voted many of his pages to the same topic. The Phrenologists have argued on the same side, and cried triumphantly, "You grant that the culture must depend on the affections and faculties of the individual, and of these our science will shew you infallible criteria." As to the extent to which the criteria of Phrenologists are infallible, I offer no opinion; but I will just suppose, that by phrenological or other science, a parent were as certain of the various points of his son's character as if he came into the world ready subdivided and ticketed to the full satisfaction of Spurzheim. If such a parent had the misfortune to be possessed of that "little learning" which Bacon calls "a dangerous thing," I really believe he might go on with a series of experiments on the poor boy till it were too late to think of any education at all. He would set about developing a favourite set of faculties, and would manufacture a sphere congenial to their energies to the extent of his ability; but, seriously, would this ability be sufficient? Would he not be taking in hand the whole of a piece of machinery of which he knew only a part? Does not every countryman exclaim, "this rain will ruin one crop-that frost will kill another," when notwithstanding, were he permitted to call down a little sunshine to-day, and a gentle shower to-morrow, every man of sense would tremble with fear of a plague or a famine. If I grant that science can ascertain capacities, and also shew means adequate to their development, can any man be sure that there is no subtle proportion to

be preserved, no secret conditions on which the vigour of the whole depends? Are you confident that the artificial sphere you carefully provide, is not deficient in some mysterious influence of vital moment? Have you never heard of the errors of watering the root and forgetting the leaves-of killing the birds ordained to guard, not eat, the seeds? Granted, some will say, and what then? Is there to be no discrimination in the culture of minds that vary as the soil, productive of one crop but barren of others? I say discriminate, undoubtedly, but beware of carrying your theories too far. I would not, for instance, force drawing or music on boys with no idea of form, of colour, or of tune. But still, as you would not entrust your Son's health to a man who professed to exercise the legs one hour, the arms another, then the lungs, and all the animal functions in their turn; and just as you would prefer to leave all to nature, believing the general result would be best; so also as to many kinds of mental discipline, you would do well to reflect, that though tempting in theory, in practice there may be some unnatural deficiency not seen because not tested, some delicate touch wanted to give force and expression, to establish the life and harmony of the whole. The new system, for instance, may leave you a limited choice of Tutors; or again, the poor child may be made dull and dispirited by want of companions in the experiment, or for other reasons, the disadvantages incidental to all novelties may be greater than the benefit. It is possible therefore

that your plan may involve too great a sacrifice, especially as the analogies I have adduced will prove at least that you are not certain of success. Above all, what is most to be dreaded is, lest the favourite process should be allowed to interfere with the formation of certain habits indispensable as a groundwork for every mind alike. Were I to class youthful Miltons with Johnsons and Lockes, I should be assailed by a host of the speculative order. Yet were even these different natures grounded and trained for a few years in the same way, the disadvantage would be less than incurring the risk of their complaining late in life, like (another great example) Sir James Mackintosh, that his peculiar tastes had been consulted at the expense of those invaluable habits. which, for want of the methodical and invigorating discipline of school, no subsequent exertions on his part could ever retrieve. I do not deny that there is much truth in many works that have lately been written on the different cultivation of different minds. I do not doubt, that in a position to combine private with public instruction, I could safely carry part of these views into execution. The author of the Natural History of Enthusiasm, among others, in his work on Home Education, has set forth many things true in principle. But it is one thing to expatiate on a new power, like that of carbonic acid gas, for instance, and another thing to perfect the machinery for its application to a useful purpose. I would therefore advise every parent to moderate the ecstacy he feels at

new theories of Education, by a calm consideration of the way in which he can reduce them to practice. Is it at a School or with a Private Tutor that he can give them substantial, everyday shape and form? If with a tutor, can he find one who will enter into his views out of the very limited number of men who have the preliminary qualifications, physical, mental, and spiritual? At a school a new experiment may be more easily professed than accomplished. No master of many pupils can afford time to suit very minutely an individual case. Supposing a master had a pupil whom he felt sure he could cure of an impediment in his speech, and I have known such an instance, is not this as plain a case for separate treatment as you can suggest? Yet I heard one gentleman honestly confess, that though he was very desirous to cure a promising youth, he could not, with justice to other pupils, afford the time required. As another instance I can state, that though I have succeeded on the Lewisham system of penmanship so often advertised, in transformin a very bad into a very good hand, in six or eight lessons, yet from twelve to sixteen hours of separate instruction, is too great a sacrifice to allow me to extend the benefit to any but a few private pupils. The reason is, that the great benefit of School Education consists in the pupil being submitted to one regular and undeviating system of study. This system must be maintained as the groundwork of all improvement. The time and trouble required to maintain it firmly, I know by

experience to be so great, that I always suspect that those who offer to introduce any novelties intend to volunteer no extra service, but to break in upon this system, and thus to adorn the superstructure at the expense of the foundation. I freely allow, that if a boy has a taste for the fine arts, or indeed has merely his share of youthful curiosity, and he is taken to galleries, cathedrals, museums, and every record of the genius of the past or of the present day-if he is shewn original letters and manuscripts, the scenes of memorable achievements, with their respective stories, coins, medals, specimens of natural history, and the like, his mind will acquire more ideas than from any books, and be more excited to reading than by any thing I could devise. Still I should very much distrust a tutor who spoke of these peripatetic lectures as the chief part of education. should ask, Does all this go on in the hours of business or of recreation? Because, unless the mind be inured to repulsive study, and to wrestling with difficulties, and drilled and trained till inaccuracy or want of method feels jarring to its whole system, all these elegant lectures will utterly fail, because every theory will want a foundation, and every fact will want a place. For, suppose the boy brought away a specimen from every place he visited, what improvement would he derive from fossils, coins, prints, roots, medals, minerals, shells and models of all kinds, if they were to remain in one confused heap in his study? Would not their value depend solely on his in

I