moment, they were all applauded, and all to be adopted; but they perished with their unfortunate authors. In the anarchy that ensued, almost all the universities and colleges in France were destroyed; the ancient school of medicine, and every other useful and venerable institution, were suspended or suppressed. Men of sense or virtue, however they deplored this destruction, had no possible means of preventing it; they had no power; their only safety was in remaining unknown, during the reign of terror; and for years afterwards, such was the fluctuation of party, that they could only snatch opportunities to obtain any useful vote in favour of education. This neglect of all instruction would probably have continued longer, and would have thrown the nation back into barbarism, if it had not been coun teracted by extraordinary motives for exertion; motives created partly by the necessities and partly by the enthusiasm of the revolution. The ignorance of the rulers, and the equality of the people, soon threw every thing into confusion; but the rulers, to preserve their power, and indeed their lives, were obliged to have recourse to men of science.

Maps, and charts, and plans of fortifications were called for: the corps of geographical engineers was established; and it was found, that naval and military engineers must be employed.

These and other scientific men combining seized the moment, when facts spoke so loudly and incontrovertibly to the nation in their favour; and they insisted upon the necessity of establishing a national system of education, and they had grants of money, and power to do what they pleased. There were many errors in their first plan; some thought of providing appointments for their friends as professors; some produced vast and seemingly admirable schemes, which failed precisely because they were vast, and because they were disproportioned to the wants and wishes of the people. Such were the central schools. The magnificent edifices, the convents, monasteries, palaces, which were converted into central schools, with immense public libraries, botanic gardens, and museums of natural history, soon had the melancholy appearance of deserted grandeur.

The learned professors were seen walking up and down the desolate and cold halls and libraries, unable to fulfil the purposes of their appointment; few scholars appeared, and those few were not prepared by previous elementary instruction to profit by their lessons. The failure of these central schools has been ascribed by many of the late French writers to the want of intermediate seminaries for the early ages of youth: but, in fact, many circumstances contributed to this disappointment. The plans were on too extensive a

scale; many local circumstances had not been considered, and the effects of time and habit had not been taken into account".

Small difficulties in the execution of these great projects arose; then in the hurry of the moment successive alterations were suggested, and these continual changes were more pernicious than many of the habitual errors of the ancient routine. Of this the most sensible men in the nation were fully aware. But political parties, as well as the errors of projectors, continued these changes. One moment large sums were granted to lay the foundation of some new establishment; the next, the funds were withdrawn, the professors left without salaries, forgotten, or proscribed. Central schools, lyceums, academies, institutes, all appeared and vanished with transient splendour. Les écoles normales have, indeed, left a durable and useful monument of their existence; and it must for ever be regretted, that political animosities destroyed and discredited such a combination of the most solid and brilliant talents. No one can read the Journals of the Normal School, without admiring the knowledge and abilities of the lec

b The author here speaks of what he saw in the year 1802, when he travelled through the Low Countries, and visited les Ecoles Centrales. During a residence of several months at Paris, in 1802 and 3, he had opportunities of obtaining information, from the best authorities, of the state of education in that kingdom.

In ten volumes, Svo, published at Paris, ann. X.

D

tures, and the skill and patience, with which the best means of teaching were investigated.

At length, under the auspices of Monge, Haüy, Hassenfraetz, la Place, la Grange, Foureroy, Chaptal, Prony, and others, schools of science were established. Taught by the failure of their predecessors, and aware of the extreme mutability of public opinion, the founders of these schools proceeded with slow but certain steps. They tried their vast system at first for a fixed period, and upon a limited scale: they determined to convince themselves and the public, what could be done in three months by their modes of instruction. They classed their 1300 pupils: different professors took charge of them in their respective sciences, and in three months was performed the work of three years. The progress, the actual acquirements of the pupils surpassed all expectation. After this experiment, both the government and the public expressed just confidence in the means employed by the professors, and the Ecole Polytechnique was permanently established. It became the central point of all the education of France. These examples may show, that improvements in education, which have been cautiously made after trials of a reasonable time, have succeeded; while those which have been rashly attempted by theorists, and speculative men of the most enlightened genius, and the best intentions, have either failed at once, or have been gradually abandoned.

Without regard to the political animosities of the times, a writer on education should steadily endeavour to lay before the public whatever may be permanently useful. Fas est et ab hoste doceri! The example of France may be advantageous to this country, by many of her successful and unsuccessful experiments in education. For instance, at present there is in our own country a strong party for and against the learned languages. Both appear to have gone into extremes. In France the spirit of conquest led to utter neglect of all studies, which were not connected with military success. Mathematics, geometry, fortification, engineering, and all the sciences that could be useful in war, are taught admirably well in l'Ecole Polytechnique and other public establishments; but literature was so much neglected, that some of their ablest pupils could not write, or even spell with propriety. The study of the learned languages was absolutely discouraged; and if a few of the elegant scholars of former times, such as Suard, Morellet, la Harpe, and Delille, had not fortunately remained to support the cause of classical literature, ancient learning would perhaps have been neglected, the French language itself corrupted, and the literary taste of the nation utterly depraved. The French were right in preventing military youths, and pupils destined for certain other professions, from wasting their time in acquiring the learned languages, which could