Consequently we have a highly intelligent citizenship, great business activity, and a high degree of inventive skill by which machinery is made to do the work of man and to cheapen every product which his need requires.

Now these very results of our education are so much admired that they are used as an argument against the system which produced them. Mental training has resulted in great industrial progress: and now we are exhorted to abandon that training and work directly for industrial progress. Industrial education is the popular fetich; and if any one tries to advocate anything else he is suppressed by the old cry of "Great is Diana of the Ephesians."

Technical schools undoubtedly are in demand; and they are essential and highly useful. Special industrial schools are also to be encouraged, and they may be beneficial. But the public schools should not be subverted or overthrown in order to make a place for such schools.

In the first place, a distinct phase of this kind of education was begun more than fifty years ago, and it proved a dead failure. It has been my fortune to be connected with three institutions of this kind, in the States of Maine and Massachusetts, where were to be seen the decaying ruins of a system as promising to its advocates as any which is now proposed.

In the second place there is a fallacy in the claim that manual training in school is necessary in order to produce intellectual honesty; that accuracy of thought and statement can not be secured without muscular work in the production of material things; that geometry, for example, can not be learned thoroughly without cutting out blocks, nor astronomy without going up in a balloon to see the stars; - for this is what the advocates of manual training claim when their claim is reduced to its bald and concrete form. In the third place there is a materialistic tendency, in the present advocacy of manual training as an adjunct of publicschool education, which is destructive of that virile quality of thought and mental power which it is the province of education to beget. Within a fortnight one of these advocates is reported to have said: "The important thing to keep before a boy's mind in school is, 'How will all this help me in getting a living?'"-as if the American people need to be stimulated in moneygetting; and as if the high object of education is the almighty dollar!

Finally, when the public-school system undertakes to do everything for a pupil; to train his mind to clear and vigorous thinking; to develop all his physical powers and teach him a trade by which he may earn a livelihood; and to train his moral nature so that he may have a clear passport to heaven, then this system will fall to pieces of its own weight. For ours is not a paternal government whose design is to care for each individual, but a democracy in which each has not only to take care of himself but to help also in making regulations for all; and till the family relation is overthrown in the onward "progress" of our age, something must be left to parents; and it can best be left there in spite of the protestations of those self-constituted philanthropists who so much desire to educate every child for his "sphere in life."

A. P. Marble, Superintendent Public Schools, Worcester, Mass.

Industrial Training in the New York Catholic
Protectory.

THE New York Catholic Protectory is a remarkable instance of a reformatory in which industrial training is carried on to an extent unsurpassed by that of any similar institution in the world. The work and methods of the Protectory are but little known to the people of the State, although it is annually visited by many European educators and economists, and has been repeatedly noticed and extolled in the columns of such papers as the London "Times," "Standard," "Chronicle," "Post," and " Pall Mall Gazette." The superiority and excellence of its industrial training consist chiefly in the variety of trades taught, thus affording a scope for differing tastes and aptitude; the thorough, efficient nature of the instruction; the size and superior appointments of the shops; and the high standard attained as workmen by boys trained there. The following trades are taught: printing, electrotyping, silk-weaving, shoemaking, tailoring, chair-making, blacksmithing, carpentry; the business of machinists, wheelwrights, bakers, and practical farming and gardening. The girls, who are under the charge of the Sisters of Charity, are instructed in sewing, embroidery, kid-glove making, dress and shirt making. Last year the proceeds of the sewing and glove-making departments alone amounted to $11,031.32.

Mental and manual training are combined in the most admirable manner, the time of the children being about equally divided between the school-room and the work-shop, with ample opportunities for recreation. From October until May evening classes are formed in free-hand, mechanical, and architectural drawing, and in designing and modeling. In all the trades the precision and taste which the habit of drawing gives are clearly perceptible. The children of the Junior Department, who are kept entirely separate from the others, have their own work-shops, where, for a few hours daily, they are initiated into the elementary principles of trade instruction, as a preparation for the real shopwork of the Senior Department. Every boy in the Protectory is taught some trade in its entirety, and if, for any reason, he leaves before finishing his particular trade, he is at least thoroughly grounded in an elementary knowledge of it, and can readily find employment outside.

The various work-shops are each under the supervision of one of the Christian Brothers, who watches over the manners and morals of the boys, and maintains order and discipline; but the trade instruction is, in every case, given by skilled, trained mechanics, who are paid liberal salaries to act as instructors and foremen to the youthful workmen. The superior quality of the work done by very young children proves conclusively what may be done by judicious, intelligent training. Take, for example, the shoe-shop, which employs 260 boys and turns out over 300 pairs of shoes a day; or the printing-office, which does the entire work of two large publishing houses. The average age of the boys is twelve years. At the New Orleans Exhibition the work of the Protectory attracted universal attention, as it had done the year before at the London International Exhibition. Among the exhibits were finely woven silks, engravings, exquisite carvings and designs, beautiful specimens of printing, electrotyping, embroidery and sewing, well-made and really finished shoes,

suits of clothing, and gloves. The work in wood was well represented by tables, chairs, and excellent examples of carpentry.

The production of work for a regular market by the Protectory is also an important factor in promoting the efficiency and value of the industrial training. Thus, in filling an order for a certain amount of work to be ready at a stated time, many practical questions must be taken into consideration, a knowledge of which is of the highest value to the workman. So a boy is taught not only the execution of the work, but the time required for its performance; the cost of production; the quality and nature of materials; and many other practical matters which can only be learned by the production of work destined for actual use.

Boys trained in the shops of the Protectory are eagerly sought as workmen by the leading manufacturers, and many now fill positions as foremen and superintendents in large establishments in New York and neighboring cities.

Ida M. Van Etten.

The American Book.

THERE is one thing which, more than any other, would nationalize our literature. It is a question of a little common honesty a matter of a little every-day sort of justice; and it would be twice blessed in the giving and in the receiving. We need a broadening of our copyright laws, a better protection for ideal and intellectual property, which is, after all, a more natural property than lands and corporeal hereditaments. It is a case where the ideal is most real; but it is also a property most liable to theft, most easily stolen, and least protected of all property.

It is gravely urged, in opposition to copyright legislation, that it would be wrong to force people to pay for what they can now have free-that to allow copyright to foreigners would be to pay an enormous tax for what we can have for the taking. Shoes and shirts are an enormous tax paid to decency and comfort. Shall we, therefore, in order to evade the tax, take the wares of the shoemaker and the tailor without compensation? It is the argument of Captain Kidd and the banditti. Proudhon said, "Property is robbery." America says, by her attitude on the copyright question, property in brains is robbery, if the brains are under a foreign scalp. A foreign author has no rights an American is bound to respect, and because of this theory, and this only, the converse is true in fact that an American author has no rights in the hands of a foreigner.

We bear with composure the charge, and the fact, of being robbers in the fields of literature, but our blood runs cold at the thought of the torch of the mob applied to the tinder of a factory, or at the vision of a piece of gas-pipe, charged with dynamite, flung into the streets of a great city. We can not afford to suspend the truest maxims of our freedom at the call of interest or expediency. We can not allow our love of dollars to overshadow the future and forge fetters for our principles, nor let communism of brains emasculate our literature and make us a nation of literary beggars. There is something better than cheapness. The smuggler's goods are cheap. Is the smuggler, therefore, a great reformer and a public benefactor? The people

must read, they must educate; but to do these things shall we steal or smuggle? James Russell Lowell says, "There is one thing better than a cheap book, and that is a book honestly come by." The argument that cheapness is a national blessing largely resolves itself into an argument that is individual and selfish. If it is of any force as against international copyright, let us carry it out to its logical sequence and abolish home copyright as well, and then sit down and forecast the result.

