1. Has teaching a noble aim? Teaching is the conducting of the process by which the organs of the body and the faculties of the mind are developed and trained; and, surely, no human aim can be higher or nobler. "Man," said Pope, "is the noblest work of God;" and, He who knew man best, gave him dominion “ over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." From this, it appears evident that man is considered by his Maker as the head of the animal world, the crowning glory of creation. It is honorable to labor on the farm or in the workshop; but, however necessary Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts may be to the existence or well-being of the human family, the tilling of the land, the modeling of machinery, or the construction of railroads, palaces, or pyramids, can hardly be compared in importance to the education of man himself, the agent upon whom the success of the work depends.

The science of Medicine is founded in the relations of certain mineral, vegetable, and animal substances to the human system; but, as the body is less important than the mind that animates it, it cannot be that, when properly understood, a science which includes both body and mind should be considered inferior to one less expansive. It is not an object of less dignity to train, by judicious means, the body to a healthy growth than it is by appropriate remedies to remove disease from the system; and, the training of the body is but a small part of the object of education.

The profession of the law is founded upon man's social relations, and its highest aim seems to be to secure, by means of courts and juries, the proper observance of those relations. Teaching assumes to do more than this. It not only requires teachers to acquaint themselves with the relations which one man or one community of men bears to another, but it proposes to make such knowledge universal; and, to secure obedience to the great commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," not by the verdict of a jury, the decision of a judge, or the counsel of men learned in the law, but by so cultivating the understanding, training the habits, and forming the character of youth, that the spontaneous impulses of their own hearts may dictate the right.

But, contrasts aside, what nobler object can there be than that of educating the whole people? The most perfect government would fail among ignorant and immoral men; the most perfect schemes of reform, planned by the philanthropist or the patriot, would prove fruitless if not based upon awakened intelligence. Among a people devoid of education, government becomes anarchy; reform, fanaticism; science, magic; religion, superstition. Shut up the schools and colleges of our country, and you at once palsy all improvement; you cripple agriculture, manufactures, and commerce; you dam up the fountains of literature and science; you sap the foundations of our republican government; you undermine the very fabric of society; you blast as with mildew breath, the glorious religious fruit of the reformation, and send men back to revel mid the darkness and superstition of the Middle Ages.

An artist stood before a rough block just from the quarry. He gazed intently upon the stone.-None but his eye could detect the beauty which lay concealed therein. He began his work. Chip by chip the rude mass was slowly chiseled away. Days, and weeks, and years were spent in the toilsome task; but, behold, from the rough stone there has appeared a beautiful statue, whose veins swell with the coursing life-blood, whose lips utter words.-"What the art of the sculptor is to a block of marble, education is to a human soul;" so, the teacher, by labor as toilsome as that of the artist, would give grace, beauty and intelligence to the too often rude material that tests his skill. His mission is to form the manners, to cultivate the taste, to awaken the slumbering intellect, to store the mind with useful knowledge, to kindle in the heart pure and lofty sentiments, and to expand the soul until it can enjoy a just apprehension of nature and of God. Than this object, earth presents none greater or nobler.

2. Are the operations of Teaching scientific in their character, or are they merely mechanical? "The term profession," says Dr. Webster, "is not applied to an occupation merely mechanical." If teaching, therefore, be a mere imitative process or a mechanical art, it has no claims to be called a profession. It is acknowledged that some of the processes of teaching are in part mechanical. Such is, to a considerable extent, the case with the teaching of writing, drawing, instrumental music, and painting; and, perhaps, to a more limited extent, it may be true in the teaching of other branches. But surgical operations are mechanical, as are likewise all legal forms; so that in this respect, teaching does not differ from Medicine or Law.

Apart from this, however, it is claimed that teaching is a science, and that he who would teach well must teach according to fixed principles. The end proposed by education, is the training and development of the physical, intellectual and moral powers of man; and, this end, like other important objects, can only be attained by the systematic application of appropriate means. To attain it, the relation of man to circumstances-of the human mind to nature as the subject of knowledge-must be known and applied. A farmer, before he can cultivate his land successfully, must know the nature of the soil and the means by which it can be improved; and this knowledge is called the science of agriculture. The physician, before he can skillfully practice his profession, should understand the structure and functions of the human body and its relations to Materia Medica; and upon these principles the science of Medicine is based. In a similar manner, the teacher, before he can teach well, must acquaint himself with the educational capabilities of the human body and the human mind, and the means nature furnishes for conducting the process of teaching; and here, too, may be found principles, which, when systematically arranged, are well worthy of being designated a science, and I hesitate not to say the greatest and noblest of sciences-the science of man.

An additional reason why the teacher should study the constitution of mind and its phenomena, may be found in the fact that there is a natural

order of development in the mental faculties, which should be observed in teaching. First, the principle of curiosity prompts the child to look, to notice, to examine, to inquire; next, memory fills her store-house with the words, things, facts and phenomena; and, then, reason mounts her throne to classify, to generalize and to form inductions. The teacher who would reverse this order, or unskillfully follow it, will greatly mar his work.

There is likewise a logical order which should be observed in the teaching of any branch of study.-There is a proper place to begin, appropriate steps to follow in succession, and a natural conclusion.-Each branch of study is to the pupil a ladder, up which he is required to climb. This ladder the teacher should base upon the simple ideas the child possesses, and, then, allow him to mount, by easy but sure graduations, upward. This logicial order in study-this right method of teaching-is not merely mechanical, but deeply philosophical.

The government of a human being, in any circumstances, is a delicate and responsible task. Every thinking parent knows that, without system, he cannot govern his child, and, with his utmost care and study his child is not always well governed. An intimate knowledge of human nature, and of the motives which actuate human conduct, ability to detect the cause of disorder and to administer an appropriate remedy, a well-arranged system of principles applicable to the government of children-these, and only these, will enable a teacher to secure good order in his school.

In the knowledge the teacher requires of the constitution of mind and its relations, of the order in which its faculties are naturally developed, of the method to be observed in successful teaching, and in school government, he must base his principles upon the broad, solid foundations of science; and his teaching must be ill-directed and its results uncertain, who is not guided by the light of scientific truth.

It is true, however, and I acknowledge it even among teachers with shame, that far too much of our teaching, both in school and college, has been mechanical, a mere routine of learning lessons and reciting them. Our teachers and professors have been far too regardless of the Philosophy of Education, and many have taught on, seldom questioning as to whether their methods of teaching were right or wrong. Happily, a brighter day is dawning for the Profession of Teaching. Teachers are everywhere experimenting. Thinking men among them will systematize the results of these experiments; and teaching will eventually be ranked, where it is maintained its scientific basis entitles it to be, among the learned professions. 3. Does Teaching require a learned general education, on the part of those who practice it? Lawyers, Doctors and Theologians are expected to possess, in addition to the special knowledge required for the practice of their professions, a learned general education. It may perhaps be true that teachers are not at present, generally, as well informed as the members of the other professions; but if it were fair to judge the standing of a profession by the ignorance of individual members, it is feared that no profession could claim a very high standard of learning.

Law has its pettifogers, Medicine its quacks, and Theology its pretenders. We have known Doctors who had bought their Theses at graduation for want of ability to write them, Lawyers who could not spell half the words in the English language, or write three consecutive sentences grammatically, and Preachers who were almost entirely destitute of all literary or scientific information. It is readily granted, however, that Law, Medicine, and Theology all require a learned general education, on the part of those who would fully master their principles and appropriately apply them; and this, it is claimed, is equally the case with teaching.

A man cannot teach what he does not know; hence, teachers should be acquainted at least with all the branches of study in which they give instruction. It is insisted, further, that he who would teach even small children well should possess extensive knowledge. It is a gross error to suppose that teachers in primary schools require but a limited education. They need an intimate acquaintance with the youthful mind and character, and such a knowledge of literature and natural science as will enable them to enliven every lesson with suitable illustrations, satisfy the active curiosity of the young, and awaken in their pupils a love of study and a thirst for knowledge.

A teacher cannot know too much. The very staple of his profession is learning. There is no event in history, no fact in experience, no sentiment in poetry, no principle in science-nothing that has ever been written, known, or thought,-that cannot be made to subserve the purpose of teaching. Those who propose becoming members of the other professions, expect to obtain their general education from the teacher, and if it be required that this should be a learned education, teachers themselves must be learned. All men look to our educational institutions as the fountains from which issue streams of learning, and the thirst of those who seek earnestly for truth, cannot be slaked in shallow waters.

For these reasons, Teaching does require a learned general education, on the part of those who practice it.

4. Is the nature of Teaching such as to render special preparation necessary to success? If a business require no special preparation to fit those who engage in it for properly discharging its duties, it is every man's business and cannot be made a distinct profession. If even all good scholars, or persons who had been well taught, could teach, teaching could not be called a profession, because, in that case, it would be a mere incident of good scholarship. Lawyers and Doctors obtain a general academical or collegiate education, and afterward study their profession; and, this special preparation, I am ready to maintain, teaching also requires.

We know, indeed, that certain enemies of the establishment of schools for the training of Teachers, and, consequently of the Teachers' profession, have asserted that there can be no special instruction to teachers, apart from the branches taught; and that one who is well taught according to a good method, will be a good teacher if he can be made one. Hence, it would follow that all Academies and Colleges, which have thorough and

well directed plans of teaching, must train good teachers, though they do not profess to make good Lawyers, Doctors or Ministers, and though the fact is palpable that thousands of good scholars fail as teachers. I deny most emphatically the truth of this doctrine. It is a gross fallacy and a libel upon the Teachers' profession. I admit that there are those who have a natural aptness to teach, as there are those who have a natural aptness for other kinds of business, and that such persons, after having received a good education, can teach well; but such an exception does not invalidate the rule that special preparation is generally necessary or always beneficial, any more than it would render unnecessary Medical Colleges or Military Academies, because some men who had never been trained in such institutions have exhibited great skill in performing surgical operations, or in marshalling an army on the day of battle.

I admit, likewise, and have argued on a preceding page, that a teacher should possess a learned general education,—that the more thorough the mode in which he is taught, the better for him; but I maintain that, superadded to this, he should receive special preparation for the discharge of his professional duties, and that if teaching does not require this kind of preparation, it has little claim to the rank of a profession.

Among the reasons which might be given why teachers should receive special preparation, is, that in general education, comparatively little attention is devoted to the study of the philosophy of the human mind, especially with reference to its educational capabilities, its relations to the means which may be employed to instruct and discipline it, and the natural order in which its faculties develop themselves or assume a teachable condition,

Another reason why teachers should receive special preparation, is, that otherwise the philosophical method of presenting a subject to the mind of a pupil is apt to be overlooked,-that in the eagerness to reach the result, the result only receives attention, and not the gradual development of the subject or the mutual relations existing among its several parts. A traveler whirls along in car or steamboat, anxious only to reach the end of his journey; so the student, engaged in acquiring a general education, struggles through his sciences, his languages, and his mathematics, careful only to secure the knowledge of which he is in search. The pilot or engineer, however, whose business it is to guide others, watches every turn to the right and to the left, and attends to every circumstance that happens by the way; so should the teacher acquaint himself with the path along which he would conduct the steps of his pupils, and with everything that can add interest to the journey.

Bacon immortalized his name by pointing out the true method of investigating nature. If Bacon's methods are philosophical and require special study, a like philosophy may be found, and a philosophy equally well worthy of special study, in the true method of teaching-the order of proceeding from the simple, elementary ideas of a subject to those more and more complex, until the mind can grasp the whole.

Necessarily connected with teaching is school government; and a third