r - ,kh' J&
Remarks upon the
eduoation of Deaf Mutes:
(S«Gr»Howo)
ii Boston, 18 66 •
•ti 9
*«.> »j« *i „ 'Wa s-v-'.U
i „ v
3
f ''X-
"/give the/e Books
for tie founding of a College in this Colony"
Nvf 35
8€Gh
REMARKS
UPON THE
EDUCATION OF DEAF MUTES:
IN
DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINES
OF THE
SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF STATE CHARITIES,
AND IN
REPLY TO THE CHARGES OF THE REY. COLLINS STONE,
Principal op the American Asylum at Haktford.
BOSTON:
WALKER, FULLER & CO., PUBLISHERS.
1866.
Wright &, Potter, Prs., 4 Spring Lane, Boston.
PREFACE.
On reading the last Report of the Principal of the American
Asylum for Mutes, it seemed to me that I ought to criticize it
publicly, first, in the hope of promoting the true interest of deaf
mutes, by calling attention to the subject of their education; second,
in order to defend my colleagues of the Massachusetts Board of
State Charities from some discreditable imputations ; third, to set
forth the real doctrines contained in their Second Report; and lastly,
to exculpate myself from certain charges of inconsistency, and
insinuations of selfish purposes.
I thought to do this in a newspaper article ; but my interest in the
subject, or my inability to condense the matter, made it impossible.
When the manuscript was finished, it was laid aside ; and the pur¬
pose of publishing it half abandoned.
A recent event has confirmed my first purpose; but leaves not
the time to recast the article. This must explain the tardiness of
its appearance, and its being written in the third person.
SAMUEL G. HOWE.
Boston, October 21st, 1866.
REMARKS
UPON THE
EDUCATION OP DEAF MUTES.
The American Asylum, for the Education and
Instruction of Deaf Mutes, at Hartford, is the oldest
establishment of the kind in the United States, and
the only one in New England. It has been of
incalculable benefit to the deaf mutes of all the
country. It. enjoys, and it deserves public confi¬
dence and esteem. It enjoys moreover the monop¬
oly of educating the public beneficiaries of all the
New England States; a monopoly of which it
seems to be very tenacious.
Its Annual Deports are widely circulated; and
are considered as valuable and reliable. They are
read and regarded as entirely sound by most
persons interested in the education of deaf mutes.
The Institution is strictly conservative. Its
Directors are men of high character, pure motives,
and eminent gravity. Its system of instruction,
adopted fifty years ago, is still adhered to, with
few changes; and all proposals to modify it are
stoutly resisted.
6
If pressed, they are repelled with sensitiveness,
and sometimes with asperity; as though they were
considered impertinent interference; and yet any
citizen of Massachusetts, at least, has a right to
press them, because about half the pupils of the
school are beneficiaries of this State.
The late lamented Horace Mann, Secretary of
the Massachusetts Board of Education, proposed a
great modification of the system of instruction;
and brought powerful arguments and stubborn
facts to the support of his views. But he failed
to efiect any material change. The Asylum yielded
a little for a time, under his vigorous attacks, but
swung hack to its old moorings; and, held fast
by the anchor of conservatism, breasts the tide of
progressive ideas which sweep by it.
In France, Dr. Blanchet, connected with the
Imperial Institution for Deaf Mutes, has long been
advocating still greater changes in the system of
educating these unfortunates. His views are inge¬
nious and plausible, and have found considerable
favor.
The Minister of Public Instruction, in a very
able Circular to the Prefects of all the Departments
in France, recommended Dr. Blanchet's plan to
their favorable notice several years ago.
Some Departments and Municipalities have voted
money, and made arrangements for testing the
practicability of the proposed plan. It has been
7
in operation in some parts of France and of Russia.
It is radical in its nature, and points to a partial
abandonment of central Institutions, and the
instruction of mutes in their several towns.
This plan seems to us impractical in its full
extent; but it certainly has very valuable features,
and deserves notice and trial. We shall watch the
experiment in France with great interest, and we
wish Dr. Blanchet all the success which his zeal
and enterprise merit.
Meantime, the Massachusetts Board of State
Charities, part of whose duty it is to visit the
Hartford school and look after the interests of the
beneficiaries placed there by the State, suggested,
in its Second Annual Report, some important
changes in the system of instructing and educating
our deaf mutes, which, if carried out, would result
in their being educated at home instead of being
sent to Connecticut.
This seems to alarm the Hartford school; and
the Principal devotes almost the whole of his last
Report to what purports to be an answer to the
suggestions of the Board.
He seems fairly roused; but not so much to the
importance of the principles in question, as of
defending the practices of the Hartford school, and
of preserving the patronage of Massachusetts. He
has at least two qualifications, which, as Byron
8
says, always make a writer interesting, to wit,
"wrath and partiality."
His zeal leads him, not only to overlook facts
and reasonings, hut, unconsciously perhaps, to be
uncourteous to the Board, and disrespectful to the
Chairman, upon whom he makes a personal attack.
He seems to think that if he can convict him of
inconsistency, and show that he is ignorant of the
best manner of educating mutes, the matter will be
put to rest. He therefore avoids discussion of
principles, and his Report is mainly an argumentum
ad hominem. As such, it would not call for a
public reply, because the public do not care whether
the Principal or the Chairman of the Board is right
in his theories. But our people do desire to have
our deaf mutes educated in the best manner;
though do not often have the means of knowing
much about it. The present, therefore, seems to be a
good opportunity of drawing their attention to it;
and, as most of them are rather attracted than
repelled by the smack of a controversy, we shall
yield to the temptation, and without following the
example of the Principal, in regard to personalities,
we shall assail his positions, and refute his state¬
ments, so far as propriety and respect for an opponent
will permit. Out of such a discussion, conducted
with the desire to elicit truth, ought to come, not
any scandal to the cause of public charity, but on
the contrary, an advance of its best interests.
9
It will be necessary, however, first to consider
some general principles which are apt to be forgot¬
ten in the organization of Institutions, and of
methods for educating deaf mutes, and similar
classes of defectives. We can at the same time
show the grounds upon which the Massachusetts
Board of State Charities placed its suggestions
for a change in our present system, and which called
forth the displeasure of the Principal.
The multitude of unfortunates into whose condi¬
tion the Board was to inquire, and over which the
law gives it general supervision, was divided into
the Dependent class, the Destructive class, and the
Criminal class.
The first comprised destitute orphans; abandoned
children; vagrant and vicious children, and youth;
the blind, the deaf and dumb; the insane, the idiots,
the confirmed drunkards, State paupers, and the
like; making nearly twenty thousand persons in
Massachusetts alone.
The general principles to be followed in the care
and direction of these unfortunates were thus set
forth:—
1st. " That it is better to separate and diffuse the
dependent classes than to congregate them.
2d. " That we ought to avail ourselves as much as possi¬
ble of those remedial agencies which exist in society,—the
family, social influences, industrial occupations,, and the
like.
2
10
3d. " That we should enlist not only the greatest possible
amount of popular sympathy, but the greatest number of
individuals and of families, in the care and treatment of
the dependent.
4tli. " That we should avail ourselves of responsible socie¬
ties and organizations which aim to reform, support, or help
any class of dependents, thus lessening the direct agency of
the State, and enlarging that of the people themselves.
5th. " That we should build up public institutions only in
the last resort.
6th. "That these should be kept as small'as is consistent
with wise economy, and arranged so as to turn the strength
and faculties of the inmates to the best account.
7th. "That we should not retain the inmates any longer
than is manifestly for their good, irrespective of their
usefulness in the institution."
The three last propositions seem sound, but they
are unwelcome to those who are wedded to public
institutions, and who believe in the doctrine of
teaching, improving, or supporting children and
adults in masses.
The Board says:—
" Our people have rather a passion for institutions ; but
they have also a vague idea that great piles of brick and
mortar are essential to their existence and potency. They
want to see them at once, and in the concrete. Hence,
we sometimes have follies of the people as well as of indi¬
viduals—many stories high, too—and so strongly built, and
richly endowed, that they cannot be got rid of easily."
