To take the case of healthy children first, it is satisfactory to learn upon high authority that they do not suffer much physical harm from the effects of overwork. What happens in their case is that the vigorous and healthy brain offers a sound resistance to the stuffing process, and speedily forgets what has been forced into it. From an educational point of view this is, of course, very disastrous; but as far as health considerations are concerned it affords a certain amount of consolation.
This is to say, one must bear in mind, that modern methods of education are only salutary as long as they fail altogether to affect the intelligence. The moment they prove themselves to be efficacious they become an immediate source of danger.
It follows from this fact that stupid children are as well protected against the evil effects of the education system as the healthy children. In fact, to a large extent the stupid children are the healthy ones by reason of their stupidity. It is, however, a great mistake to suppose that a stupid child necessarily implies one that is in any sense deficient mentally. The dull schoolboy often proves in after life to be the brilliant man. All that his dulness need be taken to signify is that his mind is not receptive to the subjects which are being forced upon it. Linnaeus was very stupid at Latin until an enlightened physician, who was aware of his pa.s.sion for botanical study, suggested his reading Plinius; and although he may not have imbibed very accurate information about natural history from that philosopher, he succeeded in making immediate progress in the Latin language.
There should be, under a rational system of education, no such thing as a stupid child. What is, after all, stupidity or dulness in a schoolboy?
It simply means that the boy"s faculties are undeveloped, and that no amount of fact-cramming has succeeded in developing them. The whole mischief lies, of course, in the fact that the school is not trying to develop the boy"s own faculties at all, but merely to force him to adapt himself to its own curriculum and conventionality.
The danger to the brain of the healthy or stupid child is not over-development but under-development. It is not they who suffer in the worst sense from the evil effects of over-education, but the gifted children, as they are called, or those whose quick, nervous intellects are most susceptible to the process of receiving any kind of instruction.
It is the nervous boy or girl who generally makes the most promising pupil. A natural inclination to study leads children of this type to prefer the schoolroom to the playground. The boy who works hard to get to the top of his cla.s.s, or to pa.s.s an examination, or to obtain a scholarship, is the one least given to games, and, in consequence, the weakest physically.
These are the very children whom the teacher is most tempted to encourage to do more work than is good for them. The process of their mental development is so rapid that it needs no stimulation from outside. But that is not, unfortunately, the concern of the school authorities. The anxiety to produce scholars who will distinguish themselves in public examinations, and thereby advertise the school, invariably leads the schoolmaster to cram and stuff the brains of the brightest and most forward boys.
There is special danger in over-working boys or girls of this type, because the brain is not strong enough to withstand the pressure. The result is never good, and in extreme cases it is as bad as it could possibly be. It follows, in fact, as a matter of course, that the finest and most sensitive intellects are the first to succ.u.mb to the pernicious effects of over-cramming the brain. There is a strain that can only be endured by second-rate minds, and it is not, therefore, the intellectually fittest who are encouraged to survive under the present system.
What has been stated above refers rather to the higher cla.s.s of schools and colleges, which prepare boys for examinations and academic distinctions of various kinds, than to the elementary schools to which the children of the poor are commandeered. In the latter establishments a special barbarity takes place which has been so widely discussed in Parliament and in the newspapers that I will do no more here than allude to it in pa.s.sing.
I refer to the forcing of instruction upon under-fed school-children.
Apart from the gross inhumanity of the proceeding, there is the indisputable fact that the compulsory teaching of children whose bodies have not been properly nourished tends to weaken the intellect. If these children were subjected to a process of cramming such as is usual in the higher schools, their minds would undoubtedly break down altogether. As it is, the comparatively mild method of the elementary school does not effect anything worse in such cases than the prevention of the development of the mind, which is one degree better than complete breakdown or insanity.
"The School Board system of cramming with smatterings," wrote one of the greatest mental specialists in the world in reply to my inquiries, "instead of teaching their victims to think--even if only by teaching one subject well--is perhaps responsible for some positive mental breakdown; but probably the main harm of it is that it stifles and strangles proper mental development." "Undeveloped mentality," he says in conclusion, "is perhaps the princ.i.p.al fault of our educational system (so-called)."
Another distinguished physician writes to me from a lunatic asylum:
"We have had a few cases who have broken down, the results of working for scholarships; also we have had one or two cases of ladies who have broken down working for higher examinations. Dr. ---- and myself both feel certain that there is a good deal to be said against the increased pressure put upon young adolescents at schools. From my own experience I know that boys who were considered especially clever, and were high up in forms in the public school I was at, have most of them now dropped back, and are very mediocre. On the other hand, many who matured slowly have continued to advance. This is only an observation, and has many exceptions; but it is an observation that, as time pa.s.ses, is more fully confirmed."
It is not necessary to add anything to these valuable expressions of opinion, proceeding from eminent men of wide experience, who are far more capable judges than the layman who has no scientific knowledge and a necessarily limited range of observation.
