J 02 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. IX., No. 20» 



to go to the Lawrence school for them, if they 

 came to Cambridge at all. Now the same class of 

 students undoubtedly goes to the college, attrac- 

 tive in so many ways, for its lines of study have 

 been extended to include nearly every thing at 

 first found only in the scientific school, in accord- 

 ance with what is vaguely termed the ' spirit of 

 the age ; ' but it should be recognized that this 

 spirit has been strongly guided by just such insti- 

 tutions as the Lawrence school, whose graduates 

 include a large number of prominent and influ- 

 ential men. If success is to be measured by the 

 share taken in the labor of bringing neglected 

 studies into their proper position, the liberality of 

 Abbott Lawrence and James Lawrence has been 

 successful even beyond their hopes. 



In view of these altered relations. President 

 Eliot recommends that the separate organization 

 of the Lawrence scientific school should be dis- 

 continued ; that the college faculty should be in- 

 trusted with the function of recommending to the 

 governing boards candidates for the degree of 

 bachelor of science ; and that the academic coun- 

 cil of the university should recommend candidates 

 for the graduate degree of civU engineer, the un- 

 derlying degree being either A.B. or S.B. The 

 Lawrences would still be commemorated in the 

 names of certain professorships, although no 

 longer attached to a separately organized school. 

 The first of these recommendations will, it is to 

 be hoped, commend itself to the authorities con- 

 cerned ; for the separate existence of the school is 

 not sufficiently encouraged by its present circum- 

 stances, and is not likely to be by any thing 

 visible in the future. The third recommendation 

 is not of a kind to provoke unfavorable action. 

 It is to the second recommendation that the most 

 interested discussion will turn. If it result in 

 uniting bachelors of science with bachelors of 

 arts in one body of alumni, the preliminary ex- 

 aminations and the undergraduate courses of study 

 being equivalent, it will be one of the great steps 

 in the advancement of scientific education at 

 Harvard college. 



What may be called the official autobiography 

 of the knights of labor is contained in an article 

 by Carroll D. Wright in the current number of 

 the Quarterly journal of economics. To be sure, 

 Mr. Wright is not a member of the order ; and 

 we have had other accounts of its genesis before, 



notably that detailed one published in the large 

 work on the labor-question, edited by Mr. George 

 E. McNeill. But we learn from a footnote that 

 Mr. Wright's article was submitted, previous -ta 

 publication, to several officers and members of 

 the order, and was by them pronounced correct 

 in all statements of fact. It is this that gives the 

 sketch what we have called its official character. 

 Mr. Wright begins by stating that two fundamental 

 ideas underlie all labor organizations, some choos- 

 ing one, and some the other. The first of these 

 ideas is that of the association of aU men of like 

 employment, and on it the mediaeval guilds and 

 the modern trades-unions were founded. The 

 second idea is of broader scope, and takes no ac- 

 count of particular vocations. It seeks to organize 

 all laborers into a single association, and is of 

 later growth than the idea underlying the guilds 

 and trades-unions. On it the celebrated Inter- 

 national was founded, and the no less celebrated 

 knights of labor take it as their starting-point. 

 This second idea is both unsound in theory, and 

 is every day proving itself pernicious in practice. 

 It calls for the division of society at large inta 

 classes, and arrays the one against the other. As 

 a matter of fact, no such cleavage of society is 

 possible on any but the most superficial reasoning. 

 In this country, where we recognize no aristocracy 

 of birth, and where the industrial organization is- 

 democratic to the last degree, the attempt to so di- 

 vide society is especially foolish and short-sighted. 

 Though it may create uneasiness and disturbance 

 for the time being, it is in the end certain to fail. 

 If by any chance the advocates of the idea in ques- 

 tion should succeed in their endeavor to create in- 

 dustrial classes and to array them against each other, 

 the very first conflict would scatter their house of 

 cards in every direction. It would require a very 

 great turning-back of the wheels of progress to 

 make it possible for the American idea of indi- 

 vidual liberty and personal responsibility to be 

 overcome by the ancient and discarded idea of 

 corporate action and corporate responsibility. 



With the various stages in the development of 

 the knights of labor we are already fairly famil- 

 iar, but Mr. Wright puts the facts again before us 

 in a very clear and connected way. We learn 

 how the personal character and history of Uriah 

 S. Stephens, the founder of the order, impressed, 

 themselves upon its early organization, and how 

 the order struggled along from its inception in 



