the engineer's education. The study of the languages improves character, personal sympathies, and sympathies in many directions, and fits men for better, more just and higher conceptions and appreciation of life. But there is, as yet, so little sympathy between the mediæval scholasticism of our universities and the naked utilitarianism of our professional colleges, and such disorganized relations between the lower schools and colleges and universities, that one despairs of reaching, very soon, the ideal neutralization of this unfortunate antagonism. This, however, if true, should not deter this Society from aiming at the most perfect type of Engineering Education and from working hard for its accomplishment in the the direction of humanizing the engineer; he needs it more among us than among other peoples, the English alone excepted.

PROFESSOR H. W. TYLER stated, with reference to a remark of Professor Bull, that it might possibly be of some interest for the speaker to say that he was one of the students who took a course such as was outlined in Professor Drown's paper, although it was not taken with Professor Drown. But the conditions in the East are probably different from what they are in the West. Western students are likely to have had a year in German at the time of entering the second year and would not be sufficiently mature to undertake technical reading in foreign language at that time. The students referred to in this paper have had only a year in German at the conclusion of their second year in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and by that time have had elementary technical training to such an extent that they can reasonably begin the technical works in French and German in their third year.

PROFESSOR C. C. MESS thought undue emphasis was laid on the fact of the insufficiency of the preparation in German or languages with which students come to the technical colleges. By way of illustration, and he wished to emphasize it, a gentleman not very many miles away from this spot at this moment-and he will not be offended if it be stated-knew very little of either German or French, but did know a good deal about a subject upon which he was called to accumulate authorities, with the result that in two or three weeks, by virtue of his knowledge of the subject, he was able to read the language with ease. This means that in the higher classes, in the junior or senior classes of the technical institutions, it will not be at all difficult to make very rapid progress in the reading of technical literature, because the student knows what he is trying to get at-something about the subject he is going to read. In the case of a French book in mechanics, for instance, without knowing a word of French, if one understands equations pretty well, it may be possible to read the whole book. Whether the book be written in French or German, it is possible to read the book if one understands the mathematics, without understanding French; but if one understands French without understanding mathematics it will be impossible to do so. Some injustice may be done if we try to inoculate the technical study of language too early. Good results could not be reached in making children read technical literature when they have not the least idea of the subject they are trying to read. A man who A man who may be a good reader and perhaps familiar with Shakespeare, as well as fully informed on the topics of the day, if given a book on

applied mechaines, will have a hard time understanding it.

PROFESSOR STORM BULL thought that there is quite a little difference between French and German in this respect. Professor Mess has reference more particularly to French and, according to the speaker's experience in Wisconsin, students who have studied French one year, could get along very fairly. But, on the other hand, his experience was that two years of German at the University did not bring a student farther than one year in French. Besides, there are scientific German books which it takes an expert to decipher.

PROFESSOR M. E. WADSWORTH desired to ask a quesquestion: Could not the difficulty that Professor Fuertes has spoken of, be done away with by taking the stand that is taken in other professions, i. e., that the so-called general training studies should be left out of the engineering curriculum? Is it not possible to occupy a high plane and say that the engineer is just as advanced professionally as anyone else? Can he not start his professional training where the other professions do? Instead of asking the incorporation in the engineering college course of English Literature and numerous other subjects that belong to general culture and education, should they not be put into the preparatory school where they properly belong? The engineering profession is belittled by starting its education so low. Is it not possible to start it on the same plane that other professions select? In this way it would seem that the colleges could have genuine engineering courses and not be obliged to sacrifice their engineering studies to the continual demand for the interpolation in the course of literary subjects.

THE METHOD OF TEACHING PERSPECTIVE TO ENGINEERING STUDENTS.

BY HENRY S. JACOBY,

Associate Professor of Bridge Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. If a transparent plane, called the picture plane, is placed between any given object and the eye of an observer, called the station point, there may be conceived to lie in the plane, a picture of the object, every point or line of which covers the corresponding point or line of the object. A drawing in plane perspective is one which is constructed, by some method, on a plane surface so as to be exactly equal to the one supposed to lie in the transparent plane. Several methods of making this construction are in use.

The first method is that of direct projection, in which any point of the picture is located by drawing the line of sight from the station point to the corresponding point of the object, and finding where it pierces the plane of the picture. It is seen, therefore, to be pure conical projection. This method requires both the horizontal and vertical orthographic projections of the lines of sight to be drawn, and hence needs a complete plan and elevation of the object, the picture plane, and the station point, in their true relative positions. If the object is set obliquely to the picture plane, more than one elevation is necessary. If the plan and elevation of the object are furnished to the draftsman this method requires only a very elementary knowledge of orthographic projection on his part. Its

disadvantage lies in the fact that a larger number of auxiliary construction lines must be drawn than by any other system, and these tend to cause confusion. and to obscure the required lines. It is also very difficult to remember which are the corresponding points during some parts of the operation.

The second or mixed method is that in which the abscissa of any point of the picture is located by direct projection, and the ordinate by the use of vertical measuring lines and auxiliary intersecting lines vanishing on the horizon. This method has been properly characterized by Professor Ware as deficient in scientific unity. The objections to the first method also apply to this one. However, it is probably in more general use than any other.

In the third method, or that of co-ordinates, every point is located by its three co-ordinates, parallel and perpendicular to the picture. The x and z co-ordinates are laid off directly in the picture plane, while the y co-ordinate is determined in direction by means of its vanishing point, and measured by means of an intersecting diagonal in perspective. If the leading lines of the object are perpendicular and parallel to the picture plane, only perpendiculars and diagonals need to be used. If the object is placed with its leading faces at an angle to the picture plane, measurements are required to be laid off which are not obtained directly by measuring any line of the object itself, two such measurements being required for every point. While this method involves an excessive amount of labor when employed exclusively on any drawing, it is of great value in connection with other methods, in