later the worthy recipient of its degree of doctor of laws. He is still living, if existence outside of the State of Michigan can truthfully be called living, and still active and influential as an educator. Now that occasion has compelled me to name him, I can hardly forbear saying more concerning his splendid services in these earlier days. But such mention might seem invidious and unjust to other living men who also stoutly bore the burden of the times and deserve well of the commonwealth for their devotion to the interests of her schools. To those who are familiar with

THE HISTORY OF OUR ASSOCIATION

it will not, I am sure, seem boastful or vain glorious in its representative to name its inception and organization as an event well worthy of note among others that give interest and significance to the epoch of the Renaissance. It has boine an honorable part in many conflicts waged in behalf of free education and the interests auxiliary to it. Undoubtedly in the development and perfection of our system, it has been efficient and helpful, always pulling a laboring oar, and its claims to recognition by all friends and promoters of the great cause in Michigan will hardly be disputed. I note first the part which it had in the establishment and maintenance of the Journal of Education, which, during the eight years of its existence intervening between 1854 and 1862, was a powerful auxiliary to the state department of instruction and of great value to the cause generally, in arousing public sentiment, in directing public opinion and in securing wise and helpful legislation in the interests of the schools. This journal was launched upon its successful career by a committee of the association. Afterward, Dr. J. M. Gregory, a member of the editing committee, assumed editorial and financial charge, but another committee, by a memorial address to the legislature, obtained for it such substantial financial aid as to secure its permanent success.

Again, I invite attention to its earnest and effective advocacy of the right of women to the advantages which this University, up to the year 1870, had offered only to men.

THIS CONTENTION

lasted fifteen years, during which the association righteously took sides with the legislature and with advanced popular sentiment in favor of the movement rather than with the feeling of distrust and even of opposition which for years prevailed in the councils of the University itself, a distrust and opposition which a few years of trial and favorable results were sufficient to uproot and destroy. Perhaps it was mere coincidence, but I cannot forbear mentioning the fact, noted by the historian of the association, that the association's final shot in the campaign, a resolution declaring "That ladies should by right and for the proper enhancement of educational interests, enjoy equal privileges with men in our University and in every other institution of learning in the state," was fired at a meeting held on the very last days of December, 1869, and that the action of the board of regents, conceding that women are persons, bears date in the first week in the succeeding January. Further, many will remember the determined and long continued efforts made by the association in favor of suitable and responsible supervision for the common schools and its final victory made temporarily barren by unfortunate and ill-considered legislation.

I have heretofore spoken of the rate bill, of its blighting effects upon the schools, and of the tenacity with which it persisted for fourteen years after the date set by the constitution for its abolition. The records will show that in this conflict the association was always at the front waging stubborn battle until the final winning of the victory.

In the matter of the township as the territorial unit of the common schools the conflict is still on. Wait awhile and see if we do not persist, until victory shall perch upon our banners.

Another noteworthy event of the year of the Revival was the dedication and formal opening of the State Normal School. Long before, in 1836, the first superintendent of public instruction in Michigan began the agitation of this subject by urging upon the attention of the legislature and the people the value of training schools and the imperative need, in any system of instruction, of means for the special preparation of teachers for this work. careful student of the German system and a firm believer in its excellence, the Hon. John D. Pierce recommended for Michigan the adoption of a similar scheme for special pedagogical training. His immediate successors in the superintendency were urgent in the same direction.

A

In 1849 the Hon. Ira Mayhew, the superintendent of public instruction, supplemented appeals already made in his previons reports with one which was so strong and convincing that it, at last, made its impression upon the legislature and, in that year, an act was passed providing for the establishment of

A STATE NORMAL SCHOOL,

and for the creation of a state board of education, under whose control it was to be organized and operated.

This board secured a site at Ypsilanti and proceeded to the erection of a suitable building, which, completed and ready for use, was dedicated with appropriate ceremonies on the 5th day of October, 1852. The chief address. was delivered by the Hon. John D. Pierce, the beloved and venerated father of the Michigan system of education.

