of speech. But were it possible for all to become rapid
spellers, another very important requisite is necessary before the
system could be a perfect one, that is, the ability to _read_ rapid
spelling. The number of persons capable of reading the fingers beyond a
moderate degree of rapidity is still less than the number able to spell
rapidly. While it is physically possible to follow rapid spelling for
twenty or thirty minutes, it can scarcely be followed longer than that.
So long as this is true, dactylology can hardly claim to be more than
one of the _elements_ of a system of instruction for the deaf.

III. Articulate speech is another of the elements of the eclectic
method, employed with success inversely commensurate with the degree of
deficiency arising from deafness. Where the English order is already
fixed in his mind, and he has at an early period of life habitually used
it, there is comparatively little difficulty in instructing the deaf
child by speech, especially if he have a quick eye and bright intellect.
But the number so favored is a small percentage of the great body of
deaf-mutes whom we are called upon to educate. When it is used as a
_sole_ means of educating the deaf as a class its inability to stand
alone is as painfully evident as that of any of the other component
parts of the system. It would seem even less practicable than a sole
reliance upon dactylology would be, for there can be no doubt as to what
a word is if spelled slowly enough, and if its meaning has been learned.
This cannot be said of speech. Between many words there is not, when
uttered, the slightest visible distinction. Between a greater number of
others the distinction is so slight as to cause an exceedingly nervous
hesitation before a guess can be given. Too great an imposition is put
upon the eye to expect it to follow unaided the extremely circumscribed
gestures of the organs of speech visible in ordinary speaking. The ear
is perfection as an interpreter of speech to the brain. It cannot
correctly be said that it is _more_ than perfection. It is known that
the ear, in the interpretation of vocal sounds, is capable of
distinguishing as many as thirty-five sounds per second (and oftentimes
more), and to follow a speaker speaking at the rate of more than two
hundred words per minute. If this be perfection, can we expect the _eye_
of ordinary mortal to reach it? Is there wonder that the task is a
discouraging one for the deaf child?