ENGELMANN, GEORGE J. The health of the American girl as imperiled by the social conditions of the day. Reprinted from Trans. of Southern Surgical and Gynecological Assoc., 1890.

FAIRCHILD, JAMES HARRIS. Coeducation at Oberlin. Bibliotheca sacra, 46:443. Coeducation of the sexes. An address before a meeting of college presi

dents at Springfield, Ill., July 10, 1867. U. S. Bu. Education, An. Rep., 1867-68, pp. 385–400. Also in Barnard's American Jour. Education, 17:385. College Courant, 1: 177, 185, 193; Illinois Teacher, 13: 259; Ohio Jour.

Of peculiar historical importance; embodies results of experience at Oberlin. GOVE, AARON. Coeducation in high schools. Jour. of Proceed. of Nat. Ed. Assoc., 1903: 297-299.

Opposes identical education for boys and girls.

HADLEY, ARTHUR T. Admission of women as graduate students at Yale. Educ. Rev., 3: 486.

Discusses differences between colleges and universities, and argues for the admission of women to the some graduate courses as men, while retaining the policy of separate education in the undergraduate stage.

HALL, G. STANLEY, and SMITH, THEODATE L. Marriage and fecundity in college men and women. Ped. Sem., 10: 275-314.

Opposes identical education for the two sexes. See pp. 308-314.

HARPER, WILLIAM R. Policy of separate instruction for men and women at Chicago University in the junior college years. First decennial report of the President, 1891–92–1902, pp. xcviii-exiv.

HARRIS, WILLIAM T. Coeducation of sexes. Report on public schools, St. Louis, Mo., 1872-73, pp. 105-120. Reprinted in An. Rep. U. S. Bu. of Education, 1891-92, pp. 806-812. Also Rep. 1900-1901, chap. xxviii, pp. 1241-1247, Pennsylvania Sch. Jour., 19: 359.

Shows advantages of coeducation, as illustrated by the public schools of St. Louis, and discusses the relation of the policy to the progress of civilization.

Health of female college graduates. Report special committee of Association of Collegiate Alumnæ, together with statistical tables collated by the Mass. bureau of statistics of labor; pp. 78, Boston, 1885. Also in 16th An. Rep. Mass. bu. of statistics of labor, 1885. Pt. 5.

HOWE, JULIA WARD, editor. Sex and education: A reply to Dr. E. H. Clarke's Sex in education. Boston, 1874.

8°.

Comprises thirteen essays by representative men and women.

JACOBI, MARY PUTNAM. The higher education of women. Medical News, 56:75. Discusses the subject from the medical standpoint and answers the arguments advanced by Dr. E. H. Clarke.

JORDAN, DAVID STARR. In his Care and culture of men: A series of addresses on the higher education, pp. 1-23, 24-56, 95-122, 123-132, 133-149, 150-162, 173-182, 183-202. San Francisco, 1896. 8°. 268 pp.

Is coeducation a success? Current Lit., 32:178-9.

KIDDLE AND SCHEM'S Cyclopedia of Education, p. 145.

LANGE, HELENE. Higher education of women in Europe. Trans. and accompanied by comparative statistics by L. R. Klemm. N. Y., 1890. 12°. pp. 36-186.

MAGILL, HELEN.

Coeducation of the sexes in Swarthmore College. Phila., 1874.

Of historical interest.

MAUDSLEY, HENRY. Sex in mind and in education. Pop. Sci. Mo., 5:198. Fortn., 21:466. (Page 582. Elizabeth Garrett Anderson: reply to Maudsley.)

MEYER, ANNIE NATHAN, editor. In Woman's work in America. New York, 1891. 12.

MCLAUGHLIN, ANDREW C. History of higher education in Michigan. Circ. of Inf. U. S. Bu. of Ed. No. 4, 1891.

Early history of coeducation in University of Michigan.

MÜNSTERBERG, HUGO. American traits.

Chapter on The American Woman. Discussion from the German standpoint.

PAYNE, WM. H. Coeducation of the sexes.

(Letter to J. L. M. Curry.) Educa.

Jour. Va. 22:484. Chicago Sch. Rept., 1873-74, p. 104.

Favors coeducation.

PHILBRICK, JOHN D. Coeducation of the sexes. Proceed. Amer. Inst. Instruc., 1880, p. 115.

Favors separate high schools.

RADCLIFFE COLLEGE. Relations to Harvard University. Harvard Graduates' Magazine, March, 1894, pp. 339-342.

