a great many strangers gathered together at

city of . . . Jerusalem, just before the Roman army came against it, so that, although there were not nearly a million of inhabitants in Jerusalem, yet one way or ... another with the sword, when they were. . . . fighting, and by famine, and other things, more than one million persons were slain and otherwise destroyed; not merely men and women, but ... little children. Yes, the people not being able to get out of the city, on account of the Roman army, that was round the city, many thousands wanted food so long, that they . . . . died; but before they . . . . died, they were known to eat almost any thing they could get, even rats and other . . . . vermin. What a sad condition they were brought to by the Roman army, and by famine, or want of . . . . food; and what was still worse, children, they fought among themselves. No wonder, then, when Jesus knew all these sad things that . .、、 happened, that were to.... happen, that he .. What did he do when he looked on the city? He wept over it. Jesus was sorry at the punishment that was to come upon .. them for their great sins. Mention any of these great sins. Killing the prophets,

and now they were about to . . . . kill Jesus too.

But Jesus said He would have taken all these people, all this immense number of . . . . people, under his . . . . wings. Look at your books. The Bible says, "How often would I have gathered thy children together." Jesus here says, that He would have gathered all the children of . . . . Jerusalem, not merely the little . . children, but the . . . . big children, all the people of Jerusalem, under his wings, or under his . protection. And they would be quite safe, as safe as the chickens are under the wings of the hen. Jesus had no wings, master. This little boy is quite right; Jesus had no .. wings. Can you tell me of what use the wings of the hen are to the chickens? To keep them safe. Then, suppose any of you, children in the gallery, were afraid of being attacked by some animal while you are going home from school, and I were to take you under my arm, what would my arms be to you? Wings. I could not fly with my arms, but my arms could us. My arm could keep or protect the . which would be the same to the boy or girl, as the wings of a hen are to the. . . . little chickens. My arms are able to protect a child, and the wings of the hen are sufficient to . . . . little chickens.

boy or

keep

girl,

under my arm for protection, how all be safe at this moment were

you

Now, suppose any of you were would feel? Safe. Would you a furious bull or dog to come into this school? No, sir, there are too many of us. Would I be safe under your wings or protection? No,

Sir, we're too wee.

Give me a proper word for wee. Little. Little word to proper

use.

* Now, children, you think that one of you might be safe under . . . arms, but that the whole school would not be because you are too

my

་

says.

of

too many many, "How often would I have gathered you

together," that meant

Jerusalem, even as a

all

would not.

. . . Jerusalem, all the people of hen gathereth her brood under her (Expressed very slowly, and in an would

wings, and ye
under tone of voice.) "And ye
many boys and girls, and men and
themselves under the protection of
come to

...

not." Just like too

women. They will not put

Christ. They will not pray to . . . Jesus, or believe

in Him. And although Jerusalem was a large almost as large as London, yet Jesus says He would often have taken the whole hundreds of thousands of the people of the Jews, who lived in Jerusalem, under his wings, and keep them all quite safe. Could I or any here do that? No, sir. Who could do that? God. God only could do such a thing. Then who must Jesus Christ be? God. But Jesus wept when He looked on Jerusalem. You remember we had this lesson formerly; at another time when Jesus looked upon that large city, doomed to destruction for its great wickedness, He . . . . wept over it. Jesus wept over Jerusalem, and He wept at the grave of.. Lazarus. It is said in that interesting account, on approaching the

grave
Jesus wept. Do you think God can weep as we do?
No, sir. God cannot
Jesus

wept. Then what must He be? Man. Why?

cause He wept. Man because He .

Bewept, and what must Jesus

be when He could take all Jerusalem under his protection, or wings?

The trainer will of course draw out from the children from this lesson, the natural application of reverence and love, and obedience to such a holy being as the Lord Jesus Christ.

PRINCIPAL LESSON.

THE DIVINITY AND HUMANITY OF CHRIST.

The above lesson is, we think, upon the whole, a favourable specimen of a Training lesson, on the picturing out system. In some of the

* Physical exercises must not be omitted, so as to keep up the attention of the children in conjunction with picturing out.

C

published lessons, Mr. Stow dwells at great length on the various senses and applications of the words, as if his object were, not merely to bring out the sense which they bear in the passage, but to exhaust the subject. Leaving out of the question, however, the peculiar merits or demerits of the lesson in itself, we wish here to speak of the principle, or plan on which it is drawn up. We do not stop to enquire whether the text, the subject of the lesson, might have been treated otherwise-whether a more interesting, or a more profitable view could have been taken of it. With such enquiry we have at present nothing to do. Our business, we repeat, is with the principle, or plan on which the lesson is drawn up. And here the first thing that strikes one is, that the plan upon which it proceeds necessitates an unprofitable expenditure, not to say, a total waste of a large amount of time. Mr. Stow, as well he might, anticipates such an objection. And how does he meet it? By assuring such objectors that, in actual practice, nearly double the amount of words employed in the published examples will generally be used. He further maintains, that the tediousness of picturing out ought not to be objected to, since by means of it such accurate ideas, or notions can be imparted, as it would be impossible to convey by every variety of instruction. These assertions, it will probably be thought, require qualification. Mr. Stow, however, does not stop here. In support of his favourite theory of picturing out, he sweepingly declares, that we literally know nothing but from, or through the medium of visible objects." He is of opinion that the slow progress of knowledge in the world is attributable to the absence of picturing out in early education. According to him, this is the only way in which a knowledge of figurative words and phrases used in scientific and Scriptural subjects can be acquired. He illustrates his view of the matter by quoting the following sentence from Dr. Buckland. Elevations and subsidences, inclinations and contortions, fractures and dislocations, are phenomena, which, although at first sight they present only the appearance of disorder and confusion, yet, when fully understood, demonstrate the existence of order, and method, and design, even in the operations of the most turbulent among the mighty physical forces which have affected the terraqueous globe." Mr. Stow thinks that the only way in which a sentence like this can be understood, is by having its words separately pictured out. Now on this point we are quite at issue with him. We cannot think that picturing out is the best plan that can be adopted for imparting a knowledge of scientific nomenclature, or, as he terms it, the language of elementary science. In fact, when one considers the vast multitude there are of technical or scientific terms, one may well doubt whether a knowledge of them could ever be acquired by means

