eer knows the structure and uses of
each part of his engine, and does not trust to unintelligent
observation of the mere working of mechanisms which others have
constructed. The architect studies not only the principles of design,
etc., but also the nature and relative value of materials. In his own
way he is a kind of anatomist and physiologist.

We do not trust the care of our bodies to those who have picked up a
few methods of treatment by experience or the imitation of others. The
doctor must have, we all believe, a knowledge of the structure and
working of the animal body; he must understand the action of drugs and
other healing agents. We expect him not only to diagnose the
disease--to tell us exactly what is the matter--but also to be able to
predict with, some degree of certainty the course of the malady. Even
the nurse of the day must show some grasp of the principles underlying
her art.

In connection with all the largest and best equipped universities in
America there are officials to plan and direct the courses in physical
culture. This matter is no longer entrusted to a "trainer," who has
only his experience and observation to rely upon. It is realized that
the building up of the mechanism which they are supposed to train in
an intelligent manner rests upon well-established principles.

It would be just as reasonable for an engineer to point to the fact
that his engine works well, as evidence of his ability, as for the
teacher of voice-production to make the same claim in regard to the
vocal mechanism. In each case there is a certain amount of
justification for the claim, but such teaching cannot be called
scientific. Is it even enlightened? It is just as rational to follow
in medicine methods that seem to lead to good results, without any
reference to the reason why, as to train for results in speaking and
singing by methods which have for the student and teacher no conscious
basis in scientific knowledge. The physician to-day who treats disease
without reference to anatomy and physiology is, at best, but a sort of
respectable charlatan. Why should students and teachers of
voice-production be content to remain, in the advanced present, where
they were hundreds of years ago?

Indeed, there is much more reason now than formerly why the vocalist,
speaker, and teacher should have a theoretical and practical
knowledge of the structure and workings of the mechanism employed.
Many tendencies of the present d