Facts speak very eloquently for themselves. If brain specialists are continually coming across cases of mental breakdown resulting from cramming or over-education, it is quite clear that a system which is productive of such evils must be altogether defective in principle and wanting in common sense.
CHAPTER XII
EVIDENCE OF HISTORY
After an exhaustive inquiry into the multifarious evils which must be laid at the door of education, it is refreshing to turn to history for ill.u.s.trious examples of men who not only did not owe their greatness to academic training, but who actually owed it to what would nowadays be designated a neglected education.
The chronicles of the past teem with instances of youths who have developed into brilliant men, in spite of the fact that they had either had no schooling at all, or had been considered the dunces of their cla.s.s. It would, in fact, be far more difficult to supply ill.u.s.trations of great men who have succeeded on account of their academic distinction, than to give examples of those who failed to distinguish themselves at school, but who nevertheless became famous afterwards as men of unusual talent.
When Napoleon Bonaparte, at the age of fifteen, left the military college of Brienne, where he had been a pupil for five years and a half, the inspector of military schools gave him the following certificate:
"M. de Buonaparte (Napoleon), born August 15, 1769; height 4 feet 10 inches 10 lines; is in the fourth cla.s.s; has a good const.i.tution, excellent health, character obedient, upright, grateful, conduct very regular; has always been distinguished by his application to mathematics. He knows history and geography very pa.s.sably. He is not well up in ornamental studies or in Latin, in which he is only in the fourth cla.s.s. He will be an excellent sailor. He deserves to be pa.s.sed on to the military school of Paris."
This was an optimistic description of the youthful Napoleon"s accomplishments, for he was, as a matter of fact, so backward in Latin that his removal to Paris was opposed by the sub-princ.i.p.al of the college. According to the testimony of his schoolfellow and biographer, M. de Bourrienne, he exhibited backwardness in every branch of education except mathematics, for which he showed a distinct natural bent.
The only professor at Brienne who took any notice of Napoleon was the mathematical master. The others thought him stupid because he had no taste for the study of languages, literature, and the various subjects that formed the curriculum of the establishment; and as there seemed no chance of his becoming a scholar, they took no interest in him.
"His superior intelligence was, however, sufficiently perceptible,"
writes M. de Bourrienne, "even through the reserve under which it was veiled. If the monks to whom the superintendence of the establishment was confided had understood the organization of his mind, if they had engaged more able mathematical professors, or if we had had any incitement to the study of chemistry, natural philosophy, astronomy, etc., I am convinced that Bonaparte would have pursued these sciences with all the genius and spirit of investigation which he displayed in a career more brilliant, it is true, but less useful to mankind.
Unfortunately, the monks did not perceive this, and were too poor to pay for good masters.... The often-repeated a.s.sertion of Bonaparte having received a _careful education_ at Brienne is therefore untrue."
Napoleon"s military bent showed itself whilst he was at the College of Brienne. Heavy snow fell during one winter, and prevented him from taking the solitary walks that were his chief recreation. He therefore fell back upon the expedient of getting his school companions to dig trenches and build snow fortifications. "This being done," he said, "we may divide ourselves into sections, form a siege, and I will undertake to direct the attacks." In this way he organized a sham war that was carried on with great success for a fortnight.
This brief sketch of Napoleon Bonaparte"s schooldays has been given in order to show that the development of his genius owed nothing to academic training. Without being actually a dunce, he was backward in all the subjects except the one in which he took a vivid interest; and, doubtless, had he cared as little for mathematics as for Latin, he would have left Brienne with a reputation for profound stupidity.
The school career of his great opponent, Wellington, was even less distinguished. Tradition has handed down to posterity no further details regarding his Eton days beyond the record of a fight with Sydney Smith"s elder brother "Bobus." Alluding to him as a dull boy, Mr. Smiles states, in a footnote, in his book on "Self-Help": "A writer in the _Edinburgh Review_ (July, 1859) observes that "the Duke"s talents seem never to have developed themselves until some active and practical field for their display was placed immediately before him. He was long described by his Spartan mother, who thought him a dunce, as only "food for powder." He gained no sort of distinction, either at Eton or at the French Military College of Angiers." It is not improbable that a compet.i.tive examination, at this day, might have excluded him from the army."
Lord Clive was a perfectly hopeless youth from the schoolmaster"s point of view. He loathed work, and was always up to some prank or other. In the vain hope of inducing him to learn something, he was sent to four schools in succession; but, with a single exception, every master under whom he was placed declared him to be an incorrigible idler. The exception was Dr. Eaton of Lostock, who predicted a great career for Clive, provided an opportunity were afforded him for the exercise of his talents.
At Market Drayton he amused himself by organizing a band of idle scamps, who went about threatening to smash the windows of tradespeople unless they paid a fine of apples or pence; and on one occasion he alarmed the inhabitants of the town by climbing a church steeple and seating himself upon a stone spout near the top.
A man of the same stamp who received the scantiest education was George Washington. He is described as having been given a common-school education, with a little mathematical training, but no instruction whatever in ancient or modern languages.
