books, and come down and talk in easy, gentle and natural tones about common things. If we speak of those things in which we have a deep interest, we shall be sure to interest our pupils.

Mr. C. M. Woodward, the Dean of the Polytechnic Department of Washington University, St. Louis, believed in the importance and feasibility of introducing science and natural history into elementary schools; and he thought much could be done there to prepare the way for a future course. I am in accord with the gentlemen who have preceded me in regard to the method of obtaining time for this work there. Certainly the suggestion in regard to dispensing with so much of the study of certain branches now taught, for the sake of introducing this subject, is an important one. I believe, too, in abridging, somewhat, the study of geography: not that this is unimportant, but the geography of Asia and Africa is no more important than the natural history of our own state or city. I believe in knowing something of the things around us. I believe in a useful education, and I think we shall arrive at the preliminaries of a higher knowledge by the study of those things which are useful as well as in the study of other things.

I believe in the early and regular practice of drawing in school. And this is not a matter of theory, but of experience; I know it has been very successfully taught in the schools of St. Louis, where the system has accomplished a great deal. He thought there had been too much of a tendency to generalize and to teach too much in our common schools; and that some of our most earnest educational efforts had failed. In teaching natural science in our common schools, he thought the study should be made as interesting as possible, and so taught as not to interfere with the elementary studies. In the St. Louis schools the study of the natural sciences occupied but an hour a week. Even with such a brief time, he found that a wonderful degree of progress had been made, even by the youngest pupils.

The following paper, by Mr. FRANCIS H. UNDERWOOD, of Boston, was read by C. GOODWIN CLARKE, of the Lincoln Grammar School, Boston:

ENGLISH LITERATURE, AND ITS PLACE IN POPULAR
EDUCATION.

The prosperity of a nation comes from well-directed industry; its happiness, from the impartial execution of equal laws; its greatness, from the indomitable spirit of its people; but its lasting glory, from its letters and art. No seats of empire have received so much of the homage of mankind as the small cities of Athens and Jerusalem. Merely commercial cities, like Tyre, Carthage, and Palmyra, are soon forgotten. Even Rome is less reverenced as the home of the Cæsars, the mother of modern states and the source of modern civilization, than as the seat of a magnificent literature, that has enriched every language of Christendom and is still a light to the learned world. Success in arms and the acquisition of territory give temporary renown; but after the lapse of a few centuries, every thing but the thoughts of a great people perishes. Not one stone stands upon another on the site of Persepolis, and no one can enumerate the tribes that were subject to the Persian monarchs, or fix the limit of their empire.

But the precepts of ZOROASTER, (the majestic contemporary of ABRAHAM) still survive, indestructible amidst all the vicissitudes of human affairs. The history of letters refuses to be divided by the reigns of monarchs, and is measured by the appearance of great authors, as the zodiac is measured by its constellations. We speak of the age of DANTE, careless of what JULIUS or NICHOLAS or GREGORY might occupy the papal chair. The times of CHAUCER we know; but King EDWARD III is only a lay-figure, a mere accessory in the picture we imagine. The idea of Don QUIXOTE is more real to us than PHILIP II; and the time may come when the sea-fight of Lepanto may be remembered chiefly because one of Don JOHN's victorious galleys carried as a common sailor the great CERVANTES. We know that the illustrious GOETHE was a councilor of state; but the monarch he served is already a shade. So, to return to English history, we speak of the age of SPENSER, of BACON, and SHAKESPEARE; and the name of the great ELIZABETH has been made into an adjective to denote the brilliant epoch in whose glory she had no share. MILTON, once the Latin secretary, outshines the great Lord Protector. Stolid Queen ANNE lives only in the memory of the elegant essayists of her time. Farther on we trace the same intellectual lineage. Hanoverian GEORGES and WILLIAMS are naught. It is the age of SCOTT, of BYRON, and WORDSWORTH,-the age of CARLYLE, MACAULAY, DICKENS, THACKERAY, and TENNYSON.

In this country all things are so new, and political events have such an intense significance, that we do not look at affairs as posterity will look at them. But who can doubt that, when the true perspective has been adjusted, ours will be known as the age of EMERSON, IRVING and HAWTHORNE,— of BRYANT, LONGFELLOW and WHITTIER,—of LOWELL and HOLMES? Who can doubt that, in the next century, people will say to their grandchildren, "I heard EMERSON in my childhood. I once saw the gracious smile of LONGFELLOW. I have felt the electric stroke of HOLMES's wit. Shall I ever forget LOWELL'S features, gleaming as though from an inner light, when he recited the ode 'To the ever sweet and shining memory of the sons of Harvard that died for their country '?"

