BISHOP FEILD'S SPEECH AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE NATIONAL SOCIETY.

Ir may seem somewhat late to revert now to the annual meeting of the National Society; but it can never be too late to direct attention to the speech of that single-minded missionary bishop, the Right Rev. Edward Feild, Bishop of Newfoundland, who has lately left our shores for the most bleak and desolate sphere of labour among the dependencies of Great Britain. A very full report of his speech at the meeting in the Central School on the 22d May, 1844, has been procured for the Journal by a friend. Its insertion in the present number will be no doubt gratifying to those who were not present, and not less so to those hearts which were touched by the simple, unaffected, and homely earnestness with which it was delivered.

It is an encouraging sign, that on the same day three bishops should have alluded, in a pointed manner, to the necessity of elevating the official position of the schoolmaster. The Bishop of Exeter, after denouncing, in no very measured terms, the tendency to centralization in modern schemes of education, stated plainly his own conviction, that bishops in their own dioceses must entertain the question of the ordination of schoolmasters. The Bishop of London, who has on so many former occasions addressed himself with peculiar kindness to the teachers of our parish schools, spoke perhaps more guardedly, but by his very caution, showed plainly his own sense of the importance of the subject. Bishop Feild's testimony to the good which would result from conferring on the schoolmaster some commission whereby he may be recognized as one of the appointed ministers of the church, is truly valuable; because it is in his case the result of extensive acquaintance with the masters of our schools, and with the feelings of those whose children are confided to their care.

The bishop's observations on the real and permanent benefits of inspection, when it is truly diocesan, are commended, without remark, to the serious consideration of those who are satisfied with the present state of the arrangements for inspection under the authority of the Privy Council.

THE BISHOP OF NEWFOUNDLAND'S SPEECH.

MY LORD ARCHBISHOP,-I have been requested to read the following resolution, and to recommend it to the adoption of the meeting. [The Right Reverend Prelate read the resolution.] I should have sincerely rejoiced if it had fallen into other and abler hands, but I may, perhaps, be permitted to say, that few persons can have had a better opportunity than myself, of witnessing its importance in both those branches into which it divides itself. There are two particular topics touched upon in this resolution—the first is the need for increasing the supply and improving the qualifications of teachers, and the second is the success which has attended the efforts made by the diocesan boards. VOL. II. JULY, 1844.

Your

Grace is no doubt aware, that I was privileged to be the first inspector of national schools appointed by this society, and during the short time I held that office, I had of course great opportunities of witnessing the proceedings of the different teachers employed in the schools, and more especially, of witnessing the efforts made by diocesan boards. Now with respect to the necessity of training good and well qualified teachers, I would here observe, in the first place, that I cordially concur in the remarks made in the excellent report which has been read to us, that no system can be of so much importance as the qualifications of the teachers-that is to say, that the system itself will be able to effect very little, without able and well-qualified administrators.

There are at present, as it appears to me, three methods in which the teachers may be trained and fitted for the offices which they have to hold. In the first place, I think the teachers may be, indeed in some instances they have been, very successfully trained in their own parishes. I am sure that if a clergyman has time and ability, and will devote his attention to the training of the master or the mistress for his own schools, he is likely to be very well satisfied with the result. I have been able to witness such training and I have seen that it has been attended with most satisfactory results, but at the same time, we all of us who are engaged in parochial cures, especially in large ones, are well aware that few clergymen have the necessary time and opportunity for devoting themselves to this work; and I may without offence say, that all clergymen have not the ability, they have not the knowledge necessary for so delicate and important an undertaking.

The next method of training teachers is, that by the diocesan and district boards; and that presents some very peculiar advantages, in this respect especially, that they are brought under the superintendence and direction of the bishop of the diocese; and that they may be easily visited from time to time by clergymen, who will hereafter, perhaps, require their services in their own parishes.

