a direction, and, by thus making him really assimilate morality and knowledge, renders the child the chief agent in his own development.

The philosophy of the eighteenth century declared man to be originally good, but spoiled by society. This was equivalent to saying that society, in spite of being the work of man who is good, is in itself bad.

In fighting against this deplorable error, men unfortunately fell into the opposite mistake, not only declaring man to be originally bad, but denying that he bore within him a single germ of good. And thus, by a very natural consequence, Pestalozzi was condemned because he looked upon education as a development. And yet it is absolutely certain that if there were no trace of good feelings in the child's soul, good feelings could exercise no influence over him, and that if there were no seeds of good in his heart, all men's efforts for his moral education would be worse than useless.

As we have seen, Pestalozzi undoubtedly recognized the original existence of evil in the heart of man, though in stating his views he too often left this important truth in the background, partly perhaps because he was chiefly struck by the innumerable germs of goodness, dormant it is true, but yet alive, in even the most degraded souls, partly because, his aim being to interest his contemporaries in the work by which he hoped to regenerate and save the suffering people, he felt bound before everything else to prove that such a regeneration was possible.

Whatever may be the aim of education, success is not possible without method; some procedure, that is, in conformity with the natural law of man's development. And thus, in whatever religious or philosophical doctrine we may wish to train children, we must always take for a startingpoint their thoughts and feelings as they are, according to the axiom which says that before you can take a man anywhere, you must first go where he is; their powers, too, must be developed by exercise, and they must be taught to apply their strength to raising themselves slowly to the knowledge of truth and the practice of duty.

Now, this is just what Pestalozzi proposed to do. Considered in itself, his method is independent of all dogmatic opinions, and it is for this reason that it will never grow old, but at all times and in all countries be capable of appli

cation, not only to the powers of the body and mind, but also to the divine element within the soul.

In consecrating his life to a reform of elementary education, Pestalozzi not only sought to stop the sources of indi vidual poverty and suffering, but also to root out vices which were undermining the whole of European society, and preparing a fatal catastrophe for civilization. This idea comes out in most of his works. We need only remind our readers of the almost prophetic words he addressed to Mrs. Niederer when entrusting her with his manuscript on the causes of the French Revolution.

What Pestalozzi considered the real cause of the evil was not so much the absence of instruction for the people as a vicious method of teaching, which paralyzed the faculties it should have developed, and blunted the sympathies it should have quickened. And yet, as a general rule, it is this old method which has continued to prevail in the remarkable extension that has nearly everywhere been given to popular instruction in the course of this century. And thus it happens that this grand diffusion of enlightenment, as it is called, has often but aggravated the very evil it was intended to cure.

As Pestalozzi considered his elementary education to be the chief means for preserving our civilization from the terrible dangers he foresaw, we must endeavour to show how such an education, if generally applied, might contribute to bring about a change in existing conditions, and correct many of the vices which are to-day troubling society and threatening its future.

In the first place, it would give true liberty of heart and mind, without which no other liberty can be enjoyed; it would tend to re-establish in every citizen that independence of development and character which teaches a man to observe and judge for himself, without allowing himself to be absorbed by party or sect, and made a mere puppet in the hands of others. We should then no longer see the great majority of men with no other beliefs, judgments, or feelings than the beliefs, judgments, and feelings of the mass, blindly following the lead of the most skilful and violent mob orator.

Moreover, this really educational instruction, by making the child the agent of his own knowledge, gives him both taste and facility for learning by himself. Formed thus, the young man takes pleasure in devoting his leisure to self

instruction, and thus avoids temptations and the formation of habits which are often no less deadly in their effect on society than on his family and himself.

This instruction, too, that every one continues to acquire by his own observations and his own judgment, shields men from the tyranny of fashionable opinions,-opinions of the majority, that is,-which at certain times are almost forced upon us, however full of error they may be. And it is not alone in economical science that men blindly accept false systems.

To-day the craze for natural science has replaced the unintelligent contempt with which it was formerly regarded; it has even come to be spoken of as science, as though there were no other; and its authority, often invoked even outside its domain, is almost the only authority still recognized. And thus we hear people declaring that the progress of natural science has put moral science to shame. May we not believe that men would be less exposed to such a confusion of ideas if their knowledge were the fruit of faculties trained from infancy, and the conquest of their attention, spirit of observation, and independent judgment?

