and orators were skilled in their own language, and yet they learned no other in their youth.

"It is a reproach on British education," says G. Jardine, “that, whilst the minutest parts of the ancient languages are taught, and occupy a considerable portion of the time allotted for study, both at school and in college, the language in which we ourselves speak and write receives comparatively little attention." "As the sole business of life," observes Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, "is not literature, so education ought not to be only literary. Yet, what can you, the father of the boy you are about to send to a public school-what, I ask, can you think of a system which, devoting the whole period of youth to literature, not only excludes from consideration the knowledge of all continental languages-the languages of Montesquieu and Schiller, but also totally neglects any knowledge of the authors of your own country, and even the elements of that native tongue in which all the business of life must be carried on? Not in Latin, nor in Greek, but in his English tongue, your son must write; in that tongue, if you desire him to become great, he is to be an orator, a historian, a poet, or a philosopher. And this language is, above all others, the most utterly neglected, its authors never studied, even its grammar never taught. To know Latin and Greek is a great intellectual luxury; but to know one's own language is an intellectual necessity.”+

The error of the ordinary system of public instruction lies in being too classical rather than too literary. Literary education does not consist so much in an acquaintance with Latin and Greek classics, as in a familiarity with modern literature, and especially in critical knowledge of the national idiom, and superiority in the art of expressing thoughts in it, either in speaking or writing. These literary acquirements are as indispensable to the man of science as scientific and general information to the if man of letters; for of what use would knowledge be to the one, he could not readily and clearly convey it; and of what use would the power of expression be to the other, if he had no useful and practical ideas to communicate? Scientific and literary education ought to be inseparable.)

* Outlines of Philosophical Education.

† England and the English.

SECT. III.-CLASSICAL INSTRUCTION LIMITED IN ITS BENEFITS AND INADEQUATE TO THE WANTS OF MODERN SOCIETY.

The advantages which may arise in active life from the various branches of knowledge above mentioned are obvious. Those which may be derived from Latin and Greek are, if we except the mental discipline effected in learning them and the means which they afford of studying the national language, very inconsiderable. In adverting to classical instruction, Adam Smith observes, "It seldom happens that a man, in any part of his life, derives any conveniency or advantage from some of the most laborious and troublesome parts of his education.” * And yet those languages usurp the almost exclusive right of occupying, for eight or nine years, the rising generation, those on whom the country places her hopes of advancement in the different pursuits which contribute to her wealth, prosperity, and glory. That system is radically bad which casts in the same mould the physician and the engineer, the lawyer and the merchant, the soldier and the agriculturist, the clergyman and the statesman. Not only do the dead languages present but little chance of being applied to any useful purpose in after-life, but the mental training which their acquisition may promote, although of a high character, cannot supply all the intellectual wants of society. The discipline which arises from the comparative study of foreign languages leads to particular attainments, which, valuable as they are, ought not to be the only objects of ambition in intellectual education. Different courses of mental training are required to prepare the mind for the scientific, military, and industrial professions, from that which is calculated to produce great scholars. The habits of the mind formed by the study of Latin and Greek have contributed but little in raising to eminence those who hold the first rank amongst monarchs, warriors, navigators, engineers, agriculturists, manufacturers, merchants, or artists. It is not these languages which have brought out the mental energy of the great benefactors of mankind, of those who, by their inventions and discoveries, have increased, and daily increase, the power and well-being of man.

The time given in most classical schools to the national tongue, or to anything beyond the ancient languages and mathematics, is, indeed, very inconsiderable. The mnemonic exercises

VOL. I.

* Wealth of Nations.

L

on the national grammar, on geography and history, and the instruction on the natural and experimental sciences, which are occasionally introduced, may satisfy those who have not reflected on what constitutes good education; but they do not supply the real wants of the generality of learners, nor do they enable them to fulfil the expectation of society concerning its future members. Every information, in fact, beyond the classics is secondary: it is attended to with indifference, and often with ill-will; it is studied merely as a matter of form, and to save appearances. This exclusive attention to ancient literature, by indirectly contemning the native and foreign living idioms, leads young people to disregard their national and other modern classics. It narrows their minds, and destroys their individuality, by making them the servile imitators of the ancients.

Under the influence of these antiquated notions, a young man, after the period of scholastic education, is ushered into the world with a smattering of one or two dead languages, and with but scanty knowledge of his own; with vague notions respecting bygone ages and utter ignorance of passing events. He is apt to entertain an exalted opinion of classical learning, and a total disregard of modern sciences and practical good sense.

