In the February Century we read of "Charles Dickens's Work in Education;" the April Nineteenth Century had "Higher Education and the State"; The Fortnightly, May, had "The Teacher Problem", and we must include The Dial, which is wont to speak out so clearly its positive convictions on matters of this kind, as it did on April 16 in "The Educational Outlook."

This enumeration is by no means exhaustive. It does not include the multitude of minor publications which, like the local press everywhere, are closely interested in the schools and their work. It will be seen,

too, that no reference has been made to the educational journals themselves, nor to the Chautauquan with its numerous progeny, nor to professional publications of any kind. And finally, the articles named are nearly all general in character and interest. Those on technical subjects, those on special phases of education, such as kindergarten, manual training, Indian schools, and so forth, are omitted. Considering all these facts, the amount of reading on general educational subjects that is going before the millions of readers each month is tremendously signifi

cant.

M

Y minde to me a kingdom is; Such perfect joy therein I finde As farre exceeds all earthly blisse That God or nature has assignde; Though much I want that most would have, Yet still my minde forbids to crave.

Content I live; this is my stay,

I seek no more than may
suffice.
I presse to beare no haughtie sway;
Look, what I lack my mind supplies.
Loe, thus I triumph like a king,

Content with that my mind doth bring.

I see how plentie surfets oft,

And hastie clymbers soonest fall; I see that such as sit aloft

Mishap doth threaten most of all.
These get with toile, and keepe with feare;
Such cares my mind could never beare.

No princely pompe nor wealthie store,
No force to win the victorie,
No wylie wit to salve a sore,

No shape to winne a lover's eye,-
To none of these I yeelde as thrall;
For why, my mind despiseth all.

Some have too much, yet still they crave;
I little have, yet seek no more.

They are but poore, though much they have,
And I am rich with little store.
They poor, I rich; They beg, I give;
They lacke, I lend; they pine, I live.

I laugh not at another's losse,

I grudge not at another's gaine;
No worldly wave my mind can tosse;

I brooke that is another's bane.
I feare no foe, I fawne no friend;
I lothe not life, nor dread mine end.

I joy not in no earthly blisse;
I weigh not Cresus' wealth a straw;
For care, I care not what it is;

I feare not fortune's fatal law;
My mind is such as may not move
For beautie bright or force of love.
I wish but what I have at will;

I wander not to seeke for more; I like the plaine, I clime no hill;

In greatest stormes I sitte on shore, And laugh at them that toile in vaine To get what must be lost againe.

I kisse not where I wish to kill;

I feigne not love where most I hate; I breake no sleepe to winne my will; I wayte not at the mightie's gate. I scorne no poore, I feare no rich; I feele no want nor have too much. The court ne cart I like ne loath,— Extreames are counted worst of all; The golden meane betwixt them both Doth surest sit, and feares no fall; This is my choyce; for why, I finde No wealth is like a quiet minde. My wealth is health and perfect ease; My conscience clere my chiefe defence; I neither seeke by bribes to please,

Nor by desert to breed offence. Thus do I live; thus will I die; Would all did so as well as I!

-Sir Edward Dyer.

NASMUCH as these two men are now

ers of the public schools and the methods of teaching the one in the German states of Europe, the other in the United States of America-it will be of interest to indicate in what respects the younger of these men, Dr. Sheldon, has earned the title, the Pestalozzi of America.

RESEMBLANCES.

Zeal. Both derived their fundamental principles and the zeal for the self-sacrificing work of their lives from the depths of their

own inner feelings and from personal observation of the conditions which surrounded them. They made no demand on bookwisdom and learnedness, though they had received instruction in the public schools and at the University-instruction which was very faulty, it is true, in the public schools, and in part faulty at the University.

Unselfishness. Both revealed from their youth up a marked unselfishness of character and readiness to be of service to others. A beautiful proof of this trait is shown by Pestalozzi in his self-sacrificing care of the

orphans and little beggar-children in Neuhof and Stanz; while Sheldon's first efforts as teacher were likewise directed to the education of neglected children, whom he gathered about him from the streets of Oswego.

Steadfastness. Both possessed untiring perseverance and great strength of will in carrying out their plans. Neither the blind prejudice of the masses nor the bitter attacks of the learned were able to discourage them. Both were convinced of the sacredness of their mission, to which they could not be unfaithful. Attitude toward others. Both possessed the gift of being able to win the sympathy and cooperation of noble men and women, and to fill them with interest and

enthusiasm for the work of education. Both, as worthy sons of a republic, preserved throughout their whole lives a charming modesty and simplicity of manner, valuing men not according to their rank or social position, but according to their efforts and service for their fellow-men. While Pestalozzi often stood in touch with princes and other personages of high office, who rendered possible the introduction of his method into their states, Sheldon had to do more with school-boards elected by the people, who regarded his school as a model in organization and instruction, and whose deliberations were often influenced by his counsel and experience.

