Milan 1880

The Milan Congress in 1880

The "Second International Congress on Education of the Deaf" met in Milan, September 6 - 11, 1880. It was a turning point in the history of the deaf education. A resolution that the deaf students should be taught orally and that the use of sign language should be banned was approved.

The "preparation" for the Congress

The Congress was conceived and planned by a committee against the use of sign language. The official representatives of the Congress were selected to insure a victory for the oral method: of the 164 delegates, 56 were French oralists and 66 were Italian oralists. Together, the oralists from France and Italy represented 74% of the Congress.

Apart from the opening and closing speeches and visits to the schools, the Congress work was limited to 12 hours, during which 3 or 4 pro-oralism members tried to convince the rest of the group of the justice of their position withstanding the strong evidence for the use of sign language.

On the congress, an English delegate wrote: "The victory for the cause of pure speech was gained even before [the] congress began."

The resolution

All of the delegates, except for the four Americans, agreed on the following resolutions:

1. The Congress,
   Considering the incontestable superiority by articulation over signs in restoring the deaf-mute to society and giving him a fuller knowledge of language,
   Declares that:
   The oral method should be preferred to that of signs in the education and instruction of deaf-mutes.

2. The Congress,
   Considering that the simultaneous use of speech and signs has the disadvantage of injuring articulation and lip-reading and the precision of ideas,
   Declares that:
   The pure oral method should be preferred.

These were what came out as a result. There were a few deaf people present who favored the use of sign language, but their motion was not even brought up for vote.

It became evident that there was a big "dividing line" between the deaf world and the hearing world. The deaf people claimed that the hearing people have selected a language and determined what is the best education for them without any consultation from the deaf people themselves.

After the congress, the use of sign language was banned from the instruction of the deaf. Also, the meeting led to the disappearance of deaf instructors from the institutes.

The participants

Zucchi, the president of the Royal Institute for the Deaf in Milan, started the session on September 6. He presented the results of an investigation which showed that, "... it is universally agreed among the instructors of the deaf that the manual alphabet and the use of signs will be no more... the word will conquer; it is a privilege of man, the sole and certain vehicle of thought, the gift of God."

The organizers designated the director of the school for the deaf in Milan, Giulio Tarra, as the president of the convention. During the opening remarks, Tarra asked that the delegates remember that "Oral speech is the sole power that can rekindle the light God breathed into man..."

In his address which lasted more than two sessions, the abbot Tarra started by saying, "The kingdom of speech is a realm whose queen tolerates no rivals. Speech is jealous and wishes to be the absolute mistress."

Don Serafino Balestra, the director of the school in Como, was the first in Italy to embrace the oral method and the one to spread it nationwide. He made a touching plea: "... for a catholic priest, it is necessary that the deaf-mutes speak, because they have confessions to make... I beg all of you. Vote for speech, always the speech!"

After Magnat tried, in vain, to get the delegates to read a book on his "combined system" (which advocates the use of both speech and signs), everyone else declared that the oral method was the best. The only person who tried to defend the "combined system" was Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet. He affirmed that his "visual method, which is the same as the 'mixed' method, offers the greatest benefits to the majority of deaf-mutes... in all schools, the sign language will prevail as it is the natural language of the deaf-mutes."

Upon the closing of the meeting, the verdict was clear: the pure oral method was approved by a large margin. Tarra concluded, "Yesterday, we were shouting 'Long live Speech!' Now we will say, 'Long live Pure Speech!'"

What did the media say about this event?

The press during that time showed great support for the decision reached at the convention. It applauded the arguments set forth by the oralists, and stated that the arguments reinforced the importance and credibility of the oral movement. The change in the educational methods was seen as a great French-Italian redemption and a step toward progress.

The Italian newspapers differed in their treatment of the event. For example, the Corriere della Sera placed an emphasis on the cooperation of Italian and French armies and compared it to the partnership at the convention for the good of those poor deaf-mutes. L'Unità Cattolica appeared to show a slight disrespect for Gallaudet when it wrote "during his intervention, he spoke and signed at the same time -- he seemed to be deaf himself."

- Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione