hound's-tongue, bear'sfoot, or wolf's-bane-names of plants, both possessive sign and hyphen are retained.

When the compound term is used as an adjective, both the possessive sign and the hyphen are retained, as in the expression, a "camel's-hair shawl," "neat'sfoot oil," a "bird's-eye view.

A phrase having a possessive and used as a proper name retains the possessive sign but does not take the hyphen; as Hare's Corner, Sewell's Point.

Cardinal numbers from twenty to one hundred are written with a hyphen; thus, twenty-one, sixty-seven, eighty-four. So also fractions; as two-thirds, threefourths, nine-tenths.

A foreign phrase that is used as an epithet, or whose parts have so lost their meaning as to become Anglicized, is written with a hyphen; as, piano-forte, billetdoux. But if the words convey their original meaning, they remain separate, and no hyphen is used; as, habeas corpus, scire facias, casus belli.

Prefixes, or similar parts, are not consolidated with the rest of the word if they stand before a capital letter, and the hyphen is used to separate; thus, preAdamite, ex-President, Anglo-Saxon,

anti-Democratic.

The hyphen is used also to preserve the separate sense of the parts of a compound term, as in electro-magnetism, vice-admiral, hydro-carbon.

The words to-day, to-night and to-morrow should always be written with a hyphen.

The tendency to consolidation in compounds seems to be well marked. Thus the word schoolhouse was originally written as two words, school house; later the hyphen was inserted, making a single word, school-house, each syllable taking equal stress; later still the accent was shifted to the word school and the hyphen was dropped, and this seems to be the general rule in these compounds, that where the accent shifts to a single syllable the hyphen disappears.-Educational News.

Formula for Variation of Weight Be

low the Surface of the Earth. Editor of Public-School Journal:

In a very ingenious discussion of a simple problem in mechanics, W. R. Jones, in your July number, arrives at the conclusion that "the variation of weight (of a certain mass) below the surface of the earth (supposing the earth to be a homogenious sphere) is not as the variation of distance from the center."

Mr. Jones gives the analysis of his demonstration, and leaves it to the reader to derive a proper formula and so verify the conclusion stated above.

The argument of Mr. Jones is based on the following statement of the law of gravitation:

"(1) Gravitation varies directly as the product of the masses, and (2) inversely as the square of the distance between their centers of gravity."

On that statement as his premises, Mr. Jones reasons correctly, yet he arrives at a wrong conclusion. His error, as any student of mechanics must quickly see, lies, not in his reasoning, but in his second premise as to the distance between their centers of gravity." Except in the case of homogeneous spheres external to each other, the "distance" which is to be squared in getting the force of attraction is not the distance between the two centers of gravity.

Had Mr. Jones actually calculated the unbalanced attraction of his peculiarly shaped solid, he would have found that it was very different from the attraction of an equal mass concentrated at its center of gravity.

Let me illustrate this point, because I may seem to some to be denying the truth of Newton's statement of the law of gravitation. Newton was dealing with spheres or bodies assumed to be spheres. To make my point clear, let us take a thin hemispherical shell of radius R and a concentrated particle of unity mass placed at the center of the shell, and find their mutual attraction.

Let M be the unit mass at the center. Let SSS be a section of the hemispherical shell. Now the center of gravity of the shell is at A, the middle point of the cen

M

S

S

A

tral radius, while the resultant attraction of the shell on the mass at M is the same as that of a mass

S B equal to the shell con

centrated at B outside the shell and at a distance from M equal to R 1/2.

I would put down the demonstration of these propositions, but as they involve the use of the calculus they might not be interesting to your readers, but the points A and B are seen to be very different.

In closing, I may add that the simplest demonstration of the problem Mr. Jones proposes is by means of an elementary cone of two nappes having the concentrated united mass at its vertex. It is

easily proved that

the attractions of the two portions of any enclosing spherical shell inIcluded in the cone balance each other, so that their resultant attraction is nil. That being

true of all such ele

mentary parts, it is evident that the attraction of the entire shell, and of all other shells enclosing the mass M, is zero. Hence the unbalanced attraction is due to a sphere whose surface passes through M.

Now this mass being a homogeneous sphere, its attraction is the same as if its mass were concentrated at its center, towit: the center of the original sphere, according to Newton's law; and if the mass is at a distance Rx from the center we have by Newton's law the proportion:

The Science Teacher Does Not Need Psychology.

