the United States, of any one in our midst. He will be a suitable critic of the value of the facts and observations recorded by the workers in this crusade. It will be an essential part of the plan to publish selections made under some such supervision, of the more important of these observations.

It is here that the operations of the schools will begin to act in the advancement of science. The collection of so many local faunas and floras will in a very short time result in a thorough knowledge of the inhabitants of the State. The facts observed will fill up many a gap in the natural history of the species, and the training undergone by the scholars will not only be effective for the present, but act in the future, each one becoming a missionary of science wherever his lot may be cast.

After a time, the labor of naming and arranging may be much facilitated by having printed labels prepared and distributed, so as to be capable of direct employment in labelling specimens.

It will be highly desirable to carry on the practice of drawing natural objects while actually studying them. The different attitudes in which captive animals place themselves, will form appropriate subjects for the pencil.

Very respectfully,

SPENCER F. BAIRD.

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, Dec., 1853.

Association of the Friends of Female Education.

THE annual meeting of this Association was attended in Columbus, in the Hall of Esther Institute, on the 27th of December, 1853.

The meeting was called to order by Rev. Joseph McD. Mathews, one of the Vice Presidents, and the session opened with prayer by Rev. A. Brainerd, of Norwalk Female Seminary.

The proceedings of the first semi-annual meeting, attended in Dayton in July last, were read by the Secretary. The Executive Committee were requested to report a list of Officers.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The Constitution was read by the Secretary, and an opportunity given for persons to become members.

The following persons gave their names, and paid the fee of one dollar: Rev. A. Brainerd, Rev. J. Covert, Rev. Wm. T. Findley, Geo. K. Jenkins, Rev. J. A. I. Lowes, Rev. J. McD. Mathews, W. D. Moore, Wm. Smith, S. A. Spear, Alphonso Wood.

The Chairman, Rev. S. Findley, Jr., presented the annual Report of the Executive Committee; which was accepted.

The Annual Address was delivered by Rev. Wm. T. Findley, of Chillicothe subject, Woman the Sovereign Educator. The thanks of the Association were returned for the Address, and a copy solicited for publication.

Mr. J. C. Zachos, of the Female Seminary in Dayton, read a Report on the Study of Mathematics in Female Seminaries.

The Chairman of the Executive Committee read a Report by Mrs. Mary C. Wilber, of the Wesleyan Female College, Cincinnati, on the Evils of early Graduation from Female Seminaries.

EVENING SESSION.

The Chairman of the nominating Committee made his report, and the following officers were elected:

President REV. J. McD. MATHEWS, of Hillsboro.

Vice Presidents-Rev. J. Covert, College Hill; Rev. A. Brainerd
Norwalk; Miss Margaret Coxe, Dayton; G. W. Batchelder, Zanesville;
Mrs. M. C. Wilber, Cincinnati.

Recording Secretary-Lewis Heyl, Columbus.
Corresponding Secretary-J. Hurty, Lebanon.
Treasurer-John Lynch, Circleville.

Executive Committee-Chairman, Rev. Samuel Findley, Jr., Antrim; A. D. Lord, Columbus; S. N. Sanford, Granville; Miss C. A. Gregg, Putnam; J. C. Zachos, Dayton.

A Report on the Education of Females was read by Mr. Josiah Hurty of Lebanon.

The suggestions contained in the Report of the Executive Committee were taken up; and Rev. J. D. Butler, of Cincinnati, was requested to present a Report on the History of Female Education.

Rev. S. Findley, Jr., was appointed to report on the Statistics of the Female Seminaries in Ohio.

A. D. Lord was appointed to report on Esthetics; Mr. A. Wood to report on the Course of Instruction suited to Female Seminaries. Rev. P. B. Wilber was appointed to report on Female Colleges; Rev. Asa Brainerd on Mental Science.

The President was appointed to deliver the semi-annual Address. On motion, the Association adjourned to meet in Zanesville on the 4th of July next.

A. D. LORD, Secretary.

The Eye and the Ear in Elementary Instruction.

An apology is due to the readers of the Journal for the delay of the concluding numbers of our series. For, of however little value articles in a series may be, readers prefer to have them continuous. It is not necessary to give a full explanation of the delay; various circumstances have concurred in causing it, and among them should be placed a pressure of other labors in behalf of school education. From the first, some diffidence has been felt in relation to the articles on this subject, not from any want of conviction of the correctness of the views expressed, but from the apprehension that some readers might attach less importance to opinions coming from one who is not a 'practical teacher,' as the phrase is. And it was not till after he had waited in vain for others to enter upon it, that the writer felt himself obliged, as one of the editorial corps, to open the discussion. Under the conviction that there was not enough in the Journal of an elementary char_ acter, and that the wants of the teachers of our Primary Schools were not sufficiently met, the series was commenced. The aim has been to establish principles; as opinion, on so important a subject as that of methods in education, is of little worth when unsupported by reasons; to establish principles by a careful examination of the object for which a particular study is pursued, and of the constitution of the human mind.