"Education consisting chiefly of language," observes G. Combe, "leaves the mind of the pupil ignorant of things, ignorant of men, and ignorant of the constitution of the social system in which he is destined to move. He is trained in abstractions and among shadows, and when he enters practical life he finds that his real education is only at its commencement." No wonder, then, that so many eminent men have raised their voices against the present scholastic course. "A finished scholar," says Gibbon, “may emerge from the head of Westminster or Eton in total ignorance of the business and conversation of English gentlemen."+ The learned author of “ National Government” remarks, “Our schools and colleges do not teach, and do not think of teaching, those parts of knowledge which become citizens of a free state particularly to learn." "There exists," says Talleyrand, "a complete discordance, and, in some cases, an absolute opposition between what a child is compelled to learn, and what a man is bound to do." § "The art of speech,” says also Aimé-Martin, “is unknown in a government in which speech is power; the laws are unknown in a society in which the political institutions impose duties. La

*Lectures on Popular Education. On National Education.

† Memoirs of my Life and Writings. § Rapport sur l' Instruction publique. 1791.

a word, public instruction continues to be silent on all that children will, when men, require to know."* Dr. Arnold himself,

who was so conversant with the details of instruction in classical schools, equally condemns it as inefficient: "Our intellectual eminence in modern times,” he says, "by no means keeps pace with our advances in all the comforts and effectiveness of society. And I have no doubt that our miserable system of education has a great deal to do with it.”+ (7)

Even the little which is usually learned of Latin and Greek is often but imperfectly acquired, and seldom leads to useful result. Young people parse with grammatical accuracy every word of Cicero; but they can perceive neither the force of his reasoning, nor the majesty of his periods. They scan each line of Virgil with critical exactness; but they can feel neither the exquisiteness of his thoughts, nor the harmony of his verse. They write Latin themes and make Latin hexameters; but they can neither read the ancient classics with pleasure, as we do our national writers, nor express themselves in Latin with even an approach to ease or elegance.

The ordinary method by which the ancient languages are acquired, presents so few incentives to exertion and so many obstacles to learning, that, for one who distinguishes himself, twenty sink disheartened into torpor and perverse unwillingness, insensible alike to rebuke and ferula. They are thought by their instructors to be unredeemable dunces; but, when the fetters of the scholastic course are shaken off, those who have been able to resist its baneful influence and give themselves a more useful education, often far surpass in the practical affairs of life their school-fellows who carried away the prizes in ancient learning. In fact, so indispensable to success is this second education in the present order of things, that those who have not acquired it, whatever may have been their success at school, never rise to eminence.

Even to professional men Latin and Greek never afford advantages equivalent to the time, labour, and expense which their acquisition by the ordinary scholastic process demands. Less beneficial still are these languages in other pursuits. This classic lore is often unsuitable to the business for which children are destined by their parents. It is true that learning, which was formerly the privilege of a chosen few, is now the birthright De l'Education nationale en France, Journal des Débats, 16 Janvier, 1829.

↑ Life and Correspondence, by A. P. Stanley.

of all; but of the immense range of subjects which modern civilisation presents for investigation to all inquisitive and aspiring minds, every one ought to select that which can best realise his expectations in life, and enable him to serve society. For the great majority of citizens, universal knowledge, were it possible, would be a useless luxury. Besides, instruction would lose in depth what it gained in extent; and, in attempting to be fit for everything, a person would run the risk of being fit for nothing. Society, embracing, as it does, an infinite variety of occupations and callings, will be truly benefited only from the subdivision of study, and consequent concentration of knowledge among its different members. The subdivision of labour is a principle of perfection and universal usefulness.

That is a very mistaken pride, which sends children to classical schools, to foster in their hearts desires inconsistent with their future prospects, and to confine them to that kind of learning which is appropriate to clergymen, to qualify them for a place behind a counter. The mean defeats the end; for this is acting in direct opposition to human nature. Man is always prompt to ascend, never willing to descend. Let him who adopts this course for his children assume the responsibility of their ill success in pursuits for which he has taken every pains to unfit them. Let him blame himself, if they scorn his advice or rebel against his authority, when desired to embrace a calling which they think beneath them. "In the social order in which all places are marked," says J. J. Rousseau, “every one ought to be brought up for his own." *

If schools were, as we think they ought to be, an introduction to the world; if their method of training embraced the cultivation of all the mental powers; if their course of study were a preparation for the various avocations and active duties of life; and if the instruction received in them were available in manhood, they would present some prospect of advantage to every class of society. But this is not the case: it is but too obvious that, in this country, scholastic instruction is not instituted with a view either to the greatest advantage of the child or to the greatest public utility. It is, therefore, an error in parents to make heavy sacrifices to procure for their children admittance into classical academies, under the belief that education is better than fortune—an aphorism, the truth of which, under the influence of a better system, would be undeniable.