would rarely supply a basis for governmental interference, but in the interests of society at large—­of the State itself.  The State’s first concern is to see her citizens healthful, vigorous, wealth-producing factors; and to this end bad sanitary conditions, which undermine the “health-capital” of labor, imperatively demand correction.

The deeper seated the roots of labor’s inefficiency in heredity and environment, the greater the need for an education that will develop whatever potencies may lie latent.  Inefficiency will rarely correct itself.  Superior ability must train it into better power.  Where is there any proper provision for such an education?

State governments and our National Government have for a number of years been fostering certain branches of industrial education, chiefly in the line of agriculture.  The late report of the Bureau of Education upon industrial education presents a very encouraging summary of what is thus being done under the guidance of the State.  It reports concerning forty-three colleges aided by State grants to give agricultural and mechanical training, besides a large number of technical departments in other colleges, industrial schools, evening classes for such instruction, etc.  Probably the finest example of industrial education that the country possesses is found in the Hampton schools in Virginia.  Of attempts, however, to combine general and intellectual education with practical training and handicrafts we have few examples.  The Hampton schools, already alluded to, present one of the best.  Professor Adler’s school in this city is very interesting in this respect.

Our common schools have until lately signally passed by the whole field of practical education.  Drawing is at last being generally introduced, and sewing is also being introduced to a small extent, I believe, especially in New England.  But the schools which are supposed to be intended for the mass of the people, and which are supplied at the public cost, have made next to no provision for the practiced training of boys and girls to become self-supporting men and women—­wealth-producing citizens; while the whole curriculum of the school-system tends to a disproportionate intellectuality, and to an alienation from all manual labor. * * *

The necessity of the State’s entering the educational field is disputed by no one; but if it is to educate children at the public cost it is bound, I think, to so educate its wards that they shall return to society the taxation imposed for their education.  Its justification in becoming school-master lies in the necessity of making out of the raw material of life citizens who shall be productive factors in the national wealth and conservators of its order.  If, therefore, it is justified in teaching the elementary branches of education, if it is justified in adding to those elementary branches departments that may be considered