secure a classical education for a clever son:they do not despise learning, if they have not been made to quarrel with it personally in early life. Thus it is that some who have risen to competency or opulence from the lowest ranks, and who can barely write their names, are seen to be the liberal supporters of educational institutions; while those of the same intellectual stamp who have themselves endured the discipline of a grammar school, speak with acrid contempt of classical learning.
On some accounts it may be well, as I have already said, to send non-intellectual children to school; but really so long as it continues to be the practice to cram all with the fragments of dead men’s bones (for it is the bones only of classical literature that can be given to those who have no taste) there may be good reason for retaining such at home.
If it be supposed then that parents, exercising a sound discretion, and being convinced that their children are not naturally endowed with intellectual tastes, have resolved to exclude the learned languages from their system of education; yet it will not follow that one or two of the modern languages may not be taught in such a family. What has been said already of the guns may be said also of the unintelligent, in this respect. Beside the comparative accessibility of the European languages, and the facilities for teaching them in a colloquial method, they may easily be made attractive to almost the dullest minds. From the entire mass of ancient literature hardly the quantity of five pages can be gleaned of a sort which will entertain a boy of dull intellect; but from the literature of France, Spain, Italy, and Germany, it is easy to collect abundant materials, such as will stimulate the heaviest minds.
Or if the languages, altogether, are relinquished as unattainable, or as not likely to be useful, there are means in abundance, suited to the purpose of quickening inert facul-
