archismojapan - Technical Education技術教育

Engineering Institution : Technical Education under the Public Works in Early Meiji Japan

partly based on author's paper of same tile presented to AIJ Transaction, February 2017.

工学寮：明治初期工部省による技術教育日本建築学会計画系論文集2017年2月号掲載

Updated in April 10, 2023 for <Chapter 1, 1-1, (2)>

序PREFACE

・別項で明らかにしたように、工部省はエドモンド・モレルによってPublic Worksと構想され、もともと生活や生産のための社会基盤整備を担う部局であった。それにもかかわらず、明治政府内では「百工勧奨」を職務とする部局として発足し、具体的には近代技術を日本に導入し、定着させることを目的に、技術者養成から建造/製造実務までを担った。本来、土木寮が社会基盤整備に大きな役割を果たすべきだったが、工部省が発足して一月後、土木寮は大蔵省に移管された。

・工学寮はその技術者養成を担うために工部省中に創設され、具体的には技術学校の運営を担った。この学校は部局改組とともに、工学校、工部学校、工部大学校などと呼び名が代わっていった。学科構成とカリキュラムから建造/製造の実務技術者を要請しようとしたことが分かり、工部省内部局の

その一学科にCivil Engineeringを置いた。

それは技術立国日本の礎を築き、多くの技術者を養成していった。しかしながら、この部局は、工学校、工部学校、工部大学校と混同され、その発足経緯から運営過程については不明なままである。

・この技術学校は現在の財務省と文部省が占める虎ノ門の土地にあった(Fig.2, 3)。工部大学校跡碑は、現在、千代田区指定文化財になっており、その理由書は誰が書いたのか、実によくできている。

College Site at present工部大学校跡地は現在文科省庁舎が建つ

Technical School工学寮小学校校舎、1873年当時＠MVA.

Emblem of Imperial College of Engineering, 1877.工部大学校紋章

Design of Monument of the College工部大学校記念碑.国会図書館

Present Monument現在の工部大学校跡碑

Edmund Morel.エドモンド･モレル

Ito Hirobumi.伊藤博文.MVA.

Yamo Yozo. 山尾庸三.MVA.

Hayashi Tadasu. 林董.MVA.

要約

工部省はその建置とともに、省内で必要となる各分野の日本技術者の養成を始め、彼らが日本の近代化を一手に担っていったことはよく知られている。しかし、この技術学校がいったいどのように考案され、またどのように組織され、さらにどのように動き出しかのかについては実証的に明らかにされていない。これまで考えられているのは、(1) 工部省設立当時から山尾庸三は技術者養成に熱心であり、(2) 岩倉使節団副使としてロンドンに滞在した伊藤博文がヒュー・マセソンにこの教育機関の教師任用の協力依頼を行い、(3) グラスゴー大学のウィリアム・ランキン教授からヘンリー･ダイアーを校長とする人事案が提案され、そして、(4) ダイアーがすばらしい技術学校を作り上げてくれたというものである。しかし、これは証拠に乏しく、工部大学校卒業生が後から振り返って作り上げた＜神話＞である。すべて必然的に物事が進んだように描かれており、教育と行政の経験のない山尾庸三が一人では技術学校を作り出すことは無理であり、また、大学を卒業したばかりで教育及び実務経験のない24歳のダイアーが、都検として自らの頭脳だけで「工学校学則･教育課程」を魔法のようにひねり出したとは考えられない。

もう一つは校舎建物についても不明なことだらけで、技術学校最初の教育施設であった小学校校舎や生徒館は一体誰がどのように設計したのか分かっていない。次いで建設される大学校校舎はボアンヴィルの設計であることは間違いないが、24歳の若手建築家が世界的にまだ存在しなかった工学教育専用校舎をいったいどのように設計したのかはもまったく分かっていない。

ちょっと考えれば、このような疑問がいくつもわくはずなのに、これまでまったく解明されてこなかった。『旧工部大学校史料･同付録』や『明治工業史･建築』などの内容を再度子細に吟味し、既往研究を俯瞰して、問題点を明確にする。その上で、新たに見いだされた設立に関わった人物の記録を参考に、工学校大学校･工部大学校の発足と始動までにどのようなことがあったのを議論する。結論とすれば、多分の幸運に恵まれ裏で働いた人たちの努力が実を結んだと言うことである。

すなわち、山尾はモレル提案の工部省設置を後押しはしたが、その建置が決まった当初は造船部門の頭を希望していた。モレルに教導部（工学寮）の重要性を説得されてから、その頭に適任者がいないこともあって自ら工学頭になることにした。工学校は小学校と大学校から構成され、まず小学校の開校を1872年9月に予定し、モレルは自らのチャンネルで教師団の雇用を進め、山尾はマクヴェインを雇い校舎建設を始めさせた。マクヴェインは測量師長であったが、工部省営繕技師長も兼務することになった。モレルが急逝し、小学校教師団雇用は頓挫し、山尾は新たな協力者を探さなければならなかった。ここでマクヴェインのお陰で、1871年半ばに山尾はヒュー・マセソンと再び連絡を取り合うようになり、自らの窮状を知らせた。マセソンが工学校の教師団任用に協力してくれることが分かり、岩倉使節団副使として渡航中の伊藤博文に知らせ、彼は1872年7月に正式にマセソンに業務委託をした。マセソンは元グラスゴー大学教授で友人のルイス･ゴードンに相談したところ、同大学の後任を勤めていたランキン教授を紹介された。ランキン教授は、1860年代末に同大学に工学部を設置しようと腐心しており、その時、ランキンのもとでヘンリー･ダイアーは学生として工学教育論を研究していた。背景には、この時期、イギリス政府がインド植民地公共事業局向けに実践的技術者を養成することに決め、どのような教育機関にすべきか議論していた。この政府委員にランキン教授も入っており、彼は独立した技術者養成機関を新たに作るのではなく、既存の大学に工学部の設置を提案していたのである。結局これは成功せず、イギリス政府は「インド工学校」の新設を決め、ランキンが工学部新設のために予定していた教育課程案と教師たちは行き場を失った････かに見えたが、そこに日本政府の工学校設立の話しがマセソンから寄せられ、これらをそっくり日本に送り出すことにした。意図的であったかは別にして、結果的そうなった。この話しが進んでいる頃、ランキンは重篤な状態にあり、1872年暮れに亡くなった。明治政府はなんという幸運に恵まれたのであろうか。

小学校開校のために小学校校舎（後に博物館に改装される）、生徒館（宿舎と学習室）、教師館の設計と建設は、測量師長であったマクヴェインが担った。マクヴェインがこの大きな仕事を成し遂げられたのは、親戚であるグラスゴーの大建築家キャンベル･ダグラスの支援によるものであった。1872年12月にはダグラスから若手建築家のチャールズ･ボアンヴィルが派遣されてきて、それ以後、ボアンヴィルが一手に工学寮工学校の設計と施工監理を行った。

1873年7月に教師団が到着し、同年11月に講義を開始したが、小学校と生徒館の完成は間に合わず、それまで工部省大和屋敷に残されていた旧主屋を仮校舎とした。1874年3月に小学校校舎が完成すると、ボアンヴィルは引き続きから大学校校舎（本館となった）の建設に取りかかった。ボアンヴィルはダイアーやエアートンらの教師団と議論を重ねながら、科学技術教育に必要な実験、実習、実演などの授業をスムーズに行えるように、教室、設備、装置などのデザインを決めていった。このが建物が完成するとイギリスの学術学会や雑誌で最も進んだ科学技術教育用施設として紹介され、その種の建築デザインの手本とされた。

このように多分の幸運に恵まれ、さらに山尾（と伊藤）の無尽蔵な支援のもとで、世界で最も優れた教師陣、教育課程、そして校舎施設が完成し、そこで学んだ卒業生が優秀でないわけがない!!!。明治日本の技術発展の原動力になったのは当然のこと!!!そんなことを考えると、現在の日本の教育はなんとひどいものか。

ENGLISH SUMMERY

By strong recommendation of Edmund Morel, chief engineer employed for railway construction, the Meiji government decided to set up Ministry of Public Works in December 1870. However, there was a misunderstanding between the government leaders and Morel, as the government leaders wanted to promote engineering for industrialization, while Morel oriented to development of social infrastructure/public works. Foreign engineers had to be hired by the ministry for the time being, but soon would be replaced by Japanese engineers. So, Public Works took responsibility for Japanese engineers' education and training too, and would establish engineering institution. Yozo Yamao, acting vice minister, endeavored to found the Engineering Institution and Survey Department under Public Works in 1871, and became head of both departments.

Engineering Institution was intended to train young Japanese to engineer and technician by various programmes. The most complete professional training programme was by Engineering College supplemented by School. According to 1871 Regulation of Engineering College, young Japanese would be taught by British teaching staffs and the College would be open in September 1872. Colin Alexander McVean was re-employed by Public Works not only as chief surveyor but also chief manager of building division, and soon started up design and construction of first several buildings for Engineering College; School Building, Student Hall and Dormitory and Teacher's Residences. Morel as long as he lived, endeavoured to recruit proper teaching staffs through his connection, probably King's College. Eventually this initial recruitment of the teaching staffs failed, and Y. Yozo had to find another channel to hire the teaching staffs.

When McVean met Yamao around mid-1871, he first suspected Yamao's carrier in Glasgow, and had to ask his father to check up what Yamao really did in Glasgow through Colin Brown. This Brown was a close friend of Hugh Matheson, and provided lodging for Yamao during his technical training period at Napier Shipyard and Anersonian College. Brown and Matheson were so glad to hear that Yamao was appointed as leading technocrat in charge of engineering affairs of new government. Yamao reopen communication with Matheson by end of 1871 through McVean's effort, and surely asked him advise for foundation of the Engineering College. In August 1872, when H. Ito visited to London as vice Ambassador of Iwakura Mission, he officially commissioned Matheson to find proper teaching staffs for the College.

According to McVean's diaries, Campbell Douglas, an architect of Glasgow helped McVean very much in term of technical matters and appointment of young architect. Douglas kindly recommended his talented assistant, Charles Alfred Chastel de Boinville for appointment of architect of Public Works. As McVean left Japan for home in 1873, de Boinville went on supervision of construction of buildings, even redesigned.

Matheson asked Lewis Gordon and William Rankine for appointment of teaching staffs and arrange College outline, and Rankine recommended brilliant young scholar, Henry Dyer for the post of principal. Dyer has known what Rankine really intended to do in Glasgow University and failed, and fully realized what his master Rankine did not do there instead.

In 1874, design of College Main Building was commissioned to Boinvile, who was only 24 years old without experience of such big project. Therefor he might ask his previous masters, Campbell Douglass or William Henry White. It was marvelous baroque style architecture with some renaissance feature. According to Dyer's Report, de Boinville successfully designed the the main building with discussions with Dyer and Edward Ayrton, professor of natural physics.

However, Edward Robins, a British architect specializing room design of science and technical educations in 1870s-1880s, claimed partial credit of the main building of ICE as he offered his plan of natural physics laboratory to Ayrton. Robins has been a friend of Ayrton, and later collaborated for design of Finsberry Technical College. Robins introduced design of ICE Main Building into the British academic societies as one of the design for science and technical educations in world. Although Meiji Japan's technocrats did not intend to have such splendid buildings for ICE, de Boinville and Dyer built the most complete facility for science and technical education at Tokyo with full support of Yamao.

de Boinville after retirement from Meiji Government, he found his architect's office together with his brother and Robins in the name of Robins and de Boinville Brothers, architect and surveyor at Victoria Mansion in 1882. After Robins left partnership next year, de Boinville Brothers joined design competition of Buttersea Polytechnic, and selected as one of the four first place designs. Thomas Roger Smith's design was the second place. Actually, it is known at all what happened to de Boinville brothers after this, bankrupted according to McVean's 1888 Diary.

PREFACE: Previous Understandings and Issues既往の理解と問題点

1.Previous Studies and Source/Reference既往研究と資料

(1)Previous Studies既往研究

・三好信浩 (1981), 日本工業教育成立史の研究, 262-290頁.

・Benjamin Duke (2009), The Imperial University of Engineering, The History of Modern Japanese Education, 1872-1890, Rutgers University Press, pp.172-181.

・Olive Checkland (2001), Working at their Profession, Japanese Engineers in Britain before 1914,

2. SOURCE資料

(1) 二次資料Primary Source

・『工部省沿革報告』大蔵省、1889年

・『𦾔工部大学校史料･同付録』、1931年

『𦾔工部大学校史料･同付録』を編集したとき、参考になるのは『工部省沿革報告』しかなく、それに初期卒業生の記憶をつけたしたに過ぎない。『工部省沿革報告』は公文書をもとに書かれたわけではなく、多数の誤謬がある。

(2) 一次資料：公文書

・工部省については『工部省沿革報告』、工学寮については『𦾔工部大学校史料･同付録』が唯一の資料と信じられ、その事案に関する記録（一次資料）の掘り起こしは行われてこなかった。工部省については柏原宏紀氏が新たな考察を進められたが、工学寮と工部大学校についてはまだである。

・上に挙げた二次資料は必ずしも公文書に基づいてまとめられたものではない。特に創設に関する記述は多くは伝聞に寄っている。

・以下は筆者がつい最近発見した最重要公文書である。太政類典や大隈文書などの発掘が必要である。

・太政類典明治5年2月14日工部省学業技術ニ長スル者数名ノ選挙セントス、其周旋ヲ英国人ヒウ・マセソンニ託ス

工部省伺

一．工学技都検一人

一．同小学校教師六人

一．勧工寮都検一人

一．同助一人

一．長崎造船所校長一人

一．同助一人

一．同所製作所校長一人

一．同助一人

一．活字製作技術方一人

右は既に申上候通工学校其他御開相成候ニ付キハ教師校長等英人御雇入ノ責ニ候処先般伊藤工部太輔亜欧各国ヘ被差遣候ニ付幸ヒ於英国学業技術などニ長侯者相選御雇入ノ筈にて同人出発前談判致シ置候儀ニ有之尤旅費支度寮等ハ当省定額金ノ内ヲ以テ相賄候積ニ有之候、且右教師等相雇い候ニ付テハ英国ニハ人選雇入方等周旋引受候者無之候ニハ百事不都合ニ付ヒウ、マセソン儀ハ兼テ伊藤博文見知の者ニ候、間前條選挙方其外用達申付候へハ此上工学校其他学術成業ノ者実地ノ修業トシテ彼国ヘ被差遣候節前書ヒウ・マセソン方ニテ引受及周旋候 2月12日工部

※『𦾔工部大学校史料･同付録』をもとにして、既往研究では1872年8月に伊藤博文(工部大輔、岩倉使節団副使)がロンドンでヒウ･マセソンに工学校教師斡旋を頼んだことになっているが、上記公文書によればすでに明治5年2月14日(1872年3月22日)時点でヒウ･マセソンが協力してくれることになっていた。後は、伊藤工部大輔が公式に依頼するだけだったことがわかる。発信者は山尾庸三であることは明白で、工部省各寮にイギリス人顧問と助手を配置しようとして事がわかる(aded in May 22, 2020)。

3.Fundamental ad Issues基本事項と問題点

(1) Engineering Institution Seen for "Report of Outline of Public Works"『工部省沿革報告』にみる「工学寮」

明治3年

・明治三年四月九日山尾庸三を民部兼大蔵権大丞に任じ横須賀製鉄所の事務を処理せしむ。

・同年十月二十日工部省を置かれ二十日にに至て横須賀横浜両製鉄所を其所管に帰し民部権大丞山尾庸三工部権大丞に転任し之を掌理する故の如し。

明治4年

・明治四年二月八日横須賀製鉄所修船架築造の工竣るを告げ是日創開の式を挙行し大納言及び参議中、伝習生徒を養成する。

・同年四月七日工部権大丞山尾庸三長崎に至り同所製鉄所及び其所轄小菅修船架を同県庁より受領す。

・同年同月九日横須賀及び長崎製鉄所を造船所横須賀製鉄所を製作所と改称の旨を布告せらる。

明治5年

・五月三日工部大丞兼燈台頭佐野常民工部省三等出仕ニ補シ燈台頭ヲ兼ヌル故ノ如シ。

・五月二十五日工部三等出仕佐野常民ニ墺国博覧会理事官ヲ兼ネシム

・六月四日工学、勘工、鉱山、鉄道、燈台、造船、電信、製鉄、製作ノ九寮及ヒ測量司ノ職務事務章程ヲ禀定ス

明治6年

明治7年

・明治七年五月一日工学寮雇都検英人「ダイエル」に当所工場の監督を兼務せしむ。蓋し当時各種の工場を以て工学生徒の実験場と為すに由る。明治10年

明治8年

明治9年

明治10年

・明治十年一月十一日官制改革工部省中の諸寮を廃し更に工作局を置き𦾔工学製作二寮の事務を継続し工学校を工部大学校と改称す。大書記大歳圭介本局の長と為る。

・一月十一日官制改革各省中閣僚ヲ廃シ便宜局ヲ置キ亦大少丞以下ノ官ヲ廃シ更ニ奏任正権大少書記官判任。製作工学二寮ノ事務ヲ工作局ニ。大鳥圭介ヲ工作局長

674頁工作局附製鉄、造船、勧工、製作ノ四寮

・本局は明治十年一月の創置にして𦾔製作、工学二寮の事務を承続し以て長崎、兵庫、赤羽、深川、品川の五分局及び工部大学校を管理す。

明治15年

・同十五年八月工部大学校を本省の直属と為し同十六年二月赤羽耕作分局を廃し該所を海軍省に付し

(2) Public Building Office 『工部省沿革報告』に見る「営繕課」

営繕課

本課の事務は明治元年会計事務局を置き之を掌管するに創始し同年四月会計事務局を廃し会計官を置き該官中に営繕司を置き二年七月会見官を廃し大蔵省を建ての日亦た之れに隷し八月本司を廃し其事務を民部省土木司に併属す。三年七月再び本司を置き大蔵省に属す。四年八月改めて寮となし二等に班し十月之を廃し工部省所轄の土木寮と併せて之を大蔵省土木寮に被管す。七年一月土木寮を内務省に属するを以て之れに随伴す。同月土木寮中の営繕事務を分離して工部省に属し製作寮の所管と為し八年六月製作寮より分離して本省中に営繕局を置き二等に班す。十年一月寮を廃し営繕局を置き十六年二月局を廃し営繕課を置き

明治七年一月二十二日内務省土木寮中の営繕事務を本省に属せらる○二十八日営繕事務を製作寮に属し同僚中に営繕課を設置し製作頭平岡通義之を監理す○

(3) Survey Office『工部省沿革報告』にみる「測量司」

工部大学校附測量司

明治四年八月十四日工学寮及び測量司を置かれ共に一等に班し工部大丞山尾庸三工学頭兼測量正に任す。乃ち工学寮測量司を併せ其庁舎を虎ノ門内𦾔延岡藩邸に設く。是より先工学を解明するは厚生利用の道を立る基礎にして当時急務たり。而して是を勧奨するは本省の責任たるを以て工学校を興し之を大学小学の二校に分かち外国教師を聘し以て学生を教育し成績を後年に期せんと欲し又其速成を要する為め現時工業に従事せる官吏及び当時各部局修技学（燈台造船電信等の部を参看すべし）の工術見習生を選抜し質問生或は伝習生となし之を海外に航遣し各科を研究せしめんと欲し共に其の概則を定めて之を太政官に稟議し其の裁可を得以て之に至る○二十七日工部省出仕松尾辰五郎（後ち清慎と改む）工学助に選任す。

十月二十七日測量司東京府下を測量せんが為め仮に皇居内の富士見櫓を所管し、該所に測量標旗を樹立す（三角形の紅白布を平面に縫合し白布に工学を墨書す）

十一月八日測量司東京府下測量の為区要の地に目標として建置する旗章又施業の際障害となる林藪等は相当の価金を給し之を伐除する等を東京府及び傍近の各県に告知す

十二月七日工学助松尾清慎測量正を代理し工部省出仕村田重区（後文夫と改む）工学権助に選任す

明治五年正月造営掛を置き雇英人「アンデルソン」を造家師となし小学校及び生徒館教師館等を経始す。本条の建築六年十二月に至て竣工し小学校を以て仮に大学専門科の教場に充つ。

三月二日工学校大小学の二校に分かち共に私費生徒を教育するの略則を禀定し之を頒布す。小学校は本都市七月十五日に至て開校する旨を併て告知す

四月二十六日工学助松尾清慎卒す工学寮出仕河野通信（後ち越知通信と改む）工学権助に選任す。

五月四日兼ねて頒布せし工学校略則中載するする所の小学の開校外国教師渡航遅延の故を以て之を延期し更に其旨を布告す。是月測量司技術一等見習小川資源飯塚義光等を英国に派して留学せしむ。資源義光内務省の管轄に属す。本校に入学す。

六月二十七日工学寮及び測量司ノ事務章程を稟定す。十月測量司一等見習佐々木和三郎を英国に派して留学背しむ。

明治六年三月八日工学権助河野通信命を奉じて英国に渡航す。工学権助村田重区測量正を代理す。是月測量司一等見習小林八郎を英国に派して留学背しむ。内務省に移り、その後本校に入学。

七月三十日既に頒布せる工学略則を廃し大学校の私費生を官費静と為し直ちに該当科目に因て之を試験し入校を許可するものとし仮に学課並び諸規則を定めて之を頒布す

十月十三日測量司を分離し馬場先門内の旧衆議院に移置す。十四日測量司測量技術通学生規則を定めて之を頒布す。

明治七年一月九日測量司を内務省の所管に転属す。十日工学権助河野通信任命を終えて英国より替える十三日村田文夫本館を罷め測量正に選任す十四日河野通信本館を罷め測量正に転任す。

明治八年四月三十日入学試験に合格背ル生徒五十三名に入校を許可す。六月二十五日工部省出仕大鳥圭介工学権頭に遷任す。

明治十五年九月二日工部少書記官河野通信本校出勤幹事心得を命じられる

(4) Curriculum and Regulation学則とカリキュラム

・明治7（1874）年2月20日

工学寮学課並諸規則

工部省届 7年2月20日

當省工学寮入学式並学課類則明治六年七月中及び御届候處今般別冊ノ通確定府懸ヘ及び布達候間此段御届申候也七年二月二十日

工部省布達

明治六年七月中第六号ヲ以テ及布達置候當省工学寮入学式並学課略則今般別冊ノ通確定候條此旨更ニ布達候事七年二月廿日別冊

工部省布達

本年二月中第六号ヲ以テ及布達候當省工学寮学課並諸規則第三十五条左ノ通改正候條此旨更ニ布達候事七年六月廿三日

生徒観衣ハ官費ヲ以テ支給シ整頓ノ具ハ総テ費タルヘシ

工部省届七年十二月二十五日

本年二月中第六号ヲ以テ及布達置候當省工学寮学課並規則別冊ノ通改正候條此段御届申進候也七年十二月廿五日

工部省布達東京府

本年二月中大六号ヲ以テ及び布達置候工学寮学課並ニ諸規則別冊ノ通リ改正候條此旨更ニ布達候事七年十二月拾論に治

工部省布達東京府

工部省布達

當省工学寮課並諸規則第八條中入寮雛形ノ内府県知事令参事へ

工部省布達八年一月二十日

昨明治七年十二月中

工部省届八年九月三日

昨七年十二月中

同省達東京府神奈川県

昨七年十二月中

工部省布達

工部省届け旧年十一月十日

昨八年九月中御届け申し候當省工学寮学課並諸規則今般別冊ノ通致改正候條此段御届申候也九年十一月十日

工部省届十年五月五日

昨九年十一月中御届申候當省工学学課並諸規則今般別冊朱書ノ通改正候條此段御届申進候也十年五月五日

工部省届十年十月三日

工部大学校学課並諸規則別冊ノ通改正候條此段御届申進候也十年十月三日

(5) Points of Argument議論点

Chapter I. Foundation of Public Works and Engineering Institution工部省の創設

1. Proposal of Foundation of Public Works Division「建築局」「工学院」「工部省」

1-1. エドモンド･モレルの「建築局」E. Morel.

-This was argued in my previous article entitled "Reconsideration of Foundation of Public Works (AIJ Transaction Jan. 2015).

詳細については<拙稿『工部省創設再考（日本建築学会計画系論文集2015年1月号）』。「建築」の原語は?

-April, 19, 1870, E. Morel, a chief Engineer of Railway Construction, proposed railway construction scheme to Hirobumi Ito in charge of railways in the Meiji Government

鉄道建設主任技師のエドモンド・モレルは伊藤博文に対して鉄道建設計画書を提出する。

-May, 28, 1870, Morel revised his scheme to Ito in form of proposal of the foundation of Board of Public Works

モレルは鉄道建設をより確実に行うために「鉄道建設計画書」を修正し、それを「建築局設置の提案(英語原文は発見されていない)」として伊藤に提出する。

1-2. 伊藤博文の「工部院」Ito Hirobumi

-June, 6, 1870 (May 18, Meiji 3), Ito translated Morel's proposal and submitted it to Shigenobu Ookuma, Minister of Treasury, and Ookuma assured to realize the proposal

伊藤は『工部院建置之議』として書き直して大蔵卿の大隈重信に提出し、大隈はそれを承認した。この中に技術学校も創設すべしとの提案があるが、その文言の検討は十分に行われていない。たとえば「スクール、エンジニア建築学校」とは？

-October, 1870 (November, 1870), Ito leave for USA to investigate western financing.

独立省庁として工部院を設置するか、民部省下に工部寮として設置するかので、大久保、大隈、山尾らで激しい駆け引きが演じられた。伊藤はアメリカ合衆国へ貨幣制度の調査のために外遊することになり、その間誰が工部院創設の支援者であったのか？

1-3. 「工部省ヲ創置」の決定Government Decision of Foundation of Kobu-sho

・明治3年10月20日『工部省ヲ創置』廟議決定。しかし、組織はまだ固まっておらず、教導部（技術者養成部）はなかった。

・山尾庸三Yamao Yozo

-What month? 19, Meiji 3 or 4. "My Silly Consideration (on formation of Kobu-sho)" proposed by Yamao for Ookuma. 大隈宛の山尾の「愚行」

山尾は大隈宛に『愚行』をしたため、自己の工部省組織と人事案を開陳した。作成月は明示されていないが、『工部省ヲ創置』廟議決定直前と考えられる。山尾は造船部門の担当を所望し、教導部門は吉井を推薦していた。

-October 20, Meiji 3 (December 12, 1870), Release of Government Decision on. 設置の決定

モレルと山尾による教導部設置の要求Urging of Start-up of Kobu-sho by Morel and Yamao.

-April, 1871."Proposal of Foundation of Engineering School" by Yamao for Ookuma on 大隈宛の山尾「工学校創設の提案」

Chapter II. Organization of Engineering Institution (Kogaku-ryo).工学寮の設置

2-1. モレルの「教導部」Edmund's Proposal of Engineering Institution

(1) モレルの「教導部」Morel's Idea of Engineering Institution

鉄道建設技師長のエドモンド・モレルは、迅速に社会基盤整備と工業化を進めるために、一人の大臣の下に技術関連現業事業を一つにまとめるることを伊藤博文に提案した。その組織は「建築局」から「工部院」へと名前を変えながら、そして明治3年10月20日、工部省としての開設が決まった。しかしながら、その工部省には、旧民部省鉄道や電信といった現業部門に加えて「教導部」を併設すべき事であった。しかしながら、

モレルのは教導部は、工部省が大勢の御雇外国人を雇い続けるのではなく、日本人技術者･技能者を早急に育成することを目的にしていた。外国人の力に長く頼ることは国家独立を揺るがすと考えていた。

(2) インド工学校の存在

・モレルはイギリス政府がインド植民地公共事業局技術養成のためにロンドン郊外に新しく技術学校を創設しつつあることを知っていた。

工部省建置は決まったが、太政官が技術教導部を無視したために、再度伊藤博文と大隈重信にその設置を訴えた。しかし、伊藤は多忙で有り、

それには工学校制度、修技校制度、短期海外実務訓練制度などのプログラムを用意した。「教導部」は工部省始動時には「工学寮」として組織化され、工部省下の技術者･技能者を一手に育成訓練する役割を担っていた。少なくとも伊藤博文と山尾庸三の構想はそうであったが、鉄道寮、鉱山寮、測量司などの各寮司では独自に修技校を始め、工学寮には工学校制度だけが任されることになった。工学校は本来工部省に勤める技術者の育成を目的にしたはずであるが、他に技術者教育機関がなかっため、工部省から離れ、明治政府全体のテクノクラート、さらに明治産業界のマネージメント・エンジニアと役割を変えていった。

-Substantial Engineers' Training Programme in Japan--Technical College consisting of School and College, totally 5-7 years.工学校

-Full Training Programme in Foreign Country--長期海外留学

-Short Term Training Programme in Foreign Country--短期海外留学

-Intensive Training Programme in Japan--Vocational School修技校

前述したように、1872年4月3日（明治5年2月26日）に銀座一帯が焼失し、同年4月5日、山尾の指示でマクヴェインらは復興計画作りを始めた注52）。ジョイナー、ライマー･ジョーンズ、ウィルソンらと7日間で測量を終え、またスメドレー注53）を呼び寄せて建物の設計図面を描かせ、さらにジョイナーと2人では街路配置図を作成した。復興計画案をまとめると、村田文夫注54）に翻訳させ注55）、4月21日（明治5年3月14日）、工部省でその説明を行ったが、その後どうなったのかについては日記に記述はない。いわゆる銀座煉瓦街計画に関する既往研究注56）と合致する内容であり、付け加えるとすれば、焼失地区を実測調査した上で街路計画と建物計画を作成したのは唯一マクヴェインらであり、ウォートルスとブラントンの案は概念的なものにならざるを得なかった。

工部省は、明治4年8月14日に10寮１司の構成で動き出したが、同年10月8日にはその１つの土木寮を大蔵省に移管させてしまい、明治5年1月18日に令達された工部省職制事務章程では9寮1司となり、社会基盤や公共建築の営繕を担当する部局はなかった。銀座大火の後、山尾は工学寮及び測量司の長として復興計画に関わる必要はなかったはずであるが、工部少輔の責務としてどうしても自らの指揮下の職員を総動員してやらなければならなかったのであろう。明治初期におけるこのような土木と営繕に関わる工部省と大蔵省のぎくしゃくした関係は、今後もっと解明されるべきことである。銀座復興は、山尾の命を受けマクヴェインは部局内外の技術者の力を借りて2週間余りで計画案をまとめ上げ、実施は叶わなかったが、大部分は大蔵省のウォートルスに引き継がれたと考えられる注57）。

工部省はモレルのPublic Worksの構想をもとに発足したにもかかわらず、編成過程の中でその中心部局の土木と営繕を失い、役割を新技術の導入に比重を移してしまうが、では、モレルの教導部と建築学校の構想はそのまま工学寮と工学校として実現したといえるのであろうか。教育体系は、その変遷を見る限り、小学校で基礎を修めた後、大学校で外国人教師によって理論と実技の両方を学ぶことになっており、就業年数に若干の差異は見られるが一貫性が存在する。また、学科制は工部学校構想になってはじめて登場し、工学校に引き継がれ、教育体系はしだいに具体化する過程が読み取れる。しかし、組織機構を見ると、モレル提案の教導部は、建築局長官「ミニストル」下の3部門の1つであったのに対して、工部省下の工学寮は他の現業部門と同列に位置づけられてしまった（Fig.8）。

(3) モレルの「建築学校」 Edmund Morel's Proposal of Engineering College

明治3年3月、鉄道建設技師長として雇用されたモレルは、伊藤博文から近代化の要は何かと訊かれ、「鉄道の建築、道路の補理、海港海岸の造築、灯明台、礦山等の緒件」を管轄する建築局を設置すべしと返答した。長官「ミニストル」の下に執事、会計、教導の3部門を置き、各部局は暫くは外国人を長とするが、「欧羅巴人の手を仮らずして事を遂る」ため、教導部は「百般の建築製造に熟練せるインゼニール」を自国で育成する任務が与えられた。教導部の実態は附属技術学校であり、「十七歳より十八歳位の少年数算測量究理及外国の語学等略学び得たる」者を「学術大学に送り五六年の間留学」させることにし、具体的に「東京或いは大阪に於いて、スクウル、インゼニール建築学校を創立する」ように説いた注9）。

「スクウル」はschoolであり、一方、「インゼニール建築学校」はengineering collegeとなり、前者は基礎教育の役割を担うものと考えられる。教育体制については、「学校首長たる者欧羅巴人2名日本人両3名蓋し欧人1名は学術教導を掌り今１人は職業上のことを掌る日本の教師は只戸外に出職業上のことを教ゆ」とされていた。「学術教導」とは理論であり、一方「職業上のこと」とは専門実務と考えられ、いくつの課目をどれだけの学生人数に教えるのかは定かではないが、5〜6年間にわたり教師5名程が教育を担うことになる。モレルの「建築局」構想は、「鉄道の建築、道路の補理、海港海岸の造築、灯明台、礦山等の緒件」といったpublic worksを担う公共事業局の創設であり、局下の学校は「百般の建築製造に熟練せるインゼニール」育成を目的としたengineering collegeであった。

モレルはこの技術学校構想においていったい何を参考したのであろうか。1860年代のイギリス政府にとって、インド省公共事業局にどのようにして大勢の技術者を供給するかが産学界を巻き込んで大問題になっていた。東インド会社は、1847年にニューデリー北部のルールキーにトマソン工学校（Thomason College of Civil Engineering）を開いたが、イギリス流の現場重視の徒弟制技教育を展開できず、能力のある技術者育成を達成できなかったといわれている。インドがイギリス政府の直接統治下なると、政府はインド省公共事業局のために本格的な技術者育成に動き出した。土木技術者学会の協力を得て、諸外国の工学教育機関を詳らかに調べ注10）、その提案を受けて1870年にロンドン北部のクーパー・ヒルに王立インド工学校（Royal Indian Engineering College、以後RIECと略す）を開いた注11）。これがイギリスにとっての初めての工科大学であり、当時の代表的技術雑誌『ビルダー（The Builder）』もその設立経緯を数回にわたって誌面で紹介しているので注12）、モレルはその存在を十分に知っていたと考えられる。RIECは基礎学力のある17歳から21歳の若者を受け入れ、3年間にわたり理論と実務を半年ごとに繰り返し学習した後、１年間社会で実地研修を経験し、そしてインド省公共事業局の採用試験を受けることになる。組織･カリキュラム等に関する工学校との比較は次稿で議論する。

(4) Morel's Kings's College Connectionモレルの友人たち

・モレルが1871年11月に亡くなる前、「建築学校」の教員を集めていた。当事、工部省が大きな予算を使って進めていたのが鉄道と灯台の建設であり、これらの公共事業を担うシヴィル・エンジニアを養成するため、インド工学校と同じように測量、製図、構造物、機械などを教える教員が必要だった。モレルの死去と前後してやってきたのがライマー・ジョンズとジョージ・イートンの二人で、モレルを含む三人はともにキングス・カレッジで「応用科学部Applied Science」で学んでいた。任用手続きはマクヴェインが行ったが、この二人がモレルの「建築学校」の最初期教員となるはずだった。モレルは機械や電気などのインストラクターの雇用も考えていたと思われるが、彼の死去ともに、山尾は別の協力者を探さねばならなかった。

