I have already said, Do not hear the class in regular rotation from one end to the other, but promiscuously. Neither is it necessary, (or even advisable, if the class be large,) to hear each pupil read every time the class is called out, as some parents and teachers suppose. It is better for one or two to read thoroughly and correctly, while the others listen attentively, than to run through the whole class in a hurried, confused, faulty manner. In this, as in all things, regard not the principle 'how much,’ but how well.'

Again, they need not always read to a period, or full stop, or to the end of a sentence or paragraph, or even to any pause. Rather, sometimes, let one commence and read to the middle of a sentence; and then let another take it up there right in the middle of a sentence, and just where, it may be, the sense is incomplete, and finish it. At one recitation you may spend most of the time in reading;—at another, in asking questions, and making remarks; and at a third, in reading yourself to the class. This last will be an excellent mode of spending the time; especially, if you allow your pupils to remark upon your reading. This can be done with safety and profit, when a right state of feeling prevails.

After a scholar has read, point out to him his faults,in pronunciation, pauses, inflections and tones; in omitting or substituting words; or what is more important, in regard to the general style and execution of the reading. as affecting the meaning, strength or beauty of the passage. Let this be done after the scholar has read,—after he has got through. Do not keep stopping and correcting him while he is in the very act of reading. This serves only to provoke or discourage him; and makes a

bad matter worse.

Read it over to him once or twice, or let so:ne one of the class do it, and then let the first reader try again. Be sure you do this last.

Some teachers will point out a fault, show by example how the passage should be read, and then, without requiring the pupil to read the sentence a second time, and himself correct the fault, pass on to the next. This is very faulty. I repeat,-do not stop a scholar, or allow your pupils to interrupt him in the midst of his performance, but wait until he gets to the end; unless it be for some gross fault or blunder, which would utterly pervert the sense, and destroy all propriety of reading. It is perplexing and discouraging so to do. It mars all the beauty of the performance; and utterly defeats the object of correction. Far better is it to allow him to go on to the end of the sentence, and then call his attention to his faults in the gross.

Almost every scholar will have something good and deserving imitation in his manner, as well as something faulty. Call the attention of the whole class to the points of excellence as well as of defect. Urge them to imitate the one, and avoid the other.

One scholar, for instance, will read too fast; another, too slow-one, too high, and another too low; one will be very indistinct and cluttering, yet perfectly correct in all his intonations and inflections; and a third, who avoids the faults of both, will hesitate, stumble and miscall words.

Satisfy yourself in any proper way, and in various ways, that your pupils understand what they read. Question them on every exercise. And frequently require them to give you oral or written abstracts or analy

ses of what they read. This is an excellent exercise for mental discipline, and for acquiring the use of language, and the art of constructing sentences,-a very important 、part, though not the most difficult part, of composition.

The ability to read well depends much on practice. Let your pupils, therefore, if possible, read often. But do not forget that much more depends on regular, systematic, thorough drilling, than upon the quantity read. Two exercises a week, thoroughly and judiciously executed, are better than half a dozen, or even half a thousand, such as I have known. Again, I repeat,-take care that the exercise does not become a dull, monotonous, unmeaning affair. Let everything within its limits, be turned to the cultivation either of the head or of the heart; every word, fact, allusion, and character, and vary your method, until variety itself becomes monotony. Do not, as thousands have done, allow your pupils to run over whole pages and chapters, in a careless, rambling, superficial way, just that they may be able to say, they have read through their book! This is exactly the way to make them familiar with the book, while they know nothing of its contents. Many a book in this way has lost its novelty, before a single chapter in it had been fully understood and well read. It has nothing to recommend it, but that it is admirably calculated to make scholars careless and stupid.

Call the attention of your pupils often to their own faults, or to faults to which they have a tendency; particularly to any erroneous provincialisms which may prevail in the community in which they have been brought up. Many words of common use are often very incorrectly pronounced, while the very commonness of the fault is

the reason that it is not noticed. Instance in the words, -head, leg, bed, window, nature, catch, get, tobacco, together with all the participial terminations in ing, and many others. These are often pronounced, haid, laig, winder, ketch, git, &c., instead of hed, leg, window, catch, get, &c. Furnish them with a catalogue of such words, or rather let them make out one for themselves, and require to rehearse it often.

You perceive I have been describing a process of teaching reading on the assumption that you take the pupil from the beginning, give him his first lesson, and lead on through his whole course. You would commence with the most simple words, names of familiar objects, then pass to simple sentences made up of these words, thence to plain narrative; after which will come in due succession, conversational prose, dialogue, simple poetry, and finally the more impassioned strains of poetry and prose. This is the course I would recommend. To do all this and to do it well, is no easy task; and yet it may be far easier than what will actually fall to your lot. For you will have not only scholars who have not been taught at all, but those who have been taught badly, with every variety of pronunciation, tone, cadence and inflection. You will find much to be corrected; much work of preparation to be performed, many thorns to be extirpated, before the good seed can grow, or even be sown. The inquiry then arises, 'How can we make good readers of those who now read badly, as well as of those who cannot read at all?' I reply in another question. How can we become good readers ourselves? For on the same principles, and by the same method, that we learn ourselves, we may teach others.

In Walker's Rhetorical Grammar, Barber's Elocutionist, Porter's Rhetorical Reader, and other elementary works, you find directions laid down for your guidance in this matter. These authors have gone very fully into this subject. I commend them to your particular attention. You will find in them valuable suggestions on emphasis, pause, cadence, interrogation, tone, inflection, and almost every thing relating to reading, illustrated by appropriate examples. In Barber's Grammar, there is something on articulation; a better work, however, on this branch of the subject, is Russell's Lessons in Enunciation. In Worcester's books, as I have already said, there are very good rules, though nothing like a systematic analysis of the principles of good reading.

It is not my intention to go very fully into the question which I have proposed. To do this, would require me to write a treatise; for which I have neither time nor qualifications.

Reading is the utterance of certain elementary sounds variously combined: These elementary sounds are the powers of letters, so united in vocal expression, as to form syllables, words, and sentences. And good reading is the utterance of these combinations in such a manner as to bring out the sentiment with all the clearness, force and beauty of which it is susceptible, without aid from the eye, or the hand. I am aware some writers make a distinction between grammatical reading and rhetorical reading; meaning by the former, reading so as to express the sense merely; and by the latter, reading so as to bring out the sense with clearness, force, and beauty. I do not in this connexion regard the distinction. I think we should aim to teach scholars to read in