One of the greatest dangers in these democratic times is the separation in the education of the different classes of society. The rich have one education, the poor another; the two classes, each going its own way, get farther and farther apart; with different habits, tastes, ideas, and feelings, nay, with a different language even, they end by no longer understanding each other; and so misunderstanding breeds mistrust, and mistrust not infrequently hatred. It is easy to see how much this evil would be lessened if all children could remain together in the same schools up to the age of thirteen or fourteen; for, by that time, they would have a common stock of ideas, knowledge, and language, and durable relations would be possible between them. Schools in the spirit of Pestalozzi would render such an education as this possible, without even the richest and most particular parents having anything to fear for their children. We should not only want teachers, however, animated by Pestalozzi's spirit, but a considerable increase in the number of primary classes. But this latter reform we shall certainly have to wait for, although the need is very generally felt.

There is, however, a reform which might easily be realized. at once, and which, though less complete, would still do

much to lessen the lamentable antagonism that so often divides men engaged in different occupations.

It is now the custom for children intended for classical studies to begin Latin at eight or nine years of age, from which time they are, if not entirely separated, at any rate distinguished from their comrades who are preparing for industrial pursuits. Their work is quite different from the work of the others, and they are more or less encouraged to hold themselves aloof.

This state of things is not only bad for the harmony and sympathy that it is so desirable to see existing between al classes of society, but has besides the serious disadvantage of compelling parents to decide upon a calling for their children before they are in a position to judge of their tastes and aptitudes, with the result that many boys are launched into classical studies who will never succeed in them, and many, who at fourteen are clever and eager to learn, find themselves shut out from the liberal professions because they did not make their choice before. This state of things is also exceedingly bad for the studies themselves.

Pestalozzi was long ago struck by the painful waste of time and labour involved in trying to teach children Latin before they are acquainted with the principles of their own language, that is to say, before they have any knowledge of grammar, without which it is impossible for them to arrive at any understanding of a dead language. He even insisted that the study of a foreign modern language should precede the study of Latin, that the child might be provided with a first simple means of grammatical comparison.

This system has since been attempted a hundred times in different countries, even in important public establishments as at Berne, and has always met with complete success. Pupils who have only commenced the study of dead languages at the age of thirteen or fourteen, have invariably made such rapid progress, that in a few years they have more than made ap for the time which they seemed to have lost, but which in reality they had employed far more usefully.

And yet this reform has not yet been generally adopted, for nothing is more difficult than to change a system of studies which has slowly grown, as it were, into a national custom, and which is intended to preserve a certain unity between the schools of a country. Books and methods

adapted to children who as yet know nothing, would not of course do for those whose minds were already well formed. Besides, the reform would have to be carried out in all schools simultaneously, so that pupils might pass from one to another without detriment to their work. This reform, however, would be so advantageous in every respect, that it will certainly some day be adopted.

One of the chief vices of modern society is pride, in all its forms: vanity, ambition, the spirit of rivalry and domination, the desire to shine, to rise above others, to surpass them in power and in wealth; and this vicious tendency, into which our nature so easily slips, is aggravated nearly every day in class-rooms where the activity of the pupils is stimulated by prizes and other unwise means. Instead of being satisfied with the natural emulation which, in a properly conducted school, results from the very nature of things, and from the satisfaction of doing well and meeting with success, teachers employ all sorts of artificial means to excite and keep alive an unhealthy and un-Christian emulation, a desire for distinctions and honours, and a spirit of rivalry, which is not always unmixed with spite, envy, and hatred.

In his very earliest works, Pestalozzi condemned and proscribed these artificial means of exciting emulation; and in his after labours he did better still and rendered them superfluous. His elementary exercises, in fact, by reason of their starting-point, gradation, and connection, are so thoroughly adapted to the faculties, tastes, and needs of the child, that he takes part in them with pleasure, the mere satisfaction of feeling that he is learning and discovering, and that his powers are increasing, being a sound and sufficient stimulus. And so when we teach children by the rational elementary method, we are no longer tempted to make their vanity the stimulus to activity.

These are a few only of the points of view from which the discovery of the great educational reformer appears to us to be the chief factor in the solution of the social problem by which we are confronted to-day.

To sum up, that part of Pestalozzi's work which will endure, and that which constitutes him the benefactor of humanity, is his application of his philosophy to an elementary method of education. If we have succeeded in our attempt to explain this method, it will be clear to everybody that it does not