activities as public interest, deadened in politics in the seventies, turned more wholly to education as guarantee for the future. The average citizen resented the education tax less than any other. The private purse opened voluntarily to the religious college and the non-sectarian as well-to women, to negroes, to poor whites at the South, and to the new vocations. Matthew Vassar was not the first to desire real college discipline for girls, but his college, opened at Poughkeepsie in 1865, is a great landmark in the education of Women's women as well as a measuring-rod for their at- education tainments. The long existence of its preparatory department revealed the dearth of women prepared for college. If the trustees exacted high entrance requirements they could not fill their dormitories, and the college would face financial disaster. If they filled up with preparatory students they learned that the discipline and type of teaching needed by girls of sixteen spoiled the college for its more mature students. Between the devil of bankruptcy and the deep sea of the young ladies' seminary they struggled along for many years, as did Wellesley, which opened on the outskirts of Boston in 1875. More fortunate in its financial arrangements was the college that grew from the gift of Sophia Smith, of Northampton, Massachusetts. This could afford to wait to test its conviction that girls could stand the strain of Greek as well as boys. It opened in 1875 with only fourteen freshmen, whom it allowed to ripen as genuine collegians, letting in a new class of freshmen each succeeding autumn and paying the full price for a high standard fully maintained. A decade later, when Bryn Mawr College opened its doors, the preparatory schools had caught up, and there was no talk of letting down the bars. Instead of this, Bryn Mawr could tell of the duty of its teachers to be men of industry and research, professionally instead of accidentally drawn into their college work. In the West the women had an easier entry into the field of higher education. Here the frontier had clarified the rights of women and here the colleges were new, lacking tradition of exclusive masculinity; and here by 1870 it had become the general practice to co-educate the boys and girls. Women entered the men's collegiate course. In increasing numbers the experiment of co-education was tried, with no bad consequences. Spurred by the activities of the women's colleges in the East and co-education in the West, Harvard and Columbia felt a need to extend their work. The "Annex" at Harvard offered its first courses in 1879 and developed into Radcliffe College a little later. At Columbia the admonitions of President Barnard to take like action were long in vain, but when the women got their college it received his name. In 1882 thirteen colleges and universities, all doing men's work for women, shared in the formation of the Association of Collegiate Alumnæ. Education of negroes The part education was to play in the real reconstruction of the South impressed the imagination at an early date. Under the protection of the Freedmen's Bureau schools were opened almost before the echoes of the guns were silent. In 1867 George Peabody handed over to a group of notable trustees a fund to help the "more destitute portions of the Southern and Southwestern States of our Union." From this fund negro schools and normal schools were aided and encouraged year after year. In 1875 a normal college at Nashville became the largest single interest of the fund, which, in another generation, passed its remaining assets to this college and wound up its work. John F. Slater, of Connecticut, inaugurated a friendly rivalry to Peabody when he set aside a million dollars in 1882 for "the uplifting of the lately emancipated people of the Southern States." Booker T. Washington began, with small equipment and a large vision, in 1881, his Tuskegee experiment of self-help for negroes. The growth of professional education fills the same two decades after the Civil War. Agriculture, engineering, Professional law, and teaching shifted to a new basis of intereducation est and popularity. The normal schools multiplied and grew into the teachers' college. The high school entered upon its delicate mission mediating between the needs of the common school and the exactions of the over shadowing university. Its task grew in volume and difficulty as a prosperous nation sent ever larger numbers of its children into the high school, in which it had full confidence, and on into the university where its uncertainties were growing less. From 392 to the million of population, when Barnard examined the figures of higher education in 1869, the ratio of attendance rose to 1161 in 1880, and to 1913 in 1900, with endowment, equipment, and public interest growing in proportion. The renascence of American education began simultaneously with the legislation of the sixties, which created the land-grant colleges in 1862 and a United States Bureau of Education in 1867. The stream of private benefactions that still flows unchecked began its run. Public leaders in education formed a new school of college teachers who were neither pedants nor pedagogues, but were statesmen in the best sense. Charles W. Eliot, beginning his reign at Harvard in 1869, was the most prominent of these, but at his side were White at Cornell and McCosh at Princeton (1868), Angell at Michigan and Porter at Yale (1871), Alice Freeman at Wellesley (1882), and Gilman at Johns Hopkins (1876), Pepper at Pennsylvania (1881) and Northrop at Minnesota (1885); while the newly inspired universities were training Wilson, Lowell, James, Jordan, and Van Hise to take the lead a generation later. At Johns Hopkins University the new education made its special imprint. The great teachers of the old colleges had been drafted from the clergy, with only Johns general preparation for their work. Beginning Hopkins University about the thirties there had come now and then young men inspired with science and scholarship from the German universities. Only in the seventies did advanced work in America become possible. There were in 1850 eight graduate students recorded in the United States, said Ira Remsen in his Johns Hopkins inaugural in 1902; and in 1875 but 399. By 1900 there were 5668, in whose production and training no one had surpassed the predecessor of Remsen at Johns Hopkins - Daniel Coit Gilman. It was Gilman who shaped the graduate university for which Johns Hopkins gave three and one half millions to Baltimore and the South, founding its leadership not upon a shell of buildings, but upon teachers and scholars. Here Gildersleeve and Martin and Adams trained the graduates who filtered into the new faculties of the eighties, and disturbed the tranquillity of the old with their ideas of research. It was science and scholarship, not irreligious, but without religious bias. The inaugural orator, Thomas Huxley, in 1876, by his presence indicated the courage of Gilman's scientific conviction, for evolutionists were in disrepute and even Charles Darwin had not yet received his Cambridge LL.D. Science was on the program at Johns Hopkins, but not prayer; and to one who complained of the lack of the latter a clergyman aptly answered: "It was bad enough to invite Huxley. It were better to have asked God to be present. It would have been absurd to ask them both." The warfare of science and religion was at its height when Hayes became President, but society was clearly turning to education to solve its problems. "What is the significance of all this activity?" asked Gilman at the opening of his university: "It is a reaching out for a better state of society than now exists; . . . it means a wish for less misery among the poor, less ignorance in schools, less bigotry in religion, less suffering in the hospital, less fraud in business, less folly in politics; it means more love of art, more lessons from history, more security in property, more health in cities, more virtue in the country, more wisdom in legislation; it implies more intelligence, more happiness, more religion." BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE James Ford Rhodes, History of the United States from Hayes to McKinley, 1877-1896 (1919), is volume VIII of his monumental and invaluable work. John W. Burgess, Administration of President Hayes (1916), is a sketchy continuation of his writings on the Civil War. Paul L. Haworth, The Hayes-Tilden Election of 1876 (1906), gives the best view of the electoral contest; his United States in Our Own Times, 1865–1920 (1920), contains a |