It seems at this point that a moment should be spent in recalling to mind this central and conspicuous figure in the earlier history of our schools, and especially so since it was he who, with great foresight and intelligent skill, not only outlined and suggested, but set forth in considerable detail the plans upon which the University has been conducted from that day to this. Michigan owes him sincere thanks and grateful remembrance. Soon after the adoption of the first constitution the legislature trusted to him the duty of devising a complete scheme of public instruction, including plans for the organization of the University. No man ever executed a great and laborious task more wisely and faithfully. Grasping in its fullness the greatness of the work committed to his hands and the magnitude of the problems he was set to solve, and profoundly impressed with the responsibilities of his position, he spared no labor to fit himself for his great task. He brought to the performance of his duties all the resources of his far-seeing wisdom, persevering and self-sacrificing industry, and the full energy of a noble enthusiasm born of love for his fellow-men and an abiding confidence in the value of universal education.

He saw, as the framers of the old constitution had not seen, that the schools must be free in order to work out the highest and best results, and he

never ceased to urge this cardinal doctrine upon the people and upon successive legislatures. To him Universities had their justification, not alone in their direct and obvious advantages, but also and emphatically in the truth. that elementary education must wither and finally perish without them. The people trusted him to the uttermost, and the legislature, confident in his wisdom and integrity, followed, almost without deviation, the course which he marked out. Let us remember that he wrought almost without precedents or means of comparison for his guidance. I saw him first on the occasion of the dedication to which I have alluded. He was even at this time white-haired and venerable in mien and bearing, although he was hardly past the prime of his years. To one looking upon his benevolent face and his snowy locks and into his kindly eyes, it was easy to see good reasons why those who knew and loved him had, as by common consent, come to call him "Father Pierce." His place in history is among the foremost of Michigan's real benefactors. I am sure that this University will cherish his memory and see to it that the story of his life and the record of his works shall not be forgotten.

I have already alluded to the fact that up to the time of

THE REVIVAL

the University had led a languishing existence. As yet it gave no hint of the vast possibilities which succeeding years have revealed and realized. Under the administration of executives whose term of office lasted only a single year, there was no possibility of a fixed and continuous policy or of any adequate provision in its councils, and this great institution, now the pride and glory of the State, was showing signs of decadence rather than growth. The regents, appointed under the old constitution, had established branches or preparatory academies, scattered about the State, isolated from the parent institution and having no close administrative connection with it. They should have remembered what the Scripture says of the fruitlessness of the branch "except it abide in the vine." These were the only acknowledged preparatory schools and they did little toward supplying the University with properly prepared candidates for admission.

In 1848 the number had dwindled to four, and the last one had ended its miserable existence before the beginning of the year to which I have called attention. They had sadly disappointed the expectations of their projectors.

A chief cause for their failure to meet the need for which they were established and the reason for their early dissolution and disappearance, was thus set forth by Dr. Zina Pitcher, in a memoir written in 1852 for the purpose of bringing before the new board of regents information concerning the condition of the University. "From this experimental, though abortive effort, to build up and sustain branches of the University, the board have learned, and they deem the lesson of sufficient importance to have it on record, that local institutions of learning thrive best under the immediate management of the citizens of the place in which they are located, and when endowed and sustained by their immediate patrons." The failure of the branches left a great gulf between the primary schools and the University, and for years there were idle attempts to bridge it by means of private seminaries and a preparatory department. But few were wise and bold enough to look in the right direction for the coming remedy. Four years before, the superintendent of

public instruction, in his report for 1848, had spoken hopefully of the public high schools or union schools, as they were then called, as giving promise of meeting this deplorable want, and Supt. Shearman, in 1852, spoke still more confidently of them as the future preparatory schools for the University, and in support of his views was able to say that the union school at Jonesville had already furnished candidates for admission to the freshman class prepared in the most satisfactory manner. From this date forward the high schools of the State came promptly to the rescue, and there was swift progress toward

FULFILLMENT OF THESE PROPHECIES.

