one.

For more than a score of years he had not entered a school-room, but "all of a sudden" he was appointed to the oversight of the schools. In less than twenty-four hours he discovered, or thought he did,-that his predecessors had done nothing right; that the teachers were a set of lazy, inefficient menials, and that the schools were in a ruinous way. He at once sought to change everything, and his movements were so unreasonable that he at once secured the disrespect of the teachers, and in a few weeks he had no more influence in the schools, or with the teachers, than an entire stranger would have had ;and he soon retired from his post with feelings of disgust, saying he considered teachers a very difficult class to manage. He reminded us of an incident that came under our observation a few years ago. An Irishman was standing near a locomotive which was "fired up," and in readiness "to take the track." He was telling his companions how "aisy" it was to manage that "auld horse." He'd like to shew them how he could drive. An opportunity soon offered and was improved. The engineer left for a few minutes, when the Hibernian jumped upon the engine to exhibit his wonderful skill in the driving business. He pushed, or pulled, a bar,—when away went the iron bucephalus,—but crab-like,―backwards,—for matters were reversed, and though at the top of his voice Patrick shouted "whoa,"--the old horse kept his backward course until he went from the track into the "mud and mire," driver and all. Patrick returned to his associates declaring that it was the ugliest and "contraryriest" baste he had ever seen,--though he did not bate a particle from his own driving powers. Just so it is with some school officials. Whatever they take hold of will be sure to move backward. We would, however, consider these as rare exceptions. Most of the men who serve as visitors have the good of schools at heart, and do what they can for their improvement,-far more than the community has any right to expect under the circumstances. As a general thing, school visitors are kind, considerate and encouraging,-true friends to the teachers. But we do, occasionally, hear of one who is in no true sense a friend to teachers or

schools, and it is this that prompts us to give our views, hoping to awaken such attention to the subject as will result in the election of the right men for the office.

School visitors and teachers should co-operate with each other. Each may do something to encourage the other, each something to make the duties of the other more pleasant. Good school visitors will do much to make good teachers, and, on the other hand, good teachers will do much to make good school visitors While, then, we contend that visitors are under obligations to treat teachers with the utmost kindness and respect,-in seeking to aid and encourage them,--we at the same time say that teachers should not forget that they are bound to respect school visitors. In some particulars the visitor is to the school what the merchant is to the ship which he is fitting out for a voyage. There are certain rights and duties which the merchant has that are paramount to those of the captain of the ship. In the matter of outfit and time of sailing, the owner may direct and decide, But when it comes to the actual working and sailing of the ship, it is for the captain to direct the courses and take the entire management, and so long as he holds his office, no one can dictate to him. The merchant or owner may tell him where to go, but not how to sail the ship. In this the captain is the responsible agent, and he must direct and guide. So in the school-room, the teacher must be the commander and director. Visitors may make suggestions and propose advisory measures, but it is not for them to command how the teacher shall teach and govern. He was placed in the school-room for the express purpose of governing and teaching the school, and no one has any right to interfere with his plans and arrangements, so long as they are reasonable and just. If visitors notice any real errors in teaching or governing, they should, in a private and kindly manner, call attention to them, and if these errors remain long uncorrected, they may afford proof of the teacher's unfitness, and call for his removal. But so long as he is continued in office, let him receive support and encouragement. Whenever we find a community in which there is a want of kindly feeling and friendly co-opera

tion between school visitors and teachers, we shall also find that the schools are not as efficient and useful as they should be.-Connecticut Common School Journal.

ILLUSTRIOUS DUNCES.

AN ENCOURAGEMENT FOR TEACHERS.

An interesting chapter might be written on the subject of illustrious Dunces-dull boys and brilliant men. We have room, however, for only a few instances. Pietro di Cortena, the painter, was thought so stupid that he was nicknamed "Ass Head" when a boy; and Tomasco Guidi was generally known as "Heavy Tom" (Massoccia Tomasaccio,) though by diligence he afterwards raised himself to the highest eminence. Newton, when at school, stood at the bottom of the lowest form but one. The boy above Newton having kicked him, the dunce showed his pluck by challenging him to fight, and beat him. Then he set to work with a will, and determined also to vanquish his antagonist as a scholar, which he did, rising to the top of his class. Many of our greatest divines have been anything but precocious. Isaac Barrow, when at the Charter school-house, was notorious chiefly for his strong temper, pugnacious habits, and proverbial idleness as a scholar, and he caused such a grief to his parents, that his father used to say, that if it pleased God to take from him any of his children, he hoped it might be Isaac, the least promising of them all. Adam Clarke, when a boy, was proclaimed by his father to be "a grievous dunce," though he could roll large stones about. Dean Swift, one of the greatest writers of pure English, was "plucked" at Dublin University, and only obtained his recommendation to Oxford "speciala gratia." The well-known Drs. Chalmers and Cook were boys together at the parish school of St. Andrews, and they were found so stupid and mischievous, that the master, irritated beyond measure, dismissed them both as incorrigible dunces.

The brilliant Sheridan showed so little capacity as a boy, that he was presented to a tutor by his mother with the complimenta

Gold

Algeri

ry accompaniment that he was an incorrigible dunce. Walter Scott was all but a dunce when a boy, always much readier for a "bicker" than apt at his lessons. At the Edinburgh University, Prof. Dalzal pronounced upon him the sentence that "Dunce he was, dunce he would remain." Chatterton was returned to his mother's hands as "a fool, of whom nothing could be made." Burns was a dull boy, good only at athletic exercises. smith spoke of himself as a plant that flowered late. left college as wise as when he entered it, and did not begin the studies by which he distinguished himself, until he had run over half of Europe. Robert Clive was a dunce, if not a reprobate, when a youth; but always full of energy, even in badness. His family, glad to get rid of him, shipped him off to Madras; and he lived to lay the foundation of the British power in India. Napoleon and Wellington were both dull boys, not distinguishing themselves in any way at school. Of the former the Duchess d' Abrantes says, "he had good health, but was in other respects like other boys." John Howard, the philanthropist, was another illustrious dunce, learning next to nothing the seven years he was at school. Stephenson, as a youth, was distinguished chiefly for his skill at putting and wrestling, and attention to his work. The brilliant Sir Humphrey Davy was no cleverer than other boys; his teacher, Mr. Davies Gilbert, says of him, "while he was with me, I could not discern the qualities by which he was most distinguished." Indeed, he himself in after life thought it fortunate that he had been left to "enjoy so much idleness at school." Watt was a dull scholar, notwithstanding the pretty stories told about his precocity; but he was, what was better, patient and persevering, and it was by his carefully cultivated inventiveness, that he was enabled to perfect his steam engine.Selected.

Social influence is stronger than the written law, and the peacemaker, and the housewife, who give the true tone to the whole neighborhood, scatter good seed that lives long after they have gone.-S. Osgood.

GRAMMATICAL AND ARITHMETICAL.

MR. EDITOR: On the 57th page of the present volume of the School Journal is the following item: "Had better. This combination is often objected to. Is it not sufficiently well sanctioned? Can would better always be substituted for it?"

I do not design to reply to these questions, but to express an opinion respecting the combination had better. I see no necessity of using this combination, (except with reference to past time,) nor of resorting to that of would better. So far as I can see, it is sufficient (unless we use the circumlocution, it is better for me, too, to say, for instance, I better walk than ride-not had better-the tense being the Present. Interrogative present. Better I walk than ride?

Also, in the combination, had rather, had seems to me to be unnecessary. Is it not better to say, I rather walk than ride. than, I had rather, &c.? Interrogatively, Rather you walk than ride? than, Had you rather, &c.?

Had you just so soon do it as not? Is it not preferable to say, (for the present tense,) Have you just so soon do it as not?— i. e., Have you the mind to do it, just so soon as not to do it?

A like omission may, and I think should, be made in the expression, Had I ought? using Ought I? (It occurs to me that this is done by writers, but I think not very generally in spoken language.)

I should not wonder if the Republican candidate should be elected. (Time future.) Is not this mode of expressing a future transaction, a common error in conversation? Ought we not to say, I shall not wonder if the Republican candidate shall be elected?

What can be said of the distinction made, by men in measuring hay, between a solid and a cubic foot; and also, of the various quantities to which the term cubic foot is applied? A mow of hay which is 8 feet square on each side, they say, contains 8 cubic feet. A cubical mow 12 feet square on each side contains