the relations of the Imperial Government with the colonies that the
Secretary of State is believed to be willing to employ the resources
of the empire to assist backward colonies. He has invited English
capitalists to aid the declining West Indies, and a leading firm has
offered to invest a million in the sugar industry if a guarantee
of sufficient returns is given. The constitution of the projected
Australian Federation contains a novel analogous provision, permitting
the commonwealth to aid its needy provinces. The growing unity in the
social organism as a whole is accompanied by an increasing unity in its
component parts.
The mother country continues to defend its colonies, as animals defend
their young and parents their children. But the polyp does not defend
its offspring, nor did the earliest colonizing powers succor their
colonies. While not even the armed persuasion of Cambyses could induce
Tyre to make war against Carthage, neither seems to have helped the
other in its need. Carthage fought savagely for her Sicilian colonies,
but in her own interests, not in theirs. Though the ties between a
Greek metropolis and her colonies were closer, the one did not
invariably defend the other. Corcyra refused the aid her daughter city
Epidaurus sought, and the latter had to find it in the grandmother city
of Corinth, who considered it _her_ colony no less than that of Corcyra.
The Dorian city was celebrated for her typical Greek patriotism, and
she gladly assisted Syracuse to expel her Carthaginian conquerors. Rome
fought for her colonies while her power lasted. France and England
fought for their colonies, or rather for the possession of them, all
through the eighteenth century. Spain has just fought for her last
colonies, but as much against the colonists as against the foreign
state that came to set them free. The mother country is also at the
cost of keeping her colonies in a state of defence. The sum of £9,000
was in 1679 annually expended on the maintenance of English soldiers in
Virginia and two West Indian colonies, and £1,000 on the fortifications
of New York. Troops were often dispatched to assist the American
colonies in special expeditions. The colonial military expenditure of
Great Britain in 1859 amounted to nearly £1,200,000. In compliance
with the findings of a Royal Commission, repeatedly reaffirmed by
resolutions of Parliament, to the effect that the self-governing
colonies ought to suffice for their own military defense, the troops
were finally withdrawn in 1873, but she still maintains a garrison at
Halifax and in Natal and a fleet in Australian waters, to which last
the adjacent colonies contribute a fraction. Most of the self-governing
colonies have at their own cost erected fortresses, and they maintain
a defensive force. Two of them have stationary ships of war. They are
willing and eager, moreover, to aid the mother country when she is in
difficulties. When England was embroiled in Egypt or danger threatened
in India and South Africa, several of these colonies offered to send,
and one actually sent, troops to engage in wars in which they were
not directly concerned. The head and the extremities are sometimes at
variance because their interests conflict. The heart of such an empire
is one. A stride has been taken toward organic unity.
Animals evolve special organs for the nursing of their young, and all
colonizing countries seem to have created special departments for the
supervision of their colonies. As the lacteal glands are only modified
skin-glands, are in certain lower genera (the Monotremata) at first
without teats and only in higher species develop into true mammæ, so
the colonial department in the mother country is originally a mere
adaptation of existing agencies. A rather perfect example of this stage
is presented by the earliest of modern colonizing powers. The Casa de
la Contratacion de las Indias, established soon after the discovery of
South America, was organized in 1503. It granted licenses, equipped and
despatched fleets, received merchandise for export and cargoes imported
and contracted for their sale. It controlled the trade with Barbary and
the Canaries and supervised the shipping business of Cadiz and Seville.
Taking cognizance of all questions concerning marine trade, it was
advised by two jurists. It also kept the Spanish government informed
of all that concerned the colonies. It was a general board of colonial
marine trade, and such it remained even when, a few years later, its
more important colonial functions were absorbed by a higher department.
Where the colony has been founded by a commercial or by a colonizing
company, the mother country controls the colony through the directors
of the company; the office of the company is _pro tanto_ the
Colonial Office. Yet the later colonial department, as an organ of
government, is not a development of these shipping, commercial or
colonizing boards. It is a delegation of the sovereign authority.
This is at first exercised directly by the sovereign as it was
notably by Isabella and Ferdinand. It is next delegated, like almost
all functions of the ruler, to his privy council, which assigns the
business of colonies to a committee, which again may be set apart as
an independent administrative body. The Spanish Council of the Indies,
the separate English privy council for colonial affairs contemplated
in the first Virginian charter, the Council of Nine appointed by the
States-General of the Netherlands, the Swedish royal council, were
such bodies. Their powers are everywhere the same. The superintendence
of the whole colonial system is entrusted to them. They have supreme
jurisdiction over all the colonies. They appoint and may recall
viceroys, governors-general, governors and other local officers. They
can veto laws and ordinances made by colonial rulers or legislatures.
