2. The second great change, which should be wrought in the existing system of education, is to make it decidedly American. This would seem to be as obviously right and expedient, in a temporal point of view, as the preceding, in an eternal. That the history and institutions of our own country demand more of our time and attention than any other, cannot surely be doubted. Does it not then appear strange, that they should form so inconsiderable a part of the studys of American youth; when evry one admits that to be ignorant of them is disgraceful to the man. How shall the man know them as he ought? except he be well informd as to facts; and be deeply imbu'd with their spirit, in early life. This is obviously the wise and eficient course, and in this repect, there must be an AMERICAN REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION, before it will be fit for and worthy of this country. I would then propose that American history, biography, and geography should become part of evry plan of general instruction, thro' the whole course of education: This would commence with the discovery of America, would embrace the history of all the other countrys of the new world; would present the annals of each of our states of the revolution, confederation, and new constitution, down to the latest period, to which an authentic, well written history could be obtaind. American biography follows of course. I do not name the Life of Washington; because it is, to a vast extent, identical and co-extensiv with the history of his country. But the lives of the most remarkable of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, with those of Franklin, Green, Jay, Henry, Morris and others, are worth incomparably more in the education of Americans, than the whole body of classic biography, notwithstanding the sentiment of Theodore Gaza, that if all books were about to be destroyd, but one, he would, if he had the selection, save Plutarch. Let us present the following consideration, in favor of American history and biography. If there is not time for studying both the foreign and domestic departments of these branches of knowlege, which ought to be preferd? Assuredly no one can hesitate in replying "unquestionably our own." Again, if there be time for the study of both, which ought to be preferd? Can but one answer be

given? certainly our own. Let us make sure of that in the first instance, and then whatever can be spared for the other,shall be given to it. Perhaps, it may be said that ancient is the foundation of modern history, and therefore ought to be first taught. The reply is an obvious one. If your system containd a complete course of ancient and modern history, there would be sense in the remark; but in truth it comprises nothing of modern, but what is found in one or two juvenile books, and as to ancient history, you offer nothing, but disjointed fragments. I do not however admit the justness of the remark, for however novel or strange the opinion may appear, I am convinced, that the best plan is to study history backwards, not forwards. This remark applys to the history of the world as divided into great periods; to the history of particular nations, as divided in the same manner; and to the history of great events, if sufficiently independent of each other, as the American compar'd with the British and French Revolutions: the reformation, compar'd with the discovery of America. The very fact that the history of different countrys, and of great periods, are written as separate works, establishes this position. The history of each nation is far more connected with that of cotemporary.nations than with any that preceded it. The history of evry people is to a far greater extent independent, than dependent on that of preceding nations. It is the same with the history of remarkable eras in the life of any given nation: and with regard to periods of a more general character, such as the crusades, and the thirty years' war, the great mass of facts which constitute the history, are independent of preceding history. And as to either class, a suitable introduction, and suitable explanations in the body of the work, would be all sufficient for the vast majority of readers. I am not providing, it will be observed, a course of history for the profound student of the history and philosophy of society, in its progress from the plains of Shinar to the prairies of our great west, and in all its phases of the savage and barbarian, of the civilized and the polishd.

I am sensible that succeeding history is always more or less connected with the preceding; but this connection is much

more obvious and important in the history of society and its institutions, than in what is commonly calld history, and especialy ancient history, that is the anuals of governments and rulers. Now the latter is chiefly occupy'd with war and foreign relations: and would occupy the years of childhood and boyhood; while the former is more particularly devoted to institutions, and domestic relations, and would be reservd for youth and early manhood, supposing education to cose at twenty-one. So with regard to biography. Private or personal biography should be the study of early years, but the lives of public men, including eminent clergymen, missionarys, and philanthropists, which belong properly to the historical department, would be laid aside for the period between sixteen or seventeen and twenty-one. I regret that the value of private biography is so little estimated. The lives of warriors above all others, seem to be selected for schoolbooks; as tho' in the eye of religion and reason, and as tho' in our age and country, the warrior were not a subordinate character. Is it not altogether wiser, safer, and more consistent with the spirit of American institutions, to put into the hands of our youth, the lives of men, eminently useful as Christians, and philanthropists; as professional men, merchants, and mechanics; as artists, farmers, seamen and travelers? The warrior is but the gay plume, the graceful tassel of society: they are society itself. By this change, we accomplish two objects, in my judgment, of great value. First, we keep before youth continualy, classes of character, of events and scenes, of virtues and vices, arising out of conditions of life, for which the great majority of them are destind. Such biography is therefore an actual preparation for real life. It is constantly familiarizing them with facts, which are to become under various modification, the very substance of their own, and of the lives of all around them. Second, this species of biography is calm and grave, breathing the spirit of peace, usefulness and benevolence; whereas the life of the warrior, like his arms and dress, is gaudy and full of the new and unnatural, compar❜d to ordinary life; and of cruelty, pride and misery, when contrasted with the usual course of events in citys, villages, or the country at

