Prefatory Note.

The subject treated of in the following Lectures has occupied my attention, at different intervals, for many years. Having been sent abroad at an early age, my attention was called to the contrast between the extraordinary facility by which Foreign Languages are acquired in the country where they are spoken, and the slow, painful, and unsatisfactory process by which they are often inculcated in Schools, and by private teachers. I could not but perceive that there was something wrong in many of our common methods; and, when afterwards called to take an active part in the business of Academical instruction, I set myself, with all diligence, both to inquire into the philosophical principles of the art of teaching—too often neglected by those who style themselves "practical men"—and at the same time to make various experiments in the business of my own class, by which I might test the truth of theory. The results of these investigations and experiments I communicated on different occasions to two of our leading Journals; but being still unsatisfied with the manner in which I had treated the subject, and desirous, in a matter of no small Educational importance, to put my most mature thoughts into a complete and systematic shape, which might be beneficial to the rising generation of Teachers, I determined to deliver an Academical Lecture on the subject. This Lecture was delivered at the opening of last Session, in Latin; and it was my intention, at that time, to publish it immediately, with English notes, page iv explaining more fully what had been only touched on in the text. Circumstances however occurred to delay the publication of that discourse; and, at the opening of the present Session, I took up the subject again, and delivered a similar Lecture in English. Both these Lectures now appear; the one as an encouragement to the Academic use of the Latin language in our philological classes, which, I think, has fallen into unwise desuetude; the other, as not only more popular in its form, but I hope more complete also, both in its philosophical deductions, and its practical inferences. The one is in no wise a translation of the other; the only bond of connection between them, in fact, being that they were written by the same man, on the same subject, at about a year's interval. In order to ensure as much variety as possible in the phraseology, and in the illustration (for the main ideas must be substantially the same), I did not look into the Latin, after its delivery, till after I had printed the English.

I have only further to remark, that the English Lecture was not written till after delivery. This, to those who heard it, will explain how it contains some things that were not said in the class, and exhibits a greater amplitude of exposition in the text, and variety of bookish references in the notes, than would have been suitable, or even possible, in its original shape. As for the Latin, I do not pretend to write a curiously faultless style; but if I write well enough to prove, to the satisfaction of all fair judges, that I am a good practical workman in my own craft, I desire no farther praise.