At one session of the section of science teachers at the Milwaukee meeting of the N. E. A. the idea was freely expressed and seemed to find general favor, that there is no necessity for a teacher of science to study the action of a pupil's mind. That it is, in fact, better for a teacher of science to forget that a pupil has a mind, and to look merely at the facts of the science. That there is great danger of becoming morbid concerning the mental effects of studies. That what we ought to do is to teach the facts of the science, and the best mental discipline inevitably follows.

in

While the general expression of opinion at a subsequent meeting was pleasing contrast to the above ideas, the prevalence of such sentiments at a section meeting of the N. E. A. is to an advocate of scientific study, very depressing. It affords an explanation of the reactionary tendency against scientific subjects, observable in certain quarters, and casts doubt, in the minds of friends of scientific education, upon the value that is really derived from the pursuit of science as now taught in high schools at least.

The kind of sentiments herein criticised seemed to be most popular with teachers in colleges, and those who have passed into secondary schools from colleges. Several normal school men who were present, dissented vigorously from the opinions criticised. As there seems to be a growing tendency to draw teachers of science from the colleges and universities without any reference to their training in pedagogical principles, the outlook is rather discouraging. The fault lies with the teachers themselves, who refuse to consider that pedagogy has anything of value for them."

It suggests, too, a question concerning the ability, or rather the futility, of the attempt of the pedagogical department of an university to make itself effective in conjunction with other departments, especially those of science. Until the schools whose particular business it is to train teachers can furnish a more adequate scientific training, the outlook for science is decidedly blue.

I do not know that teachers of science

History in Cross-Sections. Superintendent J. M. Greenwood said at the Milwaukee meeting that history ought to be taught in "parallels" and not in "cross-sections." He illustrated his meaning by supposing that a man had twelve stories to tell. "Would he relate each one without reference to the others, or would he relate the first stage in all of them, then the second stage, and so on to the end?"

History is the biography-the "written life" of humanity. We may say of botany also that it is the biography of the plant world.

Now history is made up of many groups of stories of events, some contemporaneous and others successive. If we select one of these groups, the history of our nation, for example, and examine it, we shall find it to consist of stories contemporaneous and successive. Each of these groups is composed of similar groups holding similar relations. Now how is it possible to tell one of these most elementary stories without correlating it with the others of its group. What would the story of George Washington be worth if not correlated with stories of other persons and other events not only contemporaneous, but antecedent to and subsequent to the time in which he lived? How is it possible, in other words, to teach the history of our country without teaching it in cross-sections? How is it possible to teach history from beginning to end without "worrying over correlations," which phrase seems to assume that such relations are worrisome.

And let us further inquire how it would be possible to touch the Revolutionary War, for another example, without "worrying over" the geography of a large part of our contineut east of the Mississippi river, and of England and France, and the Atlantic ocean? And what would a knowledge of the war be worth with

the story of the government left out, and without some knowledge of France and England at that time? How can one single strand in the web of history be taught without a knowledge of many other strands that together constitute the fabric? When one denies the principle of correlation in teaching, he is certain to fall into grave inconsistencies.

So

What Superintendent Green wood probably had in mind was correlations that are so far apart that the learner does not easily recognize that they are co-related, and so loses the thread of his story. long as he holds firmly to this thread, he can explore a good many "cross sections" of other threads that help to form the warp and woof of history. EDITOR.

It was said that the word "apperception" was not heard at the Milwaukee meeting. Perhaps apperception was not discussed by any speaker, and it is possible that the idea which the word names was no part of any discussion. The fact that the word was not heard is no indi

cation that it has not an abiding place in our educational vocabulary. Every careful thinker knows that "apperception" is the name of an idea that no other word names so well, and that this idea is one of the most fundamental and important in the science of pedagogics. Those who become hilarious and waste a good deal of cheap wit on new technical terms in education will find that such terms will come when they are needed and will stay long after the wit and its author have been forgotten.

Mr. R. R. Reeder, whom many of our readers remember as a prominent educationist in Illinois, until he entered upon a business career in Massachusetts, begins a valuable communication in the Springfield Republican with the following words:

OBEDIENCE AND WORK NECESSARY.

"Two things are necessary to make law-abiding citizens of our boys,-obedience in the home, and regular employment at some kind of wholesome work. A clear view of these two essential conditions will not permit us to spread the responsibility out thin over a half-dozen different institutions, including the Sun

day school and the Young Men's Christian Association. Each institution has its peculiar and important work to do in the development of the boy, but any attempt to obscure the fact that the home does and should carry at least nine-tenths of the responsibility for the behavior of children, is reasoning from false premises."