Chapter III. Searching New Consultant After Morel's Death

(1) McVean's Connection to Colin Brownマクヴェインとコリン･ブラウン

マクヴェインは、ブラントンを技師長とする灯台建設技術者団の一員として幕末日本にやってきた。神子元島での灯台建設作業は過酷を極め、ブラントンの指揮のもとで業務を続けることは困難として、着任一年後の明治2年7月25日（1869年8月26日）、燈明台を辞職してしまう注24）。日本での鉄道建設を見越してヴァルカン鉄工所が横浜に進出してきており、そこに職を得て、家族ともども日本に留まることにした。山尾の名前はマクヴェインの日記や手紙類に頻繁に見いだすことができ、彼の父からの1870年11月15日（明治3年10月22日）付け手紙が現時点で確認できる限り最初のものである注25）。彼の父は、山尾という人物についてグラスゴー在住のコリン･ブラウンに照会したところ、「明治政府のリーダーにふさわしい人物なので、彼に会いに行き、ぜひ仕えるように」と息子に助言した。そうすると、1870年半ば頃にはマクヴェインは山尾と出会い、その人物にいたく関心を持つようになり、父にそのことを知らせたと考えられる。その後2回、山尾を支えるよう父から手紙が届き、マクヴェイン日記では1871年9月13日（明治4年7月29日）付けで工部省雇いになり、3週間程後に測量司測量師長に任用されたことになっており、日本側資料と合致する。

(2) Reunion of Yamao and Hugh Matheson山尾庸三とヒュー･マセソンの再会

このブラウンはヒュー・マセソンの友人であり、2カ年に渡る山尾のグラスゴー生活を支えてくれた人物である注26）。一方、マクヴェインの父はエジンバラ大学で哲学を修めた後、聖職に就き、終生アイオナ大聖堂の司教を勤めた。その長男として生まれたマクヴェインは13歳でエジンバラの公学校に入り、卒業とともに土木技術者の道を歩み始める。いくつかの土木技師事務所で実務研修を受け、その後測量を中心にした業務を経験した注27）。1865年から2年間、ブルガリアで鉄道建設に従事し、同時代の多くのイギリス人技術者と同じように海外志向をもっていたのであろう。灯台建設技術者として日本政府の任用が決まると、コーワン製紙所有者の末娘メアリー（Mary Wood Cowan）と結婚し、これが彼の人生の大きな転機となった。メアリーの長兄チャールズは工場経営と共に貴族院議員を、別の兄ジェームスはエジンバラ市長（1872~74）をそれぞれ勤め、姉の一人は大出版社のトーマス・カンスタブル（Thomas Constable）注28）と結婚し、また別の姉の娘はグラスゴーの建築家キャンベル・ダグラス（Archibald Campbell Douglas）注29）と結婚していた注30）。

(3) Maheson's Memory related to Japan's Engineering College工学寮創設に関するマセソンの記憶

妻のメアリーは姉妹･親戚と頻繁に文通をしており、マクヴェインが職務上の問題があればコーワン家を頼って支援を受けることができたはずであるが、これについては現時点の関係資料解読では断片的なことしか分からない。まず、義兄のカンスタブルは、19世紀半ばグラスゴー大学の初代工学教授であったルイス･ゴードン（Lewis D. B. Gordon）とは公私にわたる付き合いがあり、彼の逝去に際して『ゴードン回想録』を上梓している注31）。同回想録の中にヒュー・マセソンからの興味深い追悼文が寄せられており、要約するとマセソンは、1872年に旧知の日本人の中で工部大臣となった人物から技術学校設立の協力を求められ、最も信頼できるゴードンに相談したが、すでに彼はグラスゴー大学を辞していたので、代わりに同大学後任教授のウィリアム･ランキン（William J. M. Rankine）が紹介されたという内容である注32）。

マセソンは1882年のRoss shine Journal誌にも同じことを述べており注33)、明治5年8月（1872年9月頃）、伊藤博文が岩倉使節団副使として訪英した際に実際にマセソンに依頼したのであろう。しかし、すでに前年に出されていた「工部省学校ヲ設ク」と「工学校定則ノ概略」の中では学校の規模と課程がほぼ定まり、明治5年2月12日（1872年3月20日）には教師団の任用に目処がたち、明治5月7月15日（1872年8月28日）に開校することになっていた。そうすると、伊藤が明治5年8月にマセソンに会って、初めて技術学校教師団の雇用委託をしたのではなく、少なくともその半年前に委託していたことになる。あるいは、伊藤＝マセソンとは別のチャンネルがあったのかもしれない。

RIECの創設に際して、エジンバラ大学のジェンキン（Fleming Jenkin）とグラスゴー大学のランキンが調査委員会委員に選ばれ、この2人が1860年代のイギリスの工学教育に関して最も高い見識を持っていた。ランキンに依頼される前に、どのようにして技術学校の規模と課程が決められ、さらに校舎と寄宿舎の建築略図面が作成されたのであろうか。この点に関してマクヴェインの関与は現時点では明らかではないが、岩倉使節団が1872年9月にエジンバラのいたるところで大歓迎を受け、またコーワン家では製紙工場の視察後、驚くほど盛大な昼食会が催されたのは、まったくマクヴェイン夫妻のお陰であった注34）。また、後述するようにグラスゴーのダグラスは工学校校舎他の建設資材を日本に送り、さらに「腕利きの若い建築家」を派遣したことを考えると、彼が事前に略図面を提供し、マクヴェインと山尾を助けていた可能性は否定できない。

(5) Construction of Engineering College Buildings工学寮工学校校舎の建設

Chapter V. Process of Appointment of Teaching Staffs教師団任用の経緯

5-1. Attempt of Edmund Morel. エドモンド･モレルの試み

・明治3年10月20日「工部省建置」には教導部はなかったが、モレルはその設置を強く主張した。それが取り入れられ、明治4年4月には工部学校学則案が出された。技術者を外国に求めるのではなく、可及的速やかに日本人が担うことができるように。

・彼が学則案を作り、教師団の任用を進めていた。モレルの経歴からすれば、キングス･カレッジKing's Collegeの応用科学Applied Scienceの教授の誰かに支援を求め、開学を急いでいたのであろう。キングス･カレッジはスクールSchoolを併設していた。

・イギリスには、まだ実践的技術者を養成する工学部はなかったが、1871年になって長い議論の末にそのためのインド工学校が開学した。

・明治4年9月がモレルが急逝し、モレル主導の教員任用は頓挫し、山尾と伊藤は別のルートを探さなければならなかった。

5-2. Yamao's Approach to Hugh Matheson. 山尾によるマセソンへの依頼

1870年12月、工部省設置が決まり、山尾は引き続き造船部門の長を勤めるようと考えていた。ところが、モレルから教導部の重要性を説かれ、そちらにずっと傾倒していった。モレルが教師団任用を、山尾が校舎建設をそれぞれ担い、工学寮工学校開校を目指したが、モレルの急死によって、山尾は苦境に立たされる。誰に頼ればいいのか。そこにマクヴェインが登場し、山尾を再びスコットラントと結びつけてくれた。マクヴェインは1870年からヴァルカン鉄工所を自営するとともに、明治政府で測量事業を始める機会を待っていた。グラスゴーのコリン･ブラン宅に2年間下宿し、技術研修をしていた山尾の言葉の真偽。

マクヴェインは父親を通してコリン･ブラウンColin Brownと接触、このブラウンはアンダーソニアン・カレッジの音楽教師で、ヒュー・マセソンとの親友。山尾の消息を知ったブラウンとマセソンは大感激。

ヒュー・マセソンは、ジャーデン・マセソン商会Jarden & Matheson Co.創始者の一人のJames Mathesonの甥で、マセソン商会Matheson & Co.の取締役兼ジャーデン・マセソン商会役員を務めていた。彼の追想録によれば、大学は出ていなかったが、イギリスの宗教界、財界、文化芸術界で大変な人望のあった人物だった。山尾はロンドンに3年間、グラスゴーに2年間滞在し、その間マセソンの薫陶を受けたので、彼の人物像についてよく知っていたと思われる。

マセソン自身、工学に関心を持っていたわけではなかったが、技術者や教育者との親交があった。当時スコットランドは産業の中心地であり、エジンバラのフレミング・ジェンキンFlemming Jenkin、ルイス･ゴードンLewis Gordon、デビッド・スチブンソンDavid Stevenson、グラスゴーのWilliam RankineやThomsonと懇意にしており、さらに大出版社のThomas Constableとも親しかった。

山尾はグラスゴーのコリン・ブラウンColin Brownの許に下宿し、ネピア造船所で見習い研究を受けた。ブラウンはアンダーソン･カレッジの音楽教師で、マセソンの大親友であったから、山尾のグラスゴー滞在を準備してくれたのはマセソンであったことがわかる。ブラウンは山尾の目的をよく理解し、彼が仕事着で朝早く工場に出かけていき、夕方まで一生懸命仕事をし、敬虔なキリスト教徒として生活していたと語っている。

1871年になり、マクヴェインの仲介で山尾はブラウンとマセソンと再び文通するようになり、民部省権少丞Gon-sho-joとして横須賀製鉄所担当になったなどと近況を手紙で知らせた。それを聞いたブラウンは、Gon-sho-joとはBan-joと何らかの関係があるのかとマクヴェインに問い合わせている。音楽教師らしい発想である。

1871年10月にモレルが亡くなり、翌年9月に工学校を開校する計画に暗雲が漂い始めた。建物の建設はマクヴェインに担わせたが、肝心の教師団を雇用するためにはどうしても助言者が必要であった。既往研究では、1872年8月に伊藤博文がロンドンでマセソンに教師団雇用の便宜を提供してくれるように依頼したことになっているが、その1年前に山尾がマセソンと文通していることを考えると、山尾が窮状を伝え、教師団推薦を依頼していたと考える方が自然である。。

1872年8月に伊藤博文はロンドンでヒュー･マセソンに工学校教師団人選の依頼をしたのかIto's Request to Matheson on August 1872?

岩倉使節団に副使として同行した伊藤博文が、1872年8月頃、マセソンに会い、工学寮工学校の教師団派遣他の協力依頼をしたというもので、この出典は『旧工部大学校史料･同付録』に掲載された田辺朔郎とマセソンの以下の記事、

「副使の一人工部大輔伊藤博文は、明治5年8月英京倫敦滞在中に該随行員中の一人なる二等書記官林董を遣わして学校創設の事をジャーデン・マセソンに委嘱せり。是英一番商会ジャーデン・マセソンは伊藤副使が維新前は英国に渡航せし時其斡旋の労を執りたる縁故に因りしものなり（此事は明治33[1910]年大磯滄浪閣に於て田邊朔郎氏が伊藤枢密院議長より直接聴取したるところなり）」

"Several of my friends became ministers of the states and they requested me to assist them in founding at Tokei, the capital of Japan, an institution which would train young man for efficient service in the Public Work Department, which for the first time, was felt to be all important in the development of the country. This was very responsible commission, but I did not shrink from it, and having taken counsel with an eminent friend, now mo more, Prof. Lewis Gordon, I submitted the scheme of a college with Principal and half a dozen Professors, which I was in due time authorized to establish (Ross-shine Journal, Sept 1, 1882)."

マセソンはもう一つ別の記録を残している。

"I was request in 1872 by one of the number, who had become Minister of Public Works, to assist the Government to found at Yeddo a College of Civil and Mechanical Engineering. I was to select the professors, fix the scale of their salaries, arrange a programme of studies, and prosure all the necessary books and materials required for an institution which was designed to train a large body of Japanese youths for the service of their country in connection with public works (Memoir of Lewis Gordon, 20th January 1877)."

多忙の伊藤が工学寮工学校の細部構想についてまで知って、マセソンに協力依頼の白羽の矢をたてたとは考えられず、山尾が準備を総てしていたのではないか。伊藤らが1863年にイギリスに横浜のジャーデン・マセソン社の仲介で密航し、ロンドンでマセソンの世話になった。マセソンはロンドン大学のウィリアムソンWilliamson教授の下で科学を学ぶように手配をしてくれたが、伊藤は3ヶ月たらずで帰国してしまい、マセソンが大財界人であったことは知ってても、工学寮工学校の設立に力になってくれるかどうかという確信はなかったはずである。伊藤が初めてマセソンの世話になってから9年もたっているのである。事前に、マセソンなら絶対力になってくれることを知っていたとしか考えられない。裏で山尾とマセソンの間で話ができており、伊藤はロンドンで正式にマセソンに会って正式に協力依頼をするだけでよかった。マセソンが目処をつけた人事案に対して正式雇用の手続きをしたのが林董で、林は山尾の指示で動いたと『後は昔の記』の中出述べている。

5-3. ランキンが都検にダイアーを推薦した理由?Why Rankine recommended Dyer as Principal?

既往研究では、教師団がグラスゴー大学に縁のある人物で占められ、また都険がグラスゴー大学出身であったので、工部大学校はグラスゴー大学の教育が日本に持ち込まれたと理解されている。実際は、当時のグラスゴー大学にはランキン教授を主任とする土木講座Department of Civil Engineeringがあったが、工学部College of Engineeringはなかった。また、イギリス全体では技術者はまだ徒弟制研修により育成されるべきものと考えられ、大学の科学や技術関連の科目は理論を中心にした教育であった。

ランキンは効果的工学教育方法としてサンドウィッチ･コースを考え出して、何段階に渉って理論と実習･実験を繰り返すものであった。これは1871年に開講したインド工学校Indian Engineering Collegeで実践され、3年間にわたって半年ずつ理論と実習･実験を繰り返して学び、4年目には一年間のインターンシップを受け、その後卒業試験を受けるというものだった。この学校創設にはジェンキンス（エジンバラ大学教授）とともにランキンも関わっており、サンドウィッチ･コースが適用された最初の例。ランキンは、インド工学校設立よりも既存の大学校に工学部を設け、インド植民地が求める技術者の養成をするべきだと主張しており、グラスゴー大学の理事会に諮った。イギリスの大学は神学や哲学を中心に発達してきており、工学部新設には否定的で、ランキンの計画はかなわなかった。この間、ダイヤーはランキンのもとで工学教育方法を研究課題にしており、ランキンがグラスゴー大学でできなかったことを実現してみたいと思っていたはずである。ダイアーは、離英する2ヶ月前の1872年暮れに師のランキンが亡くなってしまい、ランキンの企画をすべて受け継ぐことができた。そもそも、エアトンらの教師団は、ランキンがグラスゴー大学に工学部を新設するためにケルビン卿とともに集めていた俊英であった。ランキンの遺産をごっそりといただいてしまった。

5-4. Role of Tadasu Hayashi林董の役割

(1) 林董：後は昔の記、明治43年刊

p.113

大学教師傭入

使節一行は1872年歳暮佛国に渡る大統領はチールスなる。予は大陸語を解せず一行の為めに用なき故巴里より倫敦に引返す。是は東京虎の門に創立せる工部大学校に傭われたる教師等を伴ひ帰朝し学校設立に与らんが為めなり。1873年1月早々カレーの海峡を渡らんとせしに恰もな那波侖第三世帝の殂落に中り大将マクマホンを初めとし多数の佛人渡英するが為めに船便を得ること難きを以て数日間航海を見合わせたり。帝の人望の未だ佛国に於て落ちざる様子を見て多少の感慨に打たれたり。

p.123

大学教師雇入

虎の門の工部大学校は後に帝国大学に合併して今の工科大学となったが初は工部省に属して居った。岩倉使節出発以前伊藤公が工部大輔たりし時山尾庸三子は横須賀造船所長であったが盲唖学校設立の事を建言した。伊藤公は目明が未だ教育を受けざるに盲唖に教ゆるは突飛すぎる故先ず目明の学校を立つるが宜しと云う意見であった。使節出発後山尾子が工部大輔となってから大いに此事に力を尽し工部大学校を立つることになって教師の雇入、器械の買入を伊藤公の処へ嘱托して来たによって伊藤公は昔英国へ留学に来た時世話になっヒュー・マケー、マヂソンという人に教師人選等の事を頼み予は巴里より倫敦に引返して右等の事を取計らい教師同伴帰朝して大学校設立に与ることになった。マヂソンは東印度会社のサー・ヂャーヂン・マヂソンの一族で大商であったからサー・ウイリアム・ロムソン（後にロード・ケルビン）博士、ランキン博士ウイリヤムスなどなど別懇の間柄であったから教師の人選には大なる便宜があって好き人を得られた。工部大学の教師にして現にローヤル・ソサイテーの成員たる者も数名ある位である。

p.124

工部の教授法

工部大学校の教授方法は学問詰込流は避けて実地経験を目的とした。然し学問を専にする人の為にも昇進の道は十分に開けている。

(2) 考察

･1873年にダイアーが来日し、工学寮工学校大学校の開校準備が始まる。山尾から工学助に推され、林はダイアーの考えを山尾に伝え、さらに外国人教師を支える日本側体制を整えていたことを考えると、彼自身は認識していなかったが、は工学校発足に大きな役割を果たしていたことが分かる。それは、1873年1月ダイアーをグラスゴーに迎えに行ったときから始まり、1873年4月から3ヶ月に及ぶ船旅の間、ずっとダイアーと対話することになった。ダイアーは、学校を開こうとするならそこにどんな教育が合うのか見定めなければ、人間は育たないというプレイフェアの言葉を鑑に、日本とはどんなところか、日本人はどのような基礎能力を持っているのかなどなど、林を質問攻めにしたはず。