The writer's attention was first directed to the defects in the prevalent methods in Elementary Schools, soon after the introduction of the Union system into the place of his residence. Close watching of these schools soon induced the belief that these methods were unsuccessful; unsuccessful because unnatural. They were not adapted to the end in view, and not in accordance with the nature of the faculties whose cultivation was sought. The views expressed in our previous articles are the result of much reflection and study, and strong confidence is felt in their correctness and in their future prevalence. As already remarked, our elementary books for reading and spelling, almost without exception, show an evident inclination in this direction, though they betray some timidity as to carrying out the principles to their legitimate extent.

The December No. of the Journal contains some strictures on our

article in the June No., from a correspondent in Lawrence County. We feel persuaded that, as he has already taken some steps in the right direction, longer reflection and a more careful examination of the principles involved, will lead the writer to a total abandonment of the old system. As his article contains some objections that are often made, and confounds certain things which are entirely different, we will devote a paragraph or two to its examination.

The first remark of our correspondent, that "The sounds of letters are arbitrary to their form, (if we except O,) but the sounds of syllables have a relation, to some extent, to the letters that compose them," is, by itself, entirely unintelligible to us; and, from the context, we are able only to guess at the meaning. Further on he says, "While the eye analyzes the letters, does not the mind as quickly comprehend their sound?" What sound? If he means the combined sound of the letters as composing the word, we say yes, certainly; and this is the very point we are claiming, viz: that from the eye knowledge of the letters the mind instantly apprehends the word. The sight of the letters in the word suggests the word itself, as a whole; and thus the utterance of the names of the letters is entirely unnecessary. Still further on we find this question and an answer to it: "How shall we teach a scholar to comprehend the sound of the combined letters as quickly as the eye does the form of the letters in the combination? By audibly reading the letters of the word we teach both." Here the writer has manifestly confounded the sounds of letters with their names. By audibly reading the letters of a word is meant speaking their names, and these names have in general no resemblance to the sounds we give to the letters as component parts of a word. The next paragraph shows the same confusion of things entirely distinct. In our articles we have said nothing, favorable or adverse, respecting teaching by sounds, whether from the common character or from a different one. Our efforts have had for their object to show the uselessness of calling the names of the letters in a word, as preliminary to pronouncing the word itself.

There are in use three distinct methods of teaching children to read. One requires the child to spell orally the word, in order that he may know what the word is. It is against this that our attacks have been leveled. We believe that this preliminary oral spelling is not only useless but positively injurious. Another method commences with a word

which the child learns as a whole.

distinguish words by the eye.

From the beginning he is taught to According to this method the pronunci

ation of the names of the letters has nothing to do with reading. The mind accustoms itself to recognize words through the eye, and not through the ear. The third method employs the sounds of the letters as component parts of a word. It is commonly called the phonetic method. A new character is not essential to this method, but it may be used with the Roman letter. This method and the second agree in making no use of the names of the characters, because these names have nothing to do with reading. The advocates of both the two latter methods regard the first as unnatural and absurd. For our correspondent, therefore, to reply to our strictures on the first or spelling method, by quoting the language of an advocate of the phonetic system, is very much to the purpose.

not

Again, our correspondent inquires whether the teacher must "tell the pupil the names of forty thousand or more words." This is one of the first objections to the system. It assumes that the mind can generalize only through the ear. If the child has called over the letters in mad and sad, etc., and the teacher has told him the words, then when he has pronounced the letters l-a-d, he will know without aid from the teacher, that this word is lad, or at least he will know that it has a close resemblance to the words mad, sad, etc. We grant it. And we claim that if the pupil has seen these words and been told their names, then when he sees the new word lad he will be able to give its name also. Cannot the mind generalize through the eye as well as through the ear? No one doubts it. The objection then vanishes. We hope our correspondent will keep up good courage and not be disheartened by the thought of forty thousand words.

At last our correspondent appeals to authority to "decide the course to be pursued." With all respect to the editor of the excellent series of reading books referred to, we must remind our correspondent that in this Journal it is not usual to decide questions by authority. We believe that if one method in education is superior to another, it can be made to appear so; and that the method in support of which the best reasons can be given has the strongest claims upon us. MARIETTA COLLEGE, January, 1854.

I. W. A.

The number of adults in Virginia who cannot read or write, is 80,000 ~20,000 more than in 1840; and the number of children whose parents have not the means to educate them, 75,000.