They frame constitutions for the colonies and enact laws. Through the
governors and other officers sent out by them, they minutely supervise
and incessantly interfere with the whole internal administration
of each colony. The tendency of this supreme council is to divorce
itself evermore from the privy council and become independent, till
at last it is transformed into a ministerial department. Yet an
amicable relationship (such as sometimes survives the divorce court)
long remains. The Colonial Committee of the privy council in England
was summoned as late as 1849, and the Judicial Committee still hears
appeals from colonial courts of justice. The government of the
commonwealth was naturally averse to the king’s council, and a body
of special commissioners (Cromwell and Pym and Vane among them) was
appointed to govern the colonies.
The Restoration did not at once return to the old system. On the
contrary, a remarkable democratic advance was made. Recognizing that
though ‘politics lie outside the profession of merchants’ (as the
Swedish and British governments declared), yet trade is eminently
within their scope, the restored monarchy set up a Council of Trade and
Plantations, of whose forty members twenty were elected representatives
of the five merchant companies and the incorporated trades. But there
was ever a tendency, at least under the despotic rule of the Stuarts,
to revert to the privy council, and in 1674 a standing committee of
it was appointed Lords of the Committee of Trade and Plantations. The
change appears to have been unimportant. Trade still governed the
committee and shaped its policy.
The Board of Trade set up in 1696, rather by the House of Commons
than by the Ministry, marked the more popular character of the
revolution of 1688, and lasted for ninety years. As if foreshadowing
the despotic character of the English reaction against the greater
French revolution, this board was abolished by an act introduced by
the chief reactionary--Edmund Burke. A committee of the Privy Council
for Trade and Plantations was in 1786 again resorted to, and this
committee in a shadowy manner survived (perhaps it still survives)
till 1849, when it was for the last time summoned by Earl Grey. But
the real administration of the colonies had long been in the hands
of a department of state, directly responsible to Parliament, though
it was still a department that dealt with other affairs as well.
Specialization began in 1702 by the colonies being assigned to the
Secretary for the Southern Department. In 1768 a separate department
with a secretary was created for America, where almost all of the
colonies were then situated. After the loss of most of the American
colonies the new department was abolished in 1782. The colonies were
then annexed to the home department. In 1794 the newly created war
department nominally included the colonies, though these were not
actually united with it till the Committee for Trade and Plantations
ceased to act, seven years later. In 1854 a separate colonial
department, with an independent secretary of state, was finally
created.[A]
[A] The history of the relations between the government of
Great Britain and her colonies will be found in many books,
but best in Mr. Egerton’s comprehensive survey of British
colonial policy.
As there were twenty-three secretaries in forty-one years, it will be
readily understood that the practical work of administration remained
with the permanent officials. With a longer tenure of office, previous
training and thorough mastery of details, they held all the threads of
colonial administration in their own hands. A newly-appointed minister,
with little knowledge of the colonies and no acquaintance at all with
the business of his department, was no match for an experienced officer
who had colonial affairs at his fingers’ ends.
A mere clerk, unknown outside his office, though well known in
literature, could recall a governor; another, whose very name was
unknown till he died, recommended (that is, commanded on pain of
dismissal) a recent Governor of New Zealand to give away to his
ministers on a crucial exercise of the prerogative.
Nor is it in matters of routine alone that the permanent officers shape
the course of colonial administration. A strong-minded minister with
a policy of his own, like Lord Grey or Lord Carnarvon, will force his
subordinates to carry it out, but even here a still stronger-minded
under-secretary will often have his way. In 1848 Lord Grey, then
Secretary for the Colonies, summoned the aged and moribund Committee
(of the privy council) on Trade and Plantations to advise with him
on the policy to be adopted towards the Australian colonies. The
report was drafted by Sir James Stephen and we have no difficulty in
discovering in its far-sighted proposals and masculine style the mind
as well as the hand of the author of the essay on ‘Hildebrand.’ It is
often said that a state department is inevitably wedded to routine.
In the report just mentioned the striking feature is the outline of a
system of Australian federation that is only now on the point of being
realized. So far was the pedantic Colonial Office then, as it has often
been before and since, ahead of its subject colonies.
The other colonizing countries have followed the same line of
development. Beginning as direct delegations of the sovereign power
to a branch, first constituent and then separated, of the sovereign’s
council, the department of colonies has been in course of time made an
independent ministry directly answerable to parliament. In bureaucratic
France the colonies since 1854 have been associated with the navy. On
the first of January, 1899, the empire on which the sun never set,
having lost the last of the dependencies that were once its glory,
abolished its colonial office. The sun had set on Spain to rise no
more.
TECHNICAL EDUCATION AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY.
BY PROFESSOR GEORGE F. SWAIN.
With the enormous progress in the arts and sciences which has
characterized especially the last half of the nineteenth century,
education has kept well abreast, although its progress has been gradual
and it is not always easy to recognize the great advances that have
been made. In the sciences, a discovery is made or a machine invented
that in the course of a few years forms the basis of a new industry,
gives occupation to thousands and places within the reach of almost
every one conveniences previously attainable only by the few. In
education no such sudden revolutions occur, and great changes are
introduced by degrees without producing any commotion or any surprise.
From the days of Erasmus and Rabelais, if not earlier, educational
reformers have urged the importance of studying things rather than
books about things, of cultivating the hand and eye as well as the
mind, of training the perceptive powers, of cultivating a habit of
observation and discrimination, and of developing the faculty of
judgment. Yet, notwithstanding all that has been said and written,
progress in this direction has until recently been very slow. Carlyle,
apparently looking at the matter almost from the old scholastic
standpoint, expressed the opinion that the true university of modern
times was a great library; books, not things, should be studied. It
would conform more to the modern point of view to say that the true
university of the twentieth century is a great laboratory. Even the
function of a library in our modern institutions of learning is perhaps
more that of a laboratory than that of a mere storehouse of facts and
opinions.
It is perhaps not too much to say that the development in the direction
indicated has been greatest in our own country; that the United
States have taken the lead in the revolution against the old method
of teaching, and that at the present time the higher schools of this
country are examples of the best practice and the highest development
of the laboratory method. It may, therefore, be of interest to give the
readers of this magazine a brief account of the school which has in
these respects been one of the foremost, if indeed it has not led the
schools of this country, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[Illustration: THE ROGERS BUILDING, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY, IS AT THE RIGHT, THE WALKER BUILDING AT THE LEFT.]
With the development of the natural sciences and the growth of the
constructive arts, natural science long ago gained a place in the
curricula of the great universities of Europe; and afterwards special
schools were founded for teaching the applications of science to the
arts. In France, the École des Ponts et Chaussées, originally started
in 1747 as a drawing school, was organized in 1760 for the training of
engineers. In the States of Germany, a number of similar schools were
organized early in the present century. In America, the Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute, the pioneer in technical education, was founded
in 1824, and was the only school devoted to applied science until the
forties, when Joseph Sheffield and Abbot Lawrence established the
schools which bear their names, in connection, respectively, with
Yale and Harvard. With the development of railroads, which dates from
the thirties, and of manufacturing, which began in this country but
a few years earlier, urgent need was felt for schools which should
fit younger men to grapple with the problems which the new industries
offered. These schools, however, maintained for many years but a
precarious existence and were quite elementary in character. The Civil
War interrupted their growth and absorbed for a time all the resources
of the nation; but its termination set free an abundant store of
energy, henceforward to seek its chief application in the development
of trade, commerce, manufacturing and industrial pursuits of every
kind. From this time the success of schools of technology was assured.
They were needed to supply young men for the development of the arts;
but, on the other hand, as in all things not purely material, they
were to create a demand for such men by first furnishing a supply.
Manufacturers and leaders of industrial enterprise soon found that
they could not afford to do without the services of young men trained
in scientific principles. In this way, by reversing the usual law of
supply and demand, these schools contributed powerfully to advance the
technical development of the country, far indeed beyond the measure
that may be inferred from the mere number of their graduates.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology was chartered in 1861, and
first opened to students in 1865. Its claim to recognition as a leader
in the development of technical education may perhaps be summarized as
follows: It was the first school in the world to institute laboratory
instruction in physics and chemistry to students in large classes as a
part of the regular course of each candidate for a degree; the first
to equip a mining and metallurgical laboratory for the instruction of
students by actual treatment of ores in large quantities; the first to
establish a laboratory for teaching the nature and uses of steam, and
a laboratory for testing the strength of materials of construction in
commercial sizes; and the first in America to establish a department
of architecture. Later still, it was the first school in America to
establish distinct and specialized courses of study in electrical
engineering, in sanitary engineering, in chemical engineering and in
naval architecture.
The success of the school has been commensurate with its
progressiveness. It stands to-day the largest, most complete school of
its class in the United States, and one of the largest in the world.
The number of its students is 1,176, the number of its teachers,
including lecturers, 175. Excluding lecturers, the number of students
per teacher is only 8.7, a ratio which is a good general index of the
character of the instruction. The students come from 40 States and
Territories of the Union and from 12 foreign countries.
Before passing to a more detailed description of the work of its
various departments, some general characteristics of the school
should be mentioned. The first is the great variety of its courses
and the specialization of its instruction. It is a college of general
technology, embracing almost every branch of study which finds
application in the arts. There are thirteen distinct courses of study:
Civil and topographical engineering, mechanical engineering, mining
engineering and metallurgy, architecture, chemistry, electrical
engineering, biology, physics, general studies, chemical engineering,
sanitary engineering, geology and naval architecture. These several
departments mutually support and reinforce each other, and allow a
specialization of the instruction which would be impossible in a
smaller college with a less numerous staff of instructors. Thus,
at the Institute of Technology, there are not only professors of
civil engineering and of mechanical engineering, but professors
of mechanism, steam engineering, railroad engineering, highway
engineering, hydraulic engineering, topographical engineering, etc.
Again, the chemical staff of twenty-four persons is distributed over
general chemistry, analytical chemistry, organic chemistry, industrial
chemistry and sanitary chemistry. There are separate laboratories for
water analysis, for gas analysis, for food analysis, for dyeing and
bleaching, etc. In each of these there are teachers who are able to
give their entire time to instruction and research in a single line.
[Illustration: WILLIAM BARTON ROGERS, PRESIDENT, 1862-1870; 1878-1881.]
The second characteristic of the Institute is the predominance of
laboratory, shop and field practice, experiment and research. These
are used wherever it is found practicable to supplement, illustrate or
emphasize the work of the recitation or lecture-room.
The third characteristic of the Institute, and one which is absent in
the case of many similar schools, is the fact that a not inconsiderable
amount of general training has from the beginning been required of
every candidate for the degree. In some technical or scientific schools
there are no liberalizing studies, aside from those of a professional
character. The faculty of the institute have insisted that such studies
should be incorporated to a considerable extent in the curriculum of
every course, recognizing the fact that few students in technical
schools are graduates of colleges, and that the aim of the Institute
should be first of all to graduate broadly trained men. Aside from the
courses in liberal studies, a broad spirit is shown in the technical
courses themselves. The study of general principles is always the chief
end in view, and to it are strictly subordinated the acquirement of all
knacks, tricks of the trade or merely practical rules.
These characteristics of the Institute were impressed upon it
from the beginning by the master hand of its founder and first
president, William B. Rogers. President Rogers aimed to establish ‘a
comprehensive, polytechnic college’ which should provide a ‘complete
system of industrial education.’ It is now generally recognized that a
complete system of industrial education would consist of three parts:
First, manual training schools, for developing the eye and hand, not
with the object of producing artisans, but for training alone. Second,
trade schools for special training in the technique of the different
trades. Third, higher technical schools for training in the fundamental
principles of the sciences, and fitting men in the broadest way to
become leaders in the application of the sciences to the arts. Manual
training is now generally recognized as a desirable addition to every
scheme of public instruction and a powerful adjunct to every technical
school. It was not indicated in the original scheme of the Institute,
but was added in 1877 through the wisdom of President Runkle, as a
result of the exhibition in Philadelphia of the results obtained in
Russia by instruction of this kind. Trade schools, for the training of
artisans, were never included in the scheme of President Rogers, and
are not now, either in America or Europe, considered suitable adjuncts
to so-called technical schools, although they are very desirable
as special and independent institutions. The original plan for the
Institute contemplated simply a school of the last-named kind, together
with provision for evening lectures, to which outsiders should be
admitted, and which it was expected would be of benefit to artisans;
and also the establishment of a museum of arts, and of a society of
arts which should hold regular meetings and which should be the medium
for the communication to the public of scientific discoveries and
inventions. It may be as well to state here that the museum of arts was
never established except in so far as the separate departments of the
Institute have accumulated collections; but that the society of arts,
which held its first meeting in 1862, has been continued to the present
time. Many important inventions, as for instance the earliest forms of
the Bell telephone, were first publicly exhibited at its meetings.
In outlining his plan, President Rogers showed wonderful keenness and
foresight. With the added experience of the succeeding forty years,
it would scarcely be possible to make a more complete statement of
what experience has shown to be the best method of organization. In
fact, his Scope and Plan of the School of Industrial Science of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology may be said to be the first step
toward a new order of things in education, and contains the first clear
statement of the desirability of teaching physics, mining, metallurgy
and other branches by the laboratory method.
[Illustration: THE HENRY L. PIERCE BUILDING AND ENGINEERING BUILDING.]