・2017年3月15日、藤森先生から「近代日本の洋風建築開化編」が送られてきて、その中で林董の役割を高く評価していることを初めて知った(p.284)。

Chapter VI. Engineering Education in the Britainイギリスにおける技術者

6-1. Training of Engineers in the Britainイギリス技術者養成

(1) Royal Engineers王立工兵隊

(2) Civl Engineersシビル･エンジニア

・19世紀半ばまでのイギリスでは徒弟制技術研修により技術者養成を行っていた。高等学校を卒業した後、社会的に認知された技能者や技術者のもとで、通常、5年間研鑽をきちんと専門職従事者として認められた。朝8時から昼食時間を挟んで午後3時間まで、職長により実務のイロハを教えられた。実務中心のため、理論に興味を抱くような利発な少年は夕方に開かれる夜間学校で、数学、物理、化学などを学んだ。技術学校やカレッジもあったが、そこを修了しても徒弟制による実務研修は必須だった。イギリスの大学に工学部が開かれるのは1870年代以降で、インド工学校が理論と実務の両方をカリキュラムに取り組んだ最初の技術者養成機関であった。これはフランスやドイツと比べると半世紀近く遅い。

6-2. Demand of Civil Engineers in the British Indiaインド省における技術者の需要

(1) Public Works under the East India Company東インド会社下の公共事業局

・東インド会社領インドはイギリスの重要な経済基盤となり，領主として社会経済基盤の整備を始めた。インドには民間技術者Civil Engineerがいなかったので、公共事業局Public Worksを創設した。はじめは軍属技術者を転属させ道路や港湾などを整備させたが、しだいに鉄道や灌漑などの開発のためにシビル･エンジニアが必要となった。19世紀に入ると、本国でも有能なシビル･エンジニアを集めるのが難しくなり、高給を掲げて本国から募集をかけたり、、また自ら技術者を養成しようとした。東インド会社時代の公共事業局のこの苦悩は、たくさんの報告書に書き記されている。

・インド領内に解説した技術学校がうまくいかなかったのは、学校で理論を教えることができても、実務は教えることができなかったことによる。イギリス国内であれば、数年間にわたりシニアのもとで実務訓練を積ませることができたが、インドには民間民間技術者がいなかた。技術者教育には実務訓練がどうしても必要であった。

(2) インド省下の公共事業局Public Works under the India Office

・1858年にインド領は本国政府の直轄植民地となり，インド省が設立された。公共事業局の慢性的シビル･エンジニア不足を抜本的に解決するため、イギリス政府が民間関連機関の協力を得て議論を始めた。

・この議論の資料作りのため，インド省はシビル･エンジニア学会Insitution of Civil Engineersに国内外の技術者養成の状況を調査するように依頼した。この報告書は，(The Education and Status of Civil Engineers, in the United Kingdom and in Foreign Countries, 1870)として公表された。植民地を含むイギリスの技術者養成はどうあるべきかという大きな議論に対して、この委員会は統一した意見を出せなかった。エジンバラ大学のジェンキンスはイギリスに根付いた徒弟制教育の長所を力説し、一方、グラスゴー大学のランキンらは工学部創設を構想した。この報告とは別に、陸軍は従来からある工兵学校の拡張を考えていた。

・1868年から74年まで、インド省大臣は第八代アーガイル公爵が努め、彼はグラスゴー大学の評議員でもあった。同大学教授であるランキンとトムソン（ケルビン卿）は、アーガイル公爵に働きかけて、グラスゴー大学に工学部を、すなわち、大学課程内で理論と実務の両方を学ぶことのできる新学科の創設を画策した。ランキンとトムソンは協力し，グラスゴー大学に優秀な若手研究者を集めつつ，大学評議会に自らの構想を提案した。歴史のある大学は人文学に重点を置き，技術に特化した人材を大学が養成する必要はないということで，評議会から賛同は得られず，ランキンの構想は頓挫した。この顛末については，The Royal Engineering Collegeに関する某氏の論文に詳しい。

・ランキン＆ケルビンが集めた俊英は，日本の工学校創設に関わることになった。日本はなんと幸運だったことか。

6-3. インド工学校の創設Indian Engineering College

・政府（インド省，陸軍）は，シビル･エンジニア学会や有力学識経験者との長い議論の末に、1870年にロンドン郊外にインド省工学校Indian Civil Engineering Collegeをクーパーヒルにあったカントリーハウスを改修して開校することを決めた。

･王立インド校学校が開校した時期、岩倉使節団がイギリスを訪問しており、工部大輔（工部卿扱い）の伊藤博文はこのことを知らないはずはなかった。エドモンド･モレルの急逝により、工学寮開校を急ぐ山尾は窮状に陥り、それを伊藤に告げないはずはなかった。

(3) 大学概要とカリキュラムCalendar and Curriculum of the IEC

・校長には陸軍工兵のチスニーが選ばれ、チャサム工兵学校のカリキュラムを土台にし，軍事技術と公共事業技術の両方の科目を、最初の一年は基礎、後の2年間に専門を学ぶ。その後、外部で1年間の実務訓練を行い、学校に戻ってきて卒業試験を受け、配属が決まった。専門課程は学科制にはなっていなかった。1873年にはRoyal Indian Civil Engineering Collegeと改称された。

6-4. University of Glasgow and Prof. William rankineグラスゴー大学とウィリアム･ランキン

(1) Duke of Argyll as Council member of the University of Glasgow

The University of Glasgow built new buildings on the Kelvin Hill, with design of George Gilbert Scott in 1864-1869.

Duke of Argyll was the Secretary of the India Office 1868-1872.

(2) William Rankine and Sandwich Programme

ウィリアム･ランキン

・1872年8月、伊藤博文はマセソンに正式に工学校教師団推薦の依頼し、マセソンはランキン教授に日本の工学校の教師団は亡くなる直前に、ヘンリー・ダイアーを都検とする工学両校学校教師団を推薦し、林董が任用手続きをし、日本まで同行。

・1873年、初頭にイギリスを出航し、船中の2ヶ月で工部大学校教育概要を完成する。到着し、山尾にそれを見せると全て受け入れられる。

＊グラスゴー大学在学時にヨーロッパ諸国の技術教育の動向を調査した経験を持ち、それが日本の工部大学校の教育概要作成に大いに役に立ったと述べているが、その調査とはランキン教授がシビル・エンジア学会に協力して実施したものであった。た工部大学校はその後日本の技術立国の礎になり、世界的に成功した工学学校として認められている。しかし、25歳の若者が自分の見識だけで工部大学校のすべてを決めることができるだろうか。ダイアーは非常に優れた人物であったことは疑いないが、スイスの技術学校を参考にしたとだけ述べ、技術教育構想の源泉については口をつむんでいる。

イギリス土木学会の公式出版物によれば、イギリスの工学教育の嚆矢は「王立インド工学校Royal Indian Engineering College」であるという。広大なインド植民地の経営と開発に膨大な数の技術者が必要となり、1871年にイギリス政府は工学校をを創設することに決めた。イギリスでは伝統的に技術者は徒弟制で育成されてきており、大学に応用科学として電気学や機械学はあっても技術者養成と対応したものではなかった。これに並行して、イギリス政府は1860年代後半になりヨーロッパ諸国の工業発展を目にして自国の技術者育成に危機感を抱くようになり、諸外国の工学教育方法を調査し、イギリスの工学教育の改革をすすめる委員会を発足させた。イギリスは理論よりも実施指導を重視してきた歴史があり、理論を体系的に教える工学校の創設はなかなか進まなかった。

当然のことながら、技術学校創設を建議したモレル、測量司･工学寮担当雇いのマクヴェインも「王立インド工学校」がイギリスに作られることは仕事柄知っていたと思われる。もう一つ、1870年に「王立インド工学校」創設についてはイギリス議会からグラスゴー大学のランキン教授とエジンバラ大学のジェンキンス教授が意見を求められ、効果的な組織とカリキュラムを提案している。この二人の教授らが他の西欧諸国がどのように技術教育を行っているのか調査しているときに、ダイヤーは下働きをしていたのではないか。実際、ダイヤーの工部大学校教育概要Calendar(1873)とReport(1877)ジェンキンス教授の報告書の内容に多くの類似点が見られる。ランキン教授は1871年には重度の糖尿病に陥っており、翌年暮れには亡くなり、ダイヤーはランキン教授の調査結果と意志を引き継ぐことになったのではなかろうか。ランキン教授とジェンキンス教授に求められた「王立インド工学校」創設意見書はジェンキンス教授のものしか議会に報告されていない。

Chapter VII. Dyer's Regulation and Curriculum and ダイアーの教育課程と学則

7-1. Curriculum学科編成と学則

(1) 全体の課程と学則General Regulation and Calendar

都険に選ばれたダイアーは、工学校カレンダー（組織体制とカリキュラム）を船中で構想し、横浜到着とともに完成。工学寮頭の山尾庸三に提出たところ、山尾は大変満足し、それまでにあった工学校規則を改定（廃止）し、ダイアーの工学校案を完全に実施することにした→どうして若干24歳の若者が、教育経験のない若者が、工部大学校カレンダーの作成が可能であったのだろうか。

この問題も、ランキンがグラスゴー大学に工学部新設計画を持っていたことを考えれば、弟子のダイアーとともに教師組織やカリキュラムの試案を作成していたはずで、それをダイアーはかなりそのまま使ったと考えられる。

--In August 1873,--two months after my arrival, we had an entrance examination, and it was with difficulty that we obtained thirty students who were able to pass fairly in English and elementary mathematics. However, as the staff of the College was already in Japan, it was evident that we could not sit down and wait till matters improved, so that immediately after this examination we opened the College with these thirty as Cadets, and in addition admitted other twenty as day scholars, but for some time the work was carried on under the greatest difficulties. I wish to bear the highest testimony to the spirit and zeal with which the professors entered into their work, and as the students were diligent in their studies we were able to show considerable progress by the end of the first year.

Table 2.Comparison of Engineers' Training by Apprenticeship and College

(2) 基礎教育

(3) 専門教育

(4) 実地教育

7-2. Teaching staffs

(1) Principal都検

Henry Dyer, 1848-1918. 1873-1882.

William Edward Ayrton, 1847-1908. 1873-1879.

David H. Marshall, 1873- Math

John Perry, 1850-1920. 1875年9月9日〜1879年3月31日. mechanic

Edward Divers, Chemis

Edmund F. Monday, 1873- Drawing

William G. Dekison, English

Robert Clark, English assistant

Richard Oliver Rymer=Jones, 1841-

George Cauley, 1873年6月19日〜1878年6月18日

John Milne, 1852-1913.

Henry Dyer and Elizabeth Fergusson

Henry Dyer

William Ayrton

John Parry

Monday

7-3. 学科Departments

(1) ダイアーの初期構想Dyer's Initial Concept

・太政類典明治6年8月31日工学寮入学式並学課略則

壬甲三月第六十七号布告工学校略則御詮議ノ次第有之相廃候條興旨布告候事

工学寮入学式並び学課細則ヲ定メ生徒ヲ募ル

工部省伺六年六月

当小学校創立に付去壬甲三月中御布告相成候工学校略則の儀生徒は総て私費を以入学為致候規則に候へも熟れ諸工業を興隆せんにしは速かに諸学課熟達の者を得るに之れあり候へは当分人員三十名を選び官費を以入学差許度就ては己に教師も来着能在候に付別紙の通入学式学課略則取設省より周子く一般へ布達早々試験取払度候に付至急御許可相成度依て別冊相添此段相伺候也

○別冊は前に載せたる工学寮入学式並学課略則なり略す

追て校則は即今取調中に付出来次第尚相伺可申但又壬甲三月御布告の工学校略則は御取消有之度候也六月

六年七月二十七日

指令伺之通

文部省へ達六年八月二十九日

別紙工学寮生徒官費入学の儀工部省より伺出候に付朱字の通及指令候條此段為心得相達候也八月二十九日

工学寮入学式並び学課略則

第七

在寮中授業の学課左の如し

第一　シビルエンジニール　道路橋梁堤防等部の土木に係わる諸術

第二　メカニカリエンジニール　器械建立などの諸術

第三　電信術

第四　建築学

第五　実用化学

第六　鉱山学

第七　鉱物学

・建築学及地質学教師ノ雇入

明治8年2月20日建築学及地質学教師ノ雇入レニツキ伺出デ、次デ許可セラレタリ。其伺文及指令左ノ如シ。

・書学、造家、彫像三教師ノ雇入「工学寮ノ発展ト共ニ美術教育ノ必要ヲ生ジ、、、」

(2) Civil Engineeringシビル･エンジニアリング

・ダイアーの構想を受け入れた山尾庸三は、シヴィル・エンジニアリングの領域とは従来の土木を越える物と考えていたようだ。

(3) Architecture建築

･Appointment of Instructor教師任用

『𦾔工部大学校史料』100頁：建築学及び地質学教師の雇入。明治八年二月二十日建築学及地質学教師の雇入れにつき伺出で、次で許可せられたり。其伺文及指令左の如し。

工学寮生徒追々学業進歩致候に付当九月より各科専業申付度候処建築家土質家教師不足に付各壹名孰れれも給料一箇月参百円より五百円迄にて五箇年雇入の義外国へ申遣度尤給料及呼寄等の費用は定額金より相辨可申候間支給御許可相成候様致度此段相伺候也。明治八年二月二十日工部卿伊藤博文工部太輔山尾庸三

･1877Report1877年授業実施報告

Architecture

Imperial College of Engineering, Tokei, 1st October, 1877.

o Henry Dyer, Eq.,

Principal of the College,

Dear Sir,

As it is comparatively recently that classes have been organized and a Professor appointed for the training of Architects in this College; my report must necessarily be at this time in many ways a prospective one. It is perhaps unavoidable in a College of Engineering that the preliminary training of the students, as shewn in the General course, should have a more direct bearing upon what is useful to future Engineers than to future Architects. While for example, Natural Philosophy, Chemistry, Geography, and Drawing, almost exclusively Mechanical, are excellent preparatory studies for Engineers, Geologists, and Chemists; such subjects as Universal History and Freehand Drawing and Shading, are by far more essential to Architects who require acquaintance with the History and Development of Architecture, and a much more Artistic Preparation. This is probably one reason why so few students present themselves as candidates for the study of Architecture in the College.

Having spent two years in the general course the students of Architecture devote their Third year to the study of those subjects especially necessary for an Architect ; a certain portion of their time being spent under the Professor of Architecture in the Drawing office and in attending his lectures. Among these special subjects may be mentioned particularly, Mathematics, Surveying, and the great advantage of instruction in the strength of materials and structures under the Professor of Engineering. The students on entering the Architectural Drawing Office spew a great aptitude for neatness and careful mechanical ,draughtsmanship. It becomes necessary, however, that they should acquire a much bolder style and be instructed in perspective and freehand drawing, and shading. The importance of a knowledge of the Inman figure to an Architect and of study from the Antique and the Nude, as carried out in Europe, not only for direct use in making drawings containing Sculpture and Decoration, but. also for the development of a truly Artistic feeling for the beauty of forms, and of powers of Design, is by no means lost sight of. There are, however, many reasons why it would be futile to suggest such a course at present. With your concurrence, casts of Architectural ornament will be placed in the Drawing office, and such a modification of the present course made as will give time for practice in freehand drawing and shading. The lectures upon Perspective delivered to the Third year students are practically applied by them in drawings and in sketches made from buildings in the neighbourhood. On attaining the commencement of the Fourth year the students devote their whole time to the study of Architecture under the Professor. The instruction is given by lectures and by the constant examination and correction of Drawings executed by the students under the Professor's dictation, as well as by visits of inspection to buildings. The Lectures for the sake of convenience are divided into two courses; one treating of Architectural History, Design, and Decoration ; and the other dealing with Building Materials and Construction as well as Planning, Sanitary Arrangements, the forming of Specifications, Es-t mat es, and Contracts, the general conduct of building operations, and of the business of an Architect. In the Historical course I believe it necessary to call special attention to the Architectural works still existing in Japan, possessing many excellent merits and good principles, which in Europe are to be found only in buildings of the past and best periods of Architecture or in the works of the elite among Modern Architects. It is certainly necessary that the buildings in this country should be in future more substantial and imperishable, improved and modified by the study of the works of other countries and by modern customs; but it is to be hoped that the Architects of Japan will give to their buildings a National Character of its own somewhat in keeping with the best

works of the past and such as is suited to supply the particular requirements of the climate and the tastes of the people. To further this, visits are arranged to buildings of Artistic merit in Tokio for the purpose both of study and for practice in sketching. The Japanese Buildings as yet visited by the students are, Tokio Castle: the decorated Temples and Shrines at Shiba and at Uyeno: the Temples at Kameido, Asakusa, Honguwanji, Kudanzan, Sanno, and many smaller Temples in various parts of the city. These Temples exhibit skilful wooden framed construction, roofing and bracketting, also exquisite carving, beautiful alike in conception and execution: while in the buildings at Shiba and Uyeno there are compositions in carving and harmonies in colouring that are invaluable to the student of decoration. It is hoped that it will be possible to gain admission to some important civil and domestic buildings; and it is also expected that these visits will be extended to other cities in Japan. In the Constructional Course special attention will be given to those materials which are at hand in the country and to the examination of any modes of manufacture or construction worth retaining for building purposes. The students also visit and examine works in progress under the Government Architects, in order that they may become familiar with the actual carrying out of works. The Buildings at present visited are the New College Buildings, the Shiherio, and the New Palace of the Emperor; carried out by the Government Architect. During the Summer Session of the fourth year the Students are called upon to make the drawings of some design of their own in accordance with conditions of arrangement and style specified. They are at this time left as much as is possible to their own resources and research. Upon entering the fifth year at the College the students are passed by Examination into what is termed the Practical Course. They will then have the opportunity of carrying out the working and detail drawings and of inspecting the progress of works being carried out from the designs and under the superintendence of the Professor, who is also Assis-tant Government Architect. Thus, the Architectural students finish their College Course under the immediate inspection of their Instructor, and though it is not pretended or supposed that by four years Architectural training they will be fitted for positions of entire self-dependence and responsibility ; it is hoped that they will be able to fill creditably, posts as Practical Assistants; when they may for their own interests further their studies and enlarge their experience.