REIN, W. Gemeinsame Erziehung von Knaben und Mädchen. Freiburg, 1900. 12. 16 pp.

SABINE, JANE KELLY. Effect of public school education upon the health of the college girl. Boston Medical and Surgical Jour. 146 (Apr. 10, 1902): 380. SAUNDERS, LOUISE S. B. Government of women students. Educ. Rev. 20: 475498.

SEELYE, L. CLARK. Collegiate education of women. Univ. of the State of N. Y. 92d Regents' report, 1879, p. 563; College Courant, 15: 205.

Favors separate colleges.

SMALL, ALBION W.

Nat. Ed. Assn.

SHERWOOD, SIDNEY.

Coeducation at the Univ. of Chicago. Jour. of Proceed. of 1903:288-297.

History of higher education in New York. Circ. Inf. U.S. Bu. Edne. No. 3, 1900.

Account of adoption of coe lucation at Cornell University.

SMITH, GOLDWIN. University question in England. Princ. Rev., 55: 451.
TÉRYS, ANDRIE. Coeducation of the sexes. La Revue 47:545.

Dr. Winckel, rector of the Univ. of Munich, and other rectors and professors' observations and opinions respecting coeducation in European universities.

THWING, CHARLES F. Woman's education. In his American colleges, their students and work. Pp. 178-200. New York, 1883. 16. 213 pp.

System of coordinate education at Western Reserve University. The college woman, pp. 124–131.

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF EDUCATION. Circ. Inf. 2, 1883. An. Repts. U. S. Bu. of Education, 1891-92, vol. 2, chap. xxvi; 1900-1901, vol. 2, chap. xxviii. Historical review of subject, with testimony from many school officials, teachers, presidents of colleges, etc.; also, reports of foreign visitors to this country.

Voss, P. Coeducation of the sexes. Substance of an address before the sixth Scandinavian school conference in Copenhagen, Aug., 1890. U. S. Bu. Education, An. Rep., 1888-89, vol. 1, pp. 464–469.

WARREN, WILLIAM FAIRFIELD. Coeducation at Boston University. University Yearbook, 1874, p. 24.

WHITE, ANDREW D. Coeducation in colleges. Penn. Sch. Jour., 20:313-315. Favors coeducation from observation of many schools and colleges.

WICKERSHAM, JAMES PYLE, and THOMPSON, JAMES. Coeducation of the sexes. Penn. Sch. Jour., 3:87-92.

Favors coeducation.

The most impressive religious fact in the United States to-day is the system of Catholic free parochial schools. Not less than a million children are being educated in these schools. This great educational work is carried on without any financial aid from the State. The parochial schools are maintained by the voluntary contributions of Catholics. For the Christian education of their children, Catholics are making tremendous sacrifices that elicit the praise of all thoughtful Americans; and at the same time they are saving to non-Catholic taxpayers a vast sum, estimated from $20,000,000 to $25,000,000 annually, for this isʻ what it would cost if the children now being educated in the Catholic parochial schools had to be provided for in the public schools.

The Catholic parochial system of schools is now so perfectly organized and equipped, its efficiency as tested by practical results so well established, that few

hesitate to acknowledge that it is not only an impressive but a permanent fact. The Catholic parochial school is not an experiment; it is an assured success, and it has come to stay. There was a time when it was thought by some that the parochial school could not live beside the public school. The latter had the attractions of fine buildings, ample playgrounds, well-paid teachers, all that public money-so generously provided by the State-could provide, while the former had up to within recent years poor buildings, little if any playgrounds, and scant means for carrying on its work. The success of the parochial school is largely due to the devotion and self-sacrifice of the thousands of religious women and men-the members of teaching orders of the church-who have consecrated their lives to Christian education. To these we owe the present excellent condition of our free Catholic parochial schools; without them it would be almost impossible for the system to succeed. The network of parochial schools extending into every State and Territory is, under the guidance of the Catholic bishops and priests, of their creation.

The problem of Christian education is not peculiar to America; it is at present agitating all Christendom; it is at this moment a pivotal question in France. The passage of the recent education act in England, in which the religious principle in education is embodied, has stirred the whole Kingdom. In Italy, in Spain, in Germany, this question is always a living issue with the people.

