and systems, and as many hard words as can be dispensed with.

One of the most important studies for all persons, is that of human speech, and of written language, which is its visible form. Language is the medium by which knowledge is communicated and preserved. When used with precision it is the means of instructing, convincing, and persuading: its misapplication leads to confusion in our conceptions, and to many very great errors in the science of morals, legislation, and other kindred subjects.

It is supposed, by some teachers, that the study of the native language is sufficient. It must be admitted that it may be taught independently of any other language in such a way as to give the pupil some insight into its structure, and likewise the habit of tolerably correct composition. But these ends can be better obtained by teaching the pupil another language, and by the practice of translation. If the student does not translate, he must have recourse to theme-writing or essay-writing, in order to learn what is styled the art of composition.' In general, a sentence containing some moral maxim is the text proposed, and this is to be fashioned and refashioned in all possible forms, until the pupil has produced, for the task-master, the required amount of labour. This is a bad exercise-to demand reflection and words, when the material has not been supplied.

The advantages of translation are these. We learn our own language better by labouring to transfer into it the ideas attached to the words of another language. It is not till we compare one thing with another that we understand the properties of either; and the acquisition

of a new language (those who have not tried must take it on credit) is like the acquisition of a new power. It is so indeed with all kinds of knowledge. The exercise of translation may be made at first very easy; as when the subject is a simple narrative. It is a somewhat more difficult and higher exercise to translate the language of oratory; and it is an undertaking of the greatest difficulty, requiring a matured judgment, when we attempt to translate works that treat on metaphysical, moral, and political science. Thus translation furnishes us with the means of proportioning the difficulty of the task to the power of the pupil, and tends to defer the day at which the youth first tries his strength in origi nal composition. Opinions may differ on the value of the exercise of translation as viewed here; but many careful observers think that very early attempts at original composition are unfavourable to future excellence.

The Latin and Greek are the two tongues that we use for the instruction of youth in the Science of language. As other nations besides ourselves use them for the purpose of instruction, there must be some common reason for it. A knowledge of a modern language, it seems, is not considered sufficient; and perhaps it is supposed, which is quite correct, that modern languages, as a general rule, are acquired with more ease and completeness when a youth has gone through a good training in the ancient tongues. This doctrine, however, does not oppose the learning at least one modern language, the French, at an early age, and in connexion with the Latin; by which kind of comparison between the parent and its offspring, we believe that both might be learned with more accuracy and ease.

The use of the Latin has not been a matter of choice;

it has descended to us from our fathers, like many other things. The western part of Europe dates its history and its social improvement from the era of the Roman empire. From Italy the Latin language was spread into the provinces, where it became the language of law and of administration, and, by consequence, of the educated; and, by the establishment of Roman colonies, it must have become too, in many places, particularly in towns, a popular tongue. Through violent political storms it was cherished by the learned few, and by the church; for to the church particularly we owe its preservation. Latin has not yet ceased to be a common medium of communication for scientific men and scholars, though it does not possess its once exclusive empire.

The Greek language belongs to Eastern Europe and to Asia, in many parts of which it continues to be written and spoken to the present day. Changed, indeed, but not deprived of its essential character, it has had a longer existence than any other language of which we have written evidence. The introduction of this as a general study into Western Europe cannot be dated as far back as three centuries. It became an object of curiosity from the knowledge which it contained; and we owe its early cultivation quite as much to those who studied its scientific works, as to the admirers of Grecian eloquence and poetry. The writings of the

* Greek was well known to learned individuals in western Europe and Great Britain long before the so-called revival of letters. Indeed it may be asked, when was it ever totally unknown in France and England, after the introduction of Chris tianity? Richard de Bury, Bishop of Durham, writes in 1344, "We have taken care to provide for our scholars a Hebrew as well as a Greek grammar;" yet this was not an age of great learning (See Philobiblon, London, Thos. Rodd, 1832.)

Greeks on mathematics, geography, astronomy, medicine, and natural history, &c., were calculated to give an impulse to the age. It was soon discovered also that Latin and Greek were parts of the same thing: they were found to be kindred languages; the history of one was interwoven with the history of the other. Neither ean claim the privilege of primogeniture, but both derive their pedigree from a common and far-removed

ancestor.

The political empire of the ancient world was divided between them; nor did the influence of the Greek cease when the Roman soldier had occupied the kingdoms of the Seleucida and the Ptolemies. It still traced the antiquities of the imperial city, recorded its triumphs, and continued to be the annalist of the feeble empire of the East.

The intrinsic merits of the Greek language for copiousness, perspicuity, and capability of exact classification, and the excellent models which it offers in the historical style, in oratory, and in the drama, have preserved and extended the study of it. For the theologian the Latin and Greek languages are a professional study; and accordingly some of the greatest masters of ancient learning have been found among the clergy.

Latin and Greek have, by various causes, some of them just alluded to, become interwoven in every form of our social life. The terms of most ordinary use, as well as those of science, show the traces of this intermixture as distinctly as we observe in some countries the blending of different races of people. We cannot destroy the relationship were we ever so anxious to do so. The history of our civilization, traced to its source, contains the history of those nations from whom

we received it; and so far the history of Greek and Roman civilization is part of the history of our own. What we have received from these past times is an inheritance which we should try to turn to most account: it would be foolish to throw it away; it would be still more foolish not to try to improve it, or to retain any part that is not worth keeping. These con siderations may serve to explain why, out of all ancient languages, the Latin and Greek are made the subject of education. There are other ancient languages, such as the Hebrew, the Coptic, the Sanskrit, and several more, which employ the industry of many scholars; but they are neither so intimately connected with the progress of our civilization, nor do they possess the advantages for youthful discipline which the other two do.

In explaining our mode of instruction in the Latin and Greek, I shall speak as if the whole business were carried on within these walls from the commencement; and I do this, not because I suppose that all plans are bad which differ from our own, nor that any faultless plan can be devised, but that those who are preparing pupils for this place may unite in making their instruction and ours parts of one scheme. Again, I should not volunteer any suggestions for elementary education, if I did not know, both from direct communication and otherwise, that many teachers wish to possess a more complete development of what we attempt to do. They will thus at least know more precisely the kind and degree of knowledge that our pupils ought to come with, though they may in some respects differ from us in the mode of imparting this knowledge.

The use of Latin and Greek consists, first and principally, in the mode in which these languages are