Teaching, however, in its more manifest aspects, is a special art calling for special skill, so it was perhaps inevitable that the early training of teachers should be of a narrowly practical sort, of a sort calculated to produce schoolmasters rather than educators, artisans rather than artists. This tendency was accentuated by the rather limited intellectual outlook of many of the instructors, by the shortness of the term of instruction, by the inadequate preliminary training of most of the students, and by the greatness of the need as compared with the means of supply.

It was largely to remedy this defect that, within the last quarter century, schools, colleges, departments and faculties. of education (to mention only the chief names by which they have been known) have become an essential part of University activity.

This adoption of the study of education by the universities has meant a tremendous extension of the scope of the subject and a corresponding enrichment of its content. There are, at present, at least six well recognized departments in the subject, some of which are known by names which are self-explanatory and others of which may need a word of comment.

First, there is the History of Education, considered not only as an account of famous educational movements and the lives of famous educators but, in a wider sense, as an attempt to describe the part which organized educational activity has played in the whole movement of civilization. There is at the present time perhaps no field of historical research more inviting and more promising of rich returns than the one which has just been indicated.

Second, there is the Philosophy of Education, which not only studies in detail the educational writings of such great thinkers as Plato, Aristotle, Milton, Bacon, Locke and Kant (to mention only a few of the great names which might be brought forward in this connection) but also considers carefully the educational significance of present day philosophic movements and touches in turn upon the great problems of mental, moral, social and political philosophy.

The Psychology of Education is now quite generally recognized as worthy of a separate place and name. The mind of the child differs in many important ways from the mind of the

adult. Teaching on the one hand and learning on the other involve certain characteristic mental processes which should be studied in detail. The study of educational psychology differs from general psychology not so much in its subject matter as in the fact that it is definitely practical in its character and hence selects for emphasis and special study those phases of mind which are most clearly manifested in the life of the school room.

The fourth and fifth divisions are those of Elementary and Secondary Education, and these, as the names imply, consider such problems as courses of study, the scope and the interrelations of the various subjects, and the general methods of instruction which are suitable to various ages of childhood and youth and to various types of school.

A sixth division is that of Educational Administration. The administrator, whether he be inspector, or superintendent, or supervisor, or principal, has a task somewhat different from that of the teacher. As the agent of a system he should understand that system, not only as regards its mechanism but also as regards its aims and purposes, and of these last he should be an authoritative exponent. All this necessitates a study of school organization in both its local and national aspects, of school legislation and taxation, and of the many supplementary educational agencies (libraries, playgrounds, philanthropic societies, etc.) which are coming more and more into conscious relationship with the school. An adequate survey of these includes a careful study of educational institutions in the different countries of the civilized world, especially those of Britain, France, Germany and the United States.

Such a pretentious outline as the foregoing would suggest a large staff of specialists each directing research in his own special field and each responsible for lecture courses of a decidedly intensive character within his own department. This is, in fact, an ambition realized already in a great measure by certain of the larger and wealthier universities in Europe and in the United States. All that can be hoped for in Canadian universities for many years to come are courses by instructors who have some notion of the extent and importance of the sub

ject and a fairly complete understanding of one or more of its important departments.

No mention has as yet been made of the practical aspects of the university study of Education as distinguished from the purely theoretical aspects. At the present time there are in connection with various university departments of Education on this continent and in Europe schools of elementary and secondary grade which serve with varying degrees of efficiency the purposes of practice, demonstration and experiment. They represent a tendency towards that close union and interaction between theory and practice the need for which is regarded as a necessity by all our professional schools at the present time. For the treatment of the second general division of our subject little space remains. It has already been pointed out that the elevation of the study of Education to the rank of a University subject has given it a breadth and a richness that could not otherwise be obtained. It is to be hoped that this broadening and enrichment will continue. On the other hand, it may, without any presumption on the part of the professor of Education, be expected that other university departments and faculties may profit by the more careful study and the more general understanding of educational principles and methods, for not even the most enthusiastic believer in the value of University training will contend that the work of the ordinary University lecture room is a model of pedagogic excellence and that all our University courses are ideals of arrangement and selection.

It is also quite possible that many students who have no thought of teaching as a profession but who, by way of preparation for useful lives, wish to understand one of the most significant movements of the present day, may find much profit and satisfaction from those courses in education which have a direct bearing upon the problems of parenthood and citizenship. These courses might quite conceivably be accepted as satisfying a part of the requirements for the ordinary B.A. degree without any sacrifice of the high intellectual standards which that degree very properly demands.

One further observation will suffice by way of conclusion. Through its professional faculties and schools the University serves in various concrete ways the higher life of the nation,

but no professional faculty contributes more directly and powerfully to national stability and prosperity than does an efficient faculty of education. In the training of an enlightened and devoted body of educational leaders for our elementary and secondary schools, the University performs an act of public service so manifest in its character and so far-reaching in its influence that increased public approval and support of the University in all its departments must necessarily follow. H. T. J. COLEMAN.

Faculty of Education,

Queen's University.

A PURITAN AT THE COURT OF LOUIS XIV.

T is sometimes forgotten that the chief movers in the great and glorious restoration which restored to the throne of England the scape-grace Charles II. were the Presbyterians. Under Oliver Cromwell the leaders of this Church had fallen so foul of the victorious Independents that they had been willing to bring back the King rather than to suffer longer the rule of the Saints. Once they had put their necks under royal rule, they soon found that if Cromwell had chastised them with whips, the restored Cavaliers chastised them with scorpions. But at first Charles II. walked warily, and was fain to scatter a few crumbs of reward among the Presbyterian leaders. One of these was the well-known Denzil Holles, whom he raised to the House of Lords, and sent as Ambassador to Paris.

Denzil Holles was born on 31st October, 1599, the son of John Holles, first Earl of Clare. In 1624 he entered Parliament for the Borough of St. Michael in Cornwall, and from that date was a member of all the Parliaments of Charles I. From the first he was one of the opponents of the Court party, and in 1629 was one of those who held the speaker down in his chair by main force, while Eliot made his famous protest against tyranny. "Never man went about to break Parliaments, but in the end Parliaments have broken him," said the Puritan leader, and from him Holles learned a faith in Parliamentary government which never failed him in his darkest hours. Soon afterwards he was sent into exile by Charles I, but returned in time to be elected to both the Short and the Long Parliaments, and was one of the five members whom Charles vainly tried to seize on 4th January, 1642. Of the war he was at first a strong supporter, and served with distinction at Edgehill and at Brentford, but his Presbyterianism drew him further and further apart from the Independent Cromwell, and made him an advocate of peace with the King, with the result that after the triumph of the army he was exiled by Cromwell, as he had been by Charles I. In 16.. he returned, and did such good service in promoting the Restoration, that in 1661 he was raised to the peerage with the title of Baron Holles of Ifield, Sussex.