whom he was sent, exclaimed, How can he be taught his letters ? He cannot hear. True,' replied his mother, he cannot hear, but he can see. As you can do nothing with the ear, try what can be done with the eye. If he cannot make out the difference between the sound of a and that of b, you will acknowledge that he is as competent as any other child to distinguish the form of one from that of the other.' And this expectation was soon proved to be correct, to the astonishment of those who ridiculed the idea; 'for in a very little time, he knew the twenty-six letters, large and small, as well as any child in the school.' Then vanished all the difficulty; the dame and her wondering neighbours began to see, as his mother. had predicted, that he would learn by the window his eyes, as well as any other child could by the door his ears.' At this school,' proceeds Mr. Arrowsmith, 'every child went up to his governess twice in the morning and afternoon. By constantly going up in the same manner, to look at the letters, he soon observed the dif-. ference between himself and the other children, by taking notice of their mouths; so that, at length, when the letters were pointed out. to him for observation, he looked up to the governess, as much as to say, what is it? She endeavoured to gratify his curiosity and called the letters by their names as she pointed to them; and in a few months he learnt to pronounce the alphabet, in his own way, which he does to this day.'

'The moment he convinced his mother that he knew every letter, she got several sets of alphabetical counters, large and small, with which he was exercised, and taught the name of every thing he could. see at home and at school. By these means he constantly gained information from his school-fellows without the knowledge of his mistress.'

To know the letters of the alphabet and to be able to articulate their names are, evidently, two very distinct acquisitions. Were we required to observe the features of twenty-six individuals, whom. we had never seen before, we should soon be able to distinguish them one from the other, although we might continue still ignorant of their names. The same observation will hold good when applied to written characters. Children who hear and speak may be taught to utter the names of the letters in the alphabet without knowing them by sight. In the same manner children who are destitute of the sense of hearing may be instructed to know and discriminate them without being able to articulate their names. It is, therefore, perfectly clear that if the editor's brother had not learnt to utter the names of the letters, as he is said to have done, ' in his own way,' it could not have rendered his instruction either more difficult or more tedious: for it is by no means easy to understand how the utterance of their names could have facilitated

his subsequent improvement. As he was afterwards taught, it was an acquisition which could not have been, in any way, useful to him, since he never acquired, nor did he ever endeavour to acquire, the power of articulating many words or syllables.

It is impossible to believe that the mere capacity of uttering articulate sounds has any tendency, in itself, to promote the culti vation of the mental faculties of the deaf and dumb. The ideas of others can be communicated to them solely by the eye, and their endeavours to make themselves intelligible should, naturally, be directed towards that organ. Even by its warmest advocates the utterance of the deaf and dumb is recommended, principally, if not solely, as a desirable medium to enable them to convey their ideas to the minds of those who hear: but the use of signs and written characters, which they acquire with singular ease and dispatch, is a method of communication more satisfactory to themselves and much more agreeable to those who associate with them.

That the deaf and dumb who have never been taught to utter articulate sounds may acquire a perfect command of a system of written and manual signs is certain. The progress made by Mr. Arrowsmith places the fact beyond the reach of cavil: and the quickness and intelligence displayed by the pupils who accompanied the Abbé Sicard to England in 1815, must remove the doubts of the most sceptical. One of these pupils, Clerc, being asked by a lady,' why young Godard was not so well instructed as he and his fellow-pupil Massieu,' instantly wrote down,

Godard is still very young and his mind has not yet acquired a sufficient degree of maturity. Besides, it is not in so short a time that one can hope to reach a high degree of perfection. With patience and application, you will see him, one day I hope, capable of answering any questions you may be pleased to ask him."'

Massieu, another of these pupils, being asked by the same querist 'what a spoiled child meant,' answered thus:

A spoiled child is a child whom his father and mother are fondling upon, instead of chastising him when he is deserving of it. Their ill understood fondness prevents him from receiving a good education, and he becomes a good-for-nothing fellow, often capable of being troublesome to society: Godard, for instance, has been a spoiled child. His parents entrusted him to my care, when he was yet young. As he was indolent and giddy, I wished to give him a little paternal correction, but they forbad my striking him. Seeing, however, that he was abusing their goodness, they became at length a little more severe, and since then Godard is grown with years a little wiser, and more reasonable, although he be, occasionally, a little lazy.'

These answers (not to questions previously suggested by the Abbé Sicard, but casual interrogatories put by one of the company)

evidently

evidently show that, when properly attended to, the minds of the deaf and dumb may acquire a high degree of cultivation; for they exhibit an example of precision in the thinking faculty which would reflect no discredit on a boy who can both hear and speak, and who has enjoyed all the advantages of a liberal education. These pupils, it should be further remarked, had been educated at an establishment where the acquisition of utterance had been long laid aside as useless.

On this branch of instruction the sentiments and practice of the late Abbé de l'Epée were completely at variance with the system now pursued by those engaged in the tuition of the deaf and dumb. True it is, that in the early part of his undertaking, he was induced to employ considerable pains in endeavouring to teach them utterance; and his success, in this department, was not inferior to that of any of his more modern imitators. Experience, however, soon convinced him that the object gained by enabling them to utter articulate sounds was by no means an equivalent for the difficult and disagreeable nature of the task: he therefore relinquished entirely this part of his original plan, as adapted merely to amuse or astonish the ignorant.

We feel no hesitation in declaring that our sentiments upon this point perfectly coincide with those of the Abbé. We consider the pains taken in teaching the deaf and dumb the utterance of articulate sounds an absolute misapplication of the labour and patience of the instructor, and an unnecessary waste of the time and attention of the pupil. It is, therefore, with no ordinary degree of surprize we have learnt that the Abbé Sicard, (after long and successfully following the footsteps of his benevolent precursor,) has been persuaded to re-commence a process which he had discarded as useless. We are utterly at a loss for the motives which prevailed upon him to add this foolish branch to the system already pursued with so much advantage, in the establishment over which he presides. He may, perhaps, have been influenced by his visit to this island in We know, at least, that utterance is in high favour with the English school,' for the instruction of the deaf and dumb, and that the change, to which we allude, did not take place in the French institution previously to the Abbé's return to his charge in the year above mentioned. But whatever motives may have produced an alteration, of which we cannot approve, we would earnestly request him to re-consider the subject. Let him endeavour to ascertain whether, within the space of time which has elapsed since this branch of instruction has been resumed, the progress of his pupils, in the acquisition of general information, has equalled their improvement within a period of equal length before this addition was made. If this inquiry be impartially conducted, we shall be greatly mis

1815.

CC 4

taken

taken if the result be not a conviction that he has been misled by the sophistry of the Edinburgh school.

We are fully aware that, on this tender ground, we are at issue with the whole corps, both foreign and domestic, of those who are at present engaged in educating the deaf and dumb. If the question to be decided were the best and most efficient mode of instructing the deaf and dumb to utter articulate sounds, we would readily submit to the opinions of men more conversant than ourselves with the practical detail of tuition. But the point at issue is not, the manner in which the deaf and dumb may be best taught to articulate; but whether they should be taught to articulate at all-to the discussion of which we consider ourselves fully as competent, as the most experienced of those who are actually engaged in it.

There are many individuals who hear and speak, whose tones are so harsh and dissonant that, in our communications with them, we should scarcely lament the necessity of confining ourselves to the use of signs and written characters; and there is not one among the deaf and dumb who, by any degree of care and length of practice, acquires a melody and intonation of voice which can render his enunciation even tolerable. Their utterance is found, by experience, to be so disagreeable that it is seldom or never used out of the precincts of the establishments in which it is taught; add to this, that the contorsions of countenance with which it is accompanied, are of the most unpleasant kind: in many cases they completely mould the features to a peculiar cast; and the unnatural contour of face thus produced cannot fail to augment the pain already excited by the jarring and monotonous sound of the voice. For the truth of this we appeal, with confidence, to the friends of the pupils educated by the late Mr. Braidwood. After years of toil and torture they returned to their families with an acquisition not very agreeable to their acquaintance, and, confessedly, useless to themselves. This gentleman has been greatly extolled by his associates, as the first person who, in England, practised, on any extended plan, the art of instructing the infant deaf and dumb. We feel no disposition to disparage his merits; nor have we any remark to make on the system which he pursued in teaching them the use of a manual and written alphabet. We must be permitted, however, to express our regret that he should ever have conceived it necessary to teach them utterance. We sincerely wish that he had permitted a deaf and dumb person using the organs of speech still to continue, in the words of our great lexicographer, a philosophical curiosity to amuse those who run after learned pigs and automatous chessplayers.' His practice and that of the 'school' which he founded, has, by its unlucky, industry, produced a re-action upon the conti

nental

nental establishments where the art had disappeared which is now become in England a trading mystery.

6

But we most cordially hate such schools;' they are, too often, composed of second rate imitators who, generally, copy to the life the weak, the useless or the absurd parts of the systems sanctioned, by the master:' the Braidwood school' is by no means exempt from this defect. Mr. Braidwood very successfully taught bis pupils the use of a written and manual alphabet, and, through that natural medium, stored their minds with a large portion of various and useful information. In an evil hour, however, he clogged his plan with the unnecessary and cumbersome appendage of teaching them utterance. As might have been anticipated, the school', immediately fastened upon the appendage, as containing the essence of the plan, and through the medium of their encyclopedias, their annual reports and their harangues to periodical meetings of subscribers,' succeeded but too well in persuading the public that the science which they profess is a profitable and indispensable 'craft.' 'Observe,' they say, 'the progress which children make in our asylums where they are, invariably, taught to speak! Speech, therefore, must be the cause and instrument of the progress which has been made in instructing them.' Admirable logicians! Observe the progress which children make in establishments where they are, invariably, taught the art of carving in wood-carving in wood must, therefore, be the efficient cause of their mental improvement.

But the application of the labour of the instructor, and of the time of the pupil to an useless purpose, is far from being the worst consequence which results from this practice. It is attended with the much more serious effect of prolonging the deception which, to a great extent, has already imposed upon the public, namely, that the art of instructing the deaf and dumb is to be acquired only by an initiation into its mysteries under the direction of those who have been long and intimately conversant with its details. Whatever foundation may exist for such an opinion with reference to utterance, we are firmly convinced that to teach the deaf and dumb the use and application of written characters and manual signs is a simple and easy process which may be commenced under the eye of every intelligent mother who can write, and which may be completed under the superintendence of any ordinary schoolmaster, who will patiently devote a small share of his attention to the undertaking. We may even assert, without the least fear of overstating the facility, that there is scarcely a nursery-maid, that can read, who may not, in a few hours, be instructed how to teach them, by the aid of a few alphabetical counters, the written characters which represent every visible object.

The