Dr. Arnold, the reformer of the public classical schools in England, was born at Cowes, in the Isle of Wight, June 13, 1795, and died at Oxford, June 12, 1842. No remarkable incidents attended his life. At school and at the University he was studious, thoughtful and earnest. He was ordained in his first clerical office [that of Deacon in the Church of England] in 1818. His first years were spent in retirement. This is the case with most great men. The most eminent statesmen, heroes and benefactors of the world have been called from the humble occupations of private life to take the honors as well as the weighty responsibilities of public stations. They came strengthened and fitted for their work by this very retirement. Dr. Arnold was married in 1818, and about this time his character seemed to assume a still more earnest and lofty type. He was appointed Head Master of the School at Rugby and ordained Presbyter, in 1828. At the time of this appointment, it was predicted that he would "change the face of education all through the public schools of England," and the prediction was largely verified. He remained at Rugby about thirteen years, and was then appointed Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford. After one year's labor in this field, he thought of giving up his position and spending his last years in quiet. He was not permitted that rest on earth. One Sabbath morning, after a sickness of only three hours, he was called away.

The social evils of the day needed some great soul to champion their removal, and such was Dr. Arnold, whose writings upon themes of public interest exerted a deep and powerful interest. But during his stay at Rugby, he devoted his energies chiefly to the preparation of young men

*Notes of Prof. Blaisdell's Address before the State Teachers' Association, at Janesville, July 31, 1862, taken by Miss M. J. Vail.

for the University and the world. His success in this respect leads to the inquiry: What were the qualifications of Dr. Arnold as a teacher?

WHAT ARNOLD WAS.

His large, dark, brimming eye, well developed muscles of the face, and a form symmetrical and perfect in its physical development, rendered him a marked character to those about him. His soul was the censorium in which everything produced an impression. Nature influenced him. His lament upon his departure from his home, and in later years the song he composed while visiting the grave of Wordsworth, show the sweet, touching sympathy he felt for and the communion he held with Nature.

He found sources of interest everywhere in Nature. He was in the fullest sense alive to the world of matter and thought. The interests of mankind were his interests. He also felt a deep and sympathetic interest in the historians of Greece and Rome: not as an antiquarian, but because he heard the throbbing of the great Greek heart, and went back to commune with it, as with living men of twenty centuries ago. He dwelt upon the past only with the light of the present-only as it subserved the present. His interest was with the human concerns of the first half of the present century; it partook but little of the romantic, and still less of mere fancy and fanaticism. His interest was a principle. England and his own day premised the theme which awoke his activity. He mourned over and declaimed against the dead formalisms of the times, and the evils of English social life. His intimacy with these so enlarged and intensified his interest in their removal, that they pierced through all his private happiness, and led him to labor arduously for the desired end. Every day's careful attention led to new discoveries, and at night he would take his pen to depict some new phase of political and public life. At his death he stood foremost in the ranks of great men.

We now come to the main pinciple-the hidden principle which actuated his life. During a number of years of his life he was rather undecided as to his religious principles, and on some points almost skeptical. The doctrine of the Divinity of Christ was to him for a time shrouded in doubt and mystery. After this great principle was settled, he gave himself up wholly and entirely to that Christ. It was not a cold allegiance; but Christ to him was a personal friend. A slur upon the character of Christ was a personal injury. He held daily communion with Him, and sitting at His feet, he saw that the evils of his life were but departures from Him. His liability to sin was in proportion to his wanderings from Him. To him, if the times were out of joint, it was because they were out of joint with Christ. This belief did not render him narrow and contracted, but involed a deep and earnest study of his relations to his Divine Master. His grand principle was drawn from the Bible. He

came forth to action with the port of a war-horse, as well as the self denying belief of a martyr. He was even more earnest than John Foster. [While Foster lamented over the prevailing evils of the day, Arnold acted;] and here is the stand-point from which to view his character.

His great soul-absorbing care was for the youth of England; and to them he was at once teacher and statesman. He not only imparted knowledge to their young and eager minds, but he taught them the grand principles of life; principles that eminently fitted them for the high and responsible positions of public life.

In wandering through the dim vista of the past, the mind loves to rest upon the memory of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and other noble heroes, who went forth into the world, not as warriors, but as teachers. There lay their strength. In their truly beautiful characters, we find the representatives of successful teachers. The deep and lasting impression they made upon their pupils shows the weighty power of their personality.

Comparing the influence of Dr. Arnold with that of other men, we see that the most important element of his success lay in what he was. Character indeed, under God, is the great influence of human life. It embraces all from centre to circumferance. Aside from this one great element of Arnold's success as a teacher, let us notice a few prominent excellencies, second only to this.

