public schools, is not professional education; and industrial and even professional education can be so managed as to train broadly for manhood and for citizenship, and the effect of all education that is worthy the name is to develop the ideals in the subjects that are touched. It is high time that the formal and arbitrary distinction between the old and the new education be obliterated and forgotten.

I have no desire to try to prophesy what the means or the methods of the schools are to be; but it is evident from the tendencies of the time that an intimate and vital touch with the many conditions and affairs of life is to characterize the coming schools.

There's a farm on the hillside,
A mill on the river;

There's a store on the highway,
A mine on the mountain;
There's a shop on the lowland,
A ship on the ocean.

There's a man with his reaper, A man with his dinner; There's a man with his shovel, A man with his measure; There's a man with his tool-box, A man with his canvas.

There's a home with its comfort, A street with its goers;

There's a club with its actors, A hall with its speakers;

There' 's a church with its people, A school with its learners.

These all are God's agents.
Relentless and ceaseless
In workshop and homespun
They weave the Great Fabric.
They are builders of nations,
They are makers of Heaven.

As the race in its progress,
So the child in its nurture
And the flight of the poet
Come up out of Labor.
Constructive, creative,

Will the method of nature

Of life and its content

Make the School of the Future.

IV

Evolution: The Quest of Truth

Ta recent Bible League Conven

AT

tion the hypothesis of evolution was again refuted. Most of us had been. led to think that the old contention between the theory of evolution and theology had worn itself out, and that the theory was to be allowed to stand or to fall on its own evidence. We had supposed that the theory is accepted as a working hypothesis by all naturalists and by most publicists. We had been further of the opinion that these adherents, representing all possible points of view and being honest seekers of truth, would quickly withdraw their support in case the hypothesis were found to be untenable-in short, that the burden

of disproving the organic evolution hypothesis no longer rests on the theologians.

The hypothesis of organic evolution is supposed to be an explanation or interpretation of well-observed facts and phenomena. It is well worth our while, therefore, very briefly to enquire what is the nature of the foundations on which these newest refutations rest. If the evolution theory is to collapse, or even if it is to fall into disrepute, our outlook to nature is to undergo a radical change; and the subject becomes of far greater importance than to theology alone.

I have no desire to put myself in the position of appearing to come to the aid of evolution, nor of considering such criticisms as I have mentioned as a menace to that hypothesis. The hypothesis needs no advocates. Nor is it my

purpose to make an attempt to expound the bearings of the evolution philosophy on ethics or religion, except as such discussion bears on our attitude toward nature. The general effect of the rise of the evolution theories is the endeavor to see things as they are, and then to interpret them without fear or bias or prejudice. Evolution stands for the quest of truth as distinguished from adherence to dogma. It affirms that the origin. of the forms of life is a natural phenomenon and is governed by law. Evolution has set the face directly toward truth regardless of the consequences; and the outlook to truth in what we call the natural world is the outlook to courage, to the future, and to hope.

Therefore, I use some of the criticisms and refutations merely as texts, and not that I may refute them, nor correct them, nor criticize any person. They are repre