Art. III. Report of the Military Male Orphan Asylum at Madras, with its original Proofs and Vouchers, as transmitted from India in 1796, and: published in London in 1797, &c. By the Rev. Andrew Bell, D. D. L. L. D. F. A. S. F. R. S. Ed. Master of Sherburn Hospital, Durham, 8vo. pp. xxx. 126. Murray. 1812.

Art. IV. The British System of Education, being a complete epitome of the improvements and inventions practised at the Royal Free Schools, Borough Road, Southwark, By Joseph Lancaster. 8vo. pp. xvii, 56, 1806. Longman and Co. 1810.

Art. V. Report of J. Lancaster's Progress from the Year 1798, with the Report of the Finance Committee for the Year 1810. 8vo. pp. 44. Printed by J. Lancaster, at the Royal Free School Press, Southwark. 1810.

Art. VI. A Comparative View of the Plans of Education, as detailed in the Publications of Dr. Bell and Mr. Lancaster, &c. By Joseph Fox. The third edition. 8vo. pp. 67. Darton and Harvey. 1811.

Art. VII. The National Religion the Foundation of National Education. A Sermon, preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, on Thursday, June 13, 1811. By Herbert Marsh, D. D. F. R. S. &c. Margaret Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. The fifth edition. 8vo. pp. 33. Rivingtons. 1811.

Art. VIII. A Vindication of Dr. Bell's System of Education, in a Series of Letters. By Herbert Marsh, D. D. &c. 8vo. pp. 32. Rivingtons. 1811. Art. IX. The Origin, Nature, and Object of the New System of Education. 12mo. pp. 210. Murray. 1812.

WE now proceed, as we proposed, to consider which of the shapes, in which the new system of education is in practice, merits the preference. For this purpose, we shall examine the objections to the form it assumes in the Lancasterian schools; since, if they are solid, Mr. Lancaster's plans, instead of the patronage and encouragement they have met with, deserve nothing but contempt and reprobation.

1

Mr. Lancaster's enemies have not always occupied the same ground. The lady who had the honour of first enlarging upon the mischiefs of his inventions, though she dwelt chiefly on the dangers to which they exposed the national church, said much in condemnation of the principles on which his schools were conducted, and of his mode of discipline and government. This latter topic, however,, seemed to be unten able; and accordingly it was very soon abandoned. In fact, both in the structure and management of his schools, it was evident he was in no respect inferior to Dr. Bell: while as to economy, which is the principal thing in the education of the poor, he was confessedly superior, and indeed above all

praise. Dr. Bell's most judicious and warmest partizans went no farther than to say, that his plans were quite as good as Mr. Lancaster's, and that, considering the Church Catechism formed a part of his course of instruction, he had the fairest and most urgent claims to the support of every friend of church and state. So far as we recollect, this was the exact state of the case. The whole, indeed, of Dr. Marsh's Vindication is employed, not in evincing that Dr. Bell's method is better than Mr. Lancaster's, but merely in attempting to place the two forms of the same system upon an equality.

Though given up by the wisest of Mr. Lancaster's adversa ries, there was one topic too fruitful and alluring, not to captivate a fanciful and ingenious writer. An examination into the little blemishes which might be descried in his inventions the vices with which it was possible to charge them-presented an opportunity of shining and flourishing, which it was folly to think he would let slip. Accordingly the author of the Origin, Nature, and Object of the New System of Education, (which is an article that appeared originally in the Quarterly Review, reprinted with many additions and few improvements,) seems perfectly delighted in dragging to light and brushing up Mrs. Trimmer's dusty objections, and enriching them with additions from his own stock. So far is Mr. Lancaster from having improved the mode of tuition, that he has done nothing but mischief. Every thing valuable he has taken from the Male Asylum, and wherever he differs from Dr. Bell, he is childish, or absurd, or dangerous. It seems incumbent upon us to bestow some attention on the charges brought against Mr. Lancaster's inventions, as well as on those which are deduced from his omissions.

The obvious aim of the author of the Origin, &c. which he pursues without any regard to consistency or decorum, is to trample Mr. Lancaster in the dust, and expose him to the derision of that public who have been accustomed to view him with feelings of gratitude and admiration. The circumstance of his being a Quaker, we should have thought, would have been most inauspicious to his undertakings; but, notwithstanding the cry raised against him on this very ground, it was this identical circumstance, maintains our ingenious author, (and not his enthusiastic zeal and indefatigable activity in a a good work,) that most directly contributed to his success.' If he travelled about the country explaining and recommending the system, while Dr. Bell sat quietly at home, he is not, therefore, intitled to our thanks; since this was a task quite suited to his gross and vulgar inind. Dr. Bell, this writer teaches us, published a pamphlet containing most important

785

inventions capable of being generally reduced to practice. But he went into retirement leaving them to their fate; and though his inventions were sanctioned and recommended by the Madras government, and though they were of vital importance to the national religion, yet to have attempted more would have perhaps been fatal to his schemes. Mr. Lancaster, however, did a great deal more in less time; but no thanks to him. He was a Quaker. Nothing consequently was too difficult for him. His mind was coarse. He was just the man, therefore, to perform laborious good works. It certainly is host honourable to Dr. Bell, and is a convincing proof of the utility of his scholastic plans, that many of the children who were indebted to him for a very good education,' have given him affecting testimonies of their unfeigned gratitude. This forms, with great propriety, one of the best parts of our author's panegyric on that gentleman. not also a fact, that Mr. Lancaster has given education to seve But is it ral thousand poor children who otherwise would have had none; and that he cannot walk through the Borough without meeting every where, young men who bless him as their benefactor? Yet our author cannot afford to speak a word in his praise; the circumstance of his being a Quaker, as it contributed the most to his success, having the effect of com: pletely neutralizing his merit.

A partizan can never see the least good in the party he opposes: he would wish it to be believed it has none. Thus there is not an invention that this writer allows to Mr. Lan! caster of any value whatever. Every innovation upon the usual mode of tuition, to which he can find nothing similar at Egmore, serves only to wear out the children's eyes,-or make them selfish, resentful, malicious, impudent, or stupid,or amuse them with the appearance without imparting the reality of instruction,-or inspire them with a predilection for Newgate and slave ships. The ingenuity of this writer is ~ so singular and perverse, that we shall be somewhat more particular in exposing his objections to Mr. Lancaster's efficacious and economical inventions.

It was announced by Mr. Lancaster, that one book might be made to serve several hundred children; that slates and pencils would supply the place of the ordinary materials for writing; and that a boy who could merely read, might teach arithmetic. In these improvements, which have been prac tised with great success, and which appeared, from observation and experience, to many judicious persons, cheap and effica cious, the author of the Origin, &c. can see nothing to com mend, but much to blame.

In the substitution of one book for hundreds, he allow there is great economy; but he is confident it must be very prejudicial to the children's eyesight. For, it is found that the manufacture of watch chains has this effect; and there being an obvious similarity between the manufacture of watch chains and the reading of very large print at the distance of a few feet, the consequence of both must be similar also. But if, on placing at the distance of about three feet one of Mr. Lans caster's books of large print, the examiner should suspect the cogency of this argument, we would request him to remember that children are shorter sighted than grown up persons.→→→ Not content with this objection, however, to the substi tution of one book for many, he adds another no less weighty, for which he is indebted to Mr. Bowyer. So few books will be necessary in consequence of Mr. Lancaster's plan, that no bookseller will run the risk of publishing them : and the conductor of the schools, who must be at the charge of the edition, will then have the power of circulating whatever books he chooses. If we imagined there were any persons, ex* cept Mr. Bowyer and our author, with whom this argument could have weight, we would remind them, that whoever conducts charity schools, must depend upon the benevolence of others for his support. He will be always amenable to those who employ or patronise him, and like every other seryant, will be retained or dismissed according to his behaviour. The danger, therefore, is purely imaginary. While neither the eyes nor the minds of children are in the least likely to be injured by this improvement, its economy must give it the preference to Dr. Bell's cards.

Feeble, however, as these arguments will be thought by most of our readers, those alledged against the substitution of slates and pencils for pens, ink, and paper, are still weaker. There are, indeed, two very essential points, of which this author almost always loses sight. He does not keep in mind, that Mr. Lancaster has not advanced a theory supported by abstract reasoning, and destructible by the same instrument, but a plan recommended, in all its branches, by experience; and he forgets, that the instruction of the poor is the subject of discussion. Hence, while he allows the use of the slate in teaching to write, to be a good and economical practice, as he was in duty bound, Dr. Bell having condescended to borrow it, he pretends it is not adapted to teach at once spelling and writing. But it is a fact, that the children can spell and read well, who have been taught in this way. As Dr. Bell, how ever, does not make so much use of the slate as Mr. Lancaster, and is therefore obliged to go to the expence of cyphering

broks, our author has indulged us with the following brilliant and pathetic objection. Having observed that boys delight to see their work growing under their hands, and that they will endeavour to do that neatly which is to be preserved, and find in the pleasure of finishing a book and carrying it home, a powerful motive of hope, he adds:

It was in the cyphering book that the master used to display his power of penmanship in all the varieties of ornamental writing; an art that we should be sorry to see lost. Even the flourishes which Mr. Tomkins, the great professor of that art, regards with the same sort of contempt that the regular critic feels for an acrostic, are not without beauty; and we remember, with pleasure, the pens, angels, and eagles which were the admiration of our boyhood. For the sake of these head and tail pieces, the book wherein they had been "flourished", was frequently preserved; to the son it became a point of comparison, and an object of blameless-emulation; to the father it brought back the remembrance of his youth; and though the Arabians tell us that "the remembrance of youth is a sigh," it brings with it something more profitable than regret. pp. 85, 86.

All this may be very pretty, but it is nothing to the purpose. The business is to teach writing and cyphering to those who cannot afford a writing or a cyphering book, and who must remain untaught if either of them is necessary. This circumstance alone would justify all the use that has been made of the slate and pencil, even if it were not also the effectual means of teaching at once to spell and write; of saving the teacher much time and labour; and of promoting diligence and activity among the boys.

In answer to what this writer has objected to the Lancasterian mode of teaching arithmetic, that the end of it is the blind leading the blind,' it is sufficient to say, that in this way the children do actually learn to cypher very expeditiously.

The means by which order, quietness, and activity are preserved in Mr. Lancaster's schools, have not, as might be fore seen, escaped the critic's ridicule and contempt. They are, it seems, effectual for the purpose, but they are too minute. He is, however, much more offended at the expedients employed to excite emulation among the scholars. He declaims, with vehemence, against the system of rewards. It is inconsis tent with Mr. Lancaster's principles as a quaker; and, indeed, with the principles of every one as a Christian; its tendency being to generate the meanest selfishness. After all, he does not object to rewards. He is on the contrary strenuous for giving them liberally,only let them come to the boy as a reward, not as a motive. We profess our intellects are too obtuse to understand this distinction. A reward which a boy VOL. VIII,

3 T