had carefully tested his standards by those of an inspector; and he had found that, with very few exceptions, the second standard of the Revised Code in reading, writing, and arithmetic was the pons asinorum which very few children could pass in the uninspected schools. When he came to examine the mass of the children in the schools, and to consider the comparative ages of the children, the difference was even greater than at first sight it appeared to be. It was not that too much attention was given to the elder children; there was a far worse error: special attention was given to the apter children; and constantly he had found the first class made up of five or six of the aptest among the older scholars, the majority of whom were comparatively neglected. Another evil was that parents themselves had extremely uncertain ideas as to what education is, and as to the means which should be adopted in order to bring children forward. The greatest evil we had to encounter was the spirit of pedantry in the schoolmaster; the greater the ignorance, the more intense was the pedantry; and until it was broken down you could not call forth mental effort. He fully concurred in all that Mr. Payne had quoted from Mr. Jolly, but similar views had been expressed by others, particularly with reference to the difference between telling and teaching. The evils complained of were not chargeable to the Act of 1870, nor to the former Revised Code; and Mr. Payne had not sufficiently taken into account the absolute necessity of fixing upon definite tests and standards when you came to deal with matters of money. Government promised certain pecuniary aid for certain definite results, and they must necessarily adopt a specific standard; but unless a school fell beneath a low minimum, Government could not be justified in positively punishing it by withholding the grant. Our whole system was to be regarded as one of grants in aid. Government rightly insisted upon rudiments being imparted in every school; but it did not in any way restrict or restrain managers from adopting as high a course of instruction as they found practicable. It was to managers of schools and school boards that we must look for the development of our system, and for adopting the improved methods upon which the success of any measure must depend. It was beyond the power of any Act of Parliament to give vitality and elevation to any system of education. If managers of schools would insist upon intelligence in teaching, instead of squabbling about money with the Educational Department and charging it with breaches of faith for changing standards, school management would soon elicit a much larger measure of public appreciation and support. Mr. W. COOKE TAYLOR (Liverpool) heard with high admiration and satisfaction the paper of Mr. Payne, and dissented from the premises and conclusions of Mr. Lambert. The latter objected, among other things, to the teaching of the elements of the sciences in schools, because their names ended in onomy, ology, and other uneuphonious sounds. Was the science that related to the organs of the body less understood or more difficult to learn because it was called physiology, or that relating to the heavenly bodies because it was called astronomy? Would Mr. Lambert object to teaching the elements of our language because the rules of that language were called orthography? It was not in the names of the sciences, but in the facts they taught, that there was importance; it was in the things themselves of which the sciences treated. The objection was founded on the old mistake of supposing that a science was something that was pre-arranged, whereas it was simply a name given to observations made and methodized. Mr. Lambert was gratified at the nonsuccess of a recent motion in the House of Commons in favour of the teaching of the elements of social economy in elementary schools. Whether that movement succeeded or not, every one would continue to learn something, in the home circle, and in every walk of life; and the only question was whether that which was so learned was to be truth or not, whether it was to be true or false economy. That it was called social economy could be no disadvantage; and the elements of it were not difficult things to teach. On the contrary, they were of all things the easiest to teach, because they were the results of observations made by others which had been proved to be true, and did not demand intellectual effort to receive them. If the object of education was to qualify a man to fulfil the obligations of life, surely the way to do that was to teach him the relation in which he stood to others and to society, or, strictly speaking, social science; and it was because we did not do so that the results of our teaching were so unsatisfactory. The Rev. F. E. ANTHONY said, Mr. Payne had made a very heavy indictment

against the present system of education, and if the Blue Books were to be relied on its logic was complete. However, the evil of mechanical as distinct from intelligent teaching was one which attached to all systems. We could not make teachers of the highest type any more than poets: the teacher was born, not made; and we may have the most perfect curriculi in the schools, even including Mr. Payne's panacea-psychology; but unless we had the right class of men and women as teachers-teachers by nature, and not by mere training-they would still be very unsatisfactory. The present inefficient teaching might arise from the kind of men and women who came forward for the work, and one remedy would be to improve the position of the teacher as a member of a profession. He should like to see a public opinion formed about the schoolmaster that should lead a much higher class, socially, of young men and women to come forward to undertake the work. In one religious community the most highly educated women devoted their time, strength, and ability to teaching the children of the poor. Much might be done by increasing the staff of teachers, so that more individual attention could be given to children. Neglect in the past had resulted from a want of funds, but he trusted, with school boards, this niggardliness would cease, and that in future there would be no stint in teaching power. It was important further that this should excite amongst stolid and indifferent English parents something of the intense interest felt in their children's education by the Scotch, and which had such an effect on the pupils. Free schools should be at the basis of any system, so that in the next generation there should be no parent found who had not enjoyed the benefits of primary education. This of itself would create an interest in the education of their children.

Professor HODGSON (Edinburgh), with the highest respect for Mr. Lambert's judgment, was bound to say that he had unfairly stated the question, and given an erroneous impression of the issue between himself and Mr. Payne. It was not the introduction of all the sciences nor of any one of them; but was that the introduction into primary schools of a scientific and rational method of teaching was the one thing needful. Just as it was possible to teach a language unscientifically and injuriously, so it was possible to teach any of and all the sciences injudiciously and injuriously. Mr. Payne's paper aimed at the introduction of a scientific method founded upon rational principles which were altogether unknown to the mass, whether of the higher or of the lower schools, and it was a scientific method of teaching which alone could produce really useful and beneficial results. Between the two schools of educators the fundamental issue seemed to be whether education was to be a matter of torture to the learner or it was to be a pleasant exercise. Those who dwell so much on the importance of classical study from the great difficulties that were involved in it, seemed to have profited but little from the instruction to be derived from the works of the greatest writers they were supposed to have studied, for Plato and Cicero laid down the doctrine that only what was learned with pleasure could be remembered and profited by. Let it never be supposed there could be any want of materials to struggle with; there would always be difficulties enough to serve as gymnastics for the mental energies of pupils. Let us do all we could to excite intelligent interest and to cultivate the - mental faculties of children, and we should find that those enormous difficulties of reading, writing, and arithmetic, on which so many hundred hours were wasted without attaining the despicable end aimed at, would be passed over with the greatest ease. Mrs. Malaprop said, it was better to begin with a little aversion; and that seemed to be the doctrine of educationists of a certain stamp; but, unfortunately, they would keep the aversion up to the end. The Code was spoken of as a frost;. but it had lasted ten years, and seemed likely to continue. He hoped the frost would soon pass away, and that the code might be buried with this fitting epitaph, "It failed from small attempts." In great attempts it was a glorious thing to fail; but in miserable attempts it was tremendously inglorious to fail; and that the code had ignominiously failed was abundantly testified by the official report. Mr. Payne had done good service to the country at large, because he had dissipated a grand delusion. We had been led to think that if only this system of education were widely extended over the country, and if we had compulsion everywhere, the great object would be attained. But if, as he believed, every word of Mr. Payne's paper were true and incapable of contradiction, even if such schools as now existed

were spread over every part of the country, and every child forced to attend, we should have our real education yet to begin. Professor Hodgson concluded his remarks by passing some strictures on the constitution of the Educational Department of the Privy Council, and the appointment of unsuitable persons as inspectors of schools.

Mr. JAGO (Free Schools, Plymouth) said that it was possible to use figures in any way, and that the Blue Books contained evidence of the efficiency of pupil teachers and teachers. He felt rather annoyed at the manner in which teachers had been spoken of, for he believed they were an honourable set of men, and generally well trained. In this he was borne out by the inspectors. The teachers had done very good work, as the Blue Book would show if it were properly used. Teachers ought to have been better treated, and their pensions ought not to have been taken from them when promised by an Act of Parliament. The learned Attorney-General had that morning suggested the employment of the great and practical minds of the land in preparing a new code, and this was the course that ought to be adopted in educational matters. If this had been done the terrible, stupid, Revised Code would never have been devised. The general want was intellectual training; but then money for results was a powerful incentive to mechanical teaching. The inducements to teach extra subjects were very small. Until we had compulsion throughout England, we should never fill schools nor obtain that consecutiveness of attendance which was so necessary for successful teaching.

The Rev. WILLIAM ARTHUR (London) said the figures on Mr. Payne's paper were very extraordinary and even startling. He had assumed that some one would have challenged, if not the figures, the deductions made from them; but no one had done so. If such a paper were unchallenged, the question came with tremendous power-what is the reason of this comparative failure of our educational system? Of all the reasons which have been assigned, there was one which was paramount. He was not prepared to accept all that had been said about the inefficiency of training colleges; and he should like to hear an analysis of the results of teaching at the different colleges, for he was inclined to think some colleges had produced a higher stamp of teachers than the average. The principal cause of our general failure was the miserably low conception of national education entertained in the highest places. No doubt, the reason why England was behind Switzerland, Germany, and Scotland, in national education, was that the highly educated classes of England, as a general rule, were against any effort being made to promote national education; and even up to this day a large proportion of them thought it a very doubtful thing whether the children of the poor ought to be educated "above their position." This of course was just the reverse of a right idea of the purpose of education, which, if a child was in a position lower than that he was capable of attaining to, gave him power to rise to a higher position for the benefit of himself and of mankind. The idea of treating a human being as destined to the position in which he was born was treason against the Father of human nature, and then against human nature itself. This was really the root of the failure; and what was the fruit? We must not forget how young our system was. The consequence of the state of mind described was that national education was regarded as a matter for charity, which it was up to 1832. From then up to 1839 the education vote was 20,000l. From 1839 it rose up to 100,000l. The alarm was taken at the increasing cost of education. It had not been the object of our system to make the education of the people a national question. We had endeavoured to consult, not the thoughts, feelings, and consciences of the poor man who wanted a national school for his child, but the thoughts, feelings, and consciences of the richer man who did not want a national school for his child; the poor man was not consulted; the richer neighbour was; and, if he could produce a subscription to meet the grant of the Government, a bargain was made between them to get up a national school, and the Government thus sold the parental rights of the poor man. By thus creating patronage in schools we had introduced into education those very difficulties of "purchase" which we had just got rid of in the army. Here was really the root of the whole matter. Until those in high places were moved to make the

people of England the freest, the happiest, and the best educated people in the world, we should not get the results required, and the country would be left behind in invention, national defence, and everything which makes a nation great. Mr. PAYNE, in reply, assumed that the meeting decidedly endorsed the arguments and facts he had brought forward, and connected the unsatisfactory results with the drilling, stupefying, and deadening effect of the present system of education, which blamed the child, created in his mind a distaste for learning, and prevented him from exercising his natural faculties, and enjoying the pleasure which human beings have in using their faculties. If we were to wait for heavenborn teachers, our case was hopeless-the education of the country was beyond our power. In his paper he had carefully guarded against condemning the teaching of eminent and successful teachers such as Mr. Jago. But it must not be forgotten that the brighter such exceptions as Mr. Jago the duller the average, and it was the average of the teachers he had charged with inefficiency. If, however, his paper contained a correct estimate of the present system, something more ought to be done than his talking or their listening. He therefore proposed the following resolution :-"That this meeting being convinced on the evidence of the authorized reports of the Committee of Council of the highly unsatisfactory results of our primary instruction, recommends the whole matter to the Education Committee of the Association, with a view of its being discussed by the Council, and, if thought advisable, being pressed on the attention of the Government."

Professor HODGSON seconded the motion.

The Rev. B. LAMBERT, in reply, observed that Mr. Payne had brought one of the severest indictments ever brought against national schools, but all the teachers in every class of school in the whole country were open to the same charges; and he thought it an impractical thing to fix the onus on the national-school teachers, because there were no others to take the place. As to the Blue Books, they contained the reports of men prejudiced against a system which doubled their work, and yet he thought he could have brought forward proofs from those Blue Books to show that in the lower standards education had very considerably advanced through the operations of the Revised Code. However, the least part of what a boy received at school could be tested by examination; the greater part, habits of order, discipline, and the power of acquiring knowledge, could not be so tested. It was not to be said that schools did nothing because they passed so few scholars. Considering the time that children could be kept at school, and the present lack of scientific knowledge on the part of teachers, it was useless to introduce science into the curriculum. It was partly because of his appreciation of science, and the danger which might arise in mistakes in the teaching of it, that he was anxious it should not be taught until it could be taught properly. The irregularity in the attendance of children was one of the great difficulties of the teacher, because it imposed on him the necessity of repeating the same lesson day after day.

Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE, Bart, M.P., in closing, said all would agree that both papers were interesting and instructive, and that they had awakened new ideas in their minds. And though they did not agree altogether, he saw no reason why they should not pass the resolution unanimously, because it was a matter which might very fairly occupy the attention of the Council, and lead to important steps being taken. The difficulties and the short-comings to which Mr. Payne had called attention with such strong and convincing proofs were partly common to the whole system of education in the country, and were partly and necessarily inherent in any system of State aided education. Many things which were true of primary national schools were equally true of advanced schools. What had been said of the tendency of teachers to devote their attention too much to the clever children, in order to make a favourable show, was equally true of public schools of the highest grade. A great deal of what had been said about the ignorance and indifference of parents, and their failure in encouraging their children in their work of education, was equally true, if not more true of parents in the higher clas-es, who looked only to flashy results and success in competitive examinations. There were many in the lower middle class, even in the upper middle class, and some in the upper class, who were quite as indifferent as the poorest were to the education of their children. Among the lower classes, however, where education had extended over a generation, there was a great deal of interest manifested by

parents, which was a happy omen for the future when education would be still more extended. That which had been said about mechanical teaching and cram was alike applicable to the public schools of Eton and Harrow, where "telling," the foundation of all bad teaching, was as much practised as in the lowest class schools. A boy who would not do work honestly for himself would never learn. We wanted to impress on teachers and parents that the great object was to make boys learn. It was comparatively easy to teach, to lecture, and to "tell," when a difficulty arose; but if we wanted to do good to boys and to educate them we must make them learn. It was here we were met with a difficulty peculiar to any system of State-aided education, in which there must be a certain amount of elasticity. You could not produce equal results with boys of unequal abilities, even though you bestowed upon the less able the same patience, and did them proportionately an equal amount of good. But the State must pay by some kind of results, and if the State aided education and paid by results, we necessarily had a cast-iron and a mechanical system, the tendency of which must be to produce the evils now complained of. He was afraid it would be difficult to devise a fair system of State-aided education without a kind of test which would not be most easily satisfied by mechanical instruction. This was a serious evil, and it seemed to him it was to be met by importing into school management as much as possible of an agency different from that of the Government, by importing as far as possible voluntary agency. With all respect for the Rev. W. Arthur, he would venture to say that if the voluntary managers of schools were encouraged, and were shown how to do their duty, they might counteract the mischief of the Government system, and by a judicious combination we might get a great deal more good than we could from either system separately. He was not an admirer of the Revised Code; it was open to a great many objections; and alone it would be scarcely better than having no system at all. But if we combined the voluntary system with the Government system, if we operated through the Revised Code with fair modifications, we might arrive at a satisfactory state of things. What answered well was that managers of schools should let the Government inspector look after the three R's, and that they should devote themselves to other branches of learning and the cultivation of intelligence, by offering prizes in extra subjects to boys who had satisfied the inspector. The spirit of emulation, found to work so well in the highest public schools, by publishing on the walls a list of the prizetakers, might be adopted. This would also interest the parents; and the putting of questions which could not be answered without reflection would correct the effect of the mechanical turn of mind acquired by the boys in qualifying to pass the Government standard. But it must never be thought that a single nostrum will do all that is required. No Revised Code or modification of it will make the education of the country perfect and complete. The primary schools were, doubtless, doing good, and failure in meeting the Government requirements did not prove the contrary, for there were habits of order, of regularity, and cleanliness taught the children, of which no recognition was made by the Government tests.

The resolution was then carried unanimously.

A paper, by Mr. C. H. W. BIGGS, on the subject was taken as read. He said: "It is unfortunate that the popular ideas relating to education are mainly derived from theoretical sources, and cannot always be depended upon. The educational system of this country is a myth in fact, we have none. The various parts of our educational machinery have been hastily flung together, not as they were required, but as public opinion compelled action: the result of this piecemeal action being cumbrousness and inefficiency. We have not, however, to discuss the whole of our educational machinery, but only that part which relates to the unsatisfactory state of our elementary schools. It will be found impossible to reform a part, and to leave the remainder; for the education of the lower, middle, and upper classes is so intimately connected that the one can never take its