In support of their principle the Board said:—
11
" The hideous evils growing out of the old system of
keeping men in prisons, shut up without separation, and
without occupation, are too well known to need mention '
here ; but it is not enough considered that the chief evils
arose, not from the men being especially vicious or criminal,
but from the fact of their being congregated so closely
together.
" Let us see how it affects the pauper class.
" Most of those belonging to the first division mentioned
above, to wit, those in whom dependence is inherent, and,
of course, permanent, are infirm mentally, morally, or
physically, perhaps in all these respects. Neither can those
in the other class be in a normal and vigorous condition,
else they would not be dependent. There exists in them,
indeed, the innate disposition or capacity for recovering the
normal state, but as yet it is in abeyance. Now, out of
unsound and abnormal conditions there must, of course,
grow certain mental and moral tendencies, which, to say the
least, are unwholesome. And it is a natural consequence,
(though disregarded in practice,) that if an individual with
these tendencies lives in close association with others like
himself, all his peculiarities and tendencies are intensified
by the intercourse. The greater the majority of unsound
persons in his community, the greater the intensification of
his abnormal tendencies. Eadh acts upon all; and the
characteristics of class, or caste, are rapidly developed.
Nothing is more contagious than evil."
This principle is further illustrated by reference
to special classes as of the deaf mutes, and of the
blind,—
12
" The lack of an important sense not only prevents the
entire and harmonious development of mind and character,
but it tends to give morbid growth in certain directions, as
a plant checked in its direct upward growth grows askew.
It would be a waste of words to prove this, because a denial
of it would be a denial of the importance of the great senses.
" The morbid tendencies, however, are not strong—cer¬
tainly not irresistible—at least with the blind. They are
educable, like all tendencies and dispositions, and by skilful
management may be turned to advantage. Certainly, how¬
ever, they ought to be lessened, not strengthened, by educa¬
tion. Now, they are lessened, and their morbid effects
corrected in each individual by intimate intercourse with
persons of sound and normal condition—that is, by general
society; while they are strengthened by associating closely
and persistently with others having the like infirmity.
" Guided by this principle, we should, in providing for the
instruction and training of these persons, have the associa¬
tion among them as little as is possible, and counteract its
tendencies by encouraging association and intimacy with
common society. They should be kept together no more
closely and no longer than is necessary for their special
instruction; and there should be no attempts to build up
permanent asylums for them, or to favor the establishment
of communities composed Wholly, or mainly, of persons
subject to a common infirmity.
" Special educational influences, to counteract these special
morbid tendencies, should begin with the beginning of life
and continue to its end; and they should be more uniform
and persistent with mutes than with blind.
" The constant object should be to fashion them into the
likeness of common men by subjecting them to common
13
social influences, and to check the tendency to isolation and
to intensification of the peculiarities which grow out of
their infirmity.
" A consideration of the principles imperfectly set forth
above, will show that when we gather mutes and blind into
institutions for the purpose of instruction, we are in danger
of sowing, with sound wheat, some tares that may bring
forth evil fruit. The mere instruction may be excellent,
but other parts of the education tend to isolate them from
common social influences, and to intensify their peculiarities,
and this is bad."
These rather novel doctrines have attracted atten¬
tion among thoughtful persons. They have been
praised by high authorities; pronounced too radical
by others; and have been assailed by a few who
fear that the importance and usefulness of long
established institutions, to which they themselves
are honestly wedded for life, may be impaired if
such doctrines should be accepted.
The Board, after carefully setting forth the prin¬
ciples upon which all methods of treating special
classes should be based, went on to apply them to
the case of the deaf mutes of Massachusetts.
The present method is to send these unfortunates,
at the expense of the State, to Hartford, there to
reside with many others of the same class, in a
great asylum, and be kept closely together during
the most impressible years of their lives, deprived
almost entirely of family and social relations, except
14
with each other. They have not even the advantage
of family relations with their teachers, who naturally
show their preference for domestic life over asylum
life, by dwelling in their own houses.
This arrangement, however saving of labor, and
sparing of money, violates the principle so strenu¬
ously urged by the Board of Charities, that defective
children should he associated together as little as is
possible; and with ordinary persons as much as is
possible.
The Board suggested that instead of this plan,
the deaf mutes of Massachusetts (who are quite
numerous enough to form one school as large as a
school ought to be,) should be educated at home,
that is, within the State. The plan did not contem¬
plate an asylum, but simply one or more schools, to
which mutes could go for instruction, as other chil¬
dren go to common schools; and during the rest of
the time be subjected to the ordinary family and
social influences,—not of a great deaf mute family,
but of common life.
The plan certainly had many important features.
The method proposed was in accordance with the
principles set forth by the Board, the soundness of
which has not been disproved. It avoided, as much
as is possible, the acknowledged evils of congregat¬
ing persons of common infirmity closely together.
It involved no great expense. It was in the nature
of an experiment; and could be abandoned with
15
little loss, if it should fail. In fine, it seemed to
present a happy mean between the old system of the
Hartford school and the system urged by Blanehet,
which begins to find so much favor in France and
other European countries. It incorporated the
admitted advantages, and avoided the acknowledged
evils of each. But it also involved the loss to the
Hartford asylum of almost one-half its pupils, who
are maintained there by the State of Massachusetts.
It is conceivable, therefore, that it should be
opposed, both directly and indirectly.
Accordingly, the Principal of the American
Asylum at Hartford, opposes it in his way, which
is the indirect way. He devotes almost the whole
of his last Report to this matter. First, he makes
a false issue with the Report of the Board of Chari¬
ties ; second, he makes a personal attack upon the
Chairman.
He raises a false issue, by devoting a large part
of his Report to- the subject of teaching mutes
articulation, as if that had been urged by the Board.
He sets forth forcibly and fully the advantages of
the French method of instruction used with some
modifications at Hartford, and the disadvantages of
the German method used in the German, and
many other European schools.
If there was room to go into the matter here, it
could be shown, that, with the exception of a single
sentence, which should be qualified, all that is urged
16
in the Report of the Board of Charities in favor of
articulation, is sound, and cannot he gainsaid. "We
quote from pp. 51-55 of their Report:—
" The inherent differences between children who are blind
or mute and ordinary children, are not so great as to form
characteristics of a class, or to remove them from the effect
of common educational influences. We are not, therefore,
to modify these influences to suit their condition, but rather
modify their condition to suit them. We must, however,
modify our method of instruction somewhat to suit the
blind, and a great deal to suit the deaf mutes.
" It is not the purpose, now, to speak of special instruction,
further than to say that, other things being equal, the method
is best which approaches most closely the approved methods
used with ordinary children.
" But in speaking of education in a more general sense,
that is of the influences which are brought to bear upon the
development of character, a few words may be appropriate
upon the subject under consideration, to wit,—
" Intensification of Peculiarities Growing out of an
Infirmity.
" It is to be borne in mind always, that the infirmities
which characterize these classes of mutes and blind do, in
spite of certain compensations, entail certain undesirable
consequences, which have unfavorable effects upon body and
mind both.
" The lack of an important sense not only prevents the
entire and harmonious development of mind and character,
but it tends to give morbid growth in certain directions, as a
plant checked in its direct upward growth grows askew.
It would be a waste of words to prove this, .because a
17
denial of it would be a denial of the importance of the great
senses.
" The morbid tendencies, however, are not strong— .
certainly not irresistible—at least with the blind. They are
educable, like all tendencies and dispositions, and by skilful
management may be turned to advantage. Certainly, how¬
ever, they ought to be lessened, not strengthened, by educa¬
tion. Now, they are lessened, and their morbid effects
corrected in eaqh individual, by intimate intercourse with
persons of sound and normal condition—that is, by general
society; while they are strengthened by associating closely
and persistently with others having the like infirmity. They,
themselves, seem to have an instinctive perception of this,
and the most delicate of them feel the morbid tendency
which may segregate them from ordinary people, and put
them in a special class. Some of them struggle against it
in a touching manner, as the fabled nymph resisted meta¬
morphosis into a lower form of life.
