t once all of nature and all of humanity? But if
we yield this claim in behalf of language, noting meanwhile that the
mathematics are already well represented in our courses of instruction,
then much of Mr. Spencer's eloquent appeal is simply wasted by
misdirection. All that he had really to claim is, that a
disproportionate time is now surrendered to the studies of the symbols,
as such, and too often to characteristics of them not yet brought in any
way into scientific cooerdination, nor of a kind having practical or
peculiarly disciplinary value. If Mr. Spencer had insisted on a more
just division of the school studies between the mathematical, physical,
biological, and linguistic sciences, he would have struck a chord
yielding no uncertain sound, and one finding response in a multitude of
advanced and liberal minds. If he had gone yet deeper, and disclosed to
his readers the fact that the fundamental need is, not that we study
what in the more restricted sense is known as _Science_, but that we
begin to study all proper and profitable subjects, as we now do hardly
any of them, _in the true scientific spirit and method_, he would not
merely seem to have said, but would have succeeded in saying, something
of the deepest and most pressing import to all educators.

The volume of republished papers from Mr. Barnard's able _Journal of
Education_--the first of a series of five under the general title of
'Papers for the Teacher'--will afford to those desirous of investigating
the second of the problems above proposed, some useful material and
hints. Especially will this be true, we think, of the first series of
articles, by Mr. William Russell, on the 'Cultivation of the Perceptive,
Expressive, and Reflective Faculties;' and of the second, by Rev. Dr.
Hill, now President of Antioch College, upon the 'True Order of
Studies.' In the outset of his first essay, (which appeared in March,
1859,) Dr. Hill takes it '_for granted_ [postulating, we think, a pretty
large ground, and one that analysis and proof would better have
befitted] that there is a rational order of development in the course of
the sciences, and that it ought to be followed in common education.' The
order he finds is that of five great studies, Mathesis, [mathematics;]
Physics, or Natural History; History; Psychology; and Theology. 'We also
take it for granted,' he continues, 'that there is a natural order of
development in the human powers, and that studies should