66

of picturing out. In reference to the extent of scientific nomenclature, an eminent writer (John Frederick William Herschel, "Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy,"p. 136,) observes :— "The botanist is conversant with from 80,000 to 100,000 species of plants; the entomologist with, perhaps, as many of insects; the chemist has to register the properties of combinations by twos, threes, fours, and upwards, in various doses, of upwards of fifty different elements, all distinguished from each other by essential differences, and of which, though a great many thousands are known, by far the greater part have never yet been formed, although hundreds of new ones are coming to light, in perpetual succession, as the science advances; all of which are to be named as they arise. The objects of astronomy are literally as numerous as the stars of heaven; and although not more than one or two thousand require to be expressed by distinct names, yet the number respecting which particular information is required, is not less than a hundred times that amount, &c."

To obtain a knowledge of the extensive scientific nomenclature referred to in the above extract, a far more feasible and effectual method, we fancy, than that of picturing out, would be to acquire a knowledge of the radical and primitive meaning of the elements (comparatively few in number) of which the vocabularies of the sciences are formed.

Our chief objection, in a practical point of view, to picturing out is, that it requires a large unprofitable expenditure of time. Some, however, have alleged even graver objections against it. (The Educational Magazine for 1839.) "How, it has been said, shall we picture out that Sacred Word which is the name of the Most High? And this brings us to the applicability of this principle (that of picturing out) to religion at all. We are sorry to seem to speak harshly, but we must confess our conviction, that, if any one wished to impress children's minds with low and grovelling, erroneous notions of their Creator and of themselves, of his nature and of their nature, of his dealings with them and of their relations to Him, if he wished to deter them from learning to exalt their thoughts to loftier and truer things than this world affords, no plan better adapted for this purpose could be devised than one which habituates them to recur to tangible and visible objects for an explanation of all they read in their Bibles. A system so unnatural, so alien from the constitution of the human mind, cannot endure. Mean-while, as regards its use in teaching religion to children, we are satisfied that so far as it succeeds in picturing out the persons, facts or things therein contained, its effects will be to convey to them low and degraded notions of it; while, so far as it fails in the picturing out, it will make them sceptical of the very existence of the things which cannot be displayed to

them in the usual way; in a word, its tendency, and that strongly and directly, is to materialism."

The fears here expressed, with respect to the tendency of the system to materialism, are, we believe, quite chimerical, and are by no means warranted by the experience derived from its actual working. Such complaints are sufficiently met by the many testimonials that Mr. Stow has received in favour of the plans pursued from the parents of the children who have attended the Glasgow Schools. Some years ago Mr. Stow forwarded to the parents of the children a number of queries, with a view of testing the result of the plans pursued in the schools. In addition to those who called at the schools and gave their answers verbally, 272 written answers were received, variously expressed indeed, but all bearing strong testimony to the benefit which their children had received from their attendance at the schools.

Among the queries to which we have alluded, we find the following, which is much to the point we are here speaking of.

66

Query 3.-Are you satisfied or not with the amount of Scriptural instruction, or, as it is termed, Bible Training, which they have received?" (The Training System, 7th edition, p. 445.)

"Answers,-uniformly, 'satisfied,' 'perfectly satisfied,' &c."

It will be obvious to those who have followed us in our remarks on Mr. Stow's system, that there are many good points in it. His greatest weakness, we think, is, that he is too much a system-maker. For instance, his picturing out, or at least, a modification of it, when judiciously employed on appropriate subjects, is a valuable method of instruction. Perhaps the sphere in which it is most usefully employed is religious instruction, in which the object is not exclusively to convince the understanding, but also to move the feelings and sway the will. Mr. Stow, however, would have us believe that it is equally applicable and valuable in imparting all branches of schoolinstruction. Latin grammar, for example-he thinks-might be rendered a less dry study, and more interesting, were the boy not permitted to use any term which had not first been pictured out to his mind. e. g. such words as participle, perfect, indicative, pluperfect, subjunctive, &c., why a noun is declined, and a verb conjugated; and the same in English grammar. It is a principle of the Training System, that no abstract term, or figurative word, be used, or any passage committed to memory, until each particular term, and the whole subject, be analysed and familiarly illustrated; the exercise of the understanding thus preceding the exercise of the verbal memory.

The principle enunciated in the above clause in italics, is one respecting which much might be said on both sides. Our remarks, however, have already extended to so great a length that we must