large. Hence, we should not set before the young mind, an ostentatious, exagerated, dazzling standard of human life and character, of reputation and hope. On the contrary, we should present a scene, plain and serious, teaching evry where private and social duty and usefulness, in the very walks and relations of life, which the great majority must occupy. How few of the multitude who are educated, are to be public men: and how fortunate for the country, how happy for themselvs, if all our public men had been traind in early life, in this plain, valuable, benevolent school of biography.

The third great change, which I desire to see wrought in the existing schemes of education, would be to make them in all respects peculiarly suitable to our religion, government, state of society and literature. It is manifest, that these objects would be attaind in a great degree, by the alterations propos'd under the two preceding heads: and all beyond that which might be desirable, would be accomplishd by the changes to be hereafter mentiond. The combin'd efect of all would be to make education, as it ought to be, the natural offspring of its own age and country, suited to their present state and exigencys and thoroughly prepar'd for its own progress and prospects.

4. The fourth great change, which I propose, is to provide in evry stage of education an abundant supply of useful and entertaining knowlege. This would be partly accomplishd, under the two points previously noticed. From the views already presented, under the corresponding heads of my first division, you will not be surprised, that I am prepard to lay aside both the classics and mathematics, as departments of education. I hav been gradualy brought to this conclusion, thro' a course of years, founded on personal experience, observation and long continued reflection. This result is directly contrary to all my original opinions and predilections: and being unable to trace the change to any motivs of selfishness, ambition, disappointment, or any other like source, I am constraind to act upon it, as a deliberate, dispassionate conviction, equaly approv'd by my conscience, mind and heart. I hav said that I would retain so much of common arithmetic, as is valuable for the business of life. All the rest I should discard, and with them, as fit companions in

to

the department of the useless and unentertaining, I would banish both Greek and Latin, and all the classics, from a course of general education. Having satisfy'd myself, that the knowlege which they contain is valueless and uninteresting to the great majority, who hav been hitherto compeld to study them, I do not scruple to abandon both. Being equaly satisfy'd myself, that the disciplin of mind which they impart, is equaly worthless to that same majority, I do not hesitate to abandon them on this account also. I propose to substitute, what cannot be denyd to be both useful and entertaining knowlege: and a species of disciplin more closely connected with, and better adapted to, the dutys and business of the great majority of the educated. It is plain, that I regard languages and mathematics as belonging to the department of particular, not general education. I would leav those, who need the former, as professional men or scholars; and such as require the latter, as engineers, surveyors, architects, navigators, professors, to obtain them, just as they do whatever is peculiar to themselvs, and not common to them and the community. In a word, I regard the mathematics and the classics as belonging to the department of professional, not to that of popular education: and the classics, as properly an ornamental, not a useful branch of study. They must therefore, in my view, be rejected, in any scheme of things as they should be, which "The people's schoolmaster" might establish.

Let us now attend to the substitutes proposd. I hav already said, that I should retain natural philosophy: and indeed, not only should I gladly keep it as a part of the course; but I should rejoice if thrice the time were spent upon it, which is now devoted to this branch. 1 should add also an extensiv course of natural history, as being full of curious and valuable information: and should especialy cultivate the departments, which treat of man, animals and plants. These are more open to the knowlege and observation of most men: and whilst they would be more readily preservd, they would become more extensivly and frequently the subjects of conversation. This I regard, as one of the most important objects of general education, viz: to furnish materials and inducements for intelligent

E