fore will, in conclusion, only name one other objection, out of the many, to the plan proposed by your correspondent; but I will just name the difficulty I have experienced with regard to the attendance of the children at the allotted places in church, arising from pride; but I am happy to say this is of rare occurrence in the female school with which I am connected. There are many young persons beyond 20 years of age, but with these there is no difficulty: with some of those between the age of 15 and 17, pride, with all its gaudy accompaniments and consequent temptations, will make its appearance, and then a struggle takes place. The tempted one shows a desire to shun the eye of her Teacher, irregularity in attendance at the school, excuses for absence from church, an occasional walk with parents or her friends (as they are frequently but improperly called) in the afternoon, follows; and it is to be regretted that in some cases Satan for a time has appeared to have the victory; but is this a reason for our relaxing? Ought we not rather to press on with greater zeal, to be continually more watchful over those committed to our care; to feel that we did, when we became Teachers in the Sabbath-school, virtually, as it were, take upon ourselves to perform a similar duty towards our scholars to that undertaken by sponsors for an infant when baptized; and do we not, by our attendance at the school-room, Sunday after Sunday, in the eyes of Christian men, renew that promise?

Let Teachers have this feeling, and let all be taught this lesson, that the great object of the Sabbath-school instruction is to fit us to dwell together in the "house not made with hands," as children of one family, as children of the living God. Let us learn to love each other, and let us seek our heavenly Father's blessing on our labours.

Let us not attempt to establish any plan that would in the end induce us to hope that "few were left under the Teacher's care at church."-I remain, Rev. Sir, your most obedient servant, Preston, June 17th, 1845.

J. J. M.

IN closing the correspondence on this subject, the Editor begs to give his opinion. Where practicable, there can be no question but the most desirable thing is for a whole family to go to the house of God, and sit there together; but he sees so many difficulties in the way, that his own opinion is, it is better to let the wonted Sundayschool arrangements continue as they are in the present state of society. If things were in a right state, there ought to be no need for Sunday-schools. If parents were all true Christians, they would, however poor, have an eye to the discharge of all the relative duties of life. Their children would be the objects of their first regard.

The Sabbath would be valued for their special culture. While at home, the Scriptures would be read together, and the children would be catechized and trained in the right way; the whole family would go with joyful steps to the house of the Lord, and our churches would be filled with happy family groups-one of the most blessed sights which the Sabbath could present. But, alas! we are far from this prevalence of practical family religion. Hence arises the duty of caring for the children of the poor on the Sabbath-day, and supplying their want; and we fear that, as it is necessary to do that for the children of the poor in the way of Sabbath instruction, which parents fail to do, so it is equally necessary to have them under our own direction in the church.

How many parents never go to church at all! How many very irregularly! Unless all were called for and taken by the parents, we see great difficulty, in some being taken and some not. Without uniformity, we do not see how the plan is practicable. Then, again, unhappily many of our churches are so wanting in proper accommodation for the poor, that there would not be room to locate the children with the parents.

It is our firm conviction, that so long as Sunday-schools are rendered necessary to supply the neglect of parents at home, so long will it be found necessary to confide the children to the care of Teachers in the Church; and, further, till habits of more becoming devotion are effected amongst the parents, it is better that the children should be learning them under the direction of their Teachers. And, lastly, we wish to urge, again and again, the vast importance of placing children in those parts of the church, where they can with the least facility behave ill; and, if possible, where the clergyman's eye is fully upon them.

REMOVING CHILDREN FROM ONE CLASS TO

ANOTHER.

REV. SIR,-A Correspondent in your number of the "Teacher's Visitor" for July, wishing for information on the subject of removing children from one class to another, I, who have been engaged as Teacher in a Sunday-school for four years and a half, and during that time narrowly observed the workings of the school, venture to offer a few remarks, which I hope will throw some light on the subject. I cannot certainly agree with any one who thinks that the changing of children from one class to another should be abandoned, but, on the contrary, believe it has a very salutary

effect, especially if the Teachers in the ascending classes are superior, which ought to be the case, and is so in every well regulated school; so that if their advancement and good is not promoted by the change, it is the fault of the Superintendent, who ought to remove an inefficient Teacher from his class, and to see that the instructions conveyed in the higher classes are conducted in a superior manner. I have often felt a regret at parting with my best scholars, and could not do it, had I not their good at heart. The children themselves have acknowledged, that they left the class with mingled feelings of joy and sorrow-joy at the idea of being promoted, and grief at parting with their old Teacher.

I consider that every different individual puts questions to the children in a different manner, thereby exercising their mental faculties; and also asks many questions which the former Teacher did not think of; besides, keeping the children in the same class, after they have made greater progress than the others, is injurious to the one or the other; because, while you are giving instructions to the advanced ones, the others do not understand; and while instructing the less-informed, the others gain no good, consequently much time is lost, which might have been obviated by a removal. The instructions we have given them, accompanied with prayer for God's blessing on the means used, we have reason to believe will never be lost upon them. Then again: children are sent from a lower class to make up for the lost ones, to whom we may prove similarly useful, and have an opportunity of doing good to a greater number of precious souls.