" They seem to cling to ordinary persons, as if fearing
segregation, and strive to conform themselves to their habits,
manners, and even appearance. They wish to look, to
act, to be, as much like others as is possible, and to be con¬
sidered as belonging to ordinary society, and not to a special
class.
" It is generally supposed that this feeling, especially in
the blind, arises only from the fact that blindness and
poverty are associated together, and that poverty calls forth
contempt, lightened, in their case, by pity. But the feeling
has a deeper source. It is very strong in those of delicate
and sensitive natures, and it ought always to be respected
and encouraged. Our principle in treating them should be
that of separation and diffusion, not congregation. We are
3
18
to educate them for society of those who hear and who see;
and the earlier we begin the better.
"We violate this principle when we gather them into
institutions; but we do so in view of certain advantages of
instruction in common, which are not to be had in any other
feasible method; as we bear with an inferior common school
rather than have none. A man of wealth might, indeed—
and if he were wise, would—allow his mute or blind child
to spend a certain time in a well-regulated institution for
like children; but it would be only a short one.
" Guided by this principle we should, in providing for the
instruction and training of these persons, have the associa¬
tion among them as little as is possible, and counteract its
tendencies by encouraging association and intimacy with
common society. They should be kept together no more
closely and no longer than is necessary for their special
instruction; and there should be no attempts to build up
permanent asylums for them, or to favor the establishment
of communities composed wholly or mainly of persons
subject to a common infirmity.
" This is far more important with the mutes than with the
blind, because of their speechlessness. Language, in its
largest sense, is the most important instrument of thought,
feeling, and emotion; and especially of social intercourse.
Blindness, in so far as it prevents knowledge of and partici¬
pation in the rudimentary part of language, to wit, panto¬
mime, or signs, gestures, and expression of features and
face, tends to isolation : but the higher and far more impor¬
tant part of language, speech, is fully open to them. Then
their sense of dependence strengthens their social desires ;
increases their knowledge and command of speech, and
makes that compensate very nearly, if not quite, for igno-
19
ranee of other parts of language. The blind, if left to
ordinary social influences, are in no danger of isolation. It
is when we bring them together in considerable numbers
that the tendency to segregation manifests itself; and this
is rather from necessity than from choice, for the social
cravings become more intense with them than wi'th us.
" With mutes it is not so. Speech is essential for human
development. Without it full social communion is impossi¬
ble ; since there can be no effectual substitute for it. The
rudimentary and lower parts of language, or pantomime, is
open to mutes ; but the higher and finer part, that is,
speech, is forever closed ; and any substitute for it is, at best,
imperfect. This begets a tendency to isolation; which not
being so effectually checked during youth, as it is with the
blind, by a sense of dependence, becomes more formidable.
To be mute, therefore, implies tendency to isolation. The
blind need little special instruction; the mutes a great
deal.
" An attempt to consider different modes of instructing
mutes would lead into a wide field of discussion ; but it may
be remarked that in the plenitude of arguments and disputes
about the comparative merit of the various systems of sign
language, it has not been enough considered that, by teach¬
ing a mute to articulate, we bring him to closer association
with us by using our vernacular in our way, than by teach¬
ing him the finger language, which can never become our
vernacular. The special method tends more to segregate
him and his fellows from ordinary society. In the first case
one party adheres to the natural and ordinary method of
speech, and the other party strives to imitate it; in the
second, both use a purely arbitrary and conventional
method.
20
" The favorite motto of the adherents of the method of
dactylology betrays this fault,—
1 Lingua vicaria manus;'
for the very vicariousness is objectionable, and ought to be
lessened as much as is possible.
" Without pretending to metaphysical precision, it may be
said that by means of the senses we come into conscious
relations with external nature—with men and things. Sen¬
sation and perception are the roots of knowledge. The
wider the circle of sensuous relations, the more rapid the
acquirement of knowledge. By action and reaction between
our internal nature and external nature, character is devel¬
oped. But in order that there may be harmonious and
entire development of human character, there must be the
ordinary organs of human sense : no more and no less.
" The result, then, of the lack of any one organ of sense
must be twofold; first, limitation of the circle of sensuous
relations ; second, inharmonious development of character.
" In the education of the deaf mutes and of the blind we
are to counteract the limitation by special instruction given
through the remaining senses ; and we are to counteract the
tendency to inharmonious development by special influences,
both social and moral.
" Special educational influences, to counteract these special
morbid tendencies, should begin with the beginning of life
and continue to its end ; and they should be more uniform
and persistent with mutes than with the blind.
" The constant object should be to fashion them into the
likeness of common men by subjecting them to common
social influences, and to check the tendency, to isolation and
to intensification of the peculiarities which grow out of their
infirmity.
21
"A consideration of the principles imperfectly set forth
above, will show that when we gather mutes and blind into
institutions for the purpose of instruction, we are in danger
of sowing, with sound wheat, some tares that may bring
forth evil fruit. The mere instruction may be excellent,
but other parts of the education tend to isolate them from
common social influences, and to intensify their peculiarities,
and this is bad."
It will be seen that the Board does not commit
itself to the system of articulation. Hay! the Beport
says expressly, (p. lviii.,) " that while some of the
members believe that articulation should be taught,
others, without pretending to decide upon the com¬
parative merits of different systems of instruction,
believe that many benefits would arise from having
the wards of the State taught within her borders.
They would, therefore, suggest a plan for a change
in our system of educating deaf mutes"
In this plan, the Board do not recommend that
articulation should be taught.
This is the false issue which the Principal makes.
Next, he tries to divert attention from the reason¬
ing of the Board, by attacking the Chairman, and
disparaging the value of his opinion.
He singles him out by name; rudely insinu¬
ates that he is given to riding hobby horses, and to
changing them frequently; and that moreover he
might have some personal end to gratify; and say¬
ing for himself, with much complacency,—" We are
22
not specially sensitive in this matter, ice have no
hobbies to ride, and no personal end whatever to
gratify ! " (p. 38.)
Considering that the Report of the Board of
Charities alluded to the Directors and officers of the
Hartford Asylum very courteously; and admitted
that the deaf mutes of Massachusetts " have
received fair and kind treatment at their hands, and
been taught by a corps of able and accomplished
teachers; "* such language by one of those officers,
sanctioned by those Directors, and printed in their.
Annual Report, appears uncourteous and strange,
to say the least!
Again, considering that no one charged the Rev¬
erend Principal with being sensitive, or hobby
horsical, his language certainly shows neither lack
of sensitiveness nor abundance of Christian charity;
but it does suggest the French proverb,—" qui
s' excuse s' accuse ; " — " who needlessly excuses
himself, accuses himself."
And yet again, considering that the Reverend
Principal is not sensitive, and declares (p. 29,) that
the objections urged against the Hartford system
have been repeatedly met, to the satisfaction of
committees of the Massachusetts Legislature, it is
strange he should say, " It may be proper to give
them a passing notice:" stranger still, that this
" passing notice " should occupy almost the whole
of his Report.
* Report, p. 57.
23
He then proceeds, not to consider the arguments
and considerations urged against the Hartford
system, but to demolish them by lessening whatever
weight they might derive from the character of the
members of the Massachusetts Board of State
Charities, in whose Report they are found.
That Board consists of seven members, six, at
least, of whom are gentlemen of character, and some
of them eminent scholars and teachers. They all
sign the Report; and all endorse the principles
which it advocates, and the application of those
principles to the education of mutes; although
they admit they are not all of them, competent to
decide whether mutes should be taught articulation
or not.
But the Principal regards them as mere men of
straw, who signed what they did not understand or
believe!
He says (p. 35,) with regard to the question of
teaching articulation, "On the side of educating
mutes by signs, we find every teacher in this coun¬
try, and in the British Isles, with the exceptions
above named, and several of these have spent
nearly forty years in the work of practical instruc¬
tion* on the side of teaching articulation, we find
Dr. S. G. Howe!"
And so with all the arguments and considera¬
tions urged in the Report of the Board. It is,
"Dr. Howe objects;" "Dr. Howe urges;" "Dr.
24
Howe complains;" " Dr. Howe suggests." Dr.
Howe is everywhere, the Board nowhere!
