The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1854-10-21
For The Cecil lihig.
POPULAR EDUCATION.
TILE OTHER SIDE.

stated ny us (Soihe n""'ho "S'| !" Wv II"
nctis system of Education. 1t is our inten-
ton in this article to review briefly the hco
aus,ceys to those objections written by the
aforesaid author.
Shortly after those objections were pub
rshcd in The Wing, we were graconsly in
formed as all. overwhelming argument that the
objections were not made of sufficient length
to give opportunity for REPUTATION. Thus con-
signed to oblivion as being too short for :hc
writer to find fault with the article upon is
o,cn impcrfoctions we had expected it to lie
undisturbed in the grave Of his deep and
scornful pity, but it seems that some six
months of diligent study has enabled him to
find in those no,c disturbed remains one OBJ
lection which is PRINCIPLE and therefore
deadly.
But to come directly to the 18th article.
The writer intimates firstly that the blow
which the prevalence of the Phonetic Sys-
tenn would give, would in the end be an adj
vantage. To make his figure of the summer
shower more forcible he has failed to state in
fair terms the objection. He has failed 10
state the fact that the objection was that this
deHghifui shower would sweep away the beau-
ties of a Shakespeare and other standard au-
thors of olden days who even now rule the
world of literature and to whom modern times
have failed to provide cquals.-lf the dcvas-
Eating summer Hail Storm which destroys
our crops and blights the hopes Of the hus-
bandman and whose electric flash dcmolsh-
cs the pride of the forest be an advantage
because it rcfrcshcs the stinted heritage
which has from its obscurity been able to re-
sist the shock then may we thank the friends
of Phonctics when their storm Of entire
change shall have swept away the gems Of
literature.
The writer next rises with Indignation at
the fact that we have written the word San
scrit and intimatcs that probably we write
without knowledge. If it be the case that
the writer in his studies was never better in
structed in the Etymology ofhis own language
than his words intimate We do not wonder
that he Minks the system under which he was
taught was defective. If he had been faith
fully instructed in this he would have known
that it was not necessary to dive into the
depths of the Sanscrit to bring up the mean
ing OF words into our language from that.
Neither would he have found it necessary to
have dcvoured Goethe or Schiller in their ma
tive tongue and have gone back from them to
their fathers to know something of the mean
ing of the words of our language which have
been derived from the Saxon.
He then says ''my object in these essays is
to treat Of what may be known and practiscd
by common foll;s.' Now ifhy common folks
he means the unlearncd and ignorant clown,
why at once we object, and beg to be dismiss
ed from any controversy with one, who in
stead ofclcvating the community to the liter
allure of the day, would dcprcss the literature
of the day to them. If on the other hand he
means those who have had and have improv
cd the advantages offered for a fair cdnca-
ton in the English Language we must say
that it is no excuse in this day Of works upon
Etymoogy which at least shouM be in the
hands every child, that they do not under
stand the ancient languages. They need
not in order to understand their own. One
thing more: We deny the truth Of the state
1ncnt lhit near ~ All Coliiiiloi "oiuS "io vi
Latin origin, and wc challenge 10 the proof.
The writer goes on now to state that he has
not yet after his six months Of hard study
been able to dcciphcr those strange sentences
which pertain to class of words which are
spelled differently but pronounced alike. 1t
is. an old adage that none are so blind rs
those who will not see, and rs here lies n
truth which is contrary to his sentiments, he
naturally finds that his cyesight fails him.
The amount of the objection was as follows ::
certain words are spelled differently but pro-
nounccl alike; the car is accustomed to car
ry along the connection Of each word to its
fellows, and therefore in conversation we are
enabled generally to attach the right meaning
to words spoken, but in reading the enc is not
SO formed as to retain the impression of one
word while occupied in deciphering another;
the connection is therefore lost, and confu-
sion must ensuc, unless we have different
form to present to the eye for each different
idea.
The above is the dark objection and it as
yet remains untouched in his answer, except
and also has thcorctic value.
The next point is the ssPRINcIrLE" one
and joined with the polite appellation of Ounce,
must of course be overwhelming. We are
always thankful to those who withhold harsh
cpithcts and softly insinuate that we are nat
'ural fools. If this spirit be the effect Of
Popular Education we beg leave to retire to
still more distant point from it.
Whether the mis-spclling of the word be
imputablc to us or the printer we know not,
but one thing we do know, and that is even if
it be imputabc to us he who undertakes to
overturn objections on account of u slip of the
writer's pen, shows that the ground on which
he stands is not only yielding, but that it is a
mirc in which his excrtions will only sink him
deeper and deeper.
The writer then goes on to inform the pub
lie who are waiting with itching eyes for
Popular Education in order that they may be
instructed, that he feels disposed to use some
harsh epithets He had more truthfully writ
ten | have used a harsh epithet. We beg
leave to answer to this overpowcring argn
ment that whenever the gentien,qs. shall see