Christopher Columbus, another adventurous spirit, owed very little to his schooling. "He soon evinced a strong pa.s.sion for geographical knowledge," writes Washington Irving in his interesting Life of the explorer, "and an irresistible inclination for the sea.... His father, seeing the bent of his mind, endeavoured to give him an education suitable for maritime life. He sent him, therefore, to the university of Pavia, where he was instructed in geometry, geography, astronomy and navigation.... He remained but a short time at Pavia, barely sufficient to give him the rudiments of the necessary sciences; the thorough acquaintance with them which he displayed in after-life must have been the result of diligent self-schooling, and of casual hours of study amidst the cares and vicissitudes of a rugged and wandering life."
No better instance of the advantage of natural development and self-culture could be afforded than by the career of Dr. Livingstone.
Working in a cotton factory as a boy of ten, he studied scientific works and books of travel, besides the cla.s.sics, not only at night, but during the hours of labour.
"Looking back now at that life of toil," he wrote afterwards, "I cannot but feel thankful that it formed such a material part of my early education; and, were it possible, I should like to begin life over again in the same lowly style, and to pa.s.s through the same hardy training."
Dr. Adam Clarke, the celebrated divine, scholar, and philanthropist, was a regular dunce in his early youth. It was only with difficulty, and an undue proportion of whacking, that the elements of the alphabet were driven into his head by an impatient teacher--a mode of instruction that probably caused him to remark, in after life, that "many children, not naturally dull, have become so under the influence of the schoolmaster."
It is related of Dr. Clarke that when he reached the middle of "As in praesenti," in Lilly"s Latin Grammar, he came to a dead stop and could get no further. His fellow-pupils, however, jeered him to such an extent that he determined to go on and conquer the difficulty. And this resolution seems to have helped him considerably, as, instead of the grammar being forced into him, he began to study and think for himself.
Nevertheless, he always found great difficulty in learning anything at school, but was pa.s.sionately devoted to reading imaginative books and stories of adventure, such as "Jack the Giant-killer," "Arabian Nights,"
"The Pilgrim"s Progress," "Sir Francis Drake," and a host of similar works. To these, in fact, and not to his painfully acquired school education, he was wont to attribute the formation of his literary taste.
Disraeli"s education was by no means thorough. There is no record of his having distinguished himself academically in the slightest degree. It is related of him, on the contrary, that he was such a duffer at cla.s.sics as to be incapable of grasping the rule that "ut" should be followed by the subjunctive mood. The following account of Disraeli"s schooldays, given by one of his school-fellows, is quoted by Sir William Fraser:
"I cannot say that Benjamin Disraeli at this period of his life exhibited any unusual zeal for cla.s.sical studies; and I doubt whether his attainments in this direction, when he left the school for Mr.
Cogan"s at Walthamstow, reached higher than the usual grind in Livy and Caesar. But I well remember that he was the compiler and editor of a school newspaper, which made its appearance on Sat.u.r.days, when the gingerbread-seller was also to be seen, and that the right of perusal was estimated at the cost of a sheet of gingerbread, the money value of which was in those days the third of a penny."
Turning to literary men, we find an imposing array of dunces. I have not had time to examine into the school experiences of more than a limited number of great names. If the reader is anxious to pursue the investigation further, he will doubtless find that there is scarcely a famous man of letters who made his mark at school or university.
The first person to teach Oliver Goldsmith his letters was a woman, who afterwards became village schoolmistress, named Elizabeth Delap. She did not form a very flattering opinion of her young pupil. "Never was so dull a boy," she was wont to declare; "he seemed impenetrably stupid."
From this kind but undiscriminating teacher Oliver gravitated to the village school, where he learnt nothing. Thence he was sent to Elphin; and of this period of his school life Dr. Strean says: "He was considered by his contemporaries and school-fellows, with whom I have often conversed on the subject, as a stupid heavy blockhead, little better than a fool, whom every one made fun of."
Goldsmith has himself, in his "Inquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning," recorded some very striking impressions as to the value of academic success. "A lad whose pa.s.sions are not strong enough in youth,"
he writes, "to mislead him from that path of science which his tutors, and not his inclination, have chalked out, by four or five years"
perseverance, probably obtains every advantage and honour his college can bestow. I forget whether the simile has been used before, but I would compare the man whose youth has been thus pa.s.sed in the tranquillity of dispa.s.sionate prudence to liquors that never ferment, and consequently continue always muddy. Pa.s.sions may raise a commotion in the youthful breast, but they disturb only to refine it. However this be, mean talents are often rewarded in colleges with an easy subsistence."
Another "impenetrable dunce," according to the opinion of his tutor, an eminent Dublin scholar, was Richard Sheridan. He was afterwards sent to Harrow, where he earned for himself a great reputation for idleness. Dr.
Parr, one of the under-masters, wrote to Sheridan"s biographer the following expression of opinion: