1889 Boston Physical Training Conference Reunion

    A conference in the interest of physical training was held at Huntington Hall, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, on Friday and Saturday, November 29 and 30, 1889.  William T. Harris, United States commissioner of Education, presided.  HG #1 recently held a reunion in which participants relived the event.   In his opening address, Dr. Harris said:

We open this morning a Conference devoted to the consideration of physical exercises for the development of the body.  Physical training, I take it, is a part of the subject of hygiene in its largest compass.  We wish to discuss physical training in view of hygiene, and to avoid, if we can, all narrow interpretation of our subject.  The advantage of such a Conference as this is that extremes come together; and, by comparison of views, each one learns to supplement his own deficiencies.  We shall all be delighted to find new phases of the subject.  Hygiene wishes to make the most of the body for human purposes,--not for animal purposes, but for human purposes.  Hygiene includes several departments, of which physical training is one. 
    I shall define physical training as the conscious or voluntary training of the muscular side of our system, which is the special side under the control of the will.  Of course we understand that the vital processes go on without the will, and that this is an advantage,--it is better that they should remain involuntary.  Of course the voluntary system has relations to the involuntary system, and this is one of the first questions which have been considered by persons who have thoroughly studied physical training.  What can we do with our wills?  What can we do with our muscles that shall help on the vital processes and develop them?  This is a deep subject.  It should be the first which attracts the attention of persons interested in physical education, and it should be also the last one.  We ask what we can do by the action of our wills in the matter of developing the muscles of the chest, of the legs, and of the arms, and inquire what are the relations of the muscle-action to digestion and sleep and such matters.  We have not yet probed these subjects to the bottom, nor have we ascertained the fundamental relations of the voluntary to the involuntary functions in diseases conditions.  We are continually finding some new phases, and I suppose the medial profession discover more new facts in relation to this than persons specially interested in physical training alone.  Physicians discover cases in which some oversight in regard to will-training has related in interfering more or less with the involuntary processes, so that the latter have been retarded, thus injuring some of their functions.  We all acknowledge the importance of discovering and settling the limits between these two processes and defining all the relations between the involuntary vital processes and the conscious voluntary movements, and the transition of these voluntary movements into involuntary ones again through the principle of habit.  The exercise of the muscles by voluntary effort calls into action the higher nervous motor-centers of the body and brain.  That is to say, physical training such as is advocated by us relates especially to the will, and therefore to the very highest nerve-centres of the physical system.  This reveals its relation to rest and recreation.  Now, when one, for instance, is studying science or art or literature or any school studies, he is exercising these same high nerve-centres.  Let him pass from study to one of these systematic physical exercises, and he does not get the required rest.  It is not rest and repose form the exercise of these higher never-centres, at least.  Of course all of our specialists in physical training know that it is not a relief from will-tension, and the question remains: In how far is such exercise as that valuable?  In what way is it a relief?  Those who put forward theories of physical exercise and training have their views with regard to this, and the opinions of different individuals vary.  I take it that one of the most important results of this Conference will be the adjusting of differences of opinion with regard to this point,--in how far the use of the muscles by the will can afford rest and recreation from studies and from sedentary occupations, and in how far they will serve so well as free play.  We all know the difference between play and work.  In our play, caprice governs, and there is real purpose for the will.  But in work the will takes the body and the mind and puts them under forms proscribed by others or under such forms as it has adopted for itself tin its rational hours.  Its action in work is as much inhibitory and holding back as it is spontaneous and free exercise.  But play is not inhibitory.  Play has its use in education.  We are discovering more and more how play is an exceedingly important function; that it is the source of the development of individuality through spontaneity.  The individual through play learns to know, to command, to respect himself, and to distinguish between his own impulses and inclinations and those of others.  Great strength and individuality grows from play.  Nations that postpone play until maturity fail in this respect.  In China it is said that old men of sixty fly kites.  In this country boys of twelve or fifteen fly kits; but there aged men love to do it; and children do not feel the same interest in play in china as they do here
    These considerations. With regard to the relation of the voluntary culture of the body to the involuntary, the relation of the muscles to the vital organs, have been receiving much attention in the new physical education; the old physical thought the muscular education was all that was necessary to the training of the body, and this view prevailed here up to about the year 1860.  The new physical education began with the work of Dr. Hartwell at Amherst, and was followed by Dr. Sargent in the Hemenway Gymnasium at Cambridge, Dr. Hartwell at the Johns Hopkins, and their coworkers in the various colleges and universities.  The student now studies this problem broadly, and focuses his attention on the relation of the voluntary to the involuntary, and tries to discover whereby the vital organs,--the lungs, the heart, the stomach, all the digestive organs, the kidneys,--in short, how all the functions that are involuntary in their action may be assisted and influenced by voluntary action and motion.  The old gymnastic did not pay attention enough to this relation of exercise to the vital organs to discover its negative effects.  It did not determine the limits of muscular training.  In the case of calisthenics, for example, the will-power is called into play, and it is no relief from the strain on the brain to go from the study of arithmetic or from the concentration of attention on the work in recitation to the performance of physical manoeuvres that demand close attention to the teacher who gives the signal for the callisthenic exercises.  A very powerful exercise of the will is demanded for calisthenics, whereas free play (not systematic games) is rest for the will.  The recess spent in play in the schoolyard is a great rest and refreshment.  I mention this because there has been a movement throughout the country, commencing long ago in Evansville, Ind., to do away with the recess.  A superintendent who had given much time to studying the moral development of children came to believe that the recess is the cause or the means of a great deal of immorality, and that by abolishing it he would bring the pupil more under the control of the teacher, thereby increasing the moral hold on the pupil.  That movement spread to various places in this country.  Rochester for a long time had no recess.  This abolishing of the recess has led our conservative educators who hold their faith in the old regulation to look with suspicion on this experiment, and to try to discover in what forms there is apparent a physical reaction, and in what forms there are counter-movements on the part of physicians and others, tending to mould public opinion.  
   
I hope that the papers and discussions will elaborate and settle these questions which naturally arise in our minds.  I have the pleasure of introducing as the first speaker Dr. Edward M. Hartwell, of Johns Hopkins University, who will speak on the nature of physical training and the best means of securing its ends.

The Nature of Physical Training and the Best Means of Securing it Ends
Edward Mussey Hartwell, Ph.D., M.D.

The German System

HOME