ertion of female influence more than to any other single cause; and there is room for its operation to a much greater extent. I would ever impress it upon the mind of a pupil, that her knowledge is a talent with which she is to trade and render tenfold; that she is not educated for herself and friends only, but for general society of every grade, for her country, for the world: -that she receives a light for the purpose of diffusing it. An educated mind, uninterested in the education of the masses of society, withholds that which is due. All the improvements in the social and civil position of man which are dependent on his character, his enlightened views of the sources of public and private prosperity, (and what real improvement is there which originates elsewhere?) depend on the education of the rising generation. The habits of men whose characters are formed and settled, who are fettered by the strong bands of ignorant prejudice, will not yield to new impressions. The highest advantages may be anticipated as the result of raising the mental character of the labouring classes. The great superiority of an educated mind is its power over the distant and the future; imbecility deals with the present alone; and what is economy but prudence, directing a reflecting glance on the past, a considerate superintendence of the present, and a wise anticipation of the future?

It may appear to you that in the progress of these remarks I have been confounding the science of political economy, on the one hand, with general politics, and on the other, with the economy of domestic life. I have not done so unthinkingly: the elements of the science pervades them both. The object of legislation is to enrich and civilize a nation; political economy

examines into the causes of wealth and civilization, and

the way in which these causes may be rendered most effective; or rather the way in which natural tendencies may be preserved from ignorant and injurious control. In doing this, it finds social and domestic life the most prolific department of research, and hence the necessity of intelligence on the part of those who conduct its arrangements.

You are more than personally responsible for the supply of intelligence.

Yours, &c.

LETTER XIII.

HISTORY-ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.

MY DEAR M, Ecclesiastical History is a very valuable department of the annals of the human race. I think it is generally grievously neglected in the education of the young. If there be periods when such knowledge is more than usually important, and the neglect of it emphatically culpable and disadvantageous, surely the present day may be reckoned among them. And yet there are very few young ladies who leave the school-room with more information on this subject than they have gathered incidentally from their general readings in history; and when they meet with opinions and circumstances in the religious world which they would fain comprehend by a reference to the history of the past, they know not where to turn. Having no previous information to place them a step in advance, and give them an impulse in the right direction; they know not how to choose their course, nor how to pursue it if it should be pointed out to them. The pages of Milner and Mosheim appear to them like an interminable labyrinth, which they would have to enter without a clue, and they feel that the labour of exploring its intricate passages would not be repaid by the scattered gems of information they might collect on the way.

Ecclesiastical history may, perhaps, be distinguished

into two departments. That which records the activities and passive endurances of the true Church, the character of her distinguished members and their influence, the expansion or the temporary restriction of her borders, the vindications of doctrine, the illustrations of truth, the accessions of literary treasure, which distinguish the successive stages of her history, the vicissitudes of that warfare, aggressive and defensive, which, by the Divine commission, she continually wages with the world around. In this department the best popular authority is Milner.

The other consists of the history of the Church so called, including the heresies and corruptions, in faith and practice, of those who had an adjunctive but not an incorporate connection with the Church; the intrigues, machinations, contentions, and assumptions of secular power, seeking to exalt itself by spiritual influence. Mosheim is the best popular authority here.

I am not going to recommend that you should introduce these voluminous works into the school-room, and impose the exploration of their pages on your pupils. But I am going most earnestly to urge, that whilst they are under your care, you should inspire an interest on this subject, excite a spirit of inquiry, which shall afterwards apply with avidity to its details, and furnish a general acquaintance with its prominent facts, and correct principles for the test of their character. But how shall this be effected? Are there any books adapted to the purpose? What is the plan and mode of instruction you would prescribe?

I can only reply to these questions, that I cannot name any books which I think well adapted to the end; and that were the supply ample and perfect in

suitability, they would not be effective in the hand of an instructress deficient in interest and information. But if you make yourself thoroughly acquainted with the details of church history, and get a competent impression of their importance, and of the value of a distinct, truthful estimate of them, books are a matter of comparative indifference.

It appears to me that the system of instruction by lecture might be brought to bear most effectively in our school-rooms, and applied with great advantage to the subject now in hand. Or if you decline the more formal application of this mode, you may secure most that is essential by pursuing the subject from the incidental notices in general history, and amplifying the. narration of facts and of their bearing. The greatest disadvantage of this last mode consists in its tendency to give detached and unconnected notices only; and these are comparatively valueless. If you cannot conduct it so as to avoid this tendency, you must abandon it altogether. I think it may be done. But I cannot too often urge the necessity of an established connection, a tangible link, by which the parts of historic narrative are to be held together. It is only as the body of information is "fitly framed together and compacted by that which every" incident "supplieth," that it "maketh increase to edification."

I will pursue the thread of ecclesiastical history a short way, in order to furnish an example illustrative of the remarks I have suggested.

The scope of church history is very circumscribed previous to the Christian era. All credible information is derived from the inspired record, and one or two Jewish historians. It is necessary that this period re