It is true that it is the duty of the State to legislate primarily in the interests of its own citizens. But "there is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty." American progress can not be built up on cheapness alone. We sometimes buy cheap and ask no questions, glad that our wants and our purses so nearly agree; but there is, after all, a universal sentiment of honesty that is always glad to see one's neighbor come into his own. And it would seem to be the simplest possible proposition, that if one has made anything, whether a baby-jumper, or a book that is sufficiently valued by his fellow-men to be used by them, he has an ownership in his work, and is fairly entitled to a profit therefrom. Justice is better than cheapness, honesty is more to be desired than culture, righteousness is higher than expediency.

But expediency seems to be the highest reach of international law, and, abandoning any higher principle, it is full time for America to get into line with other states and nations, and amend her copyright laws on the ground of policy.

Competition is desirable, but our copyright laws put us beyond competition, and, as we have seen, into the range of pillage. Commercial monopoly tends to robbery. Mercantile competition is a matter of public policy. But an honest merchant can not compete with the pirate and the smuggler. Piracy and smuggling under governmental protection would soon destroy all home market and home manufacture, and home honesty as well. It is a regular "Stand and deliver" to all fair trade. This is just what the United States Government is doing in literary matters. It puts the American book in competition with the book for whose production nothing is paid. It is not "Chinese cheap labor," but stolen and absolutely unpaid labor!

If the alien's book is to be forever the cheapest book, it will be the book most read. American thought and action fed on foreign diet will, in time, be but an echo of foreign types. If we are to promote a national culture, we must keep abreast of our neighbors in all that tends to the advancement of a sound national literature. The state ought to have a literature in sympathy with it, for literature is one of the strongest forces in shaping social life and national character.

It is argued against international copyright that it will increase the price of books, and that cheap reading is a large factor in cheap education. Cheap reading is, perhaps, desirable, and cheap education may be a blessing, but things may sometimes be too cheap. I think the facts would be, that new foreign books would be higher in price, by reason of copyright, and new American books would be cheaper, by reason of a wider market. There is a large class of books which would not be affected by copyright, for it would not be retroactive. Year after year the books that age can

not wither nor custom stale-the books that are “immortalities” — are dropping into the common fund by the expiration of the "limited period." Let us take these spoils of time freely and without price, under the policy of all governments, but in all justice and good conscience let us recompense the author for his work, under whatsoever skies he writes, for the statute time.

The United States, whose literature owes more to the world than that of any other nation, is, in the matter of intellectual property, behind the age. She wraps the mantle of selfishness about her and legislates for her own family only, saying to her citizens, "Thou shalt not rob thine own brother, but if there be a stranger within thy gates, thou mayest plunder him with a high hand and a free conscience." It is one against the world, and her plunder weakens her capacity for producing work that is good at home, or work that the world will even steal. A governmental policy in copyright, that would grant common rights to others, would secure for ourselves rights which we need, and rights which would largely help us to higher standards, purer taste, and added nationality in our literature. John E. Cleland.

INDIANAPOLIS, IND.

The Piedmont Exposition, Atlanta. COUNTY and State fairs are locally advantageous whenever they are intelligently conducted. If planned so as to attract wide attention and induce general interest, they always arouse a spirited rivalry among the contestants for awards of merit, and such competitive efforts necessarily result in material benefit to all branches of industry and all departments of husbandry that are represented. Likewise inter-State and na tional expositions, when successfully managed, are proportionately beneficial throughout the wider fields of their influence. They are all eye-openers to the possibilities of energy, incentives to enterprise, and powerful factors in the creation of thrift and prosperity.

In these respects it is impossible to estimate what they have done for the South within the last ten years. Probably all of the others together are not equal in the value of their effect to the Piedmont Exposition, which occurred at Atlanta, Ga., about three months ago. It is now sufficiently a thing of the past to be reviewed calmly, with some chance of determining its practical results and substantial benefits.

It was only 104 days in course of preparation, and it lasted just two weeks. The fair-grounds, consisting of 197 acres, were farm-lands in cultivation when the Exposition was organized; and yet 104 days from that time, when the gates of the great fair were formally thrown open, all the necessary buildings and other arrangements, including an excellent race-track, stood in such admirable readiness that they seemed no less than the creditable result of many months of laborious preparation.

