peasantry, in which also the winding of the silk weft for the weavers is conducted, employment was found for some hundreds of people, old and young, in their own dwellings-a plan every way more advantageous than that of working in large factories. As in some of the Swiss cantons, the Ban de la Roche now exhibited a happy mixture of agricultural and horticultural labors with mechanical pursuits. From many of the cottages on the hill-sides were heard the sounds of the swift-flying shuttle; and when these were hushed at an early hour in the evening, the weaver might be seen trimming his garden or digging in the patch of arable land connected with his establishment.

Blessed are the Peace-makers.

One of the public services performed by the Cher Papa for the Ban de la Roche was the settling of a long and ruinous lawsuit which was carrying on between the peasantry and the seigneurs of the territory. A seigneur, according to the old French usages, was the feudal lord or superior of a tract of land, from the resident proprietors or cultivators of which he exacted certain annual dues and services; in requital, he gave them legal protection and some other privileges, such as the right of cutting timber from the forests, or fishing in the rivers. At the Revolution, the seigneuries were generally abolished; without, however, as it would appear, quashing any legal disputes which had previously been unsettled between the seigneurs and their vassals. The litigation, in the present instance, was with regard to the forests which covered a large part of the mountains, and, with varying fortune, the suit had lasted upward of three-quarters of a century, and through all varieties of tribunals, In 1813, the quarrel, handed down from father to son, still raged, and promised to rage for many years longer. Attempts had been made by the seigneurs to compromise the matter, but without avail. This perplexing law-plea had been the plague of Oberlin's life: it was the standing grievance of the canton: now sinking into silence, now reviving, it kept every tongue in exercise.

With some useful advice from his friend, the prefect of the department, Oberlin undertook to convince his parishioners how much more advantageous it would be for them to make certain sacrifices, with a view to settle the dispute, than to protract it even with the ultimate chance of being victorious. He showed them the amount of expenses they had already lost, and which they might still lose; what were the vexations to which they had been exposed; and what pleasures they would have in being no longer subjected to such a

torment. Besides offering these reasons, he urged the religious view of the subject, insisting on the duty of living at peace and in friendship with all mankind. The moral power of the good pastor was, perhaps, in nothing so remarkable as his conquest on this occasion. Melting the obstinacy of his auditors by his arguments and eloquence, they agreed to the terms of a mutual compromise, and the litigation was brought to a close. A few smooth words effected what years of wrangling and battling had failed to accomplish. The day on which the mayors attended to receive the signature of the late belligerents, was one of rejoicing in the Ban de la Roche; and at the suggestion of the prefect, these magistrates presented to Oberlin the pen with which the deed had been signed, requesting him to suspend it in his study as a trophy of the victory which he had achieved over long-cherished animosities. The gift was gratefully accepted; and it was often afterward declared by Oberlin that the day on which that pen was used had been the happiest of his life.

FAMILY LIFE OF OBERLIN.

Oberlin was happy in his own domestic life-married within a year after his settlement, to Madeleine Salomé Witter, daughter of a professor in the University of Strasbourg, he found in his wife a woman of good sense and tender feelings, who entered heartily into his labors, and yet tempering his zeal with considerate prudence. During the sixteen years of their married life, she bore him three sons and four daughters,-when she died in 1784, filling his heart for a time with despair. The loss was in some degree supplied to his children, by a young woman, an orphan, named Louisa Schepler, who had been a conductrice in one of the infant schools, and finding the occupation not suitable to her health, she became a domestic -a help in his family-declining all recompense, and performing any and every service which a daughter and housekeeper could do, with the most affectionate devotion.

Death.

Oberlin died June 1, 1826, in the 86th year of his age, and the 60th of his ministry in the Ban de la Roche-and the last touching ceremonies were performed on the 5th of June in the presence of a large concourse of parishioners and strangers, of every sect and party-the Catholic population, the priests in their ecclesiastical" vestments, and the various religious orders joining in the Protestant ceremonies. In his death, it may be truly said, 'mankind lost a friend, and no man got rid of an enemy.'

UNIVERSITY CHAIR OF EDUCATION-EDINBURGH.

BY S. S. LAURIE

Professor of the Theory, History, and Practice of Education.

INAUGURAL ADDRESS-MARCH, 1876.

MR. S. S. LAURIE, M.A., the newly appointed 'Professor of the Theory, History, and Practice of Education' in the University of Edinburgh, delivered his inaugural lecture on Friday, the 31st March. Sir Alexander Grant, Principal of the University, presided, and there was a large attendance of students and friends of education, including many of the professors and authorities of the College. The interest which attaches to the first professional lecture on Education delivered within the walls of a British University induces us to give Mr. Laurie's able and thoughtful address in extenso. Professor Laurie said

Mr. Vice-Chancellor and Gentlemen,-The first occupant of a Chair new to the Universities of Great Britain is placed in a somewhat peculiar position. It may be fairly expected of him, not merely to correlate the new subject with the other studies of a University, but to vindicate for it a right to the promotion which it has obtained, to explain its bearing on the educational interests of the country at large, and to satisfy the skeptical as to its direct utility. Were I, however, to undertake to maintain a thesis so large, I should weary even the well disposed listener, and probably fail after all to convince or convert the unfriendly. A broad treatment of the subject would involve me in a range of argument, fact, and illustration, so wide and varied, that I think it better to assume very much on the general question. I am entitled indeed to make large assumptions, if the educational movement of the last thirty-five years has had any genuineness and honesty in it; if Education has been any thing more than a pretext for political and ecclesiastical contention. is not improbable, moreover, that by limiting my range of observation, and confining myself to the objections taken to the foundation of this particular Chair, while at the same time giving some indication of my own point of view with respect to the question of Education, I may do more than could be accomplished by a general treatment, to reconcile the hostile and the skeptical to this new event in educational history,But, first, a few words as to the foundation.

It

Dr. Andrew Bell was born in St. Andrews in 1753.* At the ancient University of that town he was distinguished in most subjects of study,

*See Memoir in Barnard's American Journal of Education, Vol. x., 353; ditto, 467.

but especially in Mathematics and Natural Philosophy. After spending some years as a tutor in the Southern States of America, he returned to this country, took orders in the Church of England, and sailed for Madras. There he was appointed to an army chaplaincy, and undertook, along with his other duties, the superintendence of the Military Male Orphan Asylum, which was instituted after his arrival in the Presidency. It was while devoting himself with singular earnestness and assiduity to the work of Education in this hospital that he was driven, almost by the necessity of his position, to invent the system of mutual tuition with which his name will be ever associated. After Dr. Bell's return to this country, he devoted himself to the dissemination of his system, being sustained in his unceasing activity not a little by the rivalry of Joseph Lancaster.* Out of the labors of the latter grew the British and Foreign School Society, and out of the labors of the former the National Society in connection with the Church of England.

The principle of mutual instruction of boys by boys was the discovery by which Dr. Bell hoped to regenerate the world. But in truth the invention and application of this method was not his sole merit. He was a genuine teacher, having quick sympathy with the nature of boys, and great readiness of resource in the school-room. Many of our established practices were first introduced by him, and some of his improvements are only now being adopted. My impression is, that, prior to his undertaking the charge of the Madras Orphan Asylum in 1789, it was not usual strictly to classify the pupils of a primary school; and you are doubtless aware that it is only the other day that the leading schools of Scotland began to arrange their pupils in classes according to their progress, and that in some schools of high reputation (incredible as it may seem) classification on this basis has not even yet been attempted! I shall not on this occasion enter further into Dr. Bell's educational reforms, but content myself with saying that at present, and until better informed, I am disposed to regard him as the founder of the Art of Primary Education in this country, as a conscious Art.

Dr. Bell destined his large fortune mainly for the foundation of specific Educational Institutions, the residue to be applied to educational purposes, according to the discretion of his Trustees, enjoining on them always to have due regard to the promotion of his system. The interest of this money was for many years paid away in small grants to various schools throughout the country in connection with the Church of Scot land; but after the passing of the Education (Scotland) Act in 1872, which made universal provision for schools, the Trustees, who at present are the Earl of Leven and Melville, Lord Kirkcaldie, and Mr. John Cook, W. S., resolved to employ a portion of the funds in their keeping for the purpose of instituting Chairs of Education in Edinburgh and St. Andrews, to be called the 'Bell Chairs of the History, Theory, and Practice of Education,' imposing on the occupants the duty of expounding, in the course of their prelections, Bell's principles and system. They thereby

fulfilled in the most effectual way, under existing circumstances, the objects which Dr. Bell had in view in originally constituting the trust. Certainly no one who had read the Life of Dr. Bell will doubt that this resolution of the Trustees would have been in the highest degree pleasing to him. Almost with one voice the teaching profession have hailed the action of the Trustees as a great educational advance. It has been felt that the three gentlemen above named have conferred honor on a department of work which Dr. Bell delighted to honor. They have unquestionably done very much to promote Education in Scotland, not only by raising the work of the schoolmaster in public estimation, but also by attracting public attention to Education as being not merely a question of national machinery for the institution of schools (essential though this undoubtedly is), but a question of principles and methodsin brief, of philosophy.

It is with regret that I find myself constrained by want of time to make here only a passing allusion to the zealous efforts of the late Professor Pillans to do what the Bell Trustees have now accomplished.

Objects of the Chair.-Training Colleges.

A Chair of the Theory, History, and Practice of Education having been instituted, we have now to ask what the objects of such a Chair are. There has been much misunderstanding with regard to these. Some are at a loss to know what there is to say on Education within the walls of a University, and what the principles and history of that subject have to do with the schoolmaster's work. Others who have not to be instructed on these points dread the competition of an Education Chair with the existing Training Colleges. The latter class of objectors is the more important. They are at least aware that the necessity of training teachers in methods and in school organization is not a question to be now for the first time debated. They know that the question has been settled these thirty years by the combined intelligence of the Government of the country and of the Education Committees of the various Churches. The former class of objectors have nothing to urge against the University training of teachers in the philosophy and methods of Education, which they would not have been prepared with equal readiness and confidence

to

urge against the institution of the existing Training Colleges thirty years ago. Indeed, I am disposed to think that, had the general question of the desirableness of training teachers to their professional work been propounded thirty years ago for discussion on its own merits, it would not yet be settled in the affirmative. The Parliamentary Philistine, the 'Church in danger' men, and above all (strange to say) a considerable proportion of those engaged in the work of teaching, would have been opposed to the introduction of any such novel idea in a practical form. Many as are the evils of centralization, it is to centralization and to the Committee of Privy Council that we owe the full recognition of the efforts which were being made thirty-five or forty years ago in Edinburgh and elsewhere to train teachers, and the consequent growth of the Training