Having deprived the principles advanced in the
Report of whatever moral support the names of the
doctor's colleagues might give, he next tries to
demolish whatever they might get from the name
of the doctor alone.
He quotes some of his opinions, expressed many
years ago, and shows that they differ from those
put forth in the recent Report of the Board of
Charities, and then remarks,—
" It is pleasant to notice, that as Dr. Howe's views with
regard to the best arrangements for deaf mutes have not
been entirely settled in the past, there is reason to hope he
may come out right yet."
Amen! hut he will never come out right, if he is
afraid of inconsistency with former opinions; or
clings to doctrines because he once professed belief
in them. The doctor indeed says, in one of his
Reports/that the result of many years' experience
and observation, both of blind and of mutes, con¬
vince him that he made mistakes in organizing the
Institution for the Blind, more than thirty years
ago. There was then no school for the blind in the
country, and he copied existing establishments,
among others the asylum at Hartford, merely
modifying it to meet the special condition of the
blind.
25
He found, in a few years, that he had incorpora¬
ted some fundamental errors in the plan of organi¬
zation; and in his Twentieth -Report he states, that
haying been called upon by a committee from
another State to recommend a plan for an institution
for the blind, he did recommend one differing in
important points from the Perkins' Institution. He
would have no "commons," no central boarding-
house,—only a school-house. He would thus avoid
the error of making them board, and lodge, and
live so much together; because he finds that it
encourages a spirit of caste, and intensifies the
peculiarities growing out of their infirmity. He
would have them associate with each other less,
and with ordinary persons more, than is now done.
He would now follow out this idea in the pro¬
posed school for mutes in Massachusetts. He did,
indeed, follow it out in establishing the workshop
for the blind many years ago; and the most
satisfactory results have been obtained.
There are some thirty blind persons who come
together in the morning to learn trades, and to work
at them on wages, and go away to their several
boarding places in the neighborhood.
This establishment is under the general direction
of the Institution; but the inmates (some of them
young,) are not brought together except for
instruction, or for work, and not even for work in
large numbers; because the plan is to furnish work
4
26
at their several homes whenever it is possible.
Thej are thus subjected to ordinary family and social
influences, and are trained to live in and take part
with ordinary society, and not trained to become
members of a special class or caste. The establish¬
ment is successful; and blind persons who have
been familiar with both modes of living,—asylum
life and common life,—prefer the latter.
It would doubtless be so with mutes if the exper¬
iment were fairly tried; for all the reasons and con¬
siderations in favor of such a system apply with
even more force to them than to the blind.
The first direct charge which the Principal
brings against Dr. Howe is, that he makes "an
offensive classification " of deaf mutes.
"We object to Dr. Howe's placing, as he does,
the four hundred deaf mutes of Massachusetts
among the dependent classes." (Rep. p. 29.) And
again, (p. 30,) " This offensive classification pervades
the whole Report," &c.
He would be blameworthy indeed who should,
eve n by careless use of language, give just cause
of offence to a class of unfortunates who need all
our sympathy and kindness. But we shall show
that by no fair construction of the Report can such
a charge be sustained; and moreover, that if the
language of the Directors of the Hartford school,
and of the Principal himself, were construed as he
27
construes the language of the Board, then they
and he are open to the charge of very " offensive
classification."
So far from anything " offensive" to the mutes
pervading the Report of the Board, they are spoken
of not only respectfully, but with tender interest.
Indeed, special care even is taken to combat the
common opinion, (which is really offensive to the
mutes,) that they form a special class, and must
always do so; an opinion, by the way, which the
Reports of asylums for deaf mutes, and even
those of the Principal himself, often tend, inadver¬
tently, to strengthen. The Board of Charities
says, (p. 50,)
" It may be permitted, however, to draw a further illustra¬
tion of the principle under consideration from some persons,
(neither vicious nor criminal,) the similarity of whose
defect or infirmity causes them to be classed together, such as
the deaf mutes and the blind. It may not be improper, at
the same time, to make some remarks and suggestions upon
the mode of treating such of these classes as are at the
charge of the State.
" It is common to regard deaf mutes and the blind as
forming special classes, though speaking strictly no such
classes exist in nature.
" They spring up sporadically among the people, from the
existence of abnormal conditions of parentage, which produce
a pretty equal average number of cases in every generation,
among any given population.
28
" They abound more in some localities and some neighbor¬
hoods than in others; owing, probably, to ill-assorted
marriages.
" The important points, however, are that these abnormal
conditions of parentage are not inherent and essential ones ;
that some of them are cognizable; that with wider diffusion
of popular knowledge more of them may be known; and
that, by avoiding them, the consequences may cease, and the
classes themselves gradually diminish and finally disappear.
"We have no deaf or blind domestic animals; and the
generations of men need not be forever burdened with blind
and deaf offspring."
The idea which pervades the Report is, that the
mutes and the blind, if left without special instruc¬
tion and training, tend to fall into the class of
dependents. If this gives just cause of offence,
then must the Report of all the institutions for deaf
mutes in the country be offensive; for they do
constantly express the idea that deaf mutes must be
a.burden to their friends and to society, unless they
receive special instruction.
Out of the abundance of such expression we
select a few. The directors of the Hartford school
say: " The translation indeed of one of the inferior
orders of creation to the human species, would be
only in a degree more wonderful than we have in
several instances witnessed in our scholars." The
Principal quotes this language approvingly, in his
able paper, in the American Annals, (p. 3.)
29
Nay! he himself is especially open to the charge
of what he calls " offensive classification."
"Without meaning to he "offensive/' he often
speaks of them in a way which might give pain to
sensitive persons. For instance, he says: "We do
not believe that another human being can be found,
in savage or civilized society, whose mind is so
thoroughly imbruted with ignorance and so difficult
to reach as that of many a deaf mute Who has
grown up to maturity in the darkness and neglect
consequent ujpon his misfortune ! " *
In many other places he speaks of them as
entirely dependent upon society for salvation from
a low and brutish life. He does not regard them
as dependent in the sense in which ordinary chil¬
dren and youth are, but specially and necessarily
dependent, owing to their natural infirmity; and
shows that they can be lifted out of their ignorance
and dependence only by special means and costly
training.
Nay, more! He not only considers them as a
dependent class, but he sometimes fairly puts them
down in the dangerous class. He says, eloquently:
It is the darkness and gloom of his mental condition that
makes him an object of commiseration, and renders him*, if
uneducated, the most pitiable of all God's creatures. This
darkness is as nearly total as can well exist in the midst of
* Thirty-Fifth Annual Eeport Ohio Institution for Deaf and Dumb,
p. 9. Eeport of Eev. Collins Stone," Superintendent.
30
civilized and Christian society. His palsied ear shuts out
from his soul, not only the ' melody of sweet sounds,' but also
the most familiar facts of common life and experience.
" He knows nothing of the history of mankind, or of the
globe on which he lives, or of the immensely important truths
connected with his immortality.
" He is also excluded by his infirmity from intercourse
with his fellow-men. He can neither make known to them
his own wants, nor understand and conform to their wishes.
But while in this uneducated state he is a very ignorant
being, he is by no means an innocuous one. His animal
nature is fully developed. His passions are fierce and
strong, and he knows no reason for their restraint. Revenge,
lust, jealousy, may have dominion over him, without the
presence of any moral considerations to lead him to repress
their promptings. He may thus easily become an uncom¬
fortable and dangerous member of society ! "
!N"ow, if the classification of these unfortunates
among the deserving but dependent members of
society is " offensive," what must be that of the
Reverend Principal, who puts them among the
dangerous members f
But, in reality, neither meant any offence, and
none ought to be taken. The criticism is not
worthy of the Principal, whose actions speak louder
than his words; whose devotion of his life to the
education of mutes would prove him to be their
friend, let his language he what it might; and
though he has made more " offensive classifications "
of them than the Board has done.
