The Portland gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1818-1824, 1823-08-12
MR. SHIRLEY.

Mn. SHIRLEY,
Ihave perused the numbers on education, over
the signature Of" Many" with considerable IN
terest and attention. Long had been Impress
ed with the belief that something might be done
to facilitate the mode Of impartng instruction
to youthful minds, and when this attempt al inn
proVement was commenced, | was In hopes il
would not abate until something lCas done. As
far as this writer has advanced with the subject
confess have been somewhat tarourabLy i'm
pressed towards the Lancasterian system, Ia the
light he has presented il and taking into con-
sideration what ! had heard and seen relative to
the subject before. But as two communica-
tons have appeared in your paper, directing
their aim and force against it, and as | have a
desire to be convinced whether it would afford
any improvement or not, l ask the liberty,
through the medium ofyour paper, to propose
a few questions in addition TO those put and
answered by Yeritas," for bis consideration.
think there is nothing unreasonable in eli
Their ofthem, and shall therefore expect him 10
give direct answer to each one if possible,
This course is necessary, in order to justify and
prove his own statements | come now to the
questions
You say, you visited '' one of these schools
(Lancasterian) some time since" How long
did you continue in this school Did you see a
lad placed in a class who was not capable to
perform its duties did the instructor in your
presence, punish lad for His" inability" to per-
form task without hearing bis defence If he
had any to make did you see an obstinate" lad
escape punishment?
What " publication" has authorized YOU to
assert that monitors are absolute over the sew
eral classes to which they may have been APP
pointed" that (" from their Judgment there IS
no appeal n that each one has {" full power over
bis class J" that :, boy has no chance for self
defence !" that 6 if charged by an overbearing
monitor, punishment must and CiH ensue ~
Can you prove that the Lancasterian System
is " complicated ;" that it " encourages confu-
sion )" that it " depends on schemes of the dis
affected ;" that it has in nine instances out of
ten fallen from its pristine habit, and is general
ly forsaken;" or can you even name nine in
stances, where a fair experiment has been
made OF its merits, under teacher practically
acquainted with the system, in which it has been
Abandoned
You have extolled " our system" while YOU
nave attempted to stigmatize the Lancasterian,
and place if far below ours-still YOU have said
" that some improvement naau be made on our
system o instruction is beyond doubt" WHY
then have you not pointed out some Of your
views OF improvement, as you intimate you
should IN your former communication?
confess Veritas" that my views Of both
systems do not at present accord with your
statements and as you admit this " is an inter
estlng enquiry, and demands The deliberate con-
ssderGttoa Of eUery retlecting person. hope
you will not consider it impertinent, in thus
asking for proof Of the assertions you have made.
Upon subject like this, something further than
bare assertion i necessary, before decided
opinion can be formed. The testimony, the
unPrejudiced testimony Of more than one man
is wanted. This is what call for at the pre-
sent time. A CITIZEN