The Exposition itself was undeniably higher in its aim, wider in its scope, greater in its magnitude, and fuller in its success than any affair of the kind which has ever been held in the South.

If asked to express in one word the best result and most invaluable benefit of the Piedmont Exposition, I

should say-revelation! Revelation, deep and wide, of a common interest in our common country; revelation of local pride without the slightest disposition to insist upon the perpetuation of sectional lines between the States; revelation of a sincere desire for the profitable development of every resource of our broad land; revelation of that true patriotism which should make Massachusetts rejoice in the prosperity of Georgia's cotton-mills, and make Pennsylvania glad at Alabama's mineral wealth; revelation of the truth that we are one people, with no violently conflicting interests, no ground for jealous ambitions, and no cause for internal dissensions, but bound together by a union of purposes, a sympathy in aspirations, and an indestructible fellowship in destiny. These were the revelations of interState significance.

Locally the Piedmont Exposition was a revelation of marvelous excellence in all varieties of manufacturing industry; of surprising advance in every phase of mercantile enterprise; of vast improvement in stock and cattle-breeding; of admirable progress in methods of farming; and of an inexhaustible wealth in mineral and other natural resources.

It showed too that the Southern people "have pulled themselves together," and so energized their ambitions as to insure a rapid march in all ways of material development and substantial prosperity. In this spirit of revived hope they are greatly sustained by the constant realization of encouragement from all the other branches of our great family of States.

It can not fairly be claimed that the immense crowd which gathered in Atlanta during the Exposition was all attracted by the exhibition of the Piedmont resources. It must be admitted that the President and his wife were incalculably strong magnets. No doubt thousands went to Atlanta to see them who never approached the Exposition grounds. But the crowd was great enough to stand a very liberal allowance for the hero-worshiping element, and still leave a balance altogether ample to attest a deep and wide interest in the purposes and success of the Exposition itself.

The visitors numbered more than twice as many as the resident population. I mean it as no complaint against the provision which Atlanta made for her guests, but only as evidence of how the city was packed do I mention the fact that several churches and other public buildings were thrown open as sleeping-houses for strangers who were without shelter. I saw at least five hundred men, women, and children sleeping on their trunks in the Union Depot; and the cold marble steps of the Kimball House, for three flights up, were every night literally packed with men who dropped down on them in absolute exhaustion and slept.

If most of these people suffered all these discomforts merely for a glimpse of the President, it argues powerfully the Southern interest in national affairs. If, on the other hand, even a fair proportion of them were simply in attendance upon the Exposition, it proves a lively awakening of interest in the vast wealth and infinite resources of the Piedmont region. The fair was the first of its kind in the South which I ever knew to be profitable. The total cost was $199,530. The total receipts from all sources were $209,096. Thus is shown a net profit of $9566. In this calculation the perma. nent buildings and the grounds are put down in the

receipts at their cost, and counted as property on hand fully worth in cash the estimated value.

I think possibly the most astounding fact in connection with the affair was its freedom from serious casualties. There was but one accident of any sort reported during the two weeks; a young boy working around the machinery in one of the main buildings was caught in a wheel and had his leg broken.

When it is remembered that there are eight railroads running into Atlanta, and that for ten days extra schedules were operated over all of them, and that during that time no train ever came into or went out of the town that was not packed to its utmost capacity, the escape from accidents seems almost miraculous.

The mineral exhibit alone would have justified the total cost of the Exposition. With one display in this department there was a casket of jewels (in the rough) found in North Carolina, which an expert valued at over $30,000. But I dare not trust myself to specify even the most conspicuous exhibits. The effect of the Exposition will be felt far beyond the bounds of the region it embraced, and its results will be manifested in endless phases of energy and usefulness. It is only just to say that to Henry W. Grady is due the credit for the conception of this important enterprise, as well as the chief praise for its successful fulfillment.

Marion J. Verdery.

Hawthorne's Loyalty.

AN autograph letter of Hawthorne, dated July 20th, 1863, has recently been brought to an auction sale, but without the knowledge or consent of the person to whom it was addressed. •

Its publication touched me deeply, I confess, especially as Hawthorne indicates, in the letter itself, the confidence in which it was written. He says:

"I do not write (if you will please to observe) for my letter to be read by others, for this is the first time that I have written down ideas which exist in a gaseous state in my mind; and perhaps they might define themselves rather differently on another attempt to condense them."

The publication of this letter has led to harsh and bitter comments, and to inferences entirely at variance with Hawthorne's opinions as expressed to me at different periods during the war, in our various conversations and in his letters herewith printed. There is in the letter spoken of intrinsic evidence that all its statements were not intended to be taken literally. For instance (in controverting the charge that Pierce was a traitor), Hawthorne exclaims, "A traitor! Why, he is the only loyal man in the country, North or South." Again, he says, in a jocular strain to the lady addressed, "I offer you the nook in our garret which Mary contrived as a hiding-place for Mr. Sanborn."

Remarks like these show that the letter was written in a careless manner, and ought not, all, to be taken seriously.

It should be observed that Hawthorne did not-in this letter or elsewhere - speak of the Peace Democrats as if he were one of them; and I believe there is no proof whatever that he could fairly be so classed. Did he at any time utter a wish that the "rebels " might succeed? Did he ever rejoice in any victory of theirs? Did he praise resistance to the military draft?

or discourage Union enlistments or the granting of liberal military supplies? Did he, in any case, send messages to the enemy or encourage them to persevere in rebellion? Did he express respect or esteem for the Southern people while at war with us? If he did none of these things, but, on the contrary, always approved and applauded the vigorous prosecution of the war after it had broken out, then there is no justice in calling him a Peace Democrat. While Hawthorne made no pretension to the character of a statesman, he felt deeply the importance of the national interests at stake; and some of his expressed views were wise and far-reaching. Certainly he was an ardent well-wisher for the success of the North.

Speculating in this letter upon what the rebels might do in a certain contingency, he gives it as his own opinion that "the best thing possible, as far as I can see, is to effect a separation of the Union, giving us the west bank of the Mississippi and a boundary line affording us as much Southern soil as we can hope to digest in another century."

Looking at the condition of the country to-day after the successful termination of the war and the settlement of our national difficulties, it should not be forgotten that- during the struggle — there were times when the most earnest lovers of the Union contemplated in sadness the probability of a division of the States, whose interests were then so widely different.

Letters from distinguished Republican statesmen and loyal editors are in existence which show that under the terrible financial, political, and military strain to which the North was subjected, they seriously considered the prospect of being obliged —especially in case of foreign intervention to accede to some such settlement of the contest as the one suggested by Hawthorne in the letter in question.

Many thoughtful men now living, who were of mature age at the time of the war, will remember that they themselves, though loyal to the core, from time to time had doubts and fears as to the outcome of the struggle, and speculated as to the terms of settlement most advantageous to the North that could be obtained. Nor was it cowardly or disloyal, under the trying circumstances continually occurring, for any man—while doing his utmost for the success of our cause to think and talk in confidence to his friends of the contingency of separation from the "diseased members," as Hawthorne called them.

In the dark days of the war (and they were frequent almost to its end) many true men echoed the opinion that it would be wise to "let our erring sisters go." But, happily, a stronger and wiser policy prevailed. With these remarks I submit the following extracts from letters of Hawthorne to myself, which show his deliberate judgment-expressed at various timesupon the subject of the War of the Rebellion:

CONCORD, May 26th, 1861. Dear Bridge: ... The war, strange to say, has had a beneficial effect upon my spirits, which were flagging wofully before it broke out. But it was delightful to share in the heroic sentiment of the time and to feel that I had a country a consciousness which seemed to make me young again. One thing, as regards this matter, I regret, and one thing I am glad of. The regretable thing is that I am too old to shoulder a musket myself, and the joyful thing is that Julian is too young. He drills constantly with a company of lads, and means to enlist as soon as he reaches the minimum age; but I trust

we shall be either victorious or vanquished before that time.

