of the less esteemed, but certainly not less useful class, whose toils are devoted to the improvement and direction of the powers of the youthful mind.

On this very point, at which the objection is levelled, classical learning has certainly a decided superiority over the study of the mathematics. And this study is perhaps the one of all others, which might be brought most successfully into competition with classical learning, as a means of training the intellectual powers. Whilst we are on this subject, and as we have not time to institute a formal comparison between these two rival courses of intellectual discipline, we may as well candidly admit the superiority of a mathematical education, (at least so far as the ancient Geometry forms a part of it), for some special purposes. It secures in the case of every successful student, more perfect habits of attention. It compels him to abstract himself more completely from all impressions of surrounding objects, not on account of any peculiar difficulty in comprehending the separate steps of the train of reasoning of which he must possess himself, but in order to preserve the concatenation of the successive acts of judgment uninterrupted, till he arrives at the conclusion. This not only strengthens the power of excluding every thing irrelevant to the present subject of speculation, but tends to improve the grasp of the understanding, its capacity of embracing at once an extensive subject in its most important bearings and details -an attainment which distinguishes the man of large and comprehensive views in every department of knowledge and in every situation in life, and which is absolutely necessary to all who would fill with advantage the more elevated stations in society, who would aspire to guide, in a judicious manner, the counsels of the community to which they belong, or to manage successfully extensive and complicated operations of any kind. We may also remark, though it belongs not exactly to this place, that the mathematical sciences train the mind to precision and methodical arrangement in the communication of its acquired stores of thought. But, as regards the objection stated above, a very little reflection will show that it applies to what are called the exact sciences more forcibly than to classical learning. It is not correct to say that the one treats of ideas, the other only of words, or the signs of ideas. The subjects of philology and of grammar are ideas as much as the subjects of the mathematics, and the former are certainly far less remote from the common employments of life, especially

amongst educated men. The kind of reasoning to which it trains the mind · that which deals in the probable, and pretends in most cases only to an approximation to absolute truth -is also the kind best suited to the ordinary affairs of life, to which the exact reasoning of the mathematician is generally wholly inapplicable.

As to the second object of intellectual training — the preparation of the student for the ready and accurate communication of his thoughts in speaking, or in writing-the advantages of classical learning are great and obvious. All that we have time at present to say in illustration of this part of the subject, and all perhaps that it is necessary to say-is that classical instruction, when properly conducted, serves as a continued and most effective training in English composition. This we consider as by far the most important advantage which it affords; this in conjunction with some of the direct advantages, which we have enumerated above, we think, fully accounts for that decided superiority in the use of our own language, which it appears to us, that a good classical. education always confers. The ancient author whom he translates, supplies the student with the thoughts which he is to clothe in appropriate language. The difficulty which is commonly encountered by those who attempt in any other way to instruct in composition--that the youthful scholar not having yet acquired a fund of ideas, only learns to string together unmeaning words, or borrowed phrases, to the perversion of his taste- is thus obviated, and facility afforded for cultivating the power of communication, (which, as we have already said, is earlier developed,) in advance of the power of investigation. It may be observed that the value of the Latin and Greek languages as affording an exercise of this kind, is much enhanced by the fact that their structure is so unlike that of the modern languages. Not only is their general structure different, but the separate terms, especially the abstract terms, express ideas which cannot in many cases be exactly represented, at least, by any single word in English. So that translation from these languages very frequently, especially when the subject treated is abstruse, when general and abstract terms, and particularly those expressive of mental qualifications are employed, amounts to nothing more at best, than approximation to the sense of the original, the merits of the translator being estimated by the closeness of his approximation without sacrificing the propriety of his

own idiom. He who will attempt to give in English the exact meaning of such a word as honestas will easily conceive what we mean; he will probably find, that it expresses such a modification of thought, as we have no term to express. The same idea, or rather cluster of ideas, precisely so modified has, it may perhaps be found, no place in our philosophy, and therefore no name in our language. Hence it is, that the ancient languages afford much better exercise for the powers of communication than the modern ones which are commonly cultivated, the structure of these last mentioned languages, as well as the modes of thinking, and the philosophy and general sentiments of the nations which use them, being so much like our own.

It must be obvious to the experienced teacher, from the course which we have pursued in defending the study of the Classics, what are our general views of the manner in which this study should be conducted. The advantages which we value most can never be attained by a hasty and slovenly method of instruction. They can never be gained by the use of interlineary translations, or similar professedly short and easy methods. Such plans of teaching are predicated on very different views of the relative importance of the several advantages of classical learning from those which we hold. They propose only to facilitate the acquisition of some of the direct advantages which we have enumerated, even here we think they fail, whilst, as an instrument to train and cultivate the mental powers, they are wholly deficient.

