89

studied by the teachers themselves. Groombridge\'s "Catechism," and Rhind\'s "Physical Geography," are the works I have recommended.

HISTORY, as a distinct branch of tuition, might have been omitted from our list without disadvantage. It is not taught separately, and the few books in use form part of the course of reading. Groombridge\'s "Catechism of History," "Little Arthur\'s History of England," and White\'s "Outlines of English" and "Universal History," are those generally preferred.

GRAMMAR, when taught intelligently, is not only a very valuable part of the school work but one very interesting to the children. At first it should come in as a part of the reading lesson; the teacher explaining one part of speech at a time, and making sure that it is well understood before he goes on to another. A few minutes at the end of the reading lesson employed in finding out the nouns, for example, with the occasional question, "Why is such a word a noun"? especially when a mistake has been made, and the scholar is thus led to correct himself, afford an exercise which is always liked. It forms also a good exercise for a class to write down a certain number of words from the lesson of the day, the first twelve adjectives, verbs, or pronouns, for instance. In each case, as before, when a mistake is made the scholar should be called upon for a definition of the part of speech he has put down, and then be asked to apply it to the word. The books in use are Cornwell\'s "Grammar for Beginners"; the "Grammar and Key" of the Irish Board, the Rev. Mr. Best\'s "Grammar," with a third part comprising the Rudiments of Latin; and Morell\'s smaller "English Grammar and Graduated Exercises." The rudiments of Latin have been taught in the Nelson Town School, and the progress of the scholars has been very creditable both to them and their master.

With reference to the advantages to be gained from the study of Latin, Geometry, and Music, all of which have occasionally been objected to as superfluous, unnecessary, or a mere waste of time, I might adduce the fact that the two first are taught all over the world wherever education has been carried beyond the rudiments; and to the increasing taste for music and belief in its tendency to refine and humanize, as sufficient to justify its introducing and promoting the study of these subjects. The arguments in their favor have however been so clearly and simply stated by the Rev. S. Hawtrey in his account of St. Mark\'s School, Windsor, a school described by Professor Mosely as "one of the most successful attempts in elementary education with which (in the discharge of my official duties) I have become acquainted," that I make no apology for introducing them here. He says—

"With regard to the intellectual part of Education, I believe it to be an essential element of right teaching, that boys should be set, as soon as they are prepared for it, something hard to work at; something that they will not be able to master without painstaking and intellectual effort. I think this is too much lost sight of in our National Schools."

"We want something corresponding to the effort which a boy, in a classical school, has to make in learning to construe and parse his lesson, or master a proposition in \'Euclid.\'"

"Hence it is that while there is a good deal that is striking and showy on the day of examination, there is less permanent fruit from the teaching than might be expected."

"To guard against this disheartening result, as soon as boys are fit for it, it has been the custom, in our school, to give them something hard for their minds to work upon. The subjects that present themselves for this purpose are obvious,—Language and Geometrical Reasoning. It is not much that we are able to accomplish. Though little, what is done is of the highest value in an intellectual point of view."—"About the fact there can be no doubt; we find that the boys intellects are manifestly and marvelously quickened by their Latin lessons. Of course there must be zeal and heartiness on the part of the scholars; this is secured by sympathy with them. But, supposing other things to be the same, I have no hesitation in saying that we are doing better for our scholars by giving them Latin lessons, than by imparting to them the knowledge of facts, which it may be practically useful for them to know." "I may also here remark, that an intelligent knowledge of Grammar is more speedily acquired by learning, a second language, with which one\'s own may be compared, than by learning the structure of language only through the medium of one\'s mother tongue."

Though with regard to Euclid, "the knowledge of it may have no practical bearing on their after life, the effort to understand a Geometrical demonstration is of incalculable service in the cultivation of the intellect."

"Nothing can stand in the place of Euclid."

"We should never forget that our business at school is to teach our scholars how to learn. That school will not be the best from learn. That school will not be the best from learn."