"Every child should be measured by its own standard, trained to its own duty, and rewarded by its just praise. It is the effort that deserves praise, not the success; nor is it a question for any student whether he is cleverer than others, or duller, but whether he has done the best he could with the gifts he has."-Ruskin.

The Journey of Waleta.

AN INDIAN STORY.

Where the river flowed widest and

gentlest stood the wigwam of Waleta. Its doorway faced the water and the southern sunshine. It was here that Waleta sat, hour after hour, day after day, and moon after moon. The old man's visitors always knew where to find him. He seldom traveled many feet from the doorway of his tent, so great was his trouble. For him the day had lost its light. A continual darkness was everywhere about him. Waleta was blind.

A short distance back of the tent rose the wigwams of the village. A brown, well-worn path stretched between. Each day two women of the tribe came to care for the needs of Waleta. They prepared his food, brought him water from the spring, and led him to his favorite seat in the doorway.

"Are you at rest, Waleta?" the women would ask him.

"I am, my sisters," came his answer always.

Suddenly, perhaps, a joyous shout would sound from the village.

Tis my chickens," the old man would say, "the little children. They are coming to see their old friend, Waleta."

With much shouting and laughing they would surround him, begging loudly for a story.

A leader among those who came was

Kabinos, the orphan. He it was who lived with the old woman, Ojeweena. Kabinos was a brave boy, and strong, and had already hunted far in the forest.

Tell us of the great East-land'," he would say, "tell us of the strange villages of the pale face, of the sea without end."

As soon as the children were quiet, Waleta would begin his story. When his eyes were yet bright he had traveled far, hunted much game, and been a great warrior. Many were the tales he had to tell of strange sights, brave deeds, and hard fighting.

Breathless, the children would sit about him. No one in the tribe, they said, could tell stories like Waleta.

In return for his kindness, and because they loved him, they did many things for the old warrior. Never was he without the flowers of the forest; and in the summer when the berries ripened, the basket at his side was always filled. And, too, they brought him news of all that was happening in the field and forest, and on the stream.

"Today the robins in the sycamore are teaching their babies to fly," one would

say.

"We shall have rain," perhaps another would add, "for the gophers are turning their backs to the sun.

"Gehlo, the mighty fisherman," a third might put in, "speared a pickerel near the rapids this morning. It was longer than the arm of a brave."

This and much more they told him, and to all Waleta listened with much interest. He said sometimes that his chickens were almost as good as eyes to him.

Yet of all who came he loved Kabinos best. Every day the boy had been at his side. He depended upon him for many things. Think of his pain, then, when one morning the women told him that Kabinos was gone.

"Gone!" the old man shouted, jumping to his feet. "Gone! Tell me, sisters, what you mean!"

The women were much frightened at the look in Waleta's face.

"We will bring Ojeweena to you,' they said. "She can tell you all."

Soon the old friend of Kabinos stood before the doorway of the wigwam. She

was tired with much running. Her face looked worn and old.

"Waleta, man of many stories," she said, "a stranger has been tarrying in our tent. He has lived in the towns of the pale face. He had wonderful tales to tell; many of them. Kabinos hearkened to them all and begged for more. At last the stranger told him of a man in the far eastland who has wonderful power to heal the sick. Our medicine men are as nothing to him, he says. There is no trouble he cannot cure.

Ojeweena paused. Waleta turned his sightless eyes upon her. A strange thought was growing in the old Indian's breast.

"Go on," he said.

Again the woman spoke:

"After Kabinos heard this last story of the stranger he seemed as one in a dream. I offered him food, but he ate not. 'Let me think,' he said. All night I heard him tossing on his bed of rushes in the wigwam. This morning he told me he was going.

"I must learn more of the great paleface healer,' he said. 'Tell Waleta I shall soon be back, bringing him good news.' "Then he threw himself on the back of Midjnaw and was gone.'

It was early spring when the boy rode away, it was spring again when he returned. He had been gone a whole year. All through that long season Waleta had sat in the doorway and waited. The summer's sun had beat upon him, the winter's snow sifted about him under his blanket and through his hair. For the sake of his little children he had tried to be cheerful, yet it was hard work.

"Waleta's stories are not as they once were, "said the boys and girls," they are all too sad."

Each day Waleta had become more anxious, each day thinner and more wan. But at last, one morning when the robins were singing all about him he suddenly laid his ear to the ground.

"It is he," he cried, jumping to his feet, "Ojeweena, it is he. I hear the beating of Midjnaw's hoofs. Kabinos has returned.

Ojeweena ran from her wigwam out into the bright sunshine, "It is well," she cried, "it is well."

Straight to the two old people rode