They leave no doubt as to the magnitude of the operations of the board; it is instructive to compare them with the futile results of former systems. It is further curious to observe, that the number of children in attendance is as nearly as possible that for which the commissioners originally estimated that the aid of the national schools would be required. Their estimate was, that ultimately 570,000 children would need to be brought under public instruction. No less unquestionable is the excellence of the education given. We but express the concurrent opinion of all who have examined the subject, when we say that the primary education of Ireland is not surpassed, if equalled, in any portion of the empire. When we add that the National Board do not confine their attention to literary and scientific training, but are disseminating, with the happiest effect, a sound knowledge of the principles and practice of agriculture in one hundred and sixty establishments in various parts of the country; and that the Parliamentary grant by which all this is achieved does not much exceed £270,000, we may confidently assert that never were grander results brought about by a smaller outlay. So much for the first criterion of the system's success-that afforded by the extent of its operations. Let us now apply a second test to which in fairness it must submit. It professes to be a mixed system; how far has it succeeded in bringing together children of different religious persuasions for common instruction ?*

We have been favored with official returns made up to March, 1858, which prove incontestably that, even regarded as a mixed system, the national system of education has been reasonably successful. We shall place some of these results before our readers.

It appears, then, that of 5,222 schools from which returns had been received on the 31st March, 1858, 2,929, or more than fifty-six per cent. of the whole had, in point of fact, a mixed attendance. Nor were these schools in isolated districts, but diffused through the whole country, apparently in fair proportion to the geographical distribution of religious sects. Thus, according as the humbler classes, from which the national schools derive their pupils, were more divided in religious persuasion, the number of mixed schools increased, while it fell in proportion to the prevalence of some one form of religious belief. In several of the counties of Ulster, for example, where the various religious sects are fully represented, the proportion of mixed schools was above ninety per cent., and in the whole province it was eighty-four per cent.; while in some of the Roman Catholic counties it fell as low as thirty per cent. It is, however, satisfactory to think, that in two counties alone in the whole of Ireland did the proportion fall below this per centage, and still more so, that the proportion is increasing. The return from which we quote exhibits an advance of two per cent. on a return made in 1853. How, in the face of facts like these, the national schools can be said to have failed in bringing

*The principle of this Board is, that the national schools shall be open alike to Christians of all religious denominations, and that accordingly no child shall be required to be present at any religious instruction or exercise of which his parents or guardians may disapprove; and that opportunities shall be afforded to all children to receive separately, at particular periods, such religious instruction as their parents or guardians may provide for them.

together for common instruction the children of the various religious sects, we are wholly at a loss to conceive. They have succeeded in this object to an extent which, looking at the numerous obstacles they have had to contend with, may well excite surprise.

But there is a third test by which the system may be tried, and according to which it has been again pronounced a failure. It is admittedfor this point appears to be too clear for cavil-that the national schools have succeeded so far as the Roman Catholics are concerned; but it is maintained that this is the limit of their success, and that the Protestant portion of the nation derives no adequate benefits from the system. Let us for a moment inquire how far this charge is consistent with the facts of the case. As we have already seen, the number of children on the rolls of the national schools for the year ending March, 1858, was 569,364. To this aggregate the different denominations contributed in the following proportions:

It hence appears that the Presbyterians contribute considerably more than their quota to the total sum;* on the other hand, it must be admitted that the numbers contributed by the Established Church are below their due proportion; but we shall not find much to wonder at in this, when we remember how much more wealthy the Protestants are than the Roman Catholics, and consequently how much better able to provide education for themselves; as in fact they do through the schools of the Church Education Society.t

Thus much for the pupils. It is interesting to observe that amongst the teachers the various creeds are represented with equal fairness. From returns which lie before us it appears that while the proportion of Protestants of the Established Church on the school rolls is five per cent., the proportion of teachers of the same communion comes out six per cent. The Roman Catholic pupils make up eighty-four per cent., and the

* In the last census, in which the religious denominations of the population of Ireland were noted, the Presbyterians were less than one-tenth of the Roman Catholics.

It is further to be observed that the number of Protestants has in recent years largely increased. If we again compare the returns given above with those of 1853, we find that of the gross number of pupils on the rolls in that year (490,027) there were:

making a total of 65,463 as against 88,364 of the year 1858. We have thus an increase of 35 per cent. In favor of the latter year, an increase shared by all the items of the calculation. Surely, if there is any faith to be put in statistics, these figures show that the national system is largely and increasingly acceptable and beneficial to Protestants. We may add that in the model schools, where the highest class of education is given, the Protestants of the Established Church considerably exceed their due proportion, making up one-third of the entire number of pupils in attendence. This fact confirms our impression that the deficiency of members of this communion in the ordinary schools is due to other causes than hostility to the system.

proportion of Roman Catholic teachers is eighty per cent. Lastly, the Presbyterian pupils number ten, the Presbyterian teachers twelve per cent. This correspondence, amazingly exact, considering that it was undesigned, and in fact accidentally brought to light by a hostile critic, admirably illustrates the skill with which the rules of selection have been made, and the fairness with which they are administered by the National Board.

On every ground, then, whether we regard the admixture of children' in particular schools, or the aggregate numbers of the great religious denominations which divide the country amongst them, or again the representation of the several creeds in the staff of teachers, we assert that the national system of education in Ireland is fairly entitled to be called a mixed system; and that in this respect, no less than in the extent to which it has been instrumental in diffusing education, it has fairly vindi-“ cated its claim to success. It might have been thought that success so complete would have silenced all opposition: and so it would, were the education of the people the primary object of religious parties. This, however, is far from being the case, and consequently the success attending the scheme, instead of disarming, has, it is to be feared, in some instances inflamed the hostility of its opponents. These comprise, on the one hand, the bulk of the clergy of the Established Church, and, on the ` other, the ultramontane party in the Church of Rome; and are represented respectively by the Church Education Society and the Roman Catholic prelates.

