59 



pefiod of more than three hundred years there is vel*y 

 Httle systematic teaching of the natural sciences in the 

 pubhc schools, hence this paper. 



Rousseau the Frenchman, Pestalozzi the Swiss, and 

 Froebel the German all accepted the general theories of 

 Commenius and developed from them a pedagogical 

 system based on natural science, instead of literature 

 and language. 



Perhaps no person of recent times has had a more 

 powerful influence upon the development of scientific 

 thought than Herbert Spencer, a man who refused a 

 college education, as it did not in his o|)inion subserve 

 the vital requisites of a successful business career, or 

 prepare one for complete living. He has become 

 through the development of his innate powers along the 

 lines of least resistance one of the world's greatest phi- 

 losophers and the most noted scientist of the present 

 day. To read and assimilate the works of Herbert 

 Spencer alone, would give one a liberal education, i 'is 

 essay on education published in 1860, while not as ex- 

 tensively read as many of his more profound works, is 

 one of the most concise and convincing monographs on 

 practical education that we have in any language. 



While this paper is not intended as a restatement of 

 Herbert Spencer's ideas, there is no doubt that the book 

 which has been read many times and always with in- 

 creasing interest, has had great influence in forming the 

 writer's opinions upon w^hat constitutes a practical edu- 

 cation for the public school masses in an industrial re- 

 public like ours. 



We have seen how^ rhetoric, literature, languages 

 and mathematics have ruled the schools at different 

 periods, and to-day, a plea is made for a scientific 

 education. 



We will first consider it from the stand-point of 

 utility, for the perservation of life depends upon our 

 knowledge of the physical sciences. Is there any 