I am, Yours truly, (Signed) JOSIAH CONDER, Professor of Architecture.

明治6年8月20日

工部省ヘ達6年8月20日

工学寮生徒三十名官費入学ノ儀既二及許可候就テハ生徒一名ノ至急高何程授業ノ諸入費一ヶ月分何程並當年中ノ総計共精細取調積書ヺ以早々可申出事

財務課議案6年8月13日

工学寮官費生徒入学方工部省伺之通御許可相成候最前法制官ヨリ相伺候節当課ヘハ回評脱漏二相成居右は官費支給ノ積有ノ其用途若干二相成候哉豫メ確定無之テハ不相成殊二即即今定額御取調中ニテ後来ノ目途二可差障候二付右入費詳細申立候様致シ度依テ御達案相添興段相伺候也8月13日

明治6年11月12日工部省上申

當省工学校官費生徒支給高其外當年分ノ費用総計差出儀様御達二付當八月開校ヨリ十二月迄生徒支給其外費用積高別冊ノ通調上申候也　11月12日工部省

崗学校生徒費用其外調

工学開校二付生徒費用等積高

一金七百八十七円五十銭

是ハ生徒三十名食糧本年八月開校ヨリ十二月迄五ヶ月分

内

金百五十七円五十銭

是ハ三十名一ヶ月分但一名二付金五円二十五銭充

一金二百三十六円八十二銭

是ハ本年八月ヨリ十二月マテ五ヶ月分諸費積高

内

金四十七円三十六銭四里

Chapter VIII．Design and Construction of Buildings校舎建築

8-1. 工学寮小学校校舎Engineering College School Buildings

(1) Site敷地

・旧延岡藩江戸屋敷

小学校他の最初の建物はお堀近くに配置され、工事が始まったが、敷地奥にはまだ旧屋敷の木造建物があったらしい。そこに工学寮及び測量司が役所として入った。その後、測量司は和田倉門近くの旧民部省建物へ、工部省は木挽町の旧兵部省建物に移った。この二つの役所は1872年3月末の日本橋銀座大火により焼失した。

(2) Buildings建物

・School Hall小学館（小学校校舎）

・Student's Hall: Dormitory and Library生徒館（宿舎と図書館）

・Teacher's Residence教師館

・Kitchen食堂

(3) Designer設計者

・工学寮工学校は小学校から廃校することになり、工部省営繕担当のマクヴェインとジョイナーの二人が小学校校舎他の設計を始めた。この二人はシビル･エンジニアであったが、鉄道や港湾に附属する施設設計の経験があった。

(4) Execution工事

小学校校舎と寄宿舎は、その年の暮れからマクヴェインの指揮で実施設計業務が始まり、そこでは明治4年7月の「工部省学校ヲ設ク」に添付された略図面がもとにされたのであろう。外国人教師任用と建物工事のための莫大な予算措置が必要であり注35）、明治4年8月14日の工部省編成の完了を待って、まず技術職員の任用から着手した。山尾とは週一回以上顔を合わせ、伺いを立てながら1871年10月27日（明治4年9月14日）にジョージ･イートン（George Eaton）注36）を測量教師に採用し、また1871年11月17日（明治4年10月6日）に測量と図面作成に長けたジョイナー（Henry Batson Joyner）注37）を鉄道寮から転属させ、二人で東京府下測量の準備と工学校の実施図面作成に当たった。

1872年1月の日記を見ると、ジョイナーが校舎と生徒館、マクヴェインが教師館の製図を分担し、1872年1月5日（明治4年12月6日）には煉瓦造の設計案を山尾に示し、そして石工と大工の職長を任用する了解を得た。校舎はゴシック様式になることが決まっており、1月20日（明治4年12月11日）にはマークス（James Marks）注38）とアンダーソン（William Anderson）をそれぞれ石工頭と大工頭に、またライマー･ジョーンズ（Richard Oliver Rymer Jones）注39）を測量教師に、さらにウィルソンを測量司にそれぞれ任用の伺いをたてた注40）。マクヴェインはできる限りすでに鉄道や灯台の建設に雇われている技術者･技能者を転属させ、どうしても適任者がいない分野では自らのチャンネルでイギリスから呼び寄せた注41）。測量ではイギリス海軍水路測量部での同寮であったシャボー（Henry Scharbau）注42）とチースマンを、建築ではダグラスを通じてボアンヴィル（Charles Alfred Chastel de Boinville）注43）を呼び寄せた。

『工部省沿革報告』では、「明治五年正月造営掛ヲ置キ雇英人「アンデルソン」ヲ造家師トナシ小学校及ヒ生徒館教師館等ヲ経始ス」注44）とあるが、アンダーソン着任の2ヶ月前にマクヴェインらにより実施設計業務は始まっていた。また、『明治工業史建築編』には設計がマクヴェインによってなされ、さらに小学校の時計塔の煉瓦がイギリスからの輸入品であることの伝聞が寄せられており、これはマクヴェインの記録と符合する。

工事は工部省直営で行われたが、横浜のウィットフィールド&ドーソン事務所が施工監理に入っていたことがマクヴェイン日記からわかる。同社は、1870年暮れに横浜メソニックホールを完成させており、これに横浜ロッジ管財係のマクヴェインも係わっていたと考えられる。

2月25日（明治5年1月17日）には小学校校舎の建設資材リストができあがり、グラスゴーのダグラスに資材調達の仲介を依頼した注46）。時計塔と図書室小屋組の図面をひく一方で、3月5日（明治5年1月26日）に基礎工事に着手し、耐震性を高めるために煉瓦壁にHoop Ironを敷くことにし、数回にわたってHudson Malcolm & Co.社に大量に注文した注47）。マークスが煉瓦焼成を、アンダーソンが木材の加工を担い、小学校校舎建設を急いでいたが、その後に生徒寄宿舎と教師宿舎の建設工事が控えており、3月25日（明治5年2月29日）時点で、マクヴェインは山尾に対して工学寮教師団が来日する8月までに宿舎完成が間に合わないので、臨時の宿舎を用意するように進言した注48）。これは明治4年11月4日（1871年12月15日）付の「工学校定則ノ概略」と合致し、そこで述べられたように小学校を明治5年7月15日（1872年8月18日）に開校させるために教師団雇用の手配を行い、また施設建設を進めていたことになる。実際は、7月の教師団来日はかなわず、また施設建設工事も大幅に遅れていた注49）。

マクヴェインは、小学校校舎･宿舎の他に測量司や勧工寮などの施設建築の設計と建設を担い、また測量事業の開始準備をしなければならず、多忙の中、後述するように、さらに1872年4月3日の銀座大火の後、山尾の指示により復興計画作りに約3週間集中することになった。その後、小学校校舎･宿舎建設を再開し、5月20日（明治5年4月13日）、横浜のウィットフィールド･ドーソン事務所注50）から携帯型蒸気エンジン鋸の購入を決めた。イギリスからの建設資材の到着が遅れたことや、フィート単位と尺単位を取り違えたために工事のやり直しがあったが、小学校校舎は1872年暮れにほぼ完成し（Fig.5）、次いで生徒寄宿舎の建設に着手する。1873（明治6）年2月14日のマクヴェイン日記では、寄宿舎建物のマリオンを煉瓦造に、また壁厚を18インチから14インチに減ずることにしたとあり注51）、工費と工期を切り詰めようとしていたと考えられる（Fig.6）。

『明治工業史建築編』によれば、生徒館（生徒寄宿舎）は明治6年8月10日起工、明治7年9月30日竣工となっており、マクヴェインが留守の間、ボアンヴィルが設計監理、アンダーソンが木工事、マークスが石工事をそれぞれ担当し、並行して教師館の工事も行っていたと考えられる（Fig.7）。1872年初めから山尾に対して測量と気象観測の機器購入のために一時帰国を願い出ており、1873（明治6）年になってやっとかない、同年3月28日に河野通信を引き連れ離日することになった。

・1871年10月発足の測量司は営繕掛を兼務した。測量師長マクヴェインの最初の仕事はこの校舎の設計。

・山尾からゴシック様式にするようにとの指示があった。

・マクヴェインとジョイナーが協力して小学校校舎、生徒館、教師館を実施設計と施工監理。1871年暮れから作業開始。

・日本で手に入らない材料は、キャンベル・ダグラスを通してグラスゴーから輸入。

・工事は工部省直営、石工マークス、大工アンダーソン、ウィットフィールド&ドーソン技術事務所の施工支援で行われた。

・工事は遅れ、マクヴェインは予定の1872年9月開校は無理として、山尾に開校延期あるいは仮校舎の用意を提案。

※ジョイナーは、ジョン･ナッシュ設計の建築工事を請け負っていたニクソンのもとで修行しており、建築設計の素養があった。マクヴェインの義弟にあたるキャンベル･ダグラスからの設計も含めて支援があったはず。

※ゴシック様式を指定したのは山尾庸三で、グラスゴー滞在中にG.G.スコット設計のグラスゴー大学が竣工していく姿を目にしており、それを東京に再現しようとしたのではないだろうか。

(5) Appearance of School Hall小学校校舎

"Technical School, designed and supervised by McVean and Joyner in 1872.小学校

曽根達蔵画、右錦絵

※時計塔は当初から設計にあったが、グラスゴーから送られてきた時計が破損していたため、あらためて注文し直し、取り付けが半年遅れた。

※中央講堂で1875年10月、パリミエリ姉妹によるオペラコンサートが開催された。

Design of Chrysanthemum Emblem, prepared by someone, Archive dated July 19, 1873.菊章デザイン「太政類典」

※工学寮測量司にはすでにボアンヴィルが着任しているが、1873年3月にマクヴェインが一時帰国したとき、ウォーターに工部省営繕代理を頼んだ。ダイアーらの教師団が到着し、建物はまだ工事中だった。この菊章デザインは、特にセグメンタル･アーチはコンパスで正確に描かれておらず、建築家の手になるものではない。取り付けを指示した山尾庸三か、ウォータースが描いたのだろうか。

・マクヴェインとジョイナーの設計

(6) Students' Library and Dormitory生徒館

には繊細なマリオンの付き、蒸気暖房が備え付けられていた。

『旧工部大学校資料･同付録』より。小さな間仕切りが行われたのは、東京女学館時代である。

※この平面プランは中央部と両翼部からなる左右対称形であり、部屋へは中廊下から出入りする。

生徒館、某大学某学科図書館蔵

※生徒館東立面を写しており、表玄関が東側にあったことがわかる。

東京女学館時代に震災に遭う。

(7) Appearance of Teachers' Residence工学校教師館

・ボアンヴィルの設計

教師館

※これはボアンヴィルが着任してから設計したもので、ボアンヴィルが助手をしていた時期、ヘンリー･ホワイトがヴェルノンのシャトーに設計した守衛住宅によく似ている。

※ヘンリー･ダイアーはここには住まわず、ほかの外国人教師とともに旧加賀屋敷の官舎の方に住んだ。実際何に使われたのかは不明。

8-2. College Buildings.大学校校舎

・'The Imperial College of Engineering,' "Engineer (July 27,1877)".

(1) Process of Design設計の経緯

・マクヴェインが1873年3月にイギリスに一時帰国する際、ウォートルスThomas James Watersに工部省の営繕担当を頼んだ。ボアンヴィルは来日して3ヶ月しか経っておらず、24歳の若手建築家に大学校講堂の設計を任せられるのか心許なかったのである。マクヴェイン離日後すぐに大学校講堂の新営が決まり、ウォートルスは配置計画を始めた。1873年6月にヘンリー・ダイアー率いる教師団が来日すると、彼らと専門教育のための建物デザインについての議論が始まった。おそらく、この段階でウォートルスはこの議論についていくことができなくなり、手を引きすべてのボアンヴルに任せた。この経緯について、ダイアーが「1873-1877年工学校報告」の中で詳しく述べている。

・24歳の若者のボアンヴィルは、フランス時代にホワイトWilliam Henry Whiteのもとでバロック、ゴシックリバイバル、ネオ・クラシシズムの建物の設計を一通り経験をしていた。建物は教会や邸宅であり、このような学校、特に技術学校の設計は経験がまったくなくなかった。誰が助言してくれ、何を参考にしたのは分かっていない。しかし、ルネッサンスからバロックにかけての特徴的なデザインであり、どこかに参考とした建物が見付かるかもしれない。

(2) Drawings現存設計図面

・平面プランに関しては、ダイアーやエアトンらとの議論をもとに、工部大学校の実験・実習に最も相応しい部屋と器機の配置にしたことが知られている[de Boinville 1881, 1877ICE-Report]。後述するように、ロビンズという建築家がエアトンの求めに応じて理学教室平面案を作成したと主張している。

･工部大学校の設計図は『旧工部大学校資料』に添付されているが、この出所は1877 Report of Imperial College of Engineering（1877年工部大学校報告）である。しかし、これには校舎配置図と工部大学校本館平面しかなく、細部は写真から知るしかない。ボアンヴィルによって膨大に図面は作成されたはずであるが、工部大学校を引き継いだ帝国大学工学部にも見つかってはいない。ところが、工部大学校の図面はエアトンが帰国するときにイギリスに持ち去られ、フィンズベリー技術学校の設計に関わっていたロビンズEdward Robinsの手に渡された。ロビンスは、工部大学校の図面をRoyal SocietyとRIBAの研究発表会で公開し、Builder誌にも発表した。これ以外に、1881年のEngineer誌、1877年のThe Graphic誌にも発表されており、興味深いことにそれぞれ微妙に異なっている。これは何を意味するのであろうか。

・建物内部デザインについてロビンスがイギリスの学会誌でかなり詳細に紹介し、さらに彼の技術教育用建物に関する著書の中でも繰り返し紹介しており、日本には残されていない工部大学校本館の姿が明らかになる可能性があります。

E.C. Robins, Secondary School Buildings, read at the Society of Arts in April 1880.

I described and illustrated the famous forerunner of English examples, viz., the Technical College at Japan.

E.C. Robins, Papers on Technical Education, Applied Science Buildings, Fittings and Sanitation, 1885.

E.C. Robins, Technical School and College Building, 1887.

※資料1 太政類典2月22日7年

工部省大学校ノ建築ニ着手ス

工部省伺7年2月13日

合金拾四万円但大学校建築

當省工学寮ノ儀小学校ハ既ニ落成ニ相成現今生徒ヲ教育罷在候處右工学規則ノ儀ハ小学校ニ於テ二ヶ年傳習為致夫ヨリ二ヶ年ハ大学校ニ於テ傳習為致候ニ有之候ニ付別紙絵図面ノ通大学校建築取拭申度尤前書凡積ノ儀ハ絵図面ノ内前通ノ分ノミニ有之右前通ノ儀図面添付

(2) 'Imperial College of Engineering' in "1877 Report of ICE"『1877年工学寮工学校報告』にみる校舎

Layout of ICE.工部大学校校舎配置 Source: 1877ICE-Report

No.1 Imperial College of Engineering, Tokei. Source: 1877ICE-Report本館平面図

(3) "Imperial College of Engineering' in "Engineering"1877年エンジニアリング誌に紹介された工部大学校

No.2 Imperial College of Engineering, Tokei. Source: 1877 Engineering.

Engineering, July 27, 1877. THE IMPERIAL COLLEGE OP ENGINEERING, TOKEI, JAPAN.

We noticed some time ago* the work which was being done in teaching engineering in the Imperial University (Kaisei Gakko) of Japan, where engineering forms only a growing branch of a somewhat extended curriculum. We are able to-day to place before our readers some information respecting

another institution in the same city (Tokei), which differs from the university in concerning itself exclusively with the education of engineers.

The Japanese Imperial College of Engineering is an institution established " under the orders of the Minister of Public Works with a view to the education of engineers for service in the Department of Public Works." Its work is carried on almost entirely by Englishmen under an English principal,

Mr. Hemry Dyer, B. Sc., to whom is due, we believe, the whole arrangement of the course of study in the college as well as the arrangement of the college buildings themselves, the architectural details of the work having been carried out under Mr. C. A. de Boinville.

Mr. Dyer had no easy task before him in attempting to work out a course of instruction in engineering for students in a country whore practical engineering was of very recent growth, and in some branches can hardly have had an existence, and his difficulties would not bo lessened by the fact that the instruction had to be given in a language foreign to the students. The fact, however, that so many of the official engineers of the country are and will be educated at the college which he has organised rendered it doubly important that the scheme chosen should be a wise one, for the adoption of a mistaken principle of training would have been seriously de. trimental to the efficiency of important Government departments for yearsjto come. It goes without saying that the plan best adopted for the special circumstances mentioned would not probably be that best adapted for us here. It may be none the less interesting to our readers to know what is being done in Japan, and there are certainly points in the arrangements of the Tokci college which are worthy of imitation in kindred institutions at home, in spite of their different conditions of working.

Admission to the college is obtained by examination, fifty students being admitted each year. As the curriculum extends over six years, this makes the total number of students in the college 300. There is a preparatory school for about half as many lads, who take their chance with others in the entrance examination, in which a knowledge of the English languago takes an important part. The students board in the college, either paying something for their own maintenance—in which case they are free at the end of their college course—or paid for by Government, in which case they come under an obligation to work in a Government department for at least seven years after leaving the college. The first two years of college work aro the same for all students, the principal subjects taken up, besides English, being elementary mathematics, physics, and chemistry and drawing. In their second and third years the work of the students has more direct bearing upon their profession, and the college provides separate courses of study for civil engineering, mechanical engineering, architecture, chemistry, and metallurgy and mining. The students spend the winters of these years attending lectures and working at laboratories in college, and the summers at various special works, for the most part Government works. Their last two years the students give entirely to practical work in that branch of engineering which they wish to prosecute, their position, in fact, not differing essentially from that of ordinary apprentices. The progress of the students is tested from time to time by examinations both on their their theoretical and practical work.

