my mind, by a pretty careful examination of the school, such as I could give it in one day.

I did not confer with any members of the school committee; I failed to meet them.

I may say, in general terms, that I was highly pleased with the manner in which the school was conducted. There were two teachers engaged in giving instruction. I witnessed the recitations of the pupils, who numbered about thirty. Their exercises were such as are usually practiced in the primary departments of our State institutions. I learned, from the teachers, that there were found, in the cities of Pittsburgh and Alleghany, many deaf-mutes whose education had been wholly neglected, perhaps about sixty; my recollection is that about one-third of these were orphans, or orphans in part, with no person to care for them, or to take such interest in them as to send them to the State Institution at Philadelphia. Several were pointed out to me that had been under instruction in that institution, one, two or three years, but from some cause or other, coming home in vacation, they had been neglected, and had not been returned to the institution, and, not having progressed far enough in their studies for self-improvement, had relapsed into their original ignorance.

This school, I learned, was exerting a powerful influence upon the citizens of Pittsburgh-exciting a lively interest in the community, generally, upon the subject of the education of the deaf and dumb. Through it many persons had become deeply interested in the education of these unfortunate children.

Commenced as a Sabbath School, it had grown into a day-school. The School Board had assigned it a part of one of the ward schoolhouses, comfortably furnished, with desks, seats and blackboard, suitable for the accommodation of these children, and had made provision for the payment of the salaries of the teachers.

I found the teachers using Peet's Elementary Lessons, and commended to them the use of Jacob's Primary Lessons as one of the best of books for beginners.

A large part of the pupils present in the school were the children of foreigners, the parents of some of whom, besides being poor, had, I was told, never been made acquainted with the provision made by the State for the education of such persons, and understood much less the way whereby they could avail themselves of this provision for their children.

I was made acquainted with the remarkable fact, just now alluded to by Dr. Brown, that, in Pittsburgh and vicinity, sixty of these unfortunate children had been found, of suitable age for instruction, neglected, and growing up in ignorance; while there were only five under instruction in the State Institution at Philadelphia. From Indianapolis and vicinity, out of a population of less than a hundred thousand, we had seventeen pupils under instruction last term, and three, in addition, have been regularly admitted for the next session.

Now, the state of the case as found to exist in Pittsburgh might have been produced by the ignorance, poverty and indifference of parents, the distance and the expense of travel, and the terms of admission to the State Institution.

It is unfortunately too true that the parents of many of the deaf and dumb are very poor and ignorant, and indifferent to the education of their children. Should those who have the light wait till they come to them for it? Is not instruction the gospel to the deaf and dumb, and are not these institutions the ministry, and we the missionaries, to bear to them, who sit in the most profound intellectual darkness and the shadow of moral death, the good news of their salvation?

I should like to hear from the delegates from Pennsylvania how it is that the Institution at Philadelphia, having now been in operation for nearly half a century, has succeeded in bringing under its influence so few of the deaf and dumb in the western part of the State? Was it not time for the friends of these children, led, as Dr. Brown says, by the Providence of God, but driven, as I would say, by the facts and necessities of the case, to establish a school for their instruction?

It is a day-school; the children attend school as other children do, and board at home; and I was assured that the pupils were exerting a happy influence upon their friends.

Now, one of the great evils of State institutions is, that they receive pupils and retain them often for a series of years, and thus sever all connection with their friends, and this, most frequently, in the case of those who have the fewest friends; and when they have finished their studies, and have to go out into the world, they are more friendless and isolated than when they entered. Separation from parents, and home, and friends, in childhood, is a misfortune, in most cases, second only to the loss of hearing and speech, and

ought never to be resorted to when it can be avoided. In this State we mitigate the evil, as far as we can, by sending all the pupils to their homes to spend the vacations, so that they can keep up old acquaintances and form new friendships; so that, when they leave school finally, they will have some place as a home, and friends to whom they can go.

The more destitute and friendless the pupil, the more need there is that he should be helped to cherish and keep up a connection with the friends he has, and to increase the number of his acquaintances. It is for this reason we send all our pupils home, and, if need be, the law allows us to pay their expenses.

I do not know whether I rightly understood my venerable friend on my left when he says that his institution assumes the wardenship of its pupils. If he means that the institution takes charge of the pupil for all the purposes of education, I agree with him that it may properly do so; but if he means that the institution can or ought, in any case, to assume, much less usurp, the place of a parent, so as to destroy or even weaken the relation of parent and child, or relieve him from the duties that arise out of it, I beg leave to differ with him.