Home. Both were of humble origin, Pestalozzi being the son of a surgeon, Sheldon of a farmer. Both had the good fortune to marry educated and noble-minded women, who often helped them by word and deed in their difficult labors, and revived their spirits in discouragement. The results of good family-training are less to be seen in Pestalozzi's stem (which completely died out by the death of Oberst Pestalozzi in Zurich) than in Sheldon's five children. Of the latter, the oldest daughter, Mary Sheldon-Barnes1, has become noted as historian.

Assistants. As a somewhat striking coincidence it may here be remarked that both Pestalozzi and Sheldon, in endeavoring to work out their methods and introduce them into the schools, received the assistance of a Hermann Krüsi-father and son. The younger Krüsi little thought, indeed, when he first set foot on American soil, that a task similar to that of his father sixty-two years before would be assigned to him; and assigned moreover by a man of whose existence he had known as little as had the elder Krüsi of Pestalozzi.

Like her father, she died "with the harness on," being engaged in historical research at the British Museum in London.

Long life and recognition. Both Pestalozzi and Sheldon were privileged to continue their work to a good old age, and to see the

fruit of their labors. The seed of popular education sown in Prussia and the other countries of Germany, clearly evidenced the recognition which was accorded the venerable Pestalozzi; such was also the case with Sheldon, who saw in all parts of the Union the ideas and methods taken up which he had introduced at Oswego. That the mania of persecution which attacked Pestalozzi in the later years of his life, seemed even to himself to place his efforts in an unfavorable light in spite of his undoubtedly great achievements, was due to a certain nervousness of temperament -a characteristic in which we perceive at once a difference in the characters of these two men.

DIFFERENCES.

Individuality. Pestalozzi was remarkable, even as a boy, for the sensitiveness and excitability of his nature, inspiring him, on the one hand, with enthusiasm for every step of progress toward freedom and justice, and with sympathy for the poor; but on the other hand, filling him with impatience and anger toward the oppressors, and toward all who opposed the theories which he with youthful fire and vim so staunchly supported. Sheldon, however, had a quiet; peaceable disposition. When he sought recognition for his ideas he preferred to appeal to the intelligence and convictions of his listeners, rather than to play upon the

cords of emotion; in the latter art Pestalozzi with his almost magnetic power of attraction by far excelled.

Life-work and sphere of activity. Pestalozzi, who as he himself says did not get his ideas about methods and education from books.

(where he might perhaps have found a few), considered himself the founder of a new method of instruction, in harmony with the natural laws of the mind. In working out this method he often fell into error, it is true, but gradually, with the assistance of his fellow-workers, he followed up the right course, and by means of observation and development unfolded in his pupils powers which aroused astonishment in those who visited his institution. Thus the great service of Pestalozzi consists in the application of the recognized laws of the mind, and in the step-by-step upbuilding of the child's powers in the elementary instruction of the public school.

Sheldon on the other hand was already convinced from the very beginning of his labors, of the value of the Pestalozzian method of instruction, and was accordingly more concerned in introducing the necessary measures, which by their objective character assumed a strikingly practical form. Inasmuch as he was occupied during his entire pedagogical career, in superintending either the city public schools or the State Normal School, he necessarily lacks in certain respects the absolute freedom for experimental investigation or for the introduction of new means of instruction, which is enjoyed by the conductor of such a private institution

as Pestalozzi's always was. Sheldon was therefore obliged to proceed cautiously and systematically.

Order and system. The most enthusiastic of Pestalozzi's admirers have never ventured to deny his faults in respect to such things as personal neatness, care of the clothing, financial matters and even the expression of ideas. To this lack of order and clearness are to be attributed many unfortunate events of his life. A principal who neglects the financial affairs of his institution, for example, runs the risk of leaving them in the hands of a man who will turn them to his own advantage. Something similar takes place, also, when one finds it necessary, in

order to make one's confused notions on education comprehensible to an intelligent public, to engage the services of another man for this purpose-especially if this spokesman is inclined to interpolate his own views, and especially if these views are often mere philosophical ideals in glaring contrast to

the actual facts. Such was Pestalozzi's ex

perience; whereas Sheldon, as superintendent of City Schools and as principal of a State Normal School, was compelled to express in clear intelligible terms the program of instruction and to keep close watch of its execution and of the whole school-organization.

It is natural that in the comparison of men of different nationalities there are national as well as individual differences to be taken into consideration. This explains in part Pestalozzi's ideal trend of mind, as contrasted with Sheldon's more practical tendency. There is also a difference in regard to religious views, in that Sheldon followed the example of his fathers and forefathers and clung to the orthodox faith, while Pestalozzi recognized the Gospel of Love as the true essence of Christianity. Still, it hardly needs to be said that in spite of his never intolerant preference for the orthodox exposition of the Bible, Sheldon observed to the fullest extent the duties of the Gospel of Love.

[The article above is by Hermann Krüsi (formerly of the Oswego Normal School) in the Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Pädagogik April, 1899, Jena, Germany, translated by William R. Bishop, University of Jena.]