The third method is in the great training establishments which are supported by this society. I do not mean to enter into a comparison of the merits of the two systems of training teachers in the diocesan schools, or in the central training establishments. I would just remark with respect to the diocesan schools, that they do include some of the advantages which may be obtained by clergymen training teachers in their own parishes: namely, that they afford to the clergy greater facilities for ascertaining the moral behaviour and qualifications of the teacher, during his course of training.

I will now shortly allude to a subject, which appears to me of the highest practical importance to the usefulness of the masters after they have been trained. All of us who have been at all engaged in parochial cures, feel so much the importance of having an able schoolmaster and mistress, that many of us in remote districts have felt a very strong desire that they should be appointed and connected with the church, in some more peculiar and definite way than is the case at the present moment. I do not presume to discuss any particular proposal which I have heard advocated, such as the admission of the teacher to Holy Orders, or to some lower office as a minister of the church. At the present

moment I say nothing in respect to the merits or disadvantages of that particular plan, but I am persuaded that it would be found a very great advantage if they were brought more closely and regularly into the system of the church. We can hardly expect, knowing what the duties of the clergy are, that a revival of the old regulations will be successfully attempted-it used to be one of the old regulations of the church, that the clergy should instruct the poor in domibus suis: I do not expect that such a regulation can now be literally complied with, but I do think a near approximation may be arrived at, by causing the teachers, as I have already said, to be in some degree regarded as ministers of the church.

I consider that parochial education ought to be as near an approximation as possible, to that which a well qualified person having the time and ability might be able to give to his own children, and it would be, I am sure, the greatest possible satisfaction to parents, to know that their children are as closely as possible under the eye and superintendence of their clergymen. Of course a schoolmaster is a very important person, but he would be much more so and regarded with more veneration and respect, and would otherwise be better qualified to discharge his onerous and responsible duties, if he were brought more regularly and completely into the system of the church.

With respect to the diocesan boards in the various districts, I have had, in my office of inspector of schools, abundant opportunities of witnessing their effects and their results, though as I only entered upon the office soon after the diocesan boards were established, I could not of course at first expect to see any great results. The diocese in which I was first employed was Salisbury, and I can safely affirm, that the whole diocese did even then feel the decided benefit afforded by the diocesan board, and even if it should happen, as some persons have supposed, that the diocesan boards are not to be permanent, that they are only a temporary expedient, that they are not to last-I may safely affirm that the whole diocese did feel the benefit and assistance afforded by the board. I am persuaded that the present results have been exceedingly beneficial, that they have drawn attention all over the diocese, not merely by affording information as to the manner of conducting education, but they have drawn the notice and attention of the whole district to the bishop and to the cathedral town, as the centre from which benefits and blessings were to flow to the remotest hamlets. I may mention to you that on many occasions in rural parishes, when it was understood that I came to them as one commissioned, authorised by the bishop of the diocese, the affections of the people were very strongly drawn out towards the bishop; they felt they were more cared for and more a part of the church than ever they conceived that they were before.

We have heard with great satisfaction, I am sure with great grati tude, the remarks of the Lord Bishop of St. David's, respecting the elasticity of this society; we have already seen something of what may be effected, and I do hope that it may continue to be elastic in every emergency in which the church may be placed.

I could not help feeling some regret, perhaps it was merely a personal

one, that there have been some signs of contraction in this society. I mention one particularly-with respect to the business of inspection; I do not mean to pass any judgment upon the expediency of relinquishing the duty of inspection by this society, but I am able to testify, though perhaps the last person that ought to do so, that the results of inspection as conducted by this society, were exceedingly beneficial. As I said before, it not merely carried information into the diocese and into the various parishes, but it did especially draw the affection of all those parishes and all those remote districts towards the church, in a much stronger degree than they were ever drawn before; and I am afraid the present system of inspection cannot at least supply that great desideratum. I am very far indeed from supposing that the actual business of inspecting schools, is not as ably or more ably conducted by those who have been appointed by the Committee of Privy Council, than it was before. But at the same time there are several benefits-there is one great and most important one which I have named, (I might almost say, the only permanent benefit of inspection) which did result from it as conducted by this society, and which do not appear to me likely to ensue from the present system.

