Febeuaby 16, 1900.] 



SCIENGM 



275 



The several monographs which constitute the 

 work, and their authors, are as follows : 



1. Educational Organization and Administration — 

 Andrew Sloan Draper, president of tlie University of 

 Illinois, Champaign, 111. 



2. Kindergarten Education — Susan E. Blow, Caz- 

 enovia. New York. 



3. Elementary Education — William T. Harris, 

 United States commissioner of education, Washing- 

 ton, D. C. 



4. Secondary Education — Elmer Ellsworth Brown, 

 professor of education in the University of California, 

 Berkeley, Calif. 



5. Tlie American College — Andrew Flemming West, 

 professor of Latin in Princeton University, Princeton, 

 N. J. 



6. The American University— Edward Delavan 

 Perry, Jay professor of Greek in Columbia University, 

 New York. 



7. Education of Women — M. Carey Thomas, presi- 

 dent of Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa. 



8. Training of Teachers — B. A. Hinsdale, professor 

 of the science and art of teaching in the University 

 of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 



9. School Architecture and Hygiene — Gilbert B. 

 Morrison, principal of the manual training High 

 School, Kansas City, Mo. 



10. Professional Education — James Russell Par- 

 sons, director of the college and high school depart- 

 ment, University of the State of New York, Albany, 

 N. Y. 



H. Scientific, Technical and Engineering Educa- 

 tion — T. C. Mendenhall, president of the Technolog. 

 ical Institute, Worcester, Mass. 



12. Agricultural Education —Charles \V. Dabney, 

 president of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 

 Tenn. 



13. Commercial Education — Edmund J. James, 

 professor of public administration in the University of 

 Chicago, Chicago, 111. 



14. Art and Industrial Education —Isaac Edwards 

 Clarke, bureau of education, Washington, D. C. 



15. Education of Defectives — Edward Ellis Allen, 

 principal of the Pennsylvania Institution for the In- 

 struction of the Blind, Overhrook, Pa. 



16. Summer Schools and University Extension — 

 Herbert B. Adams, professor of American and institu- 

 tional history in the Johns Hopkins University, Bal- 

 timore, Md. 



17. Scientific Societies and Associations — James 

 MoKeen Cattell, professor of psychology in Columbia 

 University, New York. 



18. Education of the Negro— Booker T. Washing- 



ton, principal of the Tuskegee Institute, Tuskegee, 

 Alabama. 



19. Education of the Indian — William N. Hailmau, 

 superintendent of schools, Dayton, Ohio. 



ED UCA TION A DMINISTRA TION IN TSE STA TE 

 OF NEW YORK. 



In his annual message to the Legislature, 

 Governor Roosevelt refers to the proposed re- 

 organization of the State of New York and the 

 Department of Instruction as follows : 



The University of the State of New York, with 

 its Board of Eegents, is an institution peculiar 

 to this Commonwealth, and one now venerable 

 with its 116 years of history. Its exercise of 

 authority over higher education has been of very 

 great public service, and its methods and stan- 

 dards have exercised a wide influence for good 

 upon those of other States. These facts have 

 led to the adoption, by the people, of an amend - 

 ment to the constitution of the State, whereby 

 the University itself and its organization under 

 a Board of not less than nine regents, has been 

 provided and safeguarded in the organic law. 



The Department of Public Instruction, on the 

 other hand, concerned chiefly with the super- 

 vision of all the free common schools of the 

 State, supported by public taxation, has grown 

 to a vast importance ; for the number of chil- 

 dren of school age in the State has largely jn- 

 creased, and nine-tenths of them attend no 

 other institution than the public school. The 

 work done in both departments has been, in the 

 main, excellent and needful to be done ; they 

 are amply worthy of the confidence and con- 

 tinued support of the people. But that their 

 work could be done better, if the two systems 

 were unified, is a proposition hardly open ta 

 question. The problem has been not whether 

 unification were desirable, but by what means 

 this end was to be attained. 



From the point of view of the public inter- 

 ests, it is neither desirable nor practical merely 

 to extend the jurisdiction of either department 

 over the other. The University convocation, at 

 its annual meeting in July, 1899, requested the 

 Governor to appoint a commission for the pur- 

 pose of recommending a practical plan of uni- 

 fication, and in accordance with this sugges- 

 tion the following commission were appointed : 



