upside down, with a tail attached, etc., would be a new alphabet." Either that he is uncandid enough to express an adverse opinion concerning systems with which he is not acquainted, or that his article was penned in short-hand, which, he says, "fairly runs away with thought-snatches it hot and sizzling from the furnace, and strikes it into shape before it has time to cool. Anything thus composed will require revision and correction."

To illustrate his idea that the system makes no difference as to the efficiency of the writer, he instances Mr. Bonynge of New York, who writes Gurney's stenography. But he inadvertently admits that "he scribbled like a perfect demon," and it is certain that it would require a "perfect deor at least a phenomenal writer, to succeed with such a perverse system. He describes the Englishman's writing as "like a dilapidated picket fence." Any rapidly written short-hand would appear so to the common eye, and his whole description of the stenographer's notes is just what one would expect to hear from a person entirely unskilled in short-hand, who first observes a page of any reporter's fast notes. "There was not a vowel sound to be found in pages, and there was little phrase-writing," which would be equally true of a phonographer's notes. He could read his notes rapidly, but this writer afterwards found that "nearly all the best reporters did very much the same thing." From these reporters he "learned some important things." If he would define what he means by "niceties," it would be more practical, and would teach the unwary learner what to take, and what to leave behind. The fourth thing he learned was that " one can best make one's own abbreviations." Really, this is calling upon the bird to fly before his wings have passed beyond the state of pin-feathers (for he is telling things important to the learner); he is calling upon the child to walk before he can creep-in short, is asking the mere pupil to exercise a power that is gained only by long experience the devising of a system of contractions that will not conflict-one of the

most valuable and indispensable features of a good system.

He has also given currency to the hackneyed remark of newspaper writers unfamiliar with short-hand, that "it will often make sad havoc with his long-hand [spelling]." This is just as credible as that the study of arithmetic will make sad havoc with the study of grammar, or that skating will make sad havoc with the ability to swim; for there is as much connection or dependence in the one case as in the other. If you find any one laying his bad spelling to his knowledge of shorthand, it will be a safe venture that he had floundered over many a hard word before short-hand tripped him up.

Here is a wild statement: "You must be able to decipher thousands of outlines, differing only very slightly in appearance, at least half of which [say one thousand] each stand for any one of about thirty different words" [that is, thirty thousand words represented by one thousand outlines].

This writer has said some good things, and it is only to be regretted that much recklessness of statement detracts from the good effect of a serious and candid assertion. It only remains to recapitulate. We agree with the writer that

1. Short-hand is not likely to be superseded by machinery.

2. An ordinary degree of proficiency is comparatively worthless, and that, generally speaking, it will pay only the professional reporter for the labor and time required to learn it, and retain it, (though this writer checkmates his own statement afterwards, when he forgets himself and says, that "it is a grand thing for the lawyer, the editor, and the author, and all who do much writing to be read by themselves").

3. The reading of short-hand requires as much practice as the writing of it, or more. But how can this be done, if you "raise your speed from seventy to one hundred and fifty words a minute, writing upon one spot of paper"?

4. The reporting style of short-hand is not fitted to supersede long-hand. A system may yet be produced that will be capable of

doing so. I see no reason why a system onehalf or one-third as long as long-hand, just as legible, and with greater facility of acquirement, cannot be invented.

5. It is certainly a great aid to composition, and a quickener of thought when thoroughly familiarized.

9. It does involve mental discipline of the most valuable character, requiring, as it does, the most rapid thinking on the spur of the moment, and the most thorough knowledge of the language in which the reporting is done. To hope for first-class results, one must be naturally bright of intellect, and of

7. It is important to waste no time on the "corresponding style," but go at once to the reporting style.

I disagree with the writer as follows:

8. Authors of systems are not necessarily unreliable advisers on the subject of short hand; which he virtually admits, for he says that one system is as good as another, and he certainly is not prepared to say that no system is good. A good system can materially shorten the labor of acquirement, and increase the ease of retaining short-hand, just as surely as a language represented by a phonetic alphabet is more easily acquired than a language in the hieroglyphic stage. And other things being equal, a writer can do more work and better work with a system which is simple, scientific, and practical than with its opposite, and to deny this is to dispute a truism; and to determine which is best, systems must rest on their own merits, regardless of who made them, or where they came from. We are thankfully past the age of receiving opinions on authority. So the work is not the "same, whether the words be built up of arbitrary signs for the letters, as in stenography proper, or of arbitrary signs for the sounds, as in phonography," but very much less in the latter All short-hand cats may be gray in the twilight, but in the light of clear concep tion some will be found much brighter colored than others. Indeed, we can safely leave the writer to refute himself on this point, for he says in another place: "Do not waste any time on the 'corresponding style,' but go at once to the simplest outline by which a word can be made out," which is admitting that there may be an advantage in the system, some systems excelling in this particular respect.

case.

sight must be good, for good spellers in the ordinary Roman alphabet will be found to be ready readers of short-hand. The study requires drudgery, but something else besides, and the drudgery will not appear very irksome, unless, like the discontented pendulum, one is always thinking about it.

10. One hundred and twenty words a minute can be reached in a year by a person fit for the profession of short-hand, with two hours each day, rightly used; and much sooner if more time is devoted to it under a good teacher. It will always pay well to employ a good teacher, and push the acquirement of the art to a conclusion with. earnest effort. The marked advance attainable in this way will go far toward neutralizing any feeling of irksomeness, and will tend to keep the mind at the pitch of enthusiasm through the most difficult portions of the study. Do not fritter away time and effort in "practicing one hour a day for five years,” losing much that is gained by such a dilatory process, but let each feature recur before it shall have faded from the memory. Thus catch and stereotype the art in the least possible time, and fortify the mind with the best safeguard against despondency-the knowledge that you can do something. Reporters are generally employed in some special line of business, and require to be very fast only in that particular line. Speed in other lines of reporting than that engaged in would be of no use, for it would soon be lost. Speed can only be kept up in any line of reporting by constant practice in that line. A law reporter is not necessarily a good lecture reporter, or a sermon reporter a good business amanuensis, or either of these for the other.

II. An "old stubbed pencil, which is

never sharpened," is of no special advantage in writing short-hand.

12. A learner is totally unfit to "make his own abbreviations," and should avoid the fatal mistake of attempting it.

13. It is not safe to "discard all vowels, or all use of position," unless a new system be invented which is independent of such aids, and which will probably be geometrically much longer than the best systems in

use.

14. It is not safe to omit "the, of, a, and, ing, etc."

15. Do not wait to know your own character before you begin the study of shorthand, because you may not be a good judge of your character until after you have attempted it; and should you fail, the experience will be of earthly and heavenly benefit, in freeing you of some conceit. But the advice of a good reader of character might be valuable. Roscoe L. Eames.

THE Johns Hopkins University is now publishing a series of monographs on American Institutional History, as an experiment in encouraging co-operation in research throughout the country. Colleges, journals, and local societies are to be the sources from which valuable papers will be taken to add to the series. The six already selected for the series (noted in our review columns of this issue) are all Johns Hopkins papers, (including Mr. Freeman's introductory one, which was the result of his visit to the University); but the hope is, that other colleges, societies, and even isolated students, will fall in after the series has thus been started. The idea is to have local institutional history studied on the ground in as many different parts of the country as possible, thus bringing, "upon the sound economic principles of division of labor and scientific cooperation," a rich mass of data into the hands of students, upon which to found an intelligent comprehension of national history. Of course the fundamental theory is that the individual community is the integer, of which the nation is a complex, not a fraction of which the nation is the integer; and that national history only becomes intelligible through local. There can be no rational dissent from this doctrine, and the whole field of study it opens up is of fascinating interest; but our present purpose is to comment not on the special historical object of the series, but on the more general, indirect object-its tendency to help on the habit of student co-operation. With regard to this, the most interesting thing in the two numbers already issued is the appendix on "Co-operation in University Work" (by Dr. Her bert Adams, the editor of the 'series), that closes the second. He calls attention to "that curious system of intercollegiate exchange which has developed so rapidly of late in America." In this system he finds one of the most encouraging signs of the times, in its tendency to cordial relations and mutual help among the institutions of learning of the country.

Two paragraphs from the many illustrations he gives of this system are of local interest to Californians: "There is nothing in the wanderings of peoples or in the history of the Errantes Scholares of the Middle Ages which rivals the migrations of the modern scholar. In 1875, the year President Gilman came eastward to Baltimore from the University of California, whither he had been called in 1872 from a professorship in Yale College, a student who that year graduated from Berkeley came eastward by the advice of his teachers, and wandered, like a veritable fahrender Schüler, from one institution to another until he reached the University of Leipzig, upon the historic border between the Teuton and the Slave. At the same time, the newly appointed President of the Johns Hopkins University was wandering over Europe, visiting the chief educational institutions of Germany, France, and England, with a view to the transmigration of ideas from the Old World to the New.