My Lord Archbishop, I should be very unwilling to trespass any longer upon your patience; but as I am shortly to leave this country, I am thankful to have this opportunity of testifying my great attachment to the cause which this society promotes, and not the less so, of testifying my gratitude for the marked attention which has been bestowed upon me by this society; and I may be allowed to make one observation, now that I shall have no further opportunity of either testifying my gratitude or of receiving benefit from the society. I cannot help drawing my heart towards the schools which I shall have presently to preside over and to direct; and I do hope, without any impropriety, though it does not at all fall into the business of this meeting, nor indeed into the resolution which I hold in my hand,-I do hope I may, without impropriety, most respectfully and earnestly hope, that some system may be devised with regard to the colonial church similar to that which has been conducted by this society, with so much benefit to the church of this country.

My Lord Archbishop, I am aware I ought to beg the pardon of this meeting for introducing this topic; but at the same time I do trust, that some allowance will be made for the feelings with which I am actuated at the present moment. I have myself, in the course of my duties, not merely as an inspector of schools, but as a curate and incuinbent, received the greatest encouragement and support from this society; and when I think of going into a country where no such encouragement and support is to be obtained, I do feel very great sinkings of heart; and I hope I may be excused in drawing the attention of the meeting, and of all the church, which I see represented on this occasion by the Lord Archbishop and all the other bishops, to the subject. I beg to thank you for your indulgence in allowing me to mention this, and also for your indulgence for the way in which the other remarks have been received. I beg to conclude by moving the adoption of this

resolution.

VARIOUS METHODS OF TEACHING VOCAL MUSIC IN

SCHOOLS.

In conveying knowledge to children, especially among the poor, the great object is to simplify it in such a manner as to make it level to their comprehension. The means by which this simplicity is to be attained, is a question which is not agreed upon among the teachers of elementary singing, as the different systems now in vogue testify.

Thus Mr. Hullah seeks to simplify the learning of notation, by using his left hand with the fingers all spread out (in place of the five lines), indicating the notes which he wishes to have sung, by the first finger of his right hand. And the difficulty of the intervals he contrives to obviate by the symbol of a ladder, having in two places the steps drawn closer, to indicate the semitones, and varying according as the key is major or minor.

There is another system, with which is coupled the name of a most respectable lady, Miss Glover of Norwich, which, if I mistake not, seeks to teach music by dispensing altogether with the five lines; the notes, which are comprised in an ordinary treble voice, are formed into a ladder, each step of which is named by the letters of the alphabet, and from this the children sing, the teacher pointing continually to the

notes.

Both these systems have been taught with success, and deserve a more detailed notice. But it seems a matter well worth serious consideration, whether the inventors of these plans have in fact simplified the science by these contrivances, or, on the contrary, introduced fresh perplexity.

Take a child who has no notion of music, and instruct him in Mr. Hullah's system. He has first to learn a set of manual signs; then the meaning of the symbol ladder; and his next step is to cast aside the whole of this, and to begin as it were afresh the old fashioned system of learning the notes upon paper. It is scarcely enough to say, that the previous instruction forms a very good preparation for further advancement; there is the fact, that the pupil has been, perhaps for months, acquiring a knowledge which he must cast away altogether. when he proceeds to learn notation on paper. It cannot be but that a portion of the time must be wasted, and much perplexity must arise to the pupil, from being at first taught notes by the ladder and manual signs, and then having to learn the characters as they appear on

paper.

The notes of music are symbols of sound-Why are we to teach these symbols by means of other symbols? Is this simplifying a science, in itself difficult to a learner, because new? Mr. Hullah's system, with all its merits, has this defect, that the foundation which he seeks to lay by his newly invented signs, has in fact no superstructure raised upon it; but, as if dissatisfied with his own ingenuity, he proceeds to lay a new one, after the old established fashion which has been in use for 200 years, and on it he builds all that is valuable in his

method.