WHEN OUGHT THE DOOR TO BE CLOSED?

REV. SIR,-May I be allowed to offer a few remarks in reference to the question proposed in the "Visitor" for June, "When ought the door to be closed?” and if you think them at all serviceable in answering the question there proposed, will you allow those remarks to appear in the pages of your practical monthly "Visitor?" I concur with a Sunday-school Teacher in Devon," with respect to the solemnity of praise as well as prayer, and also, as to the effects of not properly attending to the one as well as to the other; but we must look at other circumstances, before we decide to close the school doors at the commencement of the singing.

66

Your correspondent mentions half-past nine o'clock, as the hour of commencement of the Sunday-school with which he is connected.

Now, in this part of the country, it is generally nine o'clock, (exeept in some schools, during a short time in winter,) therefore it is in favour of closing the school after the singing, immediately before the prayer is commenced.

Let us suppose that, on a cold frosty morning, the mother, from prudential motives in regard to the health and comfort of her children, does not send them away till within sufficient time for the children to get to the school in time for the commencement, and so the children have to walk rather smartly, and so will get warmed by the walk; but suppose the clock happens to be too slow a few minutes, or some person meets them, and says a word or two to them, the poor children are consequently too late for the singing, and so they are kept waiting twenty minutes shivering in the cold, which endangers their health. This won't do for the mothers.

And now, let us suppose it is a beautiful summer morning, and similar events occurs: the Teachers will find that the children do not stay long unemployed, for he will see by their idle looks, the tittering mood, and the playful disposition, that they have been having a bit of fun. This won't do for the Teachers.

The evil still occurs in a less degree, when the doors are shut during prayer.

There are many boys and girls who come from about a mile or two from most schools. Would you keep those children, if they happened to be a few minutes out of their reckoning, a quarter of an hour or so, and deprive them of both praise and prayer too?

Indeed it seems stretching the point, and drawing the cord too tight, to shut the door, and bolt out those who would if they could arrive in time for the singing, but were by circumstances prevented.

However, the children who arrive after the singing is commenced, ought to be marked late in the class books, and encouraged to come in time for the commencement of the singing; and here, I beg to say, that Teachers ought to set the example to their children, of punctual attendance, always to be there at least ten minutes or a quarter of an hour before the singing commences; for example is a better and more effectual remedy than precept.

My humble opinion, Sir, on this subject, is, let the doors remain unclosed till the time the prayer begins, and then exclude the loiterers. Though I am perfectly aware that there are some, perhaps the majority, who might have come earlier, but would not, or did not care to do so; but in this case, those should be let in for the sake of the few that endeavoured, and were prevented coming earlier, or else it would be putting the bad and good on an equality.

It is much to be lamented, that the scholars are so void of punctuality; and every measure that is deemed capable of amending it, ought to be resorted to; but, before doing so, the amendment ought to have the serious, calm, unprejudiced consideration of those who are going to endeavour to amend it.

Perhaps some of your correspondents could give their opinion upon this point; and so by comparing the arguments of all, one with the other, the right course may be adopted.

I beg to remain, Rev. Sir, faithfully yours,

July, 1845.

WM.

ON EMULATION.

REV. SIR,-Your Correspondent who addresses you on the subject of "Emulation," is perhaps desirous of being informed how a school can be conducted without it. My opinion is that, in a monitorial school, under any practicable system, it will exist in a greater or less degree. But there are some systems (as the Madras and Lancasterian) which are more calculated to draw forth this feeling than others. These plans are not required generally in Sunday-schools, as each class has an adult Teacher, who, if he is skilled in teaching, is able for the most part to govern his scholars, and keep up their attention without them. Still the feeling is even here at work, if the Teacher adopts the plan of questioning; for, in answering, each tries to excel the others, which is emulation, and which is too often attended with its scarcely inseparable feelings of pride, envy, &c. The grace of God only can enable us to repress them.

I subjoin the opinions of Dr. Short, bishop of Sodor and Man, and Mr. Dunn, secretary of the British and Foreign School Society. Dr. Short says, "Emulation is a dangerous element of government, though no government can be carried on without it; for you cannot exclude its influence from the human mind. Under a good master, probably no evil effects would be produced; but if a master tried to supply his own want of powers, in governing by exciting a spirit of emulation, he would greatly injure those under his care." Mr. Dunn says, "I know it is a question with many, whether emulation ought, under any circumstances, to be used as a motive to induce the young to apply themselves to the acquisition of knowledge. Essays and papers innumerable have been written, to show that this principle is ranked by the Apostle Paul with the works of the FLESH, and should, therefore, find no place in schools where the spirit of Christianity is intended to be inculcated. These writers