31
The Principal next makes four several charges
against Dr. Howe, in one paragraph, as follows:
First, that " a few years ago he advocated the
plan of educating deaf mutes and blind children in
one institution, on the ground that as the blind are
intellectually superior, such a union would be
especially for the advantage of deaf mutes." The
Principal probably had been looking at the Twelfth
Report of the Trustees of the Perkins' Institution
for the Blind, without remarking that it stated that
Dr. Howe had been in Europe most of the year,
and did not write his usual Report. But, no matter;
he stands by the Trustees' report, and still maintains
that blind children are usually much superior to
mutes in capacity for intellectual attainment, by
reason of the gift of hearing, which is the mother
of speech; and that it would, on this and on other
accounts, be better for a mute child to be asso¬
ciated, while learning the English language, with
a blind child, than with another mute child.
His position is not understood by the Principal.
He has urged that certain advantages would accrue
to deaf mutes by being associated with blind chil¬
dren, because they would be forced to spell their
words upon their fingers, and to form distinct sen¬
tences, and thus to have constant practice in the
English language.
Thinking persons know well that one of the
greatest obstacles in the way of deaf mutes learning
32
our language is the strong tendency they have to
use pantomime.
The attempt to make them use the English lan¬
guage in their intercourse with each other, is like
trying to make our children speak French together.
The little mutelings won't take pains to spell out
the words when they can flash forth their meaning
with a look or a gesture.
They won't make the letters t-a-i-l-o-r if they
can touch their forehead, and imitate the swing of
his arm; nor h-o-r-s-e if they can crook their fore¬
fingers by the side of their forehead to show his
ears; nor h-o-r-s-e-m-a-n if they can set two fingers
astride the other hand. They won't restrict them¬
selves to the use of letters, and words, and sentences
in their intercourse with their playmates who can
see; but they would be forced to do so with
playmates who are blind.
There is hardly a mute graduate of the Hartford
school who can spell as well as Laura Bridgman
does; and nothing gave her such marvellous accu¬
racy, and such copious vocabulary, except the
necessity of constantly practising the use of words
which had been so painfully taught her.
It is almost a matter of certainty that she would
not have been able to spell so well as she does if she
had been merely deaf and mute. Like other mutes
she would have been tempted by the facility of
addressing signs to the eye to neglect that patient
33
and persistent practice which is necessary to make
a good speller.
She could see no natural signs, and therefore,
persons conversing with her were forced to spell
their words; and her answers were necessarily
made not by signs, but by letters and words.
The case was a new and anomalous one, and if
the Doctor had regarded the " consistency " of his
record, and followed the practice of the "schools,"
he would have declined to undertake the charge of a
child who did not come within the rules.
The passages on which, probably, the Principal
founds his first charge, merely set forth certain
advantages of the kind of instruction which the
blind mutes must have; and its applicability in a
certain extent to the instruction of ordinary mutes.
The second charge is, that "he has since been
understood to favor their education by a new system.
of dactylology of his own invention."
The Principal has been imposed upon by a purs
invention of somebody. But should he allow him¬
self to be imposed upon? Such a statement was
worth publishing, or it was not. If it was, then
the Principal should first have inquired if it were
true; and a letter of inquiry would have brought the
answer by return mail that it was untrue. If it was
not worth publishing, then such a statement is
unworthy a place in a Report professing to be a
5
34
reply to the Report of the Massachusetts Board of
State Charities.
The third charge is, that " Dr. Howe once advo¬
cated removing mute children from home influences
and associations at a much earlier period in life than
most teachers think judicious."
This is true; but if the Principal had gone on
and stated the whole truth, he would have made it
appear that Dr. Howe's heretical views were finally
adopted by the Directors of the American Asylum.
As he has failed to go into the history of the
matter, which is interesting in the history of deaf
mute education in Massachusetts, we will do so.
In the Twelfth Annual Report of the Institution
for the Blind, for 1843, occurs the following:—
" A few words must be said with regard to the two deaf
and dumb children who joined our school about a year
since, at the early age of seven years. Being too young to be
admitted. into the Asylum for the deaf mutes at Hartford,
they were placed by their parents under our direction, with
the hope that they might, at least, gain a knowledge of
language at an earlier period than has been usually the case
with children in their condition.
" The success which has attended the plan of instructing
Laura, by the finger language alone, has induced the
instructor of these two deaf mutes to teach them only by
the finger process, intentionally avoiding the use of the
gesture language, taught at Institutions for the deaf and
dumb. And, thus far, the plan, as in Laura's case, has been
satisfactory.
35
" It is found these children not only learn to talk rapidly
with the fingers, but are able to form a precise idea of a
sentence expressed by the finger language, which cannot
always be the case in the use of their natural, or gesture
language; and in this important particular does the manual
or finger language seems to he of greater value to the deaf
mutes than the language of gesture.
" They have made considerable progress, not only in the
acquisition of language, but also in writing, numerical cal¬
culations, and in a knowledge of objects which attract their
notice.
"During the last sessipn of our State Legislature, the
Committee on Education, appointed by that body, consulted
our Board on the subject of admitting the deaf and dumb
to enjoy the privileges of our Institution. A consideration
of this proposition was urged, and encouraged, by parents of
deaf mute children, and also by educated deaf mutes, who
w„ere anxious to have the education of their unfortunate
brethren commenced at an earlier age than was permitted
by the regulations of the American Asylum at Hartford, and
at a school nearer than that at Hartford.
" The trustees, acting under Dr. Howe's advice, expressed
a willingness to receive deaf mute pupils of tender years, on
the same footing with the blind, believing that it would prove
mutually beneficial to the two classes."
The Report goes on to say,—
"The question, we understand, was discussed at some
length by the committee, in the presence of a deputation
from the Asylum at Hartford, who protested against the pro¬
posed change, and it finally resulted in the arrangement that
the regulations of that Asylum should be so altered as to
36
authorize the admission of our State deaf mute beneficiaries
at an earlier age than heretofore ! "
It would appear from this record that most
teachers, and doubtless the deputation from Hart¬
ford, disagreed with Dr. Howe's views. Neverthe¬
less, in order to prevent the loss of any Massa¬
chusetts beneficiaries, they consented to make an
" injudicious " arrangement.
At any rate, they so far adopted the plan advo¬
cated by Dr. Howe, as to change their conditions
of admission, and admit pupils at what the Prin¬
cipal calls w an earlier period of life than most
teachers think judicious."
Dr. Howe had long before urged that deaf mute
children should begin to learn the English lan¬
guage as early as possible; and in 1842 he received
some young mutes into the Institution for the
Blind, partly in order to see if they could not he
taught advantageously at an earlier age than that
fixed for admission to the Hartford asylum.
From the early days of that asylum down to
1841, their Deports state that candidates for admis¬
sion must be not under ten years of age nor over
thirty. In 1842 they say, w State beneficiaries must
be not under twelve nor over twenty-five; other
applicants, between ten and thirty
This was not only putting the minimum age too
low, but making besides an odious distinction
between State beneficiaries and private pupils. It
37
was about this time that Dr. Howe was chairman
on the part of the Massachusetts House of Repre¬
sentatives, of the Committee on Public Charitable
Institutions, and agitated this matter.
It appears also that the Directors of the
asylum soon changed their views, and announced
that they would receive pupils between the ages of
eight and twenty-five, thus admitting State benefi¬
ciaries four years earlier than they had before done,
and abolishing the odious distinction between them
and private pupils.
jSTor have they stopped here; for in a later
Report, a committee of their Board says,—
" The opinion is beginning to be quite prevalent, that a
longer time than six or eight years is requisite, thoroughly
to educate deaf mutes; and that the legislatures of the
States to which they belong should extend the term of their
instruction. Indeed, there is good reason for believing that
these legislatures will do this whenever the subject is fairly
laid before them. In that case, the objection to receiving
any pupils under ten which has hitherto been felt, would
be removed, and the number of pupils actually in the asylum
at any one time would be considerably increased, even if the
annual admissions should be the same as heretofore. As we
were the first to project and carry into effect the high class,
by means of which a portion of our pupils are enabled to
prosecute their studies much beyond the ordinary limit, we
ought also to secure to the american ASYLUM the credit
of taking the first step in the opposite direction, and
thus offer the advantages of instruction to such young
38
children as contemplate a thorough and extended course of
training."