In 1876 the American student. . . . returned to his native land to enter upon a philosophical fellowship at the new university, the president of which had been inaugurated. . . . on the 22nd of February of that year. ... The Californian student, who had been schooled in German universities for one year, studied for two more years at the Johns Hopkins University, and then took his degree of Doctor of Philosophy with this significant thesis, 'The Interdependence of the Principles of Human Knowledge.' He was then called across the continent to his Alma Mater, to become an assistant professor in literature and philosophy. From that frontier-post, his contributions to the 'Californian,' the 'Berkeley Quarterly,' and the 'Journal of Speculative Philosphy' came migrating eastward. 'Mind-stuff' and other 'Realities' pushed across the sea, marched into England from the West, and effected a certain intellectual conquest, by publication in a very special philosophical journal known as 'The Mind.' And now

....

Dr. Royce himself has again migrated eastward, having been invited to a position as lecturer upon philosophy in Harvard College, as substitute for Professor James, who has again wandered to Europe.

"At the same time Dr. Royce was returning eastward, Dr. Stringham, a graduate of Harvard College, and afterward a fellow of the Johns Hopkins University, then traveling fellow of Harvard, was returning westward from the University of Leipzig to his old home in Kansas, to push on thence to his new western home in the University of California, where he has accepted a professorship in mathematics. And now a student from California, bearing letters from the faculty of the institution at Berkeley, has come eastward to Baltimore, leaving an associate editorship of the San Francisco 'Bulletin,' for the sake of discovering for himself an old world of science. . . . A student from Professor Howard's Seminary in Nebraska has also come eastward to continue his western studies. He represents, moreover, a comity of scientific associations first established at German universities between his American instructors. And with the student from Nebraska comes a regent of the Nebraska University, a graduate of Amherst College, who, although a man of middle age, has entered the same seminarium with his western protege."

Elsewhere:

"The career of Mr. Cook well illustrates the way in which modern science is conveyed in personal forms from one country or one universitycenter to another. Graduating from Rutgers College in 1872, he taught and studied for a few years in this country, and then went to Göttingen, afterward to Leipzig. In 1879 he was called to Baltimore to teach early English, of which, in America and in Germany, he had made a specialty. In 1881 he went to England to study with Professor Sweet; then back again to Germany, where at Jena, in the summer of 1882, he took his Doctor of Philosophy, with a thesis on the Northumbrian Dialect, approved by Professor Sievers. It is probable that his previous university connections with Baltimore, together with other influences proceeding from English and German experience, had some bearing upon his immediate call to a professorship in the University of California. Thus from the region of Saxe-Weimar, or, as Freeman says, 'that make-believe Saxony which is really Slavonic,' a knowledge of early English was borne across real Saxon land, across the ocean, across a continent, to the most remote home of the English people; a home which Charles Kingsley called 'a New World beyond a New World.' It is interesting to see scientific Markgrafen like Cook and Sievers stationed upon the modern borders."

THE Co-operation of scholars and of schools, illustrated by these and numerous other instances of less

local interest, is a very good thing for the strong and flourishing schools, in keeping them supplied with material; but it is more than a good thing for the weak, outlying stations and the communities surrounding them. A community like our own, where the claims of the intellectual life are represented by but few, among a population in part indifferent and in part hostile; where every man counts, and whatever intellectual stores he can bring with him count; where the sense of working against odds has produced a lamentable habit of despondency among those working in all branches of intellectual effort;— such a community cannot but receive the greatest benefit from anything that increases either the consciousness or the fact of solidarity with those engaged in similar effort elsewhere. As a mere matter of feeling, it is worth a good deal to have the pessimism of him whom circumstance is against, tempered by the optimism of him whom circumstance is with. The consciousness of lookers-on who are on one's side is an actual force; it is said that in the Harvard-Yale base-ball games, success is so sure to Yale at New Haven, and to Harvard at Cambridge, that the only decisive games are played half-way between, at New London. But besides this moral effect of co-operation, there is much definite service that comes constantly from the stronger party to the weaker in any co-operative bond. Moreover, our largest and most vigorous American centers of intellectual co-operation are now in relations of mutual helpfulness with the European; thus drawing the remotest member of an American system into vital connection with the whole world's work. pamphlets that have served as our text are an effort toward this result in the one matter of institutional history; but we have dwelt thus long on it as an illustration of a principle that may as well be applied in many other directions. The principle, observe, is to use the great universities, like that at Baltimore, as receiving and distributing points, so to speak; while local colleges, journals, and societies form the media by which the research of individuals, however isolated, may reach these depots, and be put into the common intellectual stock of the world

The

in which they, at the same time, in return, becomes sharers, as indicated in Dr. Adams's closing paragraph:

"By organized co-operative effort, American students can establish organic relations with European universities, Old World societies, foreign magazines of a special character, scientific appliances for publication, both in this country and in Europe-in fact, with the whole complex of modern science, into which no individual student can possibly find his way without scientific associations."

THE following rather droll burlesque of our national methods is clipped from the official report of a recent meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County:

Mr. Keyes offered a resolution declaring the position of bridge tender, held by Edward La Perle,

vacant.

The Theaters.

A NEW era of prosperity seems to have dawned upon the theaters. For more than three years they

MR. JENSEN.—I second the motion.

Mr. Hanifin said that Mr. La Perle was a good and faithful man, and wanted to know the reason for introducing such a resolution. MR. KEYES.-I prefer any charge. power they try to friends to whom I resolution.

don't think it necessary to Whenever a party gets into reward their friends. I have am indebted, and I offer this

times fell, heavily upon them. One after another their managers retired, disheartened and in debt. But now, when a revival of our ancient business prosperity is everywhere visible, a similar reaction has enormously increased the patronage of theaters. It is true the strange spectacle is presented of the three leading theaters of San Francisco either in the hands of New York managers, or depending for their success upon the attractiveness of New York companies; but the public will hardly grumble at this, so

MR. KEYES.-We are here in the interest of the people. If we can put as good a man in the place of the present incumbent, we are bound to do so.

The resolution was adopted by the following vote: Ayes-Jensen, Fallon, Keyes, and Dusterberry. Noes-Bailey, Molloy, and Hanifin.

MR. FALLON.—I move that the position of night watchman of the Hall of Records,. now held by Mr. Malone, be declared vacant.

I am

MR. HANIFIN.-George E. Malone, the present incumbent, was unfortunate enough to meet with an accident on July 4th, while firing a cannon. surprised at the action of Mr. Fallon. He knows the young man and his father very well.

MR. FALLON.—I offer the resolution to put just as good a man in his place. I have nothing derogatory to say about Mr. Malone. Mr. Hanifin sticks to his friends, and of course does not wish them to be interfered with.

Mr. Hanifin said he had never favored the removal of any one on the ground of politics since he had been in the board.

Mr. Fallon said that the men who held the positions suited Mr. Hanifin. Since Mr. Hanifin had been in the board the offices were controlled by Republicans, and Mr. Hanifin had no occasion to remove on account of politics.

The resolution was adopted by the following vote: Ayes-Fallon, Jensen, Keyes, and Dusterberry. Noes-Bailey, Hanifin, and Molloy.

Mr. Fallon moved that Edward Cassidy be ap pointed night watchman of the Hall of Records. The motion was carried.

MR. KEYES.-I move that John McFadden be appointed to fill the vacancy caused by the removal of Mr. La Perle.

MR. FALLON.-I second the motion.
The motion was carried.

Mr. Keyes offered a resolution declaring vacant the position of Court-house gardener, held by George Simmonds.

The resolution was adopted by the following vote: Ayes-Fallon, Jensen, Keyes, and Dusterberry. Noes-Bailey, Hanifin, and Molloy.

a fresh and varied supply of amusements before the public for some time to come. At the California the new year opened appropriately for the holiday season with a revival of "Michael Strogoff." Though played for weeks last year, this judicious mixture of melodrama, spectacle, and low comedy has not lost its hold on the public; and in spite of a decided inferiority in the performance of the rival correspondents, the excellent mounting of the piece, the gymnastic vagaries of the Girards, the surprising gracefulness of Ariel, all had their reward. At the Baldwin a great success has been made by the Madison Square Company in Mrs. Burnett's "Esmeralda." It is a piece that cheers, but does not inebriate. People who ordinarily shun theaters (though their number is smaller, we fancy, here than at the East) may see it with impunity. It is the simple, domestic tale of a country girl and her North Carolina lover, finally triumphant over an ambitious mother and a French marquis. There are many human touches in it, and the pathos is never strained, but is always quickly relieved by some bit of humor, which keeps the whole in a sufficiently low key. The performance was evenly good throughout, though the simple artlessness of Esmeralda was conspicuously artful. The management seems to have attributed some importance to the fact that the change from the first to the second act was effected in "just forty seconds." As a piece of scene-shifting, the change was no doubt creditable; but from an artistic point of view, nothing could well have been more out of place. At the end of the first act we are face to face with the occupants of a North Carolina farmhouse, and at the opening of the second we are shown the same people transformed and Frenchified in a Parisian studio. The imagination requires all the usual interval between acts to accommodate itself to such a change, instead of having the time shortened to "just forty seconds." But the most notable theatrical event that San Francisco has witnessed for several years was the recent appearance at the California of Franziska Ellmenreich in English. Here we have an actress of first magnitude, enriched with the training and experience of the German stage, who has the courage to appear in English for the first time, and