The place which the study of literature should hold among other scholastic pursuits is hardly doubtful. While other studies are pursued mainly for discipline, literature is at once a means and an end of culture. Language is the most marvelous instrument of human thought, and its study employs our noblest and strongest powers, as well as our most subtile perceptions and refined tastes; and in literature, as the appropriate end of linguistic studies, we derive the highest pleasures of which our natures are capable.

Literature is a part of the world's history, and in many respects the most important part. The rise and fall of dynasties and the changes in forms of government are chiefly important on account of the light they throw on the progress of political science, and the hope they give of the advance of mankind towards justice and equality. But the real life of a nation is preserved in its literature; and the student who is familiar with the personal memories, letters, plays and songs of any era has a better knowledge of the character and condition of the people than all the formal histories can give him.

But I do not forget that this is an assembly of instructors, and that it is properly expected, in an essay upon the study of literature, that some practical suggestions should be made respecting its pursuit in public schools. Let us en

deavor to find a proper place in a popular course of instruction for beginning the study of literature.

We shall suppose that the art of reading intelligently has been acquired,— that arithmetic has been begun,-that the general outlines of geography have been made familiar, and that the relations of words in sentences are understood. At this point the judicious teacher should consider what further subjects are of the most importance to the average pupil. The studies commonly pursued next in an English course,- besides using higher reading-books,-are, the higher mathematics, history, physical geography, some departments of natural science, the first elements of physics, rhetoric and mental philosophy. English literature has rarely found a place.

It is undoubtedly the judgment of the best teachers that mathematics should be continuously studied, and form a part of every day's routine. Next in order come the elements of physical geography, and such branches of natural science as the school has facilities for teaching, special prominence being given to physiology, or, rather, to so much of physiology as applies to the proper care of the body and its surroundings.

Whatever we may think of literature as the embodiment of thought,—of rhetoric, which fills a sort of tailor's place to fit out thoughts in smooth garments, and is often, like other tailors, inclined to think more of the elegance of the clothes than of the soul of the wearer,—and of mental philosophy, which has been groping in mists, from PLATO down to HERBERT SPENCER, and has never found the Ego nor got a step nearer the First Cause,- all these interior processes and furnishings must yield in point of utility to the sciences that put us into intelligent relations with the world we inhabit.

A gentleman told me of a rambling excursion he once made, in company with HORACE MANN and one or two other friends, in the fields and woods of Virginia, near Washington. "Don't you think it shameful," said the great educator, "that we have been so badly brought up? Here are we, all of us pronounced to be Masters of Arts or Doctors of Laws by the authority of college faculties. But what arts are we masters of? We scarcely know a tree or shrub, fruit or flower, bird or animal, especially out of our native state; and we dare not taste a strange berry or smell a new blossom for fear of being poisoned. If we were starving, we should not know how to satisfy our hunger. Nature is a sealed book to us; and yet the earth is fruitful, the woods and fields are full of life. We alone have no place at the table where all are fed."

To dwell upon the subjects suggested in this conversation would consume too much of our time at present. Let us pass on to consider a few other branches of study. As for rhetoric, it would seem to be a waste of time to study it formally,— at least in any short course. Any competent teacher ought to be able to point out to pupils the correct use of language and the propriety of figures of speech; and this should be done as a part of the daily exercise in reading. The style which is commended by such pedants as BLAIR is what all our best writers strive to avoid. Mental and moral philosophy can not be pursued with advantage by immature pupils, and should certainly be postponed to near the end of the course. There remain the two topics of History and Literature. I do not see that History is entitled to any great precedence. If a pupil has such an acquaintance with English history as he would gain from the small but admira

able work of CHARLES DICKENS, it would seem best that he should next get a knowledge of the writers of the various epochs, and that the political and literary events of the country should thereafter be taken in connection. The same remark may be made with regard to the History of the United States. If you attend an examination of a Boston Grammar School, you will find one or more of the blackboards covered with anno-domini dates; and boys and girls will be eager to give you some fact, more or less important, that is associated with every date. But if they were asked by some foreigner, who was just beginning to read our literature, when IRVING was born, or what works he had written, who JONATHAN EDWARDS was, whether COOPER was a greater novelist than Mrs. SOUTHWORTH, whether the Atlantic Monthly was equal in merit to the N. Y. Ledger, and whether EMERSON wrote often for the Waverley Magazine,-what answers would he get? But, surely, in any point of view, a knowledge of our chief poets, historians and essayists is of as much consequence as the opinions and doings of JAMES K. POLK, WM. H. HARRISON, FRANKLIN PIERCE, and similar persons, with which our historic muse is occupied.