The main objection of the Church Education Society to the national system is that the reading of the Scriptures is not made compulsory on all the children who attend the schools.

To use their own language:-"They conceive that no system of education can be sound in principle, or prove beneficial in its results, which exempts any portion of the pupils it admits into its schools from instruction in the inspired volume. Whatever such a system may be, as regards those whom it permits to receive such instruction, it is essentially defective as regards those whom it permits to refuse it."

The demands of the Roman Catholic prelates presents themselves in a more specious guise. "It is the denominational system which is in force in England; it has been found to answer there; and why should not the same measure of justice, and the same rule of expediency, be applied to both countries ?"

In the first place, then, we must observe that the educational institutions of the two countries differ in other respects than those in which the Roman Catholic prelates require assimilation, and further that the particulars in which they differ are of the essence of the case. In Ireland, as we have seen, the expense of elementary education is supported principally by the state. In the Model Schools the expense is exclusively borne by the Government, if we except the small sum derived from pupils' fees; in the vested schools it sustains perhaps three-fourths of the expense; and even to the non-vested schools its contributions are con

siderable; while the training of teachers is conducted exclusively at the public expense. On the other hand, in England, the principal weight of the charge falls upon the local subscriptions and pupils' fees: it is estimated that over the whole country the sources derived from voluntary effort bear to those derived from the state the proportion of three to two. With this difference in the mode in which the schools in the two countries are supported, it does not seem strange that there should be a difference in the mode of imparting religious instruction-it is not strange that, while in England schools which are called into existence, many through voluntary efforts, take their religious tone from the localities in which they are founded, those in Ireland, which are supported chiefly by the state, should exhibit, in their mode of dealing with religion, somewhat of the comprehensive character of the source from which they derive their origin.

What the Roman Catholic prelates really desire, in appealing to the precedent of England, is to obtain all the privileges possessed by the various denominations in England, without making the sacrifices with which those privileges have been purchased. They wish to dispose of the funds of the state with as much freedom as the English enjoy in disposing of their voluntary subscriptions. Their demand is, not that they may be placed on the same footing with the English-for we have had no intimation of a desire to undertake the English share of the expensebut that they may be permitted to deal with the national funds according to their uncontrolled discretion-that they may be intrusted with prerogatives which have never yet been intrusted to any religious party, not even to the national Church.

We would recommend those who are doubtful of the capabilities of the combined system for inculcating religion, to read the reports of the various ministers attending to the spiritual wants of the Belfast Model School. The catechist of the Established Church, after stating that the bishop, in whose presence the annual examination was conducted, expressed his entire satisfaction with the proficiency of the children in the various subjects in which they were examined, goes on to say; "The Rev. Professor Reichel, who examined the senior class in the Evidences of Christianity (a subject which was entirely new to the children, not having been taught in any of the Church schools in Belfast,) has permitted me to say that he never met so good answering, in a subject of corresponding difficulty, in any school in which he had previously examined." Again the Roman Catholic clergyman says, "The progress of the children in the knowledge of their religious duties, always steady, has been, in many instances, most astonishing—a fact which I attribute partly to the very abundant time set apart for such purposes, and partly to the zealous energetic coöperation of the Catholic teachers." Lastly, the ministers of the Presbyterians say, "that the answering of the chil dren at the examination called forth repeated expressions of admiration from the visitors present."

X. INSTRUCTION IN GERMAN.*

BY BUDOLF VON RAUMER.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST AND SECOND EDITIONS.

WHEN my father requested me to write upon the subject of instruction in German, and its history, I did not foresee the great difficulties which would stand in the way of such an undertaking. Instruction in the native language, like that in religion, is given in all grades and kinds of schools; which is alone enough to make its discussion within a limited space difficult. But there are other obstacles of a quite peculiar nature. Instruction in German deals with a subject which is constantly changing with the course of time. Not only does our knowledge of the subject change, and our mode of dealing with it, but the subject itself changes. The written German language, which is that now taught in our schools, has become what it is during the last three or four centuries; and thus the history of instruction in German can not be disjoined from that of written German. And this becomes still less possible when we consider how great and how obvious is the influence which that instruction has had upon the written German. Still, no one will expect here a comprehensive and universal history of the written German. What is required is, an account of the mutual influence of the living German language and the method in which it has been taught. The records of this influence are the works on German grammar. But as my subject is instruction in German, the discussion of languago proper must occupy a subordinate place, and that of the methods used in teaching it, must become proportionately prominent. This is no easy task; both by reason of the great extent of the subject and of the small knowledge of it which I possessed. I had also to treat my subject in such a manner as to be intelligible to a reader who could not refer to the books I might quote. For a large proportion of the works to which I was obliged to refer were such as would be familiar to but few of my readers. Of the most important of theso I have given the titles in full; not so much for the sake of the literary man, who could find the book in a large library from a much shorter title, as for the sake of the majority of my readers who probably may never see the book itself, and to whom the titles, as characteristic of its form and matter, will be of great value.

The kindness of friends in Berlin, Göttingen, Leipzig and Munich, has enabled me to use at Erlangen books from the libraries at those places. During a stay of several weeks at Berlin, the liberality of Chief Librarian Pertz, and the great kindness of Dr. Pinder, to whom I would offer in return my most sincere thanks, opened to me the rich treasures of the Royal Library there, notwithstanding that it was a season of vacation. Bibliographical researches, pro

*Translated for Barnard's “American Journal of Education" from Raumer's "History of Pedagogy," 4th edition.