destiny. And this was done, not in the superficial rationalistic manner of Basedow and his school, but so profoundly that even a man like Fichte anticipated very great things from it." Professor Joseph Payne declares that Pestalozzi "stands forth among educational reformers as the man whose influence on education is wider, deeper, more penetrating than that of all the rest-the prophet and the sovereign of the domain in which he lived and laboured ".

Fichte said: "Pestalozzi's essential aim has been to raise the lower classes, and clear away all differences between them and the educated classes. It is not only popular education that is thus realised, but national education. Pestalozzi's system is powerful enough to help nations, and the whole human race, to rise from the miserable state in which they have been wallowing." Herbart writes: "The welfare of the people is Pestalozzi's aim-the welfare of the common, crude population. He desired to take care of those of whom fewest do take care. He did not seek the crown of merit in your mansions, but in your hovels."

Of Pestalozzi's work Herbart says: "The whole field of actual and possible sense-perception is open to the Pestalozzian method; its movements in it will grow constantly freer and larger. Its peculiar merit consists in having laid hold more boldly and more zealously than any former method of the duty of building up the child's mind; of constructing in it a definite experience in the light of clear sense-perception; not acting as if the child had already an experience, but taking care that it gets one; by not chatting with him as though in him, as in the adult, there was already a need for communicating and elaborating his acquisitions; but,

in the very first place, giving him that which later on can be, and is to be, discussed.

"The Pestalozzian method, therefore, is by no means qualified to crowd out any other method, but to prepare the way for it. It takes the earliest age that is at all capable of receiving instruction. It treats it with the seriousness and simplicity which are appropriate where the very first raw materials are to be procured."

Professor A. Pinloche, in the introduction to his book on Pestalozzi, says: "For Pestalozzi was reserved the undying fame of having not only restored to credit the processes of the method of sense-perception, already known and applied, but, above all, of having realised both the social importance of the education of the people and the most suitable means of determining its method". He also speaks of Pestalozzi's "original and powerful pedagogy".

Mr. Thomas Davidson, in A History of Education, says: "Pestalozzi is the parent of the modern love for children, and it is this love that has transformed education from a harsh, repressive discipline into a tender, thoughtful guidance. . . . After Pestalozzi people saw children with new eyes, invested them with new interest, and felt the importance of placing them in a true relation to the world of nature and culture. It is not too much to say that all modern education breathes the spirit of Pestalozzi. It is education for freedom, not for subordination."

Dr. Diesterweg, a great German educationist, thus sums up the changes brought about by Pestalozzi: "Instead of brutal, staring stupidity, close and tense attention; for dull and blockish eyes, cheerful and pleased looks; for crooked back, the natural erectness

of figure; for dumbness or silence, joyous pleasure in speaking, and promptitude that even takes the word out of another's mouth; for excessive verbosity in the teacher, and consequent stupidity in the scholar, a dialogic, or, at least, a dialogic-conversational method; for government by the stick, a reasonable and therefore a serious and strict discipline; for mere external doctrines and external discipline, a mental training, in which every doctrine is a discipline also; instead of government by force, and a consequent fear of the school and its pedant, love of school, and respect for the teacher".

W. C. Woodbridge, in the Annals of Education, says: "He combated with unshrinking boldness and untiring perseverance, through a long life, the prejudices and abuses of the age in reference to education, both by his example and by his numerous publications. He attacked with great vigour, and no small degree of success, that favourite maxim of bigotry and tyranny, that obedience and devotion are the legitimate offspring of ignorance. . . . In this way he produced an impulse which pervaded Europe and which, by means of his popular and theoretical works, reached the cottages of the poor and the palaces of the great.'

:

To sum up briefly what Pestalozzi accomplished, we may say that he democratised education: he psychologised it he revolutionised teaching methods: he showed the way to research and experimental work in education : and introduced child-study. He taught us that not only must the teacher know the child as a living and growing organism, but he must acquire the art of becoming as a little child so that he may influence, in the surest and best ways, the child's development. Like Froebel he said, in effect: "Come, let us live with our children ".

That is to say, the teacher must adopt the standpoint of a child, as a well-graced actor dons the character which he impersonates. This must be done without exaggeration, fuss, or affectation; and without losing the control which wisdom, affection and authority should give. The teacher's mind should be so saturated with the realisation of the child's view of things that he unconsciously-in a great measure-works in a child-like (not childish) manner.

Above all, Pestalozzi is the one who first tried to analyse and systematise the very elements of the science of education. He dealt with the first beginnings, the real origins, of educational development. As Herbart says: "The Pestalozzian method . . . takes care of the earliest age that is at all capable of receiving instruction. It treats it with the seriousness and simplicity which are appropriate where the very first raw materials are to be procured." Herein Pestalozzi was the father of infants' education, in the modern sense; and his great disciple Froebel-himself in turn a Master--was truly an expounder and expander of Pestalozzian principles. Although Pestalozzi only sometimes dealt with those who were infants as to their bodies, he (personally) nearly always dealt with those who were infants as to their minds. It was of these that he was always thinking, and it was with them that he was so extraordinarily successful, as a practical teacher.

Perhaps the greatest success that Pestalozzi had was his influence upon two such men as Froebel and Herbart. Froebel says: "It soon became evident to me that Pestalozzi was to be the watchword of my life". Herbart wrote several essays on Pestalozzi's A B C of

Sense-Perception, and himself wrote a treatise on the same subject. Through these two men Pestalozzi has, in a special sense and degree, influenced all modern education. Indeed it is not too much to say that, in relation to modern education, Pestalozzi began everything, though he finished nothing.

During Pestalozzi's lifetime his system was introduced into most of the European countries: Alexander Boniface, for a time teacher of French at Yverdon, established a Pestalozzian school in Paris. Blochmann, teacher of music and geography at Yverdon, became chief educational counsellor to the King of Saxony; Gruner, who visited Yverdon, was head of a Pestalozzian school at Frankfort (where Froebel first taught); Muller, who was sent to Burgdorf to study the system, opened a Pestalozzian school at Mainz; Plamann, a visitor at Burgdorf, conducted a Pestalozzian school at Berlin; Barraud, who learnt under Pestalozzi, conducted a school at Bergerac; Voitel of Soleure founded a school at Madrid, and a training college for teachers at Santander; Ström and Torlitz, two teachers sent by the King of Denmark to study the system at Burgdorf, were put in charge of a school in Copenhagen; one teacher went to St. Petersburg. The King of Holland sent two student-teachers to Yverdon; and the Crown Prince himself visited the institution. Many young men from all parts, more especially from Germany, went to the institute as visitors, to study the system.

Our own country also came under the influence of Pestalozzi. Dr. Kay based much of the teaching and organisation of the Battersea Training College (founded 1840) on the principles of Pestalozzi and Fellenberg. When he (Dr. Kay) became secretary of the Education