One of the grave errors in our system is in the persistent reading and re-reading of books that are intended mainly for exercises in elocution. It is true that many of these series of readers have been compiled by scholars, and contain many admirable selections; although I have seen an advertisement by one publisher who claims as the peculiar glory of his set of books that the pieces they contain are mostly original; and yet the name of this writer is in no collection of American authors: as though the style of a mediocre person should be preferred, as a model for students, to the finished sentences and poetic gems of men of genius.

But the best of our school reading-books are merely a kind of literary hash; and I am much of the opinion of the Frenchman who had become tired of the mysterious article bearing that name in his boarding-house, and who exclaimed to the landlady: "I do not like 'ashes,-I préfer cólmeat. Please take away ze 'ash, and give me some cólmeat."

Now reading occupies a part of every day in school and should receive even more attention than it does. But it must be admitted that the miscellanies we place before children- half a dozen in a course-are not, on the whole, very attractive; and they are certainly not useful, considering the time they occupy. On one page is a goodish poem; on another is a bit of a sermon; here a tolerable story; there a speaker's peroration. The facts belong to no one age or country, and the style is as various as the matter. How utterly unphilosophical this proceeding is, either for the acquisition of knowledge or for the formation of taste, this assembly of teachers ought to know.

And this leads to the last point and the main purpose of this brief essay,which is to urge that the course of daily reading in grammar schools be wholly reformed and utilized, that after two or three preliminary collections have been gone through, and the pupils are able to read with tolerable fluency, the subsequent or higher reading-books be discarded, and their further daily practice be in systematic works that will not only give proficiency in reading, but inspire a love of nature, impart useful knowledge, and cultivate a taste for literature. A good example has already been furnished in Dr. WORTHINGTON HOOKER'S Child's Book of Nature. Dr. ASA GRAY's treatise entitled How Plants Grow

is another of like character. DICKENS'S Child's History of England (already mentioned) would be an excellent work for young pupils.

Should the course here recommended be generally adopted, we should very soon find the results of the labors of scientific explorers and savans put into popular and attractive books to meet the demand.

Instruction in English literature should go on with these branches in equal step. Any well-disciplined child of fourteen years (and perhaps less) is ready to receive judicious lessons in this department. For this purpose, it is not necessary to begin with CHAUCER, nor to follow any rigid rule of chronology. BACON and all the philosophers, and TAYLOR and all the theologians, may wait. But the teacher can take works of acknowledged merit that are capable of being understood by youths, and lead his charge through pleasant fields until, by imperceptible degrees, they reach the heights. When they have been accustomed to notice peculiarities of style and modes of thought, and have in other respects sufficient maturity of mind, they can trace the development of language historically and view the treasures of our literature as in a panorama.

It will be advisable, in all cases where the means allow, to read certain works entire. Thus, SHAKESPEARE can not be profitably studied by means of selections, but the best of his plays should be read from HUDSON's or ROLFE's editions. No separate scenes are either satisfactory or instructive. Other works may be named for thorough reading, such as MILTON'S Comus, GOLDSMITH'S Traveler, and Vicar of Wakefield, LOWELL'S Vision of Sir Launfal, LONGFELLOW's Evangeline, WHITTIER'S Snow-Bound, EMERSON'S May-Day, and one or two of TENNYSON'S Idyls of the King.

But all educators know that the cases in which complete works of this kind can be procured in sufficient numbers for the use of a school will be exceptional. And in any event it will be desirable to supplement this course with some volume of selections, arranged in historical order, and containing the nécessary biographical, critical and linguistic notes. The benefit of such a course of instruction introduced into the grammar schools, and continued in the high schools, would be incalculable. The teacher would make a daily study of the author from whom the lesson was to be taken. He would fill out the narrow outline of the biography. He would illustrate and refine the critical estimates, giving his own views, and stimulating the pupils to examine for themselves and to form habits of independent judgment. It is doubtful whether any branch of instruction would yield more certain and more abundant fruit.

In my boyhood I never, by any accident, had my attention directed to the beauties or excellences of English literature. Paradise Lost was used only for the odious exercise of parsing; and the noblest lines of MILTON are to this day connected with the pattering of conjugations and declensions. No more effectual way could be taken to disenchant the student than by breaking the lines, as upon the wheel, and analyzing the still quivering members by the dull rules of syntax.

In a few modern schools English literature receives attention, but they are generally high schools. The bulk of our children, however, never reach the high schools; and, if they did, there is no reason why the study should not be taken up earlier. Abolish the profitless reading of scrap-books! and let each day's reading be given in turn to some branch of natural science, to history