I. HIS THOROUGHNESS.

blessed

To succeed, a teacher needs a deep and thorough insight into the subject he would unfold. He knows not the alphabet of teaching if he is not possessed of this qualification. The great injury done to a pupil by the lack of this quality in his instructor is incalculable. [The speaker then went back to his early childhood, and gave a glowing description of his own teacher, the beauty of which I shall utterly fail to represent.] I remember him, he said, as almost a sage in wisdom, and yet possessed of all the sweet simplicity and congeniality of childhood. Fond associations wreathe around him, and memory recalls his loved and honored form, sitting in the accustomed place where in my youth it was my privilege to drink the pure sweet waters of knowledge. He led me with never failing interest through the mazes of mathematics, from the first principles to the intricacies of the higher branches of this subject. He unfolded to my mind the grand laws of Astronomy, and traced upon the vault of Heaven the starry constellations in their mighty course; and thus on through all the different branches; always inspiring within me a love for study by the very manner of his presentations. All this he did faithfully and well; yet one thing he lacked to make his character to me perfect, and that was classical learning. My classical culture was therefore imperfect. Never shall I cease to reap the evils resulting from this

defect. Over and over again am I compelled to know and feel that I can never attain that proficiency in this branch of learning that I might have done had my early training been thorough.

The grand indispensable principle of scholarship is thoroughness. In some primary schools, on account of the deficiency of teachers, spelling is thrown wholly into the background. Pupils come forth seemingly perfect in some branches, but constantly trammeled in their usefulness to themselves and others, by a want of thoroughness even in this one simple yet all important attainment. And yet these very teachers may be authors! It is not the best argument for a teacher that he has written a book.

Arnold sought that his pupils should master their subjects. One of his scholars, in speaking of his dislike of a poor recitation, says: "Well can I remember the portentous lifting of the brows, and the scowl like a gathering storm, when lessons were poorly recited." He also tried to inspire his pupils with the spirit of the subject. They felt what they studied. Their hearts swelled with the sweet lyrics of Sappho or Horace, and burned with patriotic fire when reading Demosthenes.

Arnold was original and real. Not a school master, but a teacher. He went before his pupils with a lofty eye and the grace of a living scholar.

II. HIS EARNESTNESS.

His second great characteristic was EARNESTNESS.

Everything he

undertook was marked with energetic active effort. His whole soul was given up to the theme in hand. He possessed both mental power and heat,

III. HIS POWER OF INFLUENCE.

The power of dealing with young men was another marked excellency in his character. This was the result of a combination of powers: a devotion to the highest and best ends of life; love for humanity; penetration, and ability to govern. He seemed born for command. His voice sounded like a clarion on Waterloo. His character was so perfect in the eyes of his pupils, that he may be said to have been the conscience of his school.

There was the blending of English sagacity [and Italian shrewdness] in his discernment of the characters of his pupils. He encouraged the plodding scholar, who, though not endowed with genius, yet possessed that patient perseverance that accomplisheth all things. He saw in such the power and force of future years.

Arnold trusted his scholars, and awakened within them feelings of selfrespect that are aroused only by the knowledge that they are trusted. Every act of the school-room was tried at the tribunal of right, and accepted or rejected according as it coincided or otherwise with the prin

ciple of right. Broad, deep principles, and not narrow, contracted rules, were the result of this careful examination.

IV. HIS LOVE FOR HIS PUPILS.

Arnold loved his scholars. It was not the mere love of benevolence, but a love for each individual scholar. It was a love for his pupil, not his pupils. He read the characters of his scholars, and knew the peculiar tendencies of each. He sat at the fireside of each one's soul, and gave sympathy to one, subdued the wild fire of another, and gently led him in the path of right. His scholars felt that if during the coming years they should be cast away from the sympathy of society, and wander from their former friends, homeless and strangers, yet in Arnold they would still find a faithful friend. Such was Arnold. He felt this embracing interest in his pupils as individuals, and in turn he was loved by all.

Quintilian says: "An orator is one who knows how to talk." So a teacher is one who knows how to teach. This characteristic in Arnold produced its proper impression upon his pupils. They possessed a belief in him, and this was a lasting good to them. The personal influence of some teachers is like the poison of a pestilence. It is like a quarantine in a community. Arnold was not merely a theoretical but a real man. His was a truly rounded manhood-a manhood possessing character and power. He possessed, not knowledge merely, but the ability to impart knowledge. This perfection and symmetry belonged alike to his intellectual, æsthetic, moral and religious nature.

He was the hero of his pupils. He marched with colors flying, challenging the opinions of men. One of his scholars says: "It was he who woke me up."

[In this part of his address the speaker expressed his conviction of the capacity of woman as an educator.]

Thor

The successful efforts of Mary Lyon give ample proof of this. oughly alive to the interests of education, and especially the interests of the young women, she visited a few of the principal families of New England, and obtained the consent of the parents that their daughters should become pupils, and from this sprang the Mount Holyoke Female Seminary.

CHARACTER NEEDED.

In conclusion, and as the moral of our subject, we may urge, that the secret of success, and what we need, is Character; and this now more than ever. Now, when fearful war is deluging our beloved country in blood, do we need to cultivate the principles of a truly beautiful and symmetrical character. We must be willing to pour out our lives, if need be, for our native land-become heroes for the war. The spirit of war is at this juncture the best protection to our imperiled Republic.