We are glad to see that Mr. Dyer has kept clear of the fatal but easy mistake of making a college workshop do duty instead of tho thing itself. He has, however, been peculiarly fortunate in this respect, in having under his own management engineering works at Akabanc. These are works employing now some 320 men (besides students from the college), and in process of considerable enlargement, Fney are intended chiefly to manufacture machinery, &c, required by tho Public Works Department, but also execute private orders, and appear to be conducted entirely as a commercial concern. They appear, in fact, to be simply engineering works with an unusually large proportion of apprentices, and from the long list of machines given in the College Calendar as in course of construction at Akabauc1, it is evident that the works are such as will give the students bona fide practical experience upon a moderately large scale.

In the work of the college itself we are glad to see that much stress is laid upon drawing— th teaching of which, in all its applications, seems to be Tery fully developed—and also upon work in laboratories. Of these there are four, physical chemical, technological and metallurgical, and engineering. We gather that the last-named is not yet in full operation, but it has been at least started the description given in the Calendar it appears to be essentially of the same kind as the " en laboratory" which it is proposed to at University College, and which has been already described in these columns.* Of the very great utility of such an institution we have no doubt, and we are glad to see that Mr. Dyer is working in this direction. The laboratory at Munich, under Professor Bauschinger, seems to be rowing rapidly, and we hear that it is proposed to form a similar one at Aachen. We trust it may not be long before we have one in London.

It only remains that we should say something as to the plans of the Japanese College, which we arc able to publish with this notice. Fig^ 1 (see next page) is a plan of the college itself. The main building (about 400 ft. long) has been completed some time (before its erection the work of the college was carried on in the building which is now the museum), and it is expected that the wings will be finished this autumn.

Fig. 2 is a plan of the grounds showing the museum, laboratories, and dwelling houses. The following references will make these clear :

Fio. 1.

a. Large Lecture Hall.

6 6. Professor's Private Rooms.

c e. Class-rooms.

d. Chemical Demonstration Booms and Museum.

e. Drawing Offices (Counting-house— (pound flat of »')■

f. Library and examination-hall, 10- ft. by 61 ft.

g. Waiting Rooms (ground flat) ; Printing Offices (upstairs).

h. Natural Philosophy Department, Laboratories, Instrument Rooms, Ac.

k. Boiler House.

Fio. 2.

1. College.

2. Museum.

3. Principal's House.

4. Professors' Houses.

5. Dormitories.

6. Assistant's House.

7. Chemical Laboratory.

8. Engineering Laboratory.

9. Metallurgical Laboratory.

10. Kitchen.

(4) "Imperial College of Engineering, Tokyo." Source: 『工部大学校史料･同付録』

(5) Imperial College of Engineering, "1881Engineer"

No.4 Plan of Natural Physics Laboratory, ICE. Source: 1881Engineer.

No.5 Fittings of Natural Physics Laboratory, ICE. Source: 1881 Engineer.

理学部実験室（東棟）は、あるイギリス人建築家がエアトンに対して平面素案を提供したと述べており、校長のダイアーと設計主任のボアンヴィルを通してのことではないので、彼は設計のクレジットを主張することはできないが、大変興味深いことである。この建築家は技術科学者の専門教育施設として世界で先駆的な事例であるとイギリスの各学会で発表する。

(6) 大学校外観Appearance of Main Building

階高Height

･1階に比べると2階の階高が高い。中央ホールの正面両側に階段室が付き、3階にあたる塔屋が載る。

壁

･イングリッシュ積みの煉瓦壁となっている。

ボアンヴィル設計のこの校舎にはモデルがあったと考えられる。

室内

8-3. Reference of Design of the Imperial College of Engineering, Tokyo.

工部大学校のデザインに類似するもの

（1）The Presidency College, Madras

“The Presidency College, Madras.” Illustrated London News. (8 June 1872)

マドラス（現チェンナイ）管区公共事業局建築技師のチザムが、1865年に入局とともに設計を始めた建物で、インド･サラセン様式のチザム最初の作品となる。工事は1870年に始まり、1872年に完成した。竣工すると『イラストレテッド･ロンドン･ニュース』誌（6月8日号）に掲載された。建物はイタリアのルネッサンス様式を基調とするもので、まだインド･サラセンの臭いはほとんどない。絵では建物東側を海に向けて正面にしているが、道路からのアクセスは西側からで、校舎はコの字配置となっている。コの字型配置、二階建ての構成、アーケードと中央棟の塔の作り方、寄棟屋根にバラストレード、パラディアン･ウインドウなど、2年後設計が始まる工部大学校本館とよく似ている。ボアンヴィルの師匠の一人であるヘンリー･ホワイトは同じ時期にカルカッタの公共事業局建築技師として、カルカッタ･プジデンシィ･カレッジを設計しているが、こちらはネオ･クラシックで、工部大学校本館とはかなり異なる。

1998年当時のプレジデンシィ･カレッジ

*Robert Fellowes Chisholm (11 January 1840 - 28 May 1915) was a British architect who pioneered the Indo-Saracenic style of architecture in Madras. Chisholm was born in London on 11 January 1840[1] (or on 3 November 1838, according to th 1998年当時のプレジデンシィ･カレッジ

e Royal Institute of British Architects), and had his early education in the United Kingdom, practising as a talented landscape painter in London during his youth. On completion of his education, he arrived at Calcutta, India and moved to Madras in 1865, where he was appointed head of the school of industrial art.[1] In that same year, 1865, Chisholm began to design the older building of Presidency College, Madras. He initially constructed buildings in the Renaissance and Gothic styles of architecture.[2] Also in 1865-67 he was designing the Nilgiri Library in Ootacamund (completed in 1869), and the Lawrence Memorial School in that same town (1865–69). The revenue board building in the Chepauk Palace complex, which was constructed by Chisholm in 1871,[3] was his first in the Indo-Saracenic or Muslim style of architecture.[4][5] Chisholm later emerged as a pioneer in the Indo-Saracenic style of architecture.[6][7]

Chisholm also constructed the Lawrence Asylum buildings (1865), Napier Museum Trivandrum,[8] Presidency College, Madras (1865–70) the Senate buildings of the University of Madras (1874–79),[6][7][9] offices of the P. Orr & Sons[10] and the Post and Telegraph Office in Ootacamund (1875–83). Chisholm also enlarged and constructed a pavilion at the M. A. Chidambaram Stadium.[11] Chisholm was appointed Consulting Architect to the Government of Madras in 1872 and served from 1872 to 1886.[12] In 1876 he was appointed to the newly established executive committee of management of the Madras School of Arts,[13]:173 and was Officiating Superintendent of that institution from 1877 to 1883.[13]:171 He was also responsible for the Bombay Municipal Offices and the immense Laxmi Vilas Palace in Baroda (Vadodara) during 1880-90. He returned to London in 1902, where his best-known London building is Cadogan Hall (originally First Church of Christ, Scientist), near Sloane Square. He also designed an uncompleted Indian Museum in Belvedere Road, Southwark, London.[1]

Chapter IX. Evaluation of ICE工部大学校の評価

9-1. "Nature"

(1) 'AN ENGINEERING COLLEGE IN JAPAN.' NATURE, April 3, 1873.

The Japanese Government, as represented by the ambassadors who visited this country last summer and autumn, have resolved upon taking example by our western civilization, and establishing a college in the city of Yeddo for affording instruction in civil and mechanical engineering to the youth of Japan, as a strong desire has arisen in that country to make an effort to develop the great natural resources which it is known to possess. Our advice and practical assistance in the establishment of the college have been called into requisition, owing to the ambassadors having observed during their sojourn amongst us, how intimately our eminent industrial status as a nation is dependent upon the attention which we devote to the cultivation of those sciences which are involved in the mining, metallurgical, engineering, and many manufacturing industries, and in bringing the forces of nature under the influence of man.

The general scheme of the instruction has been devised by one of our eminent engineers, a gentleman whose experience of Continental and British systems of instruction is very extensive and varied, and judging from the appointment already made, it is evident that the professorial equipment of the college will devolve upon this country. The principal of the college, who is also to be the professor of engineering and mechanics, is Mr. Henry Dyer, M. A. B. Sc., who studied at the University of Glasgow, under the late Prof. J. M. Rankine, Sir William Thomson, and their colleagues. Mr. Dyer was a Whitworth Scholar, and his career hitherto has been one of great and well deserved success. He is well qualified to act as principal of the Yeddo Engineering College.

Prof. Dyer is to be assisted in his duties in the Japanese College of Engineers by professors of mathematics, natural philosophy, chemistry, geology, and mineralogy, and by teachers of English, &c. At least two important appointments have been made, namely, to the professorship of mathematics and to the professorship of natural philosophy. The former has been conferred on Mr. D. H. Marshall, at present assistant to Prof. P. G. Tait in Edinburgh University ; and the latter is to be filled by Mr. W. E. Ayrton, formerly of University College, London, and the University of Glasgow. The last-named gentleman has already been employed in the East Indian telegraphic service, and he is at present assistant-engineer in connection with the manufacture of the Great Western Telegraph Cable under Sir William Thomson and Prof. Fleeming Jenkin.

In connection with this Engineering College there are several other points of importance that may be stated. It is intended to institute a geological survey of Japan, and not improbably the active superintendence of that work will devolve upon the gentleman who may ultimately be appointed to the professorship of geology and mineralogy. As an important adjunct to the College, there will be erected a technical workshop, fitted with steam-engine, machine tools, and all the necessary appliances for familiarizing the young Japanese engineers with the principles of construction, &c. There will a’so be a technological museum for the illustration of the progressive stages of various industrial processes from the raw materials to the finished products.

(2) 'ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN JAPAN,' NATURE〔May 17, 1877〕p.44-45.

The technical education of engineers is a subject which has engaged public attention for a long time past and is one of great national importance. It is somewhat singular that this country , foremost as it has always been in matters of engineering enterprise, should be so behindhand in the systematic education of its engineers, there being no establishment in England devoted to that object which is recognised by the profession. Under the system that has been in vogue up to a comparatively recent period a youth intended for an engineer is taken from school at the age of sixteen being thereby deprived of the most valuable years of his education, and placed in some engineering manufactory, where he remains, perhaps, till he is twenty. In those four years his so called “training”consists in going through the manual routine of the various workshops and “picking up”what knowledge he can by keeping his eyes open and living on good terms with the workmen.

His last year is usually spent in the drawing-office, where, by a similar process of “picking up,”he learns how to draw if not to design machinery or works of construction. At the end of that time his education is supposed to be complete, and he either remains as a draughtsman until something better is offered him, or he enters the office of another engineer for the purpose of improvement. All this time the far more important theoretical training is neglected altogether, no classes or examinations are held, no lectures or other instructions are given, and though some few energetic young men in some way make up this loss by private study they are a great exception, and the hours of manual work are usually so heavy (from 6 A.M. till 5 P.M.) as to render working in the evening both fatiguing and unprofitable. The Continental system goes to the other extreme, teaching the theory and discarding the practice.

This system is as bad as the other, for experience has shown that in engineering works a practical man without scientific training seldom makes such serious blunders as a scientific man without practical experience. It can only be by a judicious combination of the two systems, allowing science and practical experience to work hand in hand together in the education of an engineer that the best results can be looked for, and in these days of close competition, not only between man and man, but between country and country, It is of the utmost importance to a nation that its engineers should be instructed upon the best and soundest principles. The Indian Government recognised this when it established the Royal Indian Engineering College at Cooper’s Hill for the systematic training of engineers for the Public Works Department of India ; and it is remarkable that the profession of engineering should stand alone in England as having no recognised Alma Mater of its own. Many years ago an engineering college was established at Putney upon a good system, but it was badly managed, and after becoming a nuisance to the neighbourhood, was ultimately shut up ; at the present time, with the exception of the technical classes at the Crystal Palace and at King’s College, which, in a small way, are doing good work, there is no institution in this country devoted to the education of engineers.

While England is so far behindhand in this important question, a great work has been done by the Japanese Government in the establishment of an Imperial College of Engineering at Tokei, an institution which gives to its students a highly scientific training, combined with actual practical experience in engineering workshops which give employment at the present time to over three hundred workmen, but which are being largely increased and are turning out all classes of engineering work.

The system adopted is as follows : The course of training extends over six years.

The first two years are spent entirely at college ; during the next two years, six months of each year are spent at college and six months in the practice of that particular branch which the student may select ; the last two years are spent entirely in practical work. The system of instruction in the college is partly professorial and partly tutorial, consisting in the delivery of lectures and in assistance being given to the students in their work.

Candidates for admission must be Japanese subjects under the age of twenty, and must pass a preliminary examination, the best fifty being chosen as cadets, of which there are two classes. A student may elect to enter either as a Government cadet in which case all his expenses are defrayed by Government, under whom he binds himself to serve for seven years at the expiration of his six years’ training or he may enter as a private cadet, paying his own expenses, in which case the obligation to serve subsequently under Government is dispensed with. In all other respects he is on the same footing as the Government cadet.

The whole system of training may be divided into three courses : (1) General and Scientific, (2) Technical, and (3) Practical. The general and scientific course, which is taught during the first two years, includes (1) English language and composition, (2) geography, (3) elementary mathematics, (4) elementary mechanics, (5) elementary physics, (6) chemistry, and (7) mechanical drawing.

The Technical course consists of the following branches of engineering : (1) Civil engineering, (2) mechanical engineering, (3) telegraphy, (4) architecture, (5) chemistry and metallurgy, and (6) mining. This course is taught during the third and fourth years of the curriculum. The practical course, in which the students are engaged during the last two years in the practice of the special branch each may have selected, consists of working in the laboratories of the college, and in the engineering works connected with it established at Akabane, where they serve a regular engineering apprenticeship.

While this course is going on lectures on special subjects are given, and the students are required to prepare reports upon the work in which they have been engaged.

In the Technical course are included the higher mathematics and natural philosophy, engineering, civil and mechanical, geology, mineralogy, surveying, naval architecture, strength of materials, practice in the chemical, physical, metallurgical, and engineering laboratories, and in the drawing office and workshops. The main building, which is a very handsome structure, consists of a central portion containing the large examination hall and library, drawing offices and class rooms, and on each side of this extends a wing containing other class rooms and lecture halls.

This is the College proper, and surrounding it are separate buildings set apart for the dormitories, Professors’ houses, museum and laboratories of which there are four devoted respectively to chemistry, physics, metallurgy, and engineering. The buildings have been very admirably arranged by the Principal of the College, Mr. Henry Dyer, C. E., and the architectural details have been carried out with great skill by Mr. C. A. de Boinville. The staff of the College consists of a Principal and nine English Professors, assisted by Japanese teachers, and the Institution is under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Public Works. A calendar of the College is published annually, which contains information relative to the admission of students, courses of study, and examination papers, as well as catalogues of the splendid collection of instruments in the laboratories, and of the books in the library, which seems to be exceptionally rich in almost every branch of general and scientific literature.

C. W. C.

9-2. Edward C. Robins from viewpoint of Design of Buildings for Technical Education技術教育としての建築デザイン

(1) Buildings for secondary educational purposes, by Edward Cockworthy Robins

The Builder, April 10 and 17, 1880.

The Physical Department of the Imperial College of Engineering at Yedo, Japan.

From the particulars given to me by Professor Ayrton, I have been enabled to prepare a ground plan of the department of which he was professor, and it is no small satisfaction to me, as a member of the Executive Committee of the City and Guilds Technical Institute, that his able services have been secured to develop the physics classes at Cowper-street, for which costly buildings are in course of realization, such as it is hoped may give full play to his talents, to the great advantage of the youth and working classes of the City of London.

Room No.1 is the demonstration-room, 50ft. square, and occupying the whole height of this portion of the building. It was fitted up in the following manner: — On a level with the first floor, a gallery about 3 ft. wide ran round the whole room, from which wires and other apparatus were suspended for experiment; it also gave access tot he shutters by which the upper windows could be closed to darken the room for optical and other experiments. The students’ benches occupied the centre of the room, and around three sides of the room, next the walls on the ground-floor level, were instrument and working cases, the under-side of the gallery being utilized for cupboards, entered from behind.

Room No.2 is the general laboratory, fitted up with instrument cases, covered in working-cases, the tables being on concrete foundations, and uncovered instrument cases on brick piers.

Room No.3 is the Professor’s private room and private laboratory.

Room No.4 is the instrument-room.

Room No.5 and 6 are for electrical experiments, No.5 being fitted up with six brick pillars, each about 2 ft. square, and descending 6 ft. into the ground. No.& has long tables on brick piers.

Room No.7 is the lavatory attacked to the laboratory, for washing bottles, & C.

Room No.8 is a small, artificially-dried room, in which experiments with frictional electricity could be conveniently performed.

On the first-floor, which extended over all but the demonstration-room, were rooms for experiments on light, a small class-room for the teaching of applied physics, rooms for special experiments, store-closets, and the battery-room. The detail drawing, which I have had prepared from these made by Professor Ayrton, are exceedingly interesting sf valuable on account of their originality, and because they have took the test of use in the college at Yedo.