This report was approved and adopted by the
whole Board.
Dr. Howe urged the early instruction of mutes,
upon the ground that it was very important to
them; the Directors seem to have adopted it, first
to prevent the loss of the beneficiaries of Massa¬
chusetts; next, " to secure to the American Asylum
the credit of taking the first step," &c.
Surely, we may fairly quote here the language of
the Principal respecting Dr. Howe, as more appli¬
cable to the Directors of his own institution, and
say, " It is pleasant to notice that as the " Directors'
"views with regard to the best arrangement for
♦
deaf mutes have not been settled in the past, there
is reason to hope they may come out right yet."
The Principal charges, fourthly, that Dr. Howe
" now takes the ground that deaf mutes should not
be gathered into institutions at all."
We do not believe that the Principal would pur¬
posely misrepresent any one, and therefore do not
understand how, with the Beport before him, he
could make such a statement!
That document [which the Principal treats as
Dr. Howe's alone,] recommends a change in our sys¬
tem of educating the deaf mutes of Massachusetts,
39
and gives the outline of a plan for an institution.
As this is an interesting matter to all humane peo¬
ple, and a very important one to deaf mutes, we
will sketch this outline.
The Governor and Council shall appoint three
commissioners for the education of deaf mutes,
who shall act without salary, [or they may be mem¬
bers of the Board of Education.! The commission-
-* «
ers are to select the children who are to be the
beneficiaries of the State.
This would certainly be an improvement on the
present system, for it is well known that the Gov¬
ernor and Council cannot attend to this work as
carefully as they would do, and as it ought to be
done. They have neither time nor means for doing
it thoroughly. Besides, it is a work for which per¬
sons should have some peculiar fitness. Some
applicants are unfit for State beneficiaries, and are
rejected after going to the asylum at the State's
charge; some are not entirely deaf; some are
idiotic; some partially blind or deranged. How can
the Governor and Council examine a deaf mute
child and ascertain these things? But more often
the applicants are children of parents who have
some means, and who ought to pay part, at least,
of the cost, and so lessen the charge to the
Commonwealth.
These commissioners, after selecting candidates,
and deciding whether they should be taught wholly
40
or only partly at the expense of the State, may
contract with any responsible society or organiza¬
tion of citizens of Massachusetts, who will under¬
take to instruct and train indigent deaf mutes
belonging to the State, upon a plan of which the
following is a vague outline. [It is understood
that responsible parties are ready to form an organ¬
ization, if the State should favor it.]
" The society to provide a suitable building for school-
house, and, if necessary, a workshop, and to employ com¬
petent teachers.
" The commissioners to designate the beneficiaries, and to
allow the society for each one a sum not greater than that
now paid for beneficiaries at the Hartford school. Their
warrant should be, not for five years, as is now the case,
but from one year, and renewed, if, upon examination, the
pupil proved worthy.
" The society to instruct and train these beneficiaries gra¬
tuitously in its school; to board the children of.parents who
do not live in the neighborhood of the school in respectable
families, and pay dollars and cents a week for at least
forty weeks in a year.
" They shall, however, if possible, place but one mute in
any one family, and never more than three.
" The commissioners should have power to require the
parents of beneficiaries to pay a certain part—say one third
or quarter—of the cost of the board of their children ; and
when they are manifestly unable to do so, then to require
the towns where they have a settlement to pay a sum not
exceeding one dollar in a week, for forty weeks in a year.
41
" The commissioners to have general supervision of the
school, and of the welfare of such wards of the Common¬
wealth as live more than two miles from the school.
" The advantages of such a system would be many.
" 1st. The care and oversight of these wards of the Com¬
monwealth would fall where they really belong—upon our
own citizens, a very large number of whom would come into
constant relations with them.
" 2d. The children would be taught within the State, and
nearer to their homes ; and a large proportion of them might
live at home.
" 3d. The relations of family and neighborhood would not
be interrupted so much, nor so long.
" The importance of this is very great in all cases, but
especially so with those whose natural infirmity or peculiarity
tends to isolate them.
" There are innumerable threads uniting us with society,
and giving us the unspeakable advantages of home and of
familiar neighborhood, many of which are broken in the case
of these unfortunates; and we should strive to strengthen,
not to weaken, those that remain to them.
" 4th. The disadvantages and evils arising out of congre¬
gation of great numbers of persons of like infirmity, would
be lessened and counteracted.
" The Hartford school is already too large ; and it is con¬
tinually growing. Living many years in such a congregation
strengthens that tendency to isolation which grows out of the
infirmity of mutism, and intensifies other morbid tendencies.
" By the new plan all these would be lessened, and the
counteracting tendencies of common social life would be
greatly increased.
42
" The mutes would be together but five or six hours each
day. During the rest of the time, instead of being subjected
to the artificial restraint and influences of ' asylum life,'
which, at best, can be only a poor imitation of family life and
influences, they would be subjected to the average influences
of social life; which is the kind of life they are to live in
future, and for which, during all the tender years of youth,
they should be trained.
" 5th. The whole establishment would be simplified.
There would be no need of a great building, with halls,
dormitories, kitchen, dining-room and the like; but only a
simple school-house, and perhaps a workshop. There would
be no need of superintendent, matron or steward, with their
corps of assistants ; no cooks, no domestics, and none of the
cumbrous machinery of a great institution.
" 6th. Part of the burden of supporting the child would
fall where part of it (at least,) surely belongs, to wit: upon
the parents, and upon the neighborhood, and not all upon
the State. Moreover, besides lessening the cost and the
responsibility which now fall upon the State, it would divide
them among the people. The tendency of this would be to
cause our mutes to be educated more nearly as our other
children are. Every approach to this is very important to
the mutes, because it tends to prevent their social isolation,
and makes them to be regarded as members of society in full
communion.
" A regular course of intellectual instruction would be
given in the school; but advantage might be taken of neigh¬
boring workshops for teaching some, if not all, the pupils
.various handicrafts, as other youth are taught. This would
give a wider range of choice than can be given in the asylum,
where only a few trades are taught.
43
" Arrangements might be made by which children of
farmers, who can be useful at home in summer, might come
to the school in winter.
" Other advantages of such a change might be set forth,
besides the consideration that in a new school we might have
all the advantages of the long experience of the Hartford
school. We might avoid some of the errors which result
from its very organization; which cannot be cured in one
generation; and which, perhaps, stand in the way of intro¬
ducing new and improved systems of instruction."
Now, if an establishment upon this plan is not
an institution for deaf mutes, then what constitutes
one? Is it eating in a common hall* sleeping in a
common dormitory; being subjected to daily chapel
devotions; taught a particular creed; and kept
cooped up in one building and yard? Are these
things essential to an institution? Then are not the
German universities institutions; nor our country
academies, nor our common schools, " institutions."
Does not, then, this fourth sentence of the para¬
graph show, like the three preceding ones, that in
his excessive desire to put Dr. Howe in the wrong,
the Reverend Principal is led to misunderstand, and
then to misstate his views?
The conclusion that he does is strengthened by
the next paragraph, in which the Principal is led to
state what is utterly at variance with known facts,
and even with statements in his own Reports. He
says, (p. 35) :—
44
" Dr. Howe objects that our school is too large, and that
the cost is annually increasing. * * * The annual
charge is now $175. * * * The annual charge at the
Institution for the Blind is $200 per pupil, &c."
This strange blending of truth and error gives
the reader an entirely false impression. The
annual charge at the Institution for the Blind
is more than the Principal states it to be; but no
matter—the animus of this sentence is clear; it
gives the impression that the cost at the Hartford
school is only $175 a year! "Who, that is not
familiar with the financial condition of the Hartford
asylum, could fail to conclude, from reading this
statement, that it cost much less to support pupils
there than at the Institution for the Blind, or at any
similar institution in the whole land? "Whereas, the
actual cost is more than $175; probably nearer
$275 than $175 a year.
The Asylum has a fund given by the United
States government for the benefit of the mutes gen¬
erally, and the income of that, (and perhaps of
other funds,) probably amounted last year to 'over
$15,000. The Trustees, as in duty bound, appro¬
priate this, or part of it, to keeping down the
charges.
