the most advanced phase of evolutionary process, or at least its most advanced method. The most general aspect of the theory of evolution is that vast uninterrupted and eternal forces of development obtain throughout all nature, and that all phenomena, physical and mental, are subject to law. In the more specific sense organic evolution is that adaptation of organic life to its environment which is secured for the most part through the process of natural selection. Human evolution is such self-adaptation of the human race to its environment as results in development. With this stage of evolution the institutional aspect of environment is most important and social selection of greater functional significance than natural. However, so far as the race as a whole is concerned, such development has been largely unconscious. That is, since the social consciousness rather seeks to prevent change, social progress has resulted for the most part through the conscious effort of the individual to secure for himself some advantage which is not permitted or, at least, not consciously given by society. The highest form of social selection is attained when society becomes conscious of the aim,— a given social status, and of the process through which the desired results are to be secured. Since the group has now conceived definite ends and the definite method of procedure through which it shapes the character of its constituent members and thus affects its own well-being, the process is a self-conscious one on the part of the group as well as on the part of individuals. Though of chiefly a negative character, legislation in general is such a method. The great positive method developed by modern society for effecting these purposes is public education. Education thus becomes for the social world what natural selection is for the subhuman world, the chief factor in the process of evolution.'

1 For further development of this thesis see in bibliography, under Ward Mackenzie, Vincent, Howerth, and Davidson

PHILANTHROPIC-RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS FOR EDUCATION. The growth of the systems of public schools, now supported by all advanced nations, has been along two lines of development, or rather through two successive stages. The first of these was the stage in which schools were supplied chiefly by private voluntary enterprise, from motives of religious and philanthropic character. While leaving the management in private or in quasi-public control, the state yet came to contribute to these very generally. The second of these stages is that in which the political and economic bearing of education receives general recognition and states accept the responsibility for general education of all of the people as one of the functions of government. The importance of this philanthropic stage varied with different countries. The more prominent of these philanthropic-religious school movements, as they entered as constituent elements into the formation of our own public school system, deserve notice. Philanthropic-Educational Movement originating among the German Peoples. Mention has already been made of the various philanthropic institutions founded by Francke at Halle, beginning with 1694, that developed into training schools for teachers, educational institutions of a practical character for orphans, and finally into the real-schools of the German states. The philanthropic movement under Basedow which, beginning with private institutions, led through the training of teachers and the production of a voluminous literature to the introduction of a study of natural phenomena, of more agreeable methods, and of a new and better spirit into the schoolroom, has also been noticed. Similarly the Pestalozzian movement had its philanthropic aspect. But with the establishment of the school at Yverdun, the chief attention of Pestalozzi, under the influence of his assistants, was directed toward the improvement of methods. The philanthropic aspect of the work was carried on by Emanuel von Fellenberg (1771-1844).

The Fellenberg Movement.-At Hofwyl, near Burgdorf, Fellenberg conducted most successfully, from 1806 to 1844, a school that was pronounced by so competent an authority as Dr. Barnard to have been the most influential school that

ever existed. The pedagogical principles underlying the work of the school were similar to those of Pestalozzi, with whom Fellenberg had been previously associated in a school experiment. The sociological purpose of the Hofwyl school was twofold: first, to educate the youth of the peasant class in agricultural and technical pursuits, and in connection with these industries to give them the elements of an intellectual education; second, to bring the upper class into closer sympathy and understanding with the peasant class by educating them together. Therefore, two schools were established on an estate of some six hundred acres; the literary institute, which gave the ordinary classical education, and the practical institute, which gave the education of the peasant boys for more intelligent farmwork. Both groups of boys had school gardens, both were expected to work on the farm, one for training in future management, the other for future service. There was an agricultural school for scientific instruction, a printing press where the literature and music of the school were printed by the boys of the school, workshops where they made their clothing and agricultural and scientific instruments, and other similar institutions. In time there were established a school for girls and a normal school for teachers, where for a time all of the teachers of the adjacent city of Berne were trained. In almost every respect the schools seemed to be a parallel of those at Hampton, Tuskegee, and other places that are attempting a similar solution of social problems in the present.

From 1825 to 1840 scores of these "manual labor institutes" were established all over the United States. All, or very nearly all, the institutions of academic or collegiate rank that were established within these time limits, were founded

upon this basis. Many of these, such as Oberlin, soon developed into colleges. The majority of them were fostered by some religious denomination. While in these institutions philanthropic and religious motives were prominent, the pedagogical principles of Fellenberg were minimized. In the American literature that grew out of this movement but two motives were emphasized: one, the opportunity afforded by these institutions for a higher education at a lessened expense; second, the better health and consequently more active intellectual life produced by the course of life followed. With the improvement of the economic conditions of the country and the development of more of the formalities of social life, toward the middle of the century, the manual labor feature was dropped from most of these institutions. This feature had served one purpose, however, that of making these institutions possible. The sociological aspect of the Pestalozzian movement that related to the development of educational institutions for the deaf, dumb, blind, maimed, and orphans, and of educational-reformatory institutions for juvenile offenders and first offenders, can only be mentioned.

The Monitorial Systems of Bell and Lancaster. — In 1797 Dr. Andrew Bell introduced into England a system which he had employed in an orphan asylum, that of using the older boys for the instruction of the younger. By him, and especially by Joseph Lancaster (1778-1838), the system was developed until it became for England a somewhat inadequate substitute for a national system of schools. Through the use of a few conduct monitors and a sufficient number of teaching monitors drawn from the more advanced students, and through a system of organization and of method, it was possible for one teacher to direct a large number of pupils. With Lancaster the ideal, which he himself realized before he was twenty years of age, was for one teacher to control a school of one thousand boys. Thus in the absence of any willingness on the part of the people adequately to support

schools, with the government opposed on principle to contributing for such purposes, and with the religious bodies wholly unable to cope with the needs of the times, the monitorial system made possible some general attention to public education. The Bell system found little or no footing in America, since it was connected wholly with the Church of England schools. The great service which the Lancasterian system rendered in our own country was in accustoming the people to schools for the masses of the people, to contributing

to their support as individuals, and in gradually educating the people to look upon education as a function of the state. In addition to this it introduced a better system of grading, since all Lancasterian schools were rigidly graded on the basis of arithmetic work, and also on the basis of spelling and reading. Hence it was possible to promote in the one subject without in the other. Moreover, it brought in a better arrangement and classification of material and a better organization and discipline of the school. The great defects of this system were that the work was most formal; that most of the instruction was extremely superficial; that the discipline was rigid and