Fitting in Demonstration-room. — The sloping platform, or students’ gallery, is shown on the drawings, and in the side sectional view I have indicated in dotted lines the brick piers which sustain the students’ tables distinct from the general flooring, so as to be quite free from vibration. There si also a front, back, and top view of the students’ bench, and a section showing thinks and gas-fittings. By this special arrangement of students’ benches (which is believed to be unique of its kind), it was possible for the students, without leaving their places, to repeat the experiments made by the Professor during the lecture, with apparatus placed ready for them on these firm benches. Between the lectures, these benches or tables could be utilized as part of the laboratory proper.

Illustrations are also given of the instrument cases, with folding-doors and glass panels, as arranged around a portion of the demonstrating-room, which are also used in the laboratory.

Details are shown of the Professor’s lecture-table in this room, resting on a platform, the whole of which was sustained on a concrete foundation distinct from the general flooring, and its fittings include a pneumatic trough sink.

Fitting in the Laboratory. — Besides the instrument cases, the drawing also exhibit the working cases, the drawings also exhibit the working cases, furnished with glazed sash windows, as used in the general laboratory and in the Professor’s private laboratory. The tables in the cases rested on a concrete foundation, quite distinct from the flooring, to avoid the transmission of vibrations; so that except where the sash was closed, after work, to exclude dust or meddling fingers, no part of the case rested on the table, there being no connection between the table carrying the apparatus and the floor, on which rested the sash-frames and glazed inclusive, and on which the experimenter stood. With such working cases a delicate investigation could be carried on from day to day, the apparatus being always ready whenever the experimenter had leisure to work at it. Some of the working cases, so enclosed and fitted with window-sashes to exclude dust, & C., not being required for very delicate experiments likely to be spoiled by small vibrations, stood upon the common floor, without concrete foundations. There is the charm of novelty in these arrangements, so far as I know, and of the following fitting for the battery-room.

Battery-Room, — Illustrations are given of these designs as carried out in the aforesaid Technical College of Yeddo, under Professor Ayrton’s direction. Accommodation was provided for about 200 Gove’s cells and 300 Daniell’s, used for general electrical work and for the electrical testing of the students of telegraph engineering. The peculiarity of these special fitting was that all the cells were under glazed covers, and, therefore, dust was excluded; yet all the cells were visible, dust was excluded; yet all the cells were visible, and all obnoxious gases were led up the flues; the cells were easily got at by opening any portion of the double-hinged cover. When taking a Grove’s battery apart, after use, the zincs were put at once into the long, narrow leaden sink, immediately in front of the battery-stand; and the porous cells to soak in the long leaden sinks immediately behind the operator. After soaking, the porous cells were put on the racks to dry, and were ready for use within reach of the operator putting up the battery on the next occasion.

Of Professor Ayrton’s drawing I have seen ten, and of these I have chosen the most interesting examples. It is to be observed that the fittings of the physical department at Yeddo were contrived to enable the students to learn by advancing the bounds of knowledge, and not merely by assimilating editing information, as in evidenced by numerous published accounts of original research conducted in that laboratory; and it is this method of teaching which has given to Professor Ayrton the prestige which he enjoys.

The Builder, August 4, 1880

IMPERIAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,

JAPAN.

SIR,-My attention has been called to a paper by Mr. E. C. Robins, entitled “Buildings for Secondary Educational Purposes,” which appeared in the Builder of the 10th and 17th of April last. In this paper Mr. Robins dwells at length on the excellence of the arrangements in the Physical Department of the Imperial College of Engineering of Tokio (Yedo), Japan, and on the satisfactory results obtained there.

The writer at the same time gives a plan and detail drawings of the same, and I must express my surprise that an architectural paper such as the Builder should publish drawings of a new building and its fittings without the signature or sanction of the architect.

It may not be generally known that the Japanese Government, while behaving with great liberality to their foreign employés, are averse to the publication of any of the designs made by those in their employ. This, you will understand, is a sufficient reason in itself to explain why I should object to any drawings of public buildings I have de signed being published. The writer of the paper is perhaps not aware, when giving Mr. Ayrton sole credit for using benches fitted up so that the pupils can repeat the experiments made by the professor, “which is believed to be unique of its kind,”—that others before him employed the same means for instructing their pupils (Professor Williamson, of King's College, for example).

Before the Physical Department Buildings were thought of, the chemical class-room of the Imperial College of Engineering was fitted up with similar benches.

As much, if not more, credit is due to the principal, Mr. Henry Dyer, and to Dr. Divers, the Professor of Chemistry, than to Mr. W. E. Ayrton, for the happy results which that gentleman's friends would claim for him alone.

C. A. CHAstEL DE BoINVILLE,

Architect to the Board of Public Works of Japan.

11, Yamato Yashiki Tokio (Yedo), Japan,

18th June, 1880

The Builder, Aug.28, 1880

THE COLLEGE FITTINGS AT YEDO, JAPAN.

Sir,—I have seen the letter of M. De Boinville, taking exception to the good opinion I have formed of the Physical College fittings at Yedo, which were suggested by Professor Ayrton, and ably carried out by the architect.

Dr. Williamson, of University College, who took the chair at my lecture (but who is not a professor of Kind's College), admitted the original character of the fittings to which I referred, so far as he knew, and I have said no more.

I am not aware that I have given any privileged information, or described anything not justified by the subject under discussion. I certainly did not wander awav into a description of the architectural excellences of the buildings forming the College at Japan, nor did I allude to any defects ; but I simply drew the attention of the audience to a class of specially designed fittings in one department only, the particulars of which were given to me by their originator, though not their executor, and I still think them highly creditable to both, and to the enterprising founders of a technical college the like of which is scarcely equalled out of Japan.

Edw. C. Robins.

Architecture of Science edited Galison and Emily Thompson, the MIT Press, 1999

8. Bricks and Bones: Architecture and Science in Victorian Britain by Sophie Forgan, p.184

a contrasting sort of practice and career may be seen in the architect Edward Cookworthy Robins(1830-1918), who specialized in the technical requirements of scientific buildings and laboratories in particular, publishing in 1887 Technical School and College Building. This manual included a great deal of information on foreign laboratories and provided a compendium of up-to-date wisdom. He became involved in the design of Britain’s first technical college, the Finsbury College, and was a devoted supporter of the T.H. Huxley, whose fame and campaign for technical education was at its height in the late 1870s and early 1880s.

The development of the laboratory: essays on the place of experiments in industrial civilization, edited and introduced by Frank A.J. James, Macmillan press, 1989.

p.159

included laboratories and workshops for mechanics and chemistry teaching. it was Clifton who was initially given the task of designing a cheep two-story laboratory complex for the City & Guilds, to supplement the school’s facilities.

Well over 100 students — bankers, builders, engineers, insurance company clerks, chemists and druggists — attended Ayrton’s and Armstrong’s classes in the first few months. Armed with this evidence, and with the support of Robins, who was acting in his capacity as the Dyer’s Company architect and surveyor, Ayrton and Armstrong were able to persuade the City and Guilds to erect a much larger and better-equipped building in the school’s playground on Tabernacle Raw (now Leonard Street). The Drapers’ Company gave 10,000 for the purpose. As Ayrton later acknowledged., it was because Robins ‘strenuously exerted himself to further technical education in Finsbury, that the carious electrical, physical and mechanical laboratories now in Leonard Street, Finsbury became in to existence’.Indeed, it was Robins’s report to the Guides on 31 December 1880, in which he over-optimistically argued that a middle-grade technical school for engineering and applied art could be erected in the Cowper Street school grounds for 12,000, that persuaded the Guilds to proceed.

The foundation stone of England’s first technical college was laid at Finsbury by Queen Victoria’s youngest son, Leopold, in May 1881. However the building was not ready for use until February 1883, because legal, labour and cash-flow problems caused delays.

Notable Teachers at Finsbury Technical College and the Central Technical College.

Posted 12 June 2011 by Richard & filed under Biographies & Pen Portraits.

H. Armstrong (1848-1937), W.Ayrton (1847-1908), J. Perry (1850-1920) and S. Thompson (1851-1926).

Two pioneering technical institutions namely Finsbury Technical College (Leonard Street) and the Central Institution (South Kensington) – (see this website for pen portraits) attracted some remarkable individuals. Both these institutions were the result of the creation of the City and Guilds Institute for the Advancement of Technical Education (CGLI). Finsbury Technical College came to be seen as the feeder to the Central Institution which had a focus on higher education provision. The practical work developed at Finsbury was later expanded and enhanced at the Central Institution because of its well equipped and modern laboratories.

The brief biographies of four of the teachers involved at the two institutions are given below. These four remarkable individuals all ahead of their time and their ideas on how to teach mathematics, science and technical subjects was truly amazing and still have relevance today. If only their ideas had been implemented on a larger scale the parlous state of technical and scientific education and training could have been dramatically improved. They all had to deal at times with traditional and entrenched attitudes associated with the supposed superiority of academic studies and subjects over technical ones.

Henry E Armstrong

Born in Lewisham in 1848 and educated at the Royal College of Chemistry, (now the department of Chemistry at Imperial College). Between 1865 and 1867 studying under Edward Frankland who had succeeded Hofmann as Professor of Chemistry. During this time he attended lectures by such notable scientists as Thomas Huxley, William Ramsay and John Tyndall. These experiences established an independent thinking, confident and brilliant chemist. Frankland suggested that Armstrong continued his studies and research with Hermann Kolbe another famous chemist based at the University of Leipzig, Germany. During this period he visited and worked at Berlin and Dresden Universities and completed his studies and dissertation in 1870. After three years in Germany, (1867 to 1870), he returned to England and was appointed lecturer in chemistry at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in 1870. Henry was appointed Professor of Chemistry at the London Institution in 1871. He worked with William Ayrton at the Cowper Street Schools which later became the Finsbury Technical College and then Professor of Chemistry at the Central Technical College which later became the City and Guilds College between 1884 and 1913 (see biographies on this website).

Amongst other achievements he established a three- year diploma programme in chemical engineering arguing as did his other enlightened colleagues ‘that there was an urgent need for a more scientific attitude of mind among British industrialists.’ When he was appointed with William Ayrton, as the first professors at Finsbury Technical College they both shared the same view that examinations must not drive the teaching and learning process. This view was also held by other teachers such as John Perry and Philip Magnus. They all believed that teachers must have liberty of action and fortunately they were at that time supported by the committees of CGLI.

(Comment: Sadly currently examinations and continuous assessment regimes dominate the education system in many countries and particularly in England. This culture has made the awarding bodies become businesses driven by the market and are now more interested in implementing questionable government education policies and making money. Education and all the associated elements e.g. examinations should not be a hardnosed business enterprise based on market forces.)

In addition to being a notable chemist Henry was also an outstanding person in the teaching of science particularly active in this field during the last two decades of the 19th century. He was dis-satisfied with science teaching methods in schools. He strongly argued that pupils should be allowed to discover things for themselves and in a sense be in the position of the original experimenter and observer. His particular method of teaching became known as the heuristic method and was introduced at St. Dunstan’s College where he was a governor. This method has influenced science ever since, although the inevitable constraints of time modified its basic premises. His criticisms also helped to motivate science teachers and reduced the possibility of them becoming complacent. His ideas of on science teaching closely parallels those of John Perry on mathematics teaching. The Nuffield programmes in science were greatly influenced by their ideas. He was president of the Chemical Society from 1893 to 1895 and Emeritus Professor at Imperial College, London.

His obituary stated he was the major figure in chemistry and science education during two generations possessing a rare gift of expression and writing. He died in 1937.

References: Praagh. G. Van. (Ed) ‘Henry Armstrong and Science Education.’ Selection from the Teaching of Scientific Method by Armstrong. H. E. John Murray. ISBN 0 7195 2893 3. 1973.Eyre. J. V. ‘Henry Armstrong, 1848-1937. Butterworth Scientific Publications. London. 1958

William E Ayton

William Edward Ayrton was born in London in 1847 and studied at University College School and University College London where he passed with honours the first ever Bachelor of Arts at the University of London in 1867. After this he studied in Glasgow during the late 1860s with Lord Kelvin. He later worked for the Indian Government Telegraphic Service between 1868 and 1873 after gaining the highest grade in their examinations. Between 1873 and 1878 he was Professor of Natural Philosophy and Instructor in the Imperial College of Engineering in Tokyo, Japan. In both these appointments he made fundamental discoveries in fault detection systems in high tension electrical transmission lines and introduced electric lighting to Japan in 1878. He was a brilliant physicist, electrical engineer, pioneer of electrical engineering and teacher making many important discoveries and inventions both with joint collaborators and alone. He published extensively again alone and jointly on engineering and scientific disciplines particularly in their application in such areas as electrical technology and its measurement e.g. inventing with John Perry the dynamometer, the first electric tricycle, railway electrification, various ammeters and the wattmeter. He was the first to advocate high power electricity transmission. His career often crossed with that if John Perry (see below). He and Perry published 70 important scientific and technical papers between 1876 and 1891. He worked with Perry in Japan, Finsbury College, Central College and Imperial College.

On his return from Japan he took up a number of key appointments at the City and Guilds of London Institute in 1879, professor of applied physics at the Finsbury Technical College in 1881 and in 1884 professor of electrical engineering at the Central Institution at Kensington. In addition he was an outstanding teacher often using his own apparatus and inventions in the classes to demonstrate the concepts and processes. Both he and John Perry (see below) believed that teaching must be accessible to students and equally importantly with an emphasis on practical work. He believed that a machines workshop/facility was essential to effective teaching and learning and that an emphasis on practical work linked to lectures was crucial. The first year course comprised the core subjects of chemistry, mechanics, mathematics and physics and was offered both at the Finsbury Technical College and the Central Institution in order to lay strong foundations to students’ technical studies.

While teaching at Finsbury College he met and later married in 1885 Hertha (Sarah) Marks (see her biography on this website). In 1892 he became President of the institute of Electrical Engineers (IEE) and in 1896 was a member of the editorial committee of the Science Abstracts of the IEE. He died in 1908.

References: Chisholm. H. (ed). ‘William Edward Ayrton.’ Encyclopaedia Britannica. 11th Edition. CUP. 1911 Institute of Engineering and Technology Archives Biographies. The National Archives and various Dictionaries and Encyclopaedia of Science and Technologies.

John Perry

Born in Londonderry, Ireland and studied at Queens College, Belfast. He left school early to support himself and worked as an apprentice at the Lagan Foundry from 1864 to 1870. During the last three years of his apprenticeship he studied Engineering at Queen’s College on what we would now call a sandwich course. In 1870 he took up a teaching post in mathematics and science at the boys’ laboratory and workshop. Whilst studying and as a result of all this pressure he began to lose his sight. However his sister used to read text books with him and he became fascinated with the electrical sciences. Later he became interested in steam power and a book he wrote became the seminal text for the US navy. He became a gifted mathematician and pioneering engineer. He taught at Clifton College, Bristol leaving in 1874 to study a year under William Thomson (Lord Kelvin) in a small laboratory in Glasgow. He then emigrated to Japan and took an appointment as Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the newly established Imperial College of Engineering, Tokyo, (then the largest technical institution in the world), where he worked with William Ayrton. They collaborated very successfully on problems associated with applied electricity. They also introduced some novel methods of teaching mathematics and engineering. One often cited technique was the use of graph (or squared) paper as a method of teaching and analysing functional innovations relationships in mechanics and electricity. They used this technique in Tokyo and at Finsbury Technical College. This teaching technique was to become one of the defining features and innovations at the Finsbury College which are now referred to as the ‘Finsbury Method’.

On his return to England he was appointed Professor of Engineering and Mathematics at Finsbury Technical College in 1879, again joining William Ayrton and then in 1896 became Professor of Mathematics and Mechanical Engineering at the Central Institution. He retired from the Central Institution in 1914 but continued his work advising the British military on gyroscopic compasses. Mathematics to Perry was a branch of science being ’merely an inductive science based on experience’. One of his guiding rules was ‘that we ought to use, as illustrations, those things with which the pupils have most to do (and) must begin in the middle of the subject, working backwards and forwards. He was elected President of the Institute of Electrical Engineering in 1900 and was President of the Physical Society (later the Institute of Physics) from 1906 to 1908. Like Ayrton is believed in teaching science and engineering from a practical point of view. John Perry was a remarkable teacher who encouraged his students to develop a wider set of interests such as reading novels, taking an interest in literature and especially a greater emphasis in mathematics in order to move away from the rather narrow technically training and instruction that was dominant at the time. He attracted controversy and criticism from the academic mathematics community by publishing a book entitled ‘Calculus for Engineers’, It treated the subject as a purely practical tool e.g. there as an absence of abstract reasoning and presented a simplistic set of rules on differentiation and integration. The book maintained a focus on practical applications to electricity, mechanics and thermodynamics. He used the same approach to such subjects as algebra, arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry etc. He reinforced his ideas by publishing extensively from 1880 arguing strongly for major reform of teaching mathematics – sadly we are still waiting for such reforms considering the parlous state of mathematics teaching in England and some of the home countries! Indeed a man well ahead of his time.

However his ideas were picked up by the newly created Board of Education (BoE) that had succeeded the Science and Art Department in 1899 and it incorporated some of his ideas and techniques into an examination called ‘Practical Mathematics’. Following the creation of an educational section within the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) in 1900 Perry organised a series of discussions groups at the 1901 Glasgow meeting on themes associated with the teaching of elementary mathematics in military, secondary and technical education. The meeting highlighted the massive divisions between the academic approach of teaching i.e. the formal study of mathematics for its own sake as opposed to its practical applications and the essential importance of its utility that Perry was advocating. Interesting that one of the major themes identified in the history of technical education on this website mirrors this tension that has produced the so-called academic- vocational divide – nothing changes! Perry’s ideas are still very relevant and valid today and sadly await recognition and implementation and what little progress has been achieved since his time has been painfully slow. Many of his Irish predecessors, and he and others since, have been progressive thinkers and innovators in astronomy, mathematics, science and technical education. Their pioneering work has so often been overlooked or marginalised by the English. Perhaps it is another example of the inability of the English to recognise and celebrate the achievements of the other home countries? John Perry has not been given the recognition that he deserves and was truly a very remarkable individual well ahead of his time.