They do not tell us how much; and the Peport
of the Treasurer is marvellously condensed.
That document, however, show that the expenses
in 1865 were: for salaries $18,649.40; insurance
45
and sundries, $1,314.21; total, $19,963.61. Other
expenses by the Steward, (p. 44,) $33,276.47; mak¬
ing in all $53,240.08 as the cost in 1865. This sum,
divided by 212, the average number of pupils,
gives over $250 a year for each. The printed
accounts are obscure, and there is apparent discre¬
pancy between the Steward and Treasurer,—so
that the actual cost may be a little less ; but
certainly it is far greater than an unsuspecting
reader would infer from the Report of the Principal;
and probably nearer $275 than $175.
There is another proof, that the eagerness of the
Principal to convict Dr. Howe of inconsistency,
leads him to contradict his own Report. He says,
(p. 38,) comparing the pupils of the Blind Asylum
with his own,—
" It is comparatively difficult for blind children to travel in
public conveyances. They are exposed to constant danger,
and must always have an attendant. Deaf mutes, however,
travel safely to all parts of the country."
Here are several mistakes,—some excusable,
some not. It is excusable that the Principal should
not know that most of the pupils of the Institution
of the Blind travel to and from home on the rail¬
roads, without special attendants, and safely, and
that they are trained to do it. But it is not excusable
that he should publish a statement concerning them
without a little inquiry into its truth.
46
Still less is it excusable that he should make state¬
ments, contradictory to others in the Report of his
own Institution. On page 72 of the very Report in
which he states that deaf mutes travel to all parts
of the country safely, we find the following,
reprinted from former Reports:—
" On the day of the commencement of the Vacation, an
officer of the Asylum will accompany such pupils as
are to travel upon the railroads between Hartford and Boston,
taking care of them and their baggage, on condition that
their friends will make timely provision for their expenses on
the way, and engage to meet and receive them immediately
on the arrival of the early train at various points on the route
previously agreed on, and at the station of the Boston and
Worcester Railroad in Boston. A similar arrangement is
made on the Connecticut River Railroads, as far as to White
River Junction. No person will be sent from the Asylum to
accompany the pupils on their return; but if their fare is
paid and their trunks checked to Hartford, it will be safe to
send them in charge of the conductor."
A critic writing in the spirit of the Principal's
Report might be tempted to say that, when it is
desirable to make a point against Dr. Howe,
"the deaf mutes travel safely to all parts of the
country; " but, when it is desirable to attract
pupils, the parents are assured " that an officer of
the Asylum will travel with them and take care of
them."
47
But the charitable conclusion is, that in his haste
and eagerness to make points against an opponent,
the Principal overlooked what careful thought
would have made him see, to wit: that blind people
are less exposed to danger in travelling than deaf
people. The former are made careful by their
infirmity, and their hearing is made acute by
practice; the latter are made careless, and they
have no hearing at all. Again, a little reflection
would have shown him, that one of the many
advantages of hearing, over sight, as a guardian
sense, arises from the fact that in the material
world warnings of danger come mainly through
the ear. This is, first, because, during half the
time, darkness prevails over the world, and then
the sentinel at the eye is off guard; but the
one at the ear listens during all the waking
hours; and, even when the body sleeps, is still half
awake; for the ear shuts no lid, as the eye does.
And second, because the eye receives no warning
unless the rays of light strike nearly from the front,
and therefore more than half the circle round us is
unguarded. But the ear gathers in sounds not
only from all around, but from above and below.
Unless the rattlesnake be in the direct path, the eye
sees him not, while the ear catches the first note of
warning, come it from where it may. The thinnest
substance stops light; but sound traverses thick
walls. Besides, sight is more voluntary,—hearing
48
more involuntary; almost automatic indeed. Sights
are shut out easily; sounds with difficulty. You
can be blind at will; you cannot shut out all sound,
even by stopping the ears.
But be the philosophy of the matter what it
may, daily facts show that mutes and deaf per¬
sons are more exposed to the dangers of the
present mode of travel, and suffer more from them,
not only than blind persons, but than any class of
people whatever. "We constantly hear of persons
being run over on the tracks; and in a large
proportion of cases they are deaf persons.
If the Principal will consult the records of rail¬
roads he will find many cases of mutes and deaf
persons being run over; but rarely one of a blind
man being injured in that manner.
Nay! if he will look into the Reports of his own
Institution he will find evidence not only of con-
stant dread of danger from the rail cars, but acci¬
dents and deaths among the pupils, even while
under the protecting and watchful care of the
Asylum.
The Thirty-Ninth Annual Report says,—
" An accident occurred on the railroad to one of the pupils
from Canada, in September last, which resulted in his death.
While walking carelessly along on the ends of the ties, out¬
side of the track, he was struck down by a passing train, and
so severely injured that he survived less than an hour. This
49
is the first accident of the kind which has ever happened to
one of our pupils ; and we trust with the warning given to
them of the danger of a similar exposure, and the vigilance
which will in future be exercised on the part of those who
have the care of them, it will he the last. Several educated
deaf mutes have, within a few years, been killed while
walking on the track of railroads.
" The practice of thus exposing themselves to almost
certain destruction cannot be too strongly reprobated, and
their friends should enjoin upon them the importance of
discontinuing it under all circumstances."
But the trust and the hope were vain; and vain
were the warnings and precautions, for we read in
the Fortieth Report, (p. 13,) as follows:—
" A severe, but not fatal accident, happened to one of our
oldest pupils in July last, in consequence of incautiously
walking on the railroad track near the city. The warning
given in our last Report was unheeded, and the result was
an injury, which will in a measure disable him for life."
A still more shocking accident is related in the
Forty-Second Report, (p. 8) :—
" Two of the small boys, John Parker, from Massachu¬
setts, and Benjamin Dawson, from New Hampshire, were
killed by a train of cars as they were walking along the
railroad track. The caution given them but a few hours
before the accident was disregarded, and their intention of
being on the track but for a few moments, till they could
reach the crossing of a road, brought upon them this terrible
50
calamity. While we sympathize with the afflicted friends of
these promising lads, and regret most sincerely their untimely
end, we cannot think there has been any want of care or
attention to the safety of the pupils in this particular, on
the part of the officers of the Asylum to whom their imme¬
diate oversight is entrusted. No rule of the establishment
has been more distinctly set forth, more frequently or
more strictly enjoined, or more rigidly enforced, than
that which forbids the pupils going upon the track of a
railroad. Whenever an accident of the kind has happened
to a deaf mute in any part of the country, the fact has been
announced to them publicly, and they have been warned
never to indulge in a practice so unwise and so dangerous.
We trust that the lesson taught by this sad experience may
never be forgotten by the pupils, and that it may prompt
those who watch over them to still greater vigilance."
The records of other Institutions show that dread¬
ful accidents have happened in consequence of the
infirmity of the pupils. As a matter of curiosity,
we have ascertained by the annual returns of all the
Railroad Companies of Massachusetts, that the
number of persons run oyer, and killed or injured
by the cars, during the last fifteen years, is 701.
This does not include passengers, nor persons con¬
nected with the trains, but only persons outside the
train, crossing the road, or walking or lying upon
the track. Of these, one is supposed to have been
injured in consequence of blindness, six of insanity,
and seventeen of deafness. Of course the supposed
cause is not always the real one; but, assuredly, if
51
the real cause were ascertained, it would swell the
number of accidents to the deaf, much more than to
the blind; because the blindness is obvious, deaf¬
ness is not. Everybody in the neighborhood knows
who is blind, but not who. is deaf. In the case of a
stranger, even, the corpse of a blind man would
reveal his infirmity; but deaf dead men tell no tales.
But even if they could, it might be useless for our
purpose, because if in the face of these reasons and
facts, the Principal persists in saying, even to make
a point against Dr. Howe, that "deaf mutes can
travel safely to all parts of the country," he would
not believe otherwise even though one rose from
the dead.
Enough has been said to show that the charge of
ignorance and error which the Principal attempts
to fasten upon the Chairman of the Board of State
Charities, is laid at the wrong door.
