years." These are some of the subjects that should be taught, but in order to insure such teaching, the teachers, especially in the primary grades, should have some definite plan and instruction given them by competent and practical physicians. Were this done there would be less overloading of pupils with technical and unnecessary anatomical knowledge.
4. How to teach. Now that the study of psychology is fashionable we may hope, perhaps, for a better knowledge on the part of teachers of what is and is not necessary for healthy mental activity and development, what are rational methods of teaching; but as long as text-books are ground out, in questions and answers, just so long will memorizing be the rule for pupils, and the encouragement of observation and originality be the exception. Yet the child can be taught by practical methods and appliances about the admission of light and air to a room, simple tests for the purity of water, about filters, what soils obstruct drainage, why sewerage and drainage are necessary, what to do in accidents and emergencies, etc. The desire of the average child to observe and ask questions can be turned to good account instead of being stifled by rigid routine work. The energy born of observation and the intelligent application of what is learned by observing is healthful. As Herbert Spencer puts it, "Success in the world depends on energy rather than on information, and a policy which in cramming undermines energy, is self-defeating."
If the teaching of physiology and hygiene is to be of service in strengthening the growth and development of individuals and communities it is a matter of moment that these studies should be properly imparted.
|THE UNITY OF SCIENCE.|
ONE of the greatest anatomists of the age and a distinguished jurist were sitting together at the festival of a German university. They were engaged in a friendly discussion as to which of them should, by virtue of his profession, be best known to the world. At last the lawyer surrendered his claim, remarking that the arteries and muscles were the same in America and Europe, while it was doubtful if the ideas of the Roman law enjoyed a like extension. But I do not believe that the illustrious naturalist felt any great joy in the victory he had obtained; for both professors were brave defenders of the universality of science in the highest sense of the word, and were certainly not expressing their most serious thoughts in this moment of by-play. How much, during
- Address at the reopening of the University of Rome, November 3, 1887.