He was elected president of the Institution of Electrical Engineers and was president of the Physical Society, (now the Institute of Physics), from 1906 to 1908. He died in 1920.

References: Nudds. R. N., McMillan N. D., Weaire. D. L and McKenna Lawlor. S. M. P. ‘Science in Ireland 1800-1930. Tradition and Reform.’ ISBN 0:9513586 1 8. Dublin.1988.

John Perry. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Silvanus P Thompson

Born in York in 1851, the year of the Great Exhibition, he started teaching science at Bootham School in 1873. He was greatly influenced by a lecture given by William Crookes which inspired him to become interested in electromagnetism and optics. In 1876 he was appointed lecturer in physics at University College, Bristol and was made a professor in 1878 at the age of 27 and he stayed at Bristol for nine years. He was very interested in technical education and made a number of fact finding trips to Europe and presented a seminal paper at the (R) Society of Arts in 1879 entitled ‘Apprenticeships, Scientific and Unscientific’ (see chronology on this website) which again like others, (Huxley, Playfair, Magnus et.al – see biographies on this website), highlighted the deficiencies in technical education in England. He recognised that technical education was critical in transferring and translating scientific knowledge into action and practical application and enhancing technical and technological innovation. He was totally committed to this endeavour and spent the rest of his life working to improve technical education and training. Following the creation of the City and Guilds of London Institute for the Advancement of Technical Education, the Finsbury College was founded and Thompson was appointed its Principal and Professor of Physics. Thompson organised classes in optics at Finsbury Technical College which was then at the centre of the spectacle making district in Clerkenwell, He held those positions for 30 years and in 1907 the City and Guilds of London College along with other institutions merged to create Imperial College, London.

Thompson was a recognised authority on acoustics, electricity, magnetism and optics writing a number of seminal text books some of which went through innumerable editions. He later became a widely respected biographer and historian of science writing a biography of Lord Kelvin. He was a very gifted speaker, a skilful artist, and linguist and greatly interested in literary, antiquarian and artistic subjects. His range of interests and vision was truly remarkable and he bridged the scientific and artistic divide – C. P Snow, (Two Cultures), would be impressed with such an individual! In 1882 he was elected a member of the Society of Telegraph Engineers and Electricians and in 1886 a member of the Royal institution where he delivered some excellent lectures. He became the first president of the Rontgen Society, (Rontgen discovered x-rays), between 1897 and 1898. He died in 1916.

References: Thompson. J. S. And Thompson. H. G. ‘Silvanus Phillips Thompson, His Life and Letters,’ T. Fisher Unwin. London 1920. New edition published with and edited by Martin Gardner. Lynch. A. C. ‘Silvanus Thompson: teacher, researcher, and historian.’ IEE Proceedings. 1989.

Hertha (Sarah) Marks Ayrton (1854 – 1923)

Posted 12 June 2011 by Richard & filed under Biographies & Pen Portraits.

Born in Portsea, Hampshire, England and named Phoebe Sarah Marks – she later adopted the first name Hertha after the Teutonic earth goodness. Her father who had emigrated from Poland died when she was only seven and left the family heavily in debt, and who then struggled financially to survive. At the age of nine she went to live with her maternal aunt in London and attended the school that her uncle and aunt ran for their children. Both influenced the young Sarah her aunt teaching her mathematics and uncle philosophy. She supported herself and her family by tutoring and doing needle crafts. Her ambition of going to university was realised by the generosity of Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon* one of the founders of Girton College, (Girton was the first residential college for women established at Cambridge), and this allowed her to enter the college in 1876 after passing the Cambridge University Examination for women in 1874, with honours in English and Mathematics. In spite of problems with bouts of illness and consequent poor examination results she eventually completed the Mathematical Tripos with a relatively poor grade 3rd class from Cambridge in 1880. It is important to note that women were not eligible for the university degree at this time and were only granted certificates. However she then successfully completed an external examination and received a BSc degree from the University of London in 1881. She was greatly helped during this difficult period by Richard Glazebrook who provided extra coaching. So in spite of immense prejudice and resultant negative attitudes created by the male dominated education system towards women, she survived and triumphed – a remarkable achievement at the time.

Very few women were involved in such subjects as engineering, mathematics and science whether in teaching or research. Hertha began to violate and break down this deplorable situation. Between 1881 and 1884 she continued to support herself by tutoring in mathematics and other related subjects. Up to then her main interest was mathematics but she inherited from her father a practical ability, (he was a clockmaker and jeweller), and started patenting scientific and mathematical instruments such as a line divider for drafting. She also wrote and set problems in mathematics that were published in the ‘Educational Times’ and became acknowledged as a gifted mathematician particularly in spatial and geometrical reasoning. Her main interest then began to switch to science and she attended physics classes at Finsbury Technical College and was tutored by William Ayrton, (see biographies on this website), who she married in 1885. William Ayrton was a widower with a young daughter and besides being an outstanding teacher and physicist was supportive of women’s education and legal rights.

Hertha then began to work with her husband on electricity and other aspects of physics but developed her own research interests especially on electrical arc lighting and soon became an acknowledged expert in this rapidly emerging technology. She published extensively in such journals as the ‘Proceedings of the Royal Society’ and the ‘Electrician’ and wrote a seminal book on The Electric Arc which received international acclaim. She became recognised as a respected and renowned researcher in electricity and is now seen as a pioneer of plasma physics. Again it must be remembered that very few women were active in science and mathematics.

She was elected as the first female member of the Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE) in 1899 which possesses a commendable record in encouraging and recognising women in their discipline. Sadly the same cannot be said of the Royal Society for when she was nominated as the first woman for a fellowship she was refused on the excuse that she was married. The charter excluding women from fellowship was reversed in 1923 but it was another twenty years before a woman was elected. The Royal Society has a very poor record in recognising the achievements of women scientists and mathematics. However she did present a paper to the Royal Society in 1904 – the first women to do so and she later received the Society’s Hughes medal, an achievement yet to repeated by a woman. She was an amazing trail blazer!

Hertha had to reduce her research activities to look after her ailing husband and even during this period when at the seaside with William carried detailed analysis of the formation of sand ripples which later formed part of the recognition in the Hughes Medal, along with her pioneering work on electric arcs. William died in 1908 and she continued her research in such areas of hydrodynamics and invented a fan for ventilating the trenches in the First World War and also improved the design and efficiency of search lights. She was an active member of the Women’s Social and Political Unions and was a founding member of the International Federation of University Women and the National Union of Scientific Workers (1920). She served on a number of national and international committees associated with women’s rights. After WW1 she improved the design of the fan and continued her research on vortices. She died in 1923 leaving her not inconsiderable estate to The Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE), the organisation that had encouraged and recognised her achievements throughout her career without prejudice or reservation. She is now recognised and accepted as an exceptional woman in her own right. Her approach to research was pragmatic and founded on engineering traditions; not for her were the theoretical physical models and concepts. Her background and education created this unique and productive individual. An example of this approach was her seminal work on sand ripples which initially was based solely on observation. Quite rightly she subsequently became a role model for future generations of women wishing to enter the scientific and engineering professions. Below she is delivering a lecture in 1899 to the Society of Electrical Engineers note the majority of males in audience and the visual aids she is using – a very remarkable lady.

City and Guilds of London Institute – more background.

Posted 23 March 2011 by Richard & filed under Biographies & Pen Portraits.

(More background on City and Guilds of London Institute (CGLI), Finsbury Technical College, the Central Institution and the City and Guilds of London Art School).

Founded in 1878 by a number of Livery Companies and the City of London in order to contribute to the development of a national system of technical education. Following a review by a number of Livery Companies recommendations were made about the structure and scope of City and Guilds of London Institute. There were to be five branches to the Institute namely:

· The transference of the Society of Arts Technological examinations to the Association of the Livery Companies which had been constituted as the City and Guilds of London Institute for the Advancement of Technical Education. The resulting Technological Examinations Department was to register and inspect classes in technology and manual training and to hold annual examinations in the subjects taught in these classes.

· The creation of a Trade/Technical College/School north of the Thames at Finsbury: “An intermediate College’ with day courses in mechanical and electrical engineering and chemistry and evening classes in the same subjects and in applied art.

· The creation of a South London Technical Art School at Kennington offering courses in such areas as drawing, house decorating, modelling and painting.

· The creation of a Central Institution which would be a high quality training school for teachers in London. An Institution of a ‘university character’, in mechanics and mathematics; civil, mechanical and electrical engineering; chemistry and

· Grants for supporting certain technical classes already established at King’s College, London and elsewhere; and grants for the proposed chairs of Chemical Technology and Mechanical Technology at University College, London.

Subsequently a number of meetings were held to consider taking forward these proposals and on 11thNovember 1878 at the Mercers’ Hall sixteen Livery Companies and the Corporation of London in attendance that would formally decide to establish a national system of technical education.

The funding came from the seventeen organisations present at the meeting and initially a sum of £11,582. 1Oshillings (£11,582.50p) was provided.

The sixteen Companies present at the founding meeting were:

Armourers and Braziers/Brasiers, Carpenters, Clothworkers, Coopers, Cordwainers, Drapers, Dyers, Goldsmiths, Fishmongers, Ironmongers, Leathersellers, Needlemakers, Mercers, Pewterers, Plaisters and Salters.

Eventuallyin 1880 the educational association comprising 14 of the founding Companies established was incorporated under the Company Acts as the City and Guilds of London Institute for the Advancement of Technical Education. In 1900 the Institute was granted a Royal Charter by Queen Victoria.

The locations of CGLI headquarters in London since its founding:

1879-80: Mercers’ Hall

1881-1913: Gresham College

1913: 3, St Helen’s Place – whilst Gresham College was rebuilt

1914: Leonard Street at the CGLI Finsbury technical College whilst the rebuilding of Gresham College continued

1915-57: Gresham College, Basinghall Street

1958 -1995: 76, Portland Place

1995+: 1, Giltspur Street.

Technological Examinations:

1879 – 80: Mercers’ Hall

1881 – 87: Gresham College

1887 – 91: City and Guilds of London Central Institute, South Kensington

After 1891 the technological examinations became part of the examination department and between:

1891 – 1903 were based at Exhibition Road (Royal School of Needlework), South Kensington and at various locations namely:

1903 – 22: Exhibition Road

1922 – 31: 29,Roland Gardens, South Kensington

1931 – 58: 31, Brechin Place

1958 – 1995: 76, Portland Place

1995 –present: 1, Giltspur Street

Some other dates:

1879 – 1926: City and Guilds Technical College, Finsbury – Leonard Street. Initially located in the premises of the Middle Class School in Cowper Street, classes started in November 1879 with teachers such as H. E. Armstrong and W. E. Ayrton. Eventually a new college was built in Leonard Street –foundation stone laid May 1881 and opened in 1883 as Finsbury Technical College.

1879 – 1923: South London Technical Art School – 122-124 Kennington Park Road

1932 – 37: City and Guilds of London Institute Kennington and Lambeth Art School – 118-71 Kennington Park Road

1937 – 71: City and Guilds of London Art School – 118-124 Kennington Park Road

1884 – 93: Central Institution – Exhibition Road

1893 – 1910: Central Technical College – Exhibition Road

1911 – 1962: City and Guilds College – Imperial College of Science and Technology, South Kensington

The Central Institution

The Object of the Central Institution:

‘To train technical teachers, proprietors and managers of chemical, civil and electrical engineers, architects, builders and persons engaged in art industries’.

Building completed in June 1884 with extensive facilities including: classrooms, laboratories, lecture theatres, specialist workshops and studios with engines and other forms of machinery for practical work. Clearly it was an expensive initiative as it focused on high level work and initially student numbers were low e.g. in 1885 there were only 35 students. In 1909 student numbers were 408 but even with fees from them the Institution struggled to be financially viable. The shortfall of £5,000 was covered by the Livery Companies but the high cost of updating equipment was a real concern. Eventually following recommendations from a Royal Commission regarding university education in London a faculty of engineering was created within the University of London and the City and Guilds Central Technical College as it was then called became one of its schools. Finally in 1907 it became one of the constituent colleges of Imperial College and in 1910 became known as the City and Guilds College.

Finsbury Technical College

The Objectives of Finsbury Technical College:

‘One of the yet unsolved problems of education is to discover subjects of instruction which a schoolboy, in after life, shall not cast aside as unprofitable, either for the purposes of his daily work or recreation, and the teaching of which shall have the same disciplinary effect as that of other subjects, which for so many centuries have been the sole instruments of education. In this college, an attempt will be made to partially solve this problem, by teaching science with this double object’. (Philip Magnus)

It is interesting to see what occupations the students represented at Cowper Street in 1880 included the following:

Brewers, Cabinet makers, Chemists, Dentists, Distillers, Drug brokers, Dyers, Electricians, Engineers, Engravers, Fire hose makers, Gas engineers, Glue makers, Hair and felt manufacturers, Inspectors of the Telephone Company, Leather dressers, Perfumers, Philosophical instruments makers, Photographers, Printers, Scale makers, Surgical instrument makers, Telegraphic instrument makers. Telegraphists, Varnish and colour manufacturers, Whitesmiths and Wine merchants,

A remarkable range! I wonder what Philosophical instrument makers were! Something about Natural Philosophy?

Lambeth School of Art/City and Guilds of London Art School

The Institute took over the Lambeth School of Art in 1878 when it faced closure. It was renamed the South London School of Technical Art on Kennington Park Road. The premises were extended by adding extra studios. Most of the classes were offered in the evening and students from local industries particularly the Doulton potteries. Classes were offered in calligraphy, drawing, a wide range of masonry techniques, painting and pottery modelling. The school proved very successful and trained many noted artists and designers. The premises were further extended in 1932 and in 1938 and it was renamed the City and Guilds of London Art School. The running costs of £20,000 in 1970 were relatively modest but the Institute decided that its work was out of kilter with its main business. A separate charitable trust was created supported by a number of Livery Companies and in 1971 the formal links with the Institute ceased.

This brief account does not do justice to the contribution the City and Guilds has made to the development of technical education. It created a number of fascinating institutions and has become a major examining body offering over 500 qualifications in a wide range of industrial sectors throughout 8,500 colleges and training providers in over 80 countries. The City and Guilds Group comprises: the Hospitality Awarding Body (HAB), the Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM), National Proficiency Tests Council (NPTC) and the Pitman Examinations Institute (PEI).

References:

CGLI. ‘Reflections Past and Future’. By Andrew Sich CGLI. 2000.

Lang. J. ‘City and Guilds of London Institute. Centenary 1878 – 1978. CGLI. 1978.

City and Guilds of London Institute. ‘A Short History’. CGLI. 1993.

Cronin. B. P. ‘Technology, Industrial Conflict and the Development of Technical Education in the 19th– Century England’. Ashgate. Aldershot. ISBN 0 7546 0313 X. 2001.

9-3. Royal Institute of British Architects

Chapter X. Demolition and Monument解体と記念碑

(1) 東京女学館と学習院

(2) 工部大学校校舎跡地

工部大学校跡記念塔に関する書類、昭和14年4月

此の地は明治天皇の聖蹟にして又実に我が国工学発祥の処と為す。はじめ明治4年工部工学寮を此処に置く。同六年寮内に工学校を開き、同10年改めて工部大学校と称し工作局の所管と為す。よく11年新築校舎成るを以て7月15日明治天皇親臨して開校の典を挙げ給う。皇族大臣参議以下参列し其儀極めて荘厳なり。天皇勅語を賜う中に百工を勧むるは経世の要にして時務の急なり。自今此校に従学する者勤勉して以て利用厚生の源を開かん事を望むの語あり。次に校舎の鍵·鑰を工部省御用取り扱い参議伊藤博文之を拝受して工作局長大鳥圭介に授け又報答の辞を奏す。式類よて天皇格教場を巡覧し学生の進講を聴き理化学の実験を視給いで後還幸あらせらる仰も此地は麹町区三年町に在り。旧延岡藩邸の遺蹟にして面積約一万二千坪本校舎はルネイサンス式二階建てにして之を中心として博物館実験室工作場生徒館等前方及び左右に配置せられ堂々として虎ノ門壕頭に聲ゆ○て煉瓦造にして広壮偉観を極む。是に於いて土木機械電信造家化学鉱山冶金の諸学科備えり尋いて造船学科を加え俊才輩出す。同十八年工部省廃せられたるを以て文部科学省の所管となり翌十九年帝国大学令の発布せられるるに及び工科大学となり総合大学の一部を為す。後本郷区の新校舎成るに及び之に移り虎ノ門の土地諸建造物は挙げて宮内庁の所管に帰し或いは帝室博物館の倉庫となり或いは維新史料編纂事務局東京女学館等に使用せしめらる。大正十二年関東地方大震火災の起るや諸建造物皆甚しく害を被り複用を可からさるに至る。既にして帝都復興の事業始まるに及び旧地を清掃して文部科学省会計検査院華族会館東京倶楽部東亜文化学院等の諸建造物新たに此に経営せらる而して遂に一物の旧容を留むるものなし。我等工部大学校出身者は頗る懐古の情に堪えさるものあり。乃て相謀りて小記念塔を作り之に石材を嵌め入して此一大学園の由来と所在とを記す。庶民くらは聖蹟と史跡とを永く後世に伝えるを得ん。工学博士大熊喜邦夙に思を之に致し辛苦して当時の遺物なる煉瓦石材銅材等を拾集し以て此塔の位置蓋し本校舎左翼館の中央に当たると云う。昭和十四年四月工部大学校出身虎ノ門会作之虎ノ門会員工学博士曽根達蔵撰

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse