between the cradle and the school, to assist the mother and provide the child with means of instruction and amusement, gathered from toys and treasures. In short, we make play in structive and instruction play." The requisites for a true kindergarten are: "Love of children, knowledge of their physical wants, an unlimited amount of patience, physical strength and freedom from nervous affection, as thorough an education as is demanded of their teachers, a generous supply of information on the natural sciences, etc., good manners and morals, a knowledge of music, the ability to understand children's natures and for the time to forget one's self and become one of the children. Added to these one must have a perfect understanding of the system and the ability to apply it."

At the close of Mrs. Dohrmann's address the thanks of the Institute were tendered to her, to Prof. Mann, to State Superintendent Weleker, to Superintendent Sollinger, and to the others who had so ably assisted in making the Institute a success. As the experiment of appointing a committee of ten teachers six ladies and four gentlemen) to aid the Superintendent in deciding upon the time, place and manner of holding the Institute of 1884, had worked satisfactorily, it was resolved to retain the committee, making it twelve instead of ten for the coming year. By this method of preparing for Institutes much of the labor and responsibility is shifted from the shoulders of the County Superintendent and placed where it rightfully belongs, upon the teachers themselves.

In the evening, Prof. A. L. Mann delivered a highly interesting lecture upon Arnold at Rugby," after which the Institute adjourned sine Ix.

Miss F. R. WICKERSHAM, Secretary.

SHOULD PRINCIPALS APPOINT THEIR SUBOR

DINATES ?

BY H. C. KINNE.

[Our old friend, Mr. Kinne (who perished, politically, in the recent campaign), whose writings in the TEACHER were suspended during the hot canvass, turned up at our office the other day full of renewed literary vigor. We give below the first of a series of articles which he has promised us-an example of the best vein of his well-known caustic style.]

This can hardly be said to be a mooted question at the present time. It is an idea, however, that has flashed across the minds of thousands of people who are familiar with the workings of the educational machinery in our towns and cities. Time and again the opinion has been expressed that a substantial advancement in the efficiency of our school system would be attained if school principals were clothed with the power of selecting, employing and discharging their assistants.

There would certainly seem to be a show of reason in this idea. From the very nature of the case the principal is more deeply interested in the success of his work than is any other person. The parents' intense desire for the general welfare of his family may properly be supposed to eclipse that of the teacher; but we fear this hypothesis does not hold good as regards the child's intellectual development. The parent rises with the lark, dispatches a hasty meal, and hurries to the plow or the anvil, that he may earn the wherewithal to feed and clothe and house his family

flock. His whole heart and mind and soul are absorbed in his business-in the pursuit of the material things so essential to the maintenance and enjoyment of life on this mundane sphere. The education of his children he practically, if not theoretically, regards as a matter of secondary importance, and he accordingly devolves it entirely upon the teacher, reserving, of course, his constitutional American right—his natural, inalienable, indisputable, indefeasible and inestimable right-to express his disapproval of the teacher's work in that peculiar low and significant utterance with which the canine guardian of his own threshold salutes the approach of the intruding tramp.

But the principal of a school stands in an entirely different position. He may be said to be actuated by a dual motive. He is possessed of a deep love for his pupils, and he is also possessed of a deep desire for success in his vocation. He is filled with a mother's spirit of unwearied self-sacrifice and energized by a father's business zeal. His profession is to him a means of obtaining a livelihood, and he accordingly addresses himself to the task of accomplishing good work and of building up a good reputation with as much vigor as does the physician or the attorney. His personal interest and his personal responsibility for the management of his school would seem to afford an ample guaranty that he would exercise the greatest possible care in selecting his assistant teachers.

The principal also, beyond all other persons, has the best means of forming a correct judgment as to the efficiency of his subordinates. The master of a vessel can testify as to the seamanship of his second and third mates; the farmer can bear witness to the capacity of his "hired man" to cut a clean swath or turn a smooth furrow; the

druggist can give assurance as to the trustworthiness of his clerk in the matter of compounding medicines. For similar reasons the position which the school principal occupies would naturally enable him to place a correct estimate upon the value of his assistants' services. The average school trustee or school director was usually nothing but second-hand information as to what is transpiring in the school-rooms that are nominally under his control. Like other men, the trustee is obliged to devote his time and attention to his own business, and as a consequence his visits to the school resemble those of angels, in the fact that they are few and far between. Nor does a cursory glance at a school always reveal the true inwardness of the institution, especially to an unpracticed eye. A teacher's performances are often characterized by a degree of showiness which serves to conceal the lack of substance. An exhibition, with its wreaths, its flowers, its little speeches and its little songs, may possibly close a school term whose intrinsic value has been a ghastly nonentity. But the principal is not deceived by such tinsel and glitter. principal, closely scrutinizing the course of his assistants, day by day and hour by hour, can separate the chaff from the wheat, can measure the amount of the latter article, and can tell at what figures it will tip the beam when placed on the scales.

The

A February number of Kellogg's School Journal, of New York, contains an allusion to this subject. The city of New York had been plundered by her officials for many years, and no adequate remedy had ever been devised. As a final resort, it was proposed, during the last winter, to confer upon the Mayor the power of appointing nearly all the subordinate officers, and this plan was adopted. While the proposition

was pending, the Journal referred to it in the following language:

"During the past week there was a rousing meeting held at Cooper Institute to discuss the effect of distribution of patronage. In plain English, it was said the Mayor ought to appoint those who have charge of the public business, so that he would be held responsible for failures to perform duty. The best people in this city believe this doctrine. Is it sound? If it is, why not apply it to our public schools? A principal is appointed to a school; now who appoints his subordinates? Does he have a voice in their appointment? No; the ward trustee has some one whom he wishes to oblige; in other places the Board of Education have persons whom they deem created for the purpose of drawing the salary annexed to the vacant office. The principal finds himself surrounded with assistants who cause his hair to grow gray and his reason to totter on its throne. He succumbs; he becomes a salary-drawer and loses his self-respect.

Michael Angelo could not have painted a single wonderful picture if the Pope had insisted on naming his assistants, nor can any principal of a school carry forward education when he is not free to select his co-workers. The public does not believe this to-day, but the time is coming when it will."