If this were all, it would not be worth saying in
public. To aim at mere personal triumph would be
unworthy the cause and the parties. But there are
questions concerning the best modes of educating
and instructing deaf mutes which are very impor¬
tant to that class of unfortunates, and which would
deeply interest all intelligent and humane people if
they could be brought forward and fairly discussed.
It is the hope of causing them to be discussed
which decides us to print what has been written
above.
52
While earnest and enthusiastic men like Blan-
chet, in France, plead for the immediate modifica¬
tion of the old Central Institutions, such as those
of Paris, London, and Hartford, and for teaching
mutes in common schools; and while eminent and
experienced, but conservative men, like the Abbe
Carton, in Belgium, admit that the modification of
the old system is only a question of time,—we of
of Massachusetts hold on to a system borrowed
from the old world, nearly fifty years ago, by a
legislative body not known to have been partic¬
ularly enlightened upon the subject of deaf mute
education.
This ought not to be; and our neglect of the
matter is not creditable to the Commonwealth. The
slightest examination would show that we have
not only failed to improve materially our method of
treating mutes, but have also failed to introduce
into it the system and order which characterize
other departments of the public service.
It would be a great mistake to say that the present
method of selecting the beneficiaries of the State is
a good one, for there is no real method about it,;
and even the existing loose and imperfect practice
is left to officials who have not the time nor the
means to conduct it properly.
See how it works. A mother has a child who
cannot hear, and when he becomes eight or ten
years old she concludes, sadly, that he never will
53
talk. She takes him to the common school, but the
teacher sends him home, saying he cannot do any¬
thing with him—cannot teach him. By and by she
learns that there is a school, somewhere, for such
children; and if she will go to the State House
she can find out all about it. There she is passed
civilly from one official to another, until she reaches
the gentlemanly clerk of the Secretary of State,
who concludes the child ought to be sent to Hart¬
ford, and he passes her over to the gentlemanly clerk
of the Governor, who kindly assists her in making
out the necessary papers, which are signed without
further examination. ^Neither of these gentlemen,
however, has any means of knowing whether the
applicant is a fit subject for the school, or not.
The child must then wait perhaps one month, per¬
haps eleven months, until the time of the annual
reception of pupils, and then be sent to Hartford;
provided that, in the meantime, the parents do not
change their purpose.
At Hartford, if the child is found to be a proper
subject, he is well cared for, and put under the
instruction of able and zealous teachers. But if,
as sometimes happens, the mutism is the result of
insanity, or of imbecility, or if the child is partially
blind, or otherwise defective, or is too feeble in
health, then he must be sent home again.
He has lost precious time; the poor parents have
been sadly taxed for the cost of the journey; the
7*
54
State has perhaps been taxed for his clothing; and
all because it is nobody's business to see that only
fit persons shall be selected as beneficiaries, and
sent out of the State at public charge.
Again, it is clear that parents who can afford to
pay part of the expenses of the child's education
ought to do so. This would not only be just, but
really beneficial to them and to their child. It
would increase self-respect; attach more esteem to
the advantages of education; promote punctuality
of attendance; favor study at home, as preparatory
for school; and be in many ways advantageous,
besides being a saving of money to the State.
But it is now nobody's business to attend to this
matter; consequently the pupils are, almost without
exception, at the entire charge of the State for their
board and instruction, and in some cases for their
clothing also.
Again, the Commonwealth sends about a hundred
pupils to the Connecticut school, but has adopted
no method for ascertaining whether her wards
are taught by a system well adapted to their
wants,, nor even whether they have the full
benefit of the system, such as it is. There
is no examination, deserving the name, by any
official; and no means of knowing officially whether
the wards of the Commonwealth have been well
and properly treated, taught, and trained, during
their five or six years' sojourn in another State.
55
The whole thing is taken upon faith. Now, we our¬
selves do not lack faith in the honesty and ability
of those to whose care they are committed; but
officials should walk by light, and not by faith.
We say there is nothing deserving the name of
examination, for it would be a mistake to call the
present practice by such a name. The Governor
and Council, in their annual " progress" among
State institutions, sometimes go out of our bor¬
ders, and visit the asylum at Hartford. The prac¬
tice is a good one, and certain good results follow;
but surely nobody will pretend that there is, or can
be, upon that occasion, anything like an examina¬
tion. It is merely an exhibition to a highly intel¬
ligent and sympathetic audience.
Then, once in a year, the Legislature appoints a
committee to look after public charitable institu¬
tions generally, and especially to see that they do
not spend too much money. This committee makes
a general inspection of all the charitable and penal
institutions in the State; and once a year they visit
the Connecticut asylum. They have reason to be
pleased by what they witness; and they generally
give the institution a complimentary notice in
their report. It is well known, however, that
members are not selected with a view to their
ability or fitness for judging the merits of a system
of instruction for mutes, and that their single flying
visit is only a general inspection. It is not, and
56
cannot well be a thorough examination of the
merits of the system of instruction and of its
results. The reports of the Committee make no
such pretensions. They are complimentary, of
course, but very vague and general in their state¬
ments. Nevertheless, they are sometimes gravely
quoted by the Directors of the Hartford asylum, as
proofs that the friends of deaf mutes ought to be
satisfied with the excellence of their system, and of
its administration!
"We assert with confidence that our Legislature
acts without sufficient light and knowledge upon this
subject. We assert, moreover, with sorrow, almost
with shame, that whenever an attempt is made to
bring about any change in the system of educat¬
ing our mutes, it is put down by considerations
not of wise economy but of mere money saving.
The whole matter is in the hands of the Legisla¬
ture, which are always full enough with other
business.
Whenever there is any likelihood of any action
looking to a removal of our beneficiaries from
Connecticut, a delegation of pupils is sent from
Hartford to exhibit their knowledge and acquire¬
ments. They make a strong appeal (not too
strong,) to the sympathy of the Legislature. Then
the Superintendent waits upon the Committee
of Public Charitable Institutions, and exhibits his
facts and figures. He makes a strong appeal (too
57
strong, alas!) to the pocket-nerve of the State. He
shows that he can maintain our children, if we will
send them abroad, cheaper than we can do it at
home; and straightway the whole matter is left to
sleep for the year.
Perhaps there is no need of any change, and no
room for any improvement. Perhaps the great
march of improvement in all other branches of
instruction, alfects not the method adopted at
Hartford nearly half a century ago, and followed
ever since, almost without change. Perhaps noth¬
ing can be borrowed for its improvement from the
opposite system adopted in the excellent schools
for mutes through the length and breadth of Ger¬
many,—the land of learned men and of able teach¬
ers. Perhaps Horace Mann was a dolt. Perhaps
the Board of State Charities is all wrong in
suggesting any changes in our present system of
educating our mutes. But there should be no
doubt about it. Either the Board of Education,
or of State Charities, or some competent persons,
should be specially charged to see,—
First, that all the unfortunate mutes in the
Commonwealth shall not only have the oppor¬
tunity of being educated, but be sought out and
encouraged to avail themselves of it.
Second, that the present method shall be prop¬
erly systematized and regulated, so that there shall
58
be strict accountability, real examinations, and
positive knowledge about results.
Third, that any questions about change of the
present method shall be decided upon broad and
liberal grounds, and not by considerations of
dollars and cents.
Such a committee, if clothed with authority,
might procure such changes in the present method
as would satisfy all the friends of the deaf mutes;
or they might advise the adoption of a new one.
The Directors of the Connecticut asylum, which
has done so much for the mutes of JSTew England,
ought not to object to any change which will pro¬
mote the interests of those unfortunates, even if it
should involve the loss of a monopoly which the
asylum has so long enjoyed.
If Massachusetts should deem it best to establish
a school of her own, she has mute children enough
to fill it as full as a good school need to be; or
perhaps ought to be. But even if there should be
competition for the beneficiaries of other States, it
would be animated only by generous emulation,
not as to who would take pupils cheapest, but who
would teach and train them best. Of such emula¬
tion, there surely would come good, and not evil.
Gay lord Bros.
Makers
Syracuse, N. Y.
PAT. JAN. 21,130&