Meantime (though I approve the war as much as any man), don't quite understand what we are fighting for, or what definite result can be expected. If we puinmel the South ever so hard, they will love us none the better for it; and, even if we subjugate them, our next step should be to cut them adrift. If we are fighting for the annihilation of slavery, to be sure, it may be a wise object, and offers a tangible result, and the only one consistent with a future union between North and South. A continuance of the war would soon make this plain to us; and we should see the expediency of preparing our black brethren for future citizenship by allowing them to fight for their own liberties, and educating them through heroic influences. Whatever happens next, I must say that I rejoice that the old Union is smashed. We never were one people, and never really had a country since the Constitution was formed.

CONCORD, October 12th, 1861. DEAR BRIDGE: I am glad you take such a hopeful view of our national projects, so far as regards the war; but my own opinion is that no nation ever came safe and sound through such a confounded difficulty as this of ours. For my own part I don't hope (nor indeed wish) to see the Union restored as it was. Amputation seems to me much the better plan; and all we ought to fight for is the liberty of selecting the point where our diseased members shall be left off. I would fight to the death for the Northern Slave States, and let the rest go. I am glad Mrs. Bridge has had a little rest from Washington life, and heartily wish you could have been with her.

CONCORD, February 13th, 1862. DEAR BRIDGE: Frank Pierce came here and spent a night, a week or two since, and we mingled our condolements for the state of the country. Pierce is truly patriotic, and thinks there is nothing left for us but to fight it out; but I should be sorry to take his opinion implicitly as regards our chances for the future. He is bigoted to the Union, and sees nothing but ruin without it; whereas I (if we can only put the boundry far enough South) should not much regret an ultimate separation. A few weeks will decide how this is to be; for only a powerful Union feeling shall be developed by the military successes that seem to be setting in, and we ought to turn our attention to the best mode of resolving ourselves into two nations.

It would be too great an absurdity to spend all our Northern strength for the next generation in holding on to a people who insist upon being let loose. If we do hold them, I should think Sumner's territorial plan the best way!

P. S. I ought to thank you for a shaded map of Negrodom which you sent me a little while ago. What a terrible amount of trouble and expense in washing that sheet white! And, after all, I am afraid we shall only variegate it with blood and dirt. [The map referred to was

one showing the comparative destiny of the slave population of the several Southern States.]

On his return home, after a visit to me in Washington, he wrote:

CONCORD, April 15th, 1862. DEAR BRIDGE: Yours inclosing two photographs of Professor Henry's received.

I reached home safe and sound on Thursday. It is a pity I did not wait one day longer, so as to have shared in the joyful excitement about the Pittsburg victory and the taking of Island Number Ten.

In a letter to me, dated April 19th, 1862, he wrote:

"I feel a tremendous anxiety about our affairs at Yorktown. It will not surprise me if we come to grief."

It may be pertinent to add that, just after the first battle of Bull Run, Hawthorne says, in his answer to a dinner invitation from James Russell Lowell, quoted by Lathrop in his "Study of Hawthorne":

Speaking of dinner, last evening's news will dull the edge of many a Northern appetite; but if it puts all of us into the same grim and bloody humor that it does me, the South had better have suffered ten defeats than won this victory."

From an unbroken friendship beginning with our college days and ending only with his life, I believe that I enjoyed Hawthorne's confidence and understood his personal and political character as thoroughly as any one, and I should hold myself false to the memory of my friend if I did not give my testimony, and furnish the proofs in my possession, of his loyalty to the North, which has recently, and most unfairly, been called in question. Horatio Bridge, U. S. Navy.

"THE MOORINGS," ATHENS, PA.

Corrections.

ON page 77 of the November CENTURY, a picture of Gov. Israel Washburn of Maine appeared over the title of his brother E. B. Washburne. A portrait of the latter will appear in an early part of the Lincoln history.

ON page 134 of the same number, a picture of the Washington Monument in the Capitol Square, Richmond, was in a part of the edition incorrectly called the Jackson Monument.