Seven years afterward, in 1859, the question of preparatory schools was fully and happily settled. The Hon. J. M. Gregory, then Superintendent of Public Instruction, spoke of them as follows: "The union school has vindicated its claim by the most practical of all tests, and henceforth we must look to them to supply the demand for higher intermediate education," and to this he adds: "I count it as the most beautiful feature of our school system, that thus, up from the very midst of the primary schools, should grow up these free academies, to carry forward the work of these schools, and to crown them with honor. They come not as strangers into the school system, claiming for themselves the post of honor, engrossing the best minds and best public sympathies, and fostering a pride that looks down with contempt upon the common schools as fit for only the poor and ignorant; but they grow up as kindred in the great family of schools, exhibiting the vitality of the system that gave them birth and carrying over to the public school system whatever of sympathy and love they may win." Thus help came at last through an extension of the common school system. The union schools, year by year, made progress in bringing their pupils to the degree of advancement that a University ought to require of those whom it admits to its privileges, but it is a fact which deeply concerns the future of the University and one to which its friends ought to give the most serious attention, that the union and high schools have never yet, even this day, covered the ground that rightfully belongs to the domain of secondary instruction. There is still open and unoccupied space between the upper limit of high school preparation and the lower boundary of legitimate University work.

Careful observers of our educational system and all readers of the annual reports of the President of the University are familiar with this weakest point in that system, though the casual observer sees nothing amiss. He sees the young student make his way up through the primary and grammar schools, finish his prescribed course in the high school studies and, diploma in hand, enter the portals of the University. In all this there seems to be no break or interruption, but rather perfect continuity from beginning to end. And so there is apparent continuity, but only because the University unwillingly, but under compulsion by the exigencies of the case, fills the interval by undertaking and doing more than a year of mere

PREPARATORY WORK.

There ought to be devised some means of relief. This institution ought to be allowed to attend solely to the great work which strictly and fairly belongs to it. This problem is not by any means a new one. It has been earnestly

considered in the past, but the advancing wisdom of fifty pears has not as yet wrought out an accepted solution. May we not reasonably hope, however, that the vitality of our system of instruction and its inherent tendency to growth, will by and by, and perhaps in the near future, provide an adequate remedy? Will not the causes which have brought our high schools to their present point of advancement, yet bring them up to the full measure required for covering the whole field of secondary instruction? What has brought them to their present standard? Not so much the needs of the University as determination on the part of the people to give their children at their own homes the means of educational training reaching far beyond the limits of elementary instruction. Is not this feeling active still, and can it not be depended upon to be active in the future?

The signs of the times do not indicate that the men and women of Michigan will be content with the present range of instruction in their common schools. There will be progress in this direction, and by and by, perhaps, chasms will be bridged, the high schools be true and sufficient gymnasia, and their graduates be prepared for entry at once on real university training. Even now there are those who confidently affirm that there is in the lower classes of the university a wasteful duplication of training which the better and stronger high schools are abundantly able to give, and that the time has come when it may profitably saw out some of the lower rungs of its ladder. Such expressions of opinion are significant and suggest a serious inquiry whether the high schools are not able to do more than they have yet been asked to accomplish, and whether even now the University gives them "room according to their strength." Let us note the advance made within the last twenty-five years, an advance that the boldest would not have dared to prophesy, and then let us take courage for the future.

But previous to 1852, no perceptible benefits had come to the University from the union and high schools. It was an army cut off from its base of supplies. It was a railroad system with its terminal stations, warehouses, elevators, equipped and in order for business, but without a connecting track and with only a remote prospect of its construction. Under such circumstances, there was loss rather than gain, both in interest and in numbers. The class of 1845 numbered 12 literary graduates, while that of 1851 numbered only 10, and the largest class of the intervening years numbered only 17.

But during the year of which I am speaking matters began to mend and prospects to brighten. There was a sudden and pronounced awakening in educational interests all along the line. The people had just begun to understand the contents of the new constitution drafted in 1850 and adopted in 1851.

This instrument made wise and practical provision for improvement in the administration of the University. The membership of the board of regents was reduced to a reasonable and convenient number, and their sole function was to be the care of the University and of all its great interests.

THE REGENTS

were to be chosen directly by the people, thus giving the opportunity for selection in reference to fitness, and greatly lessening the danger of interference and dictation by any department of the state government.

The need of a permanent and responsible head for the University was so