As to the objections which are commonly made to classical education, we are compelled either to pass them over, or to dismiss those which we state with the briefest notice.

It has been objected that the study of the Classics tends to encourage licentiousness. It must be admitted that there are in the Classics many indelicate passages, that subjects are sometimes treated of such a nature, and in such a manner, as to suggest improper and impure ideas. Yet we think this evil has been much exaggerated. If we cannot bear plain and coarse expressions—and it is by these more generally than by licentious ideas that the Classics offend - we must banish much of our own early literature, and even the oracles of our holy religion from our schools. There is perhaps on this subject at the present day an over fastidiousness, which we may be allowed to add, is any thing but a correct index of the purity of our morals as compared with

those of our more plain-spoken forefathers. It must also be observed by all sensible persons that it is not that portion of our general literature including the Classics-which is most offensive to fastidious ears, that is most dangerous, most calculated to corrupt. Besides, this evil to whatever extent it exists, or applies peculiarly to the ancient Classics can and ought--to be removed in editions placed in the hands of youth, by judicious expurgation.

Again, it has been objected that the cultivation of classical learning is injurious to Christianity. We cannot at present enter into the discussion of this very serious objection, farther than to appeal to the argument drawn from experience, which we think is amply satisfactory, and even conclusive in this instance. When did Christianity flourish most and in the greatest purity? Was it in the first ages of the church, and since the Reformation, and consequently contemporaneously with the highest cultivation of classical learning, or in the dark ages, when the Greek and Roman authors in common with the scriptures of truth were left to moulder on the shelves of monasteries? Assuredly classical learning, instead of injuring her interests, has been the handmaid of Christianity, - her torch-bearer in every period when her genuine influence has been most widely and most propitiously diffused.

In the same way we would deal with the objection, which some make, that the study of the ancient Classics inspires and cherishes bloody and revengeful feelings. We have heard the martial spirit, and the practice of duelling, (this practice, by the bye, was unknown to the ancients,) which have distinguished the nations of modern Europe, seriously attributed to the influence which the frequent perusal of Homer's sanguinary battles has had on the minds of the young. Here, certainly, the appeal to experience is sufficient to scatter the objection to the winds. Was Homer much studied in the times when duelling was invented, or introduced in Europe, or during the ages when this practice most prevailed? Were wars more frequent, more bloody and ferocious before or after the introduction of Grecian literature into our schools? Is the vindictive, the duelling spirit most prevalent at the present day amongst the cultivators of ancient literature, and in those parts of the world, in those parts, for instance, of these United States, where this as well as other branches of learning are most sedulously cultivated? Let these questions be

fairly answered, and then let the objection pass for what it may seem worth.

"Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artes

Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros."

Such is an outline of the plan which we would adopt in defending the study of the Classics -- an outline which we are conscious that we have been able to fill up very imperfectly. We think however that we have entered the proper field on which the contest must be eventually settled betwixt the foes and the friends of classical learning. They must dismiss appeals to mere generalities, and come to a close analysis of its supposed advantages, and on the decision, which after a careful examination may be established as to the comparative value of these, classical education must stand or fall.

ent.

It will be apparent from all that we have said on this subject, that we are in favor of a more general and more sedulous cultivation of classical learning, than exists amongst us at presYet should we be very sorry to claim for it an exclusive cultivation, to the neglect of other important branches of learning. Instead of curtailing the branches which are now taught in our schools and colleges, we should feel disposed to increase the number. Amongst other subjects possessed of great intrinsic excellence, and well adapted to the purpose of cultivating the higher powers of the mind, we may be allowed to mention the claims of political philosophy and political economy to much greater attention than is at present bestowed upon them. Nor is there any want of time to pursue a much more extended course than at present, could our youth be persuaded to remain at their studies a little longer, and not rush into business, or into professions before they have acquired that stability of character, and that elementary knowledge and training of their faculties which might contribute essentially to eventual success in their pursuits. It might be profitable both for old and young to reflect on the wisdom of the maxim, "The more haste, the worse speed." The truth of this adage, we think, has received signal cenfirmation in the late disastrous prostration of our commerce. To whatever class, or party in the community we peculiarly attach the blame of this calamity, it is in the end to be attributed to an infatuated haste to get rich, and to a want of political and politico-economical science and wisdom ade