The institution should receive its beneficiaries as pupils for the purpose of instruction, not as wards, with the design of making it a permanent home for them, in any such way as to sever the connection they had with parents, friends, and neighbors. If the institution receives pupils as paupers at ten years of age, and keeps them seven years-the usual length of the course of study-and then sends them out severed from home influences, they are utter strangers in the world.

The school in Pittsburgh receives these neglected children with such homes as they have, and is endeavoring to make them and their homes better by instruction. That they are doing this, and, with the pupils I saw there, as well as any of us are, I have no doubt.

How far in a course of study a school of this kind can be profitably carried on, depends upon the number and classification of pupils and the number of teachers it could employ. In a city affording thirty or forty pupils, I suppose the course of study might very well be carried on through three or four years.

It does seem to me a question worthy of the consideration of the members of this Convention whether this experiment, now being

Since the first lines of this paper were written, several instances have occurred, through the public journals of this country and England, in which some of the best minds have taken a firm position in favor of compulsory education. If then, such a position is sound in regard to ordinary speaking and hearing children, it is most assuredly so in regard to the deaf and dumb, for reasons which have, in part, already been given.

MR. TALBOT.—I apprehend the difficulty Mr. Noyes speaks of, is one that applies to the newer portions of the country, and it has pressed upon me seriously. We had about two-thirds of the deaf and dumb in the State, in our institution, when I went there, seven years ago, and we have now, gradually, worked that proportion up to about three-fourths of the proper number. Now, this remaining one-fourth is too large a proportion of the deaf and dumb to leave in ignorance; much more would one-half be.

There are troubles of this kind pressing upon Western institutions, that Eastern institutions do not feel; and if any utterance of this Convention would so enlighten the people as to lead them to bring the deaf and dumb into the institutions, at the proper time, it would be a very great help to us. I feel it myself, in sending circulars, year after year, to the same parties, in regard to their deaf and dumb children, who still keep them out of the institution; and it is not always because the parents want them to work, but the cause sometimes is, as I heard in one case, that the deaf and dumb child already knew more than the speaking children of the family. It seems to me that we should have the power given us, to get hold of these children. When once a child is brought to the institution, we can depend on its coming again; even if it is so poor that the parents can not clothe it, (which, with traveling expenses, is the only expense that is required in our State,) the institution can furnish clothing. I am happy to know that this State can pay the traveling expenses of the pupils.

MR. NOYES.-I will give you a fact. Right in my neighborhood, there is a family where there is a young lady twenty-four years of age, who is deaf and dumb. She has not been to school. When

I went there, I heard of her, and sent circulars and reports to her parents, and also sent a friend to give them an invitation to come to the institution and bring the young lady with them. At one time Mrs. Noyes was there, and I asked her to go in and see her. I sent message after message, with reports and circulars, and documents of various kinds, until, finally, I got word from them, that I had better stay away. I went there once myself. The father is a carpenter, and a man of some little respectability. When I went there, this young lady had a room that she went into, very much like a dog going into his kennel; and they insisted on keeping her in her ignorance and degradation. Another case that I knew of, was that of a fine boy, growing up to manhood, who was kept constantly plowing and working on the farm. They kept him there in ignorance, for the purpose of being the better able to hold him, and keep him there. I say, therefore, that such a law as I have alluded to, in my paper, will do good.

There are children who will grow up and fill our jails and almshouses, unless we get a law that will compel those having charge of them, to let them come to the institutions.

There was a law in our State, at one time, that required the father to go before a Judge of Probate, and swear that he was poor, in order to get a child in there, but that is abolished now. There are imaginary evils, however, that they look upon as so formidable that they will never take a step towards the institution, unless there is something that says, authoritatively, you must.

I am bound, if the Lord helps me as hitherto, to educate the deaf and dumb children of the State of Minnesota; but, in order to do it, I want something behind some of these parents like a compulsory law. I think, gentlemen, that, if you will look at the signs of the times, and see what some of our leading men, at the present time, are doing, you will see that they are coming right to this point; that every man and woman, who is going to be a voter of this country, must be able to read and write, and think independently for themselves. I know a man who is going to Congress right on that position.

A paper was then read by P. G. GILLETT, entitled: "On the Organization of an Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb," as follows: