quate law for its protection has as yet been enacted, either by the general government or by that of the different States and territories which include portions of its range. How to best protect it, in regions so sparsely populated, and where laws are so easily set at defiance, presents by no means an easy problem, and yet one not hopeless of solution. The great traffic in hides could easily be greatly checked and wholly controlled. If allowed at all, the killing should be restricted to certain seasons of the year, and the destruction of the females and young wholly prohibited. Government inspectors should be appointed, and no sale of hides be allowed without their examination by these officers, while a suitable fine or other penalty should follow each violation of the law. Buffalo hunting should also be wholly prohibited during the period between June and October, and the destruction of females not allowed after the beginning of December. It should be further made a grave offense to kill a buffalo at any time wantonly, or without properly utilizing it. In addition to this, certain portions of the public lands now within the range of the buffalo, might be set apart as protected ground, within which no buffaloes should on any condition be killed, and within which the pursuit of them should be prohibited. It is a matter that demands prompt attention, and it is to be hoped that the present Congress will give it the consideration its importance merits.

J. A. ALLEN.

THE ART OF ENGLISH COMPOSITION.1

RADUATES of the University of Pennsylvania, who were

present at the annual dinner of 18—, will remember the story told by "a representative of the press," of a letter received by him from an alumnus of the University, which was utterly unfitted for publication by its gross imperfections in spelling and construction. Their mortification was hardly diminished by the fact that the

1(1). English Grammar, by the Rev. Richard Morris, London, 1875.

(2). A School Manual of English Etymology, by Epes Sargent, Philada., n.d. (3). The Art of English Composition, by Henry N. Day, New York, 1875. (4). English Lessons for English People, by the Rev. E. A. Abbott and J. R. Seeley, Boston, 1874. (Reprint of English Edition.)

(5). The Art of Discourse, by II. N. Day, New York, 1874.

same gentleman had told this same story at each dinner for some years, or by the plain violation of etiquette involved in an invited guest's assuming on such an occasion to offer suggestions for the improvement of an institution whose alumni were his hosts. The bitter truth remained that a man might indeed pass successfully through the usual college course, and yet be shamefully ignorant of his mother-tongue."

With not dissimilar feelings must the English University men have read recently the confession of one of their number-a clergyman of the Established Church-that a man might acquit himself most honorably at Oxford or Cambridge, and yet, on the morning after his ordination to the ministry, be confronted by a task-the writing of a sermon in his native speech-for which he had not had, in all his years of study, any adequate preparation. The confession was made under peculiar and most solemn circumstances. Contained in a letter to the writer's bishop, on the occasion of the latter's ordaining certain candidates for orders a ceremony performed distinctly in the name of the Holy Ghost-it was no doubt actuated by the purest motives and carefully confined to the strictest accuracy. And yet this most extraordinary letter begged the diocesan to warn these persons about to be admitted to an office that was believed by both them and him to be in direct succession to the ministry of Christ's chosen apostles, and in which they might confidently expect the allpowerful support of Him whose commission they bore-to warn these persons against an association formed for the purpose of supplying sermons for incapable or indolent parsons to preach as their own, and holding to weekly "black-mail," a large number of English clergymen. To be sure, the writer offered most charitably an apology for these erring brethren, that, on the day of their first attempting to write a sermon, they found themselves so unfurnished for the labor of composing English, that they fell before an unexpected temptation, insidiously placed in their way, bought just one sermon till they could collect their thoughts, and learned then, to their horror, that, unless they should continue their patronage of the infamous company, they would assuredly be exposed to their bishops and degraded from their ministry.

At the time alluded to, the University was considered by so competent a judge as the late Rev. Albert Barnes to possess unusual opportunities for imparting a thorough education.

Nor is the mischief confined to the quarters already indicated. In our own land, and at the present time, (unless, happily, its existence has recently terminated,) there is a society exactly like that already referred to, which offers to write, not sermons only, but college-essays and even prize-compositions for the lazy or the stupid under-graduate, and this, too, at a comparatively moderate price. Unfortunately, it is (or professes to be) composed of college graduates, and justly claims, therefore, an intimate acquaintance with the precise want of each applicant. It is, hence, a more dangerous set of conspirators and, sad though it be, a more certain proof of the reality of the deficiencies which it proposes to meet.3

But even this is not all. A graduate of Yale, of less than two years' standing, assures the writer of this article that certain poorer students of that college gain a large part of their annual incomes by writing compositions of all sorts for their richer comrades, and that this practice has become a settled custom in New Haven. Victorque Sinon incendia miscet insultans.

With such facts as these before us-and others to the same point could only too easily be found-we shall surely be justified in asserting that there must exist among our young men of education a wide-spread incapacity to express thought in their native tongue. The law of supply and demand points from the existence of numerous purchasers to the existence of a very generally felt want. The opportunity for so dishonorable a trade, the free confession, on the one hand, and, on the other, the oft-repeated charge, of such desperate inability, all point to the same conclusion that large numbers, very large numbers of our educated young men are not taught successfully the use of their own language and this even at Oxford and Cambridge, where Latin and Greek prose and verse are a nearly universal accomplishment. It is the purpose of this paper to ascertain, if it can, the source of this vital defect and its remedy, and especially to inquire how far the failure of the instruction in Composition may be due to the character of the course of study usually pursued in our schools and colleges Of course, it is fully understood that the failure of a system of education is not necessarily due to faults inherent in itself. But the presumption is certainly against

The circular of this Society was actually sent to certain students of the University who were appointed by their fellows to represent them on Class-day.

any such scheme, when the greater part of those who are educated under it, are found alike deficient in one particular subject of the course. We are justified, therefore, in examining critically both the subjects included in the curriculum and the methods of teaching them.

And, first, at school. If "English" is taught at all, the usual course consists of Definitions (of words), Etymology, (perhaps,) Grammar, and Composition. Elementary at first, the instruction advances pari passu with the pupil's progress, until, in "the last year at school," it has reached advanced Syntax with Parsing, the Scholar's Companion, or a similar book of Etymology, and weekly exercises in writing upon themes appointed by the teacher or selected by the pupil himself.

Now it is plain, I suppose, that no one of these subjects of instruction can possibly be objected to. They are all necessary parts of an English course, and must owe their failure to circumstances, rather than to their own essential character. Let us ascertain, if we can, what these circumstances are, and, in pursuit of this object, consider the following suggestions:-(1st.) That the end in view in the English course at school has been wholly misconceived. (2d.) That Grammar (as the term is usually understood), "Definer," Etymology, and the practice of Composition do not constitute a complete course for the study of English; and (3d.) That the methods of teaching are all wrong, because they are founded upon this imperfect view of the course as a whole.

And (1st.) unless, perhaps, in schools of which the present writer has no knowledge, the whole idea of the course is inverted and its true purpose lost sight of. Definer, Grammar, Etymology and Composition are all taught as ends; whereas, with the single exception of Composition, they are means, means to the single end just named, to Composition. Why is the study of one's own language different from that of one's neighbor's? Why must a boy learn French or German by one method and English by

In many schools English is not taught, except (perhaps) so far as Spelling and simple definitions go. Etymology and Composition are quite ignored, and Grammar taught only collaterally with Latin. If the pupil does not learn Latin, or is taught it badly, his state of mind may readily be conceived. Nay, even if he does learn Latin, and learn it well, he will have but a sorry substitute for the important laws of his own tongue.

another? We study a foreign language with a definite reference to its use, and by a method definitely aimed at this result. We study English apparently as if our sole purpose were to acquire and store away knowledge that we never dreamed of using. True, an English boy at school has already learned some English by the force of nature, and is therefore not in the same relative position as the beginner in French or German. But the child whose birthright has been stolen from him by his parents' giving him (in mistaken fondness) a foreign nurse, does not know the foreign language simply by having learned to speak it while he still ate infants' food. He must "improve his French" in later years, or at least weed out the corruptions that were firmly implanted by the rustic to whose teaching he was committed. Far oftener must he do exactly what any other child of English parents does, learn the language as an utterly unknown tongue. To be sure, such children, unless they reside abroad, must always learn English also, and thus are at the disadvantage of having "two mother-tongues."5 But the cases are sufficiently parallel. All children, whether they have imitated in infancy one or two modes of speech, are found still needing language-lessons in even their native tongue. The English studies of a school, therefore, should ever have reference to this need. That they commonly do so, however, is more than doubtful. Nay, it is certain that in general they do not. The several English studies are taught, but not the study of English. Definer, Etymology, Grammar, Composition, are so many separate English branches, and so appear on the school "report." To the poor benighted boy, though he is ever so earnestly seeking truth, they have no more unity than Grammar, Comparative Anatomy, and Botany. That they are steps leading by easy stages to a knowledge and an intelligent use of his native speech, seems never to occur to him—perhaps, never to his teacher. That he has learned English in the nursery is considered reason enough why, with slate and pen

5 Two mother-tongues! What bitter mockery! Almost as well two mothers; for language has a physical, as well as a moral nature. And yet American mothers, who might hand down to their children as an inheritance the noblest form of modern speech, voluntarily resign their privilege to an ignorant foreign peasant. An English-speaking peasant soon talks as her "lady;" a French or German girl despises her English mistress' even purer French or German.