To-day the question of education generally is receiving more attention and arousing more discussion throughout the civilized world than ever before. Mr. Moseley recently brought from England a distinguished company to study our American educational methods, and the investigation was carried on with laborious thoroughness; yet here there is no agreement on the subject. At the dinner given in New York to that commission by President Butler, of Columbia University, President Hadley, of Yale, said, very truly, "that we are ourselves only experimenters in education; that we need to learn rather than have authority to teach on the subject."

The most impressive message to England sent by American speakers was of the practically unanimous interest of the American people in education. It was pointed out by several of them that throughout this Republic the one purpose for which public money is appropriated and expended without protest from any party is the purpose of education.

In this paper it is proposed to trace the origin and development of the parochial school; to set forth the reason for its existence; to describe the typical parochial school as we find it to-day in the United States-the buildings, the management, the character of its teaching, the course of studies, the teachers, and the educational results.

ORIGIN OF THE PAROCHIAL SCHOOL.

There never was a time in the history of the Christian church when elementary schools did not exist, now of one kind, now of another. Even down in the catacombs we find next to the little chapel the schoolroom for the catechumens, where they had their own teachers, distinct from those who gave instruction to the faithful. In the East we need only mention the schools of Edessa and Alexandria. It is a well-know fact that wherever monastic institutions were established elementary Christian schools flourished. There were the episcopal school, in early days the cathedral school, the parish school, the burg school, the rural school, schools attached to the hospitals for the poor, all of which flourished at one or other time during the Middle Ages throughout Christendom. There were primary, or what we to-day call "parochial,” schools everywhere. "It is a grave mistake," writes Simeon Luce, "to imagine that there were no primary schools at this period. Mention is made of rural schools in all the documents, even in those in which we

would least expect to find it, and we can scarcely doubt that during the most stormy years of the fourteenth century most villages had their masters, teaching children reading, writing, and arithmetic." In the thirteenth century, out of a population of 90,000 in Florence we find 12,000 children attending the primary or parochial schools, a ratio of school attendance that compares favorably with that of any of our American cities to-day. James Grant, in his History of the Burgh and Parish Schools of Scotland, bears witness to the multiplicity of such schools in Scotland:

Our burgh schools [he says] were not created by an act of Parliament; they had their origin in connection with the church or were called into existence by the people themselves, but in whatever way they were founded, undoubtedly toward the end of the fifteenth century schools were planted in every considerable town of Scotland, and the memorable act of 1496, which has been so frequently quoted, assumes the existence of schools enough for supplying the people with knowledge.

The same state of affairs existed throughout France. As early as 1500 in the Middle Rhine provinces there were primary schools every 2 miles. It is evident, then, that Christian primary or parochial schools were always and everywhere established by the church.

THE IDEA OF THE CHURCH.

The Catholic Church has always laid down this great and vital principle, namely, that secular and religious instruction shall never be parted in education. It has laid down and followed this principle from the beginning. It has laid it down not only for the elementary schools, but for the higher schools-the colleges and universities. It has never wavered; it has never receded, and it never will; and that because of the view it holds of education. Education, it maintains, is the formation of the whole man-intellect, heart, will, character, mind, and soul. Whether it be the child of the American artisan in the parochial school or the son of the millionaire in the university, it is all the same. The Catholic Church will accept as education nothing less than the formation of the whole man. It will never consent that its children shall be reared without the knowledge of their faith, or that education shall be so divorced that secular knowledge shall be made the subject of daily and earnest inculcation and that religion should be left out as an accident, to be picked up when and as it may. The Catholic Church holds that a Christian nation can spring only from Christian schools, and that neither private zeal, nor home education, nor the Sunday school suffice to supply the Christian teaching and formation of character which she desires in her children. It is because of this settled conviction that at all costs and at great sacrifices she preserves here in the United States the unbroken and unimpaired tradition of Christian education from the parochial school of the humble mission to the majestic colleges and universities of the land.

CARDINAL GIBBONS'S VIEW.

This position of the church is admirably set forth by Cardinal Gibbons in his book, Our Christian Heritage (p. 489 and following): “I am persuaded," he writes, "that the popular errors now existing in reference to education spring from an incorrect notion of that term. To educate means to bring out, to develop the intellectual, moral, and religious faculties of the soul. An education, therefore, that improves the mind and the memory, to the neglect of moral and religious training, is at best but an imperfect system." According to Webster' definition, to educate is "to instill into the mind principles of art, science, morals, religion, and behavior." "To educate," says Webster, "in the arts is important; in religion, indispensable."