Page images

To illustrate: Take a leaf from a book. Let the pupils see you tear or cut it from the book.

T.-6. What is this?
P.-" A leaf."

T.—“ What is this?” rolling the paper in the form of a cylinder or cone.

P.- A leaf.”

Then let the teacher tear or cut the upper margin of the leaf into lobes, and then roll together. Then roll the paper into a solid cylinder, then dip it into ink, or some coloring matter; talk of its being colored, red or blue or yellow, if you do not actually color it-continually asking, as you make a change in the form or color, “what is this now?” Thus develop the fact that the leaf may assnme a great variety of forms and color; but it is a leaf, nevertheless. On the stem you may find a bud; present this to the class and ask:

T.-" What is this?" P.-"A bud."

Let the pupil examine it; ask him to pull it to pieces, and so direct him that he may discover that ihe bud is a coilection of leaves on a short stem; that a bud is stem and leaves. Take a piece of elastic cord and some bits of paper in the form of leaves; make a hole in each of the pieces of paper, and then string them on the cord, quite close together; secure each piece to its place on the cord with a bit of sealing wax or some mucilage,-this may represent a bud. Now, take hold of the ends of the cord and stretch it; the leaves will be separated more widely from each other, and we shall have a branch or developed bud.

Teach that the bud develops into a branch by elongation of the stem and enlargement of the leaves, and not by an increase in the number of leaves.

Some buds do not develop into ordinary branches, but into flowers. Show that a flower is a collection of developed leaves upon a short stem or axis. Call attention to the fact, before stated, that the peculiarly shaped and colored parts of the flower (sepals, petals, stamens and pistils) are only leaves. Then call attention to the place of the bud. Let the pupil discover that the bud is always between the leal, or the leaf scar, and the stem..

How SHALL TARDINESS BE PREVENTED ?—" Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it,” expresses not only a command but a promised reward.

The first word of this old but trite proverb is the one coming to us perhaps most forcibly. In the training of immortal minds, nay, immortal souls, there is a fearful responsibility resting upon teachers. The

grand secret of success among men in any business whatever, may, almost without an exception, be traced directly to attention, regularity and punctuality; and their failures and disasters as often be traced to an opposite cause. It is of the utmost importance that all get the right impulse in early life in our infant and primary schools, for, “just as the twig is bent the tree is inclined.”

From the first day of their entrance into school we must strive to impress upon their little minds the importance of promptness in every duiy. The entrance of a single tardy pupil disturbs the economy of an entire school, and when one or more pupils are habitually late, the whole school is interrupted in its exercises; every pupil feels it, and thus far becomes demoralized, disheartened, discouraged, and thus the way is rared for a futuje course of idleness and crime. The poor

teacher is often blamed for the want of success in his school, when in fact if an angel had taught the same school no better success could have resulted. Nothing is farther from the truth than to suppose a scholar can keep pace with his classes when he is habitually late, or irregular in his attendance. If he is kept there, it is at the expense of his entire class. Now is it just that every member of the school be made to suffer for the faults of the few? Should one scholar be permitted to destroy the real benefits of the school; and to rob, yes, directly rob his fellows of their legitimate rights? No more right than to put his hand into your pocke: and take your money. For is it not everywhere conceded that time is money-yes, it is often more than money.




“How can this state, or any other, constitutionally abolish the grand jury system?”_Query Box, 10th question, New Series.

The constitution of the United States, the laws made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties sanctioned by national authority, are supreme in the sense that they are so high and so authoritative that they cannot be annulled by any power save that which established them, and the supreme court. But the operation of these laws is limited by special grants of the people; they are restricted to national purposes, and do not concern theniselves with the immediate control and local government of the people. That is, where these laws have any authority at all, they are supreme; where they are not supreme they have no authority, but the states come in to fulfil the functions not granted to the United States, and within the circle of rights not granted to the gene

How far is the Constitution of the U. S. the Supreme Law? 225 ral government the states are as supreme as any power can be. Supremacy in the one case does not annihilate supremacy in the other, unless there is an undefinable borderland of authority giving rise to conflicting laws; in such cases the state judges as well as the United States judges must give the preference to the United States laws.

The people give to the general government civil and criminal jurisdiction in certain enumerated cases; but in criminal cases they gave permission to proceed in two ways only--on either a presentment or an indictment of a grand jury. But the United States courts have no power, either with or without an indictment, to take any cognizance whatsoever of cases falling without the limits of their jurisdiction. How, then, can this class of cases such as petty larceny, arson, etc., be adjudicated? The constitution answers: “ The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Art. X. of Amendments. This is conclusive that the states may and must have judicial establishments of their own. If so, must their procedure be by presentment or indictment? Some of the states, by the abolishment of grand juries, clearly assume that they are not bound by the fifth amendment, which, they say, is applicable to the United States courts. This question has arisen so recently that I am unable to find any written opinion of eminent jurists in explication of it, though such opinions may have been published. But there are evidences drawn from the constitution itself that secm entirely satisfactory. I give a few :

“No bill of attainder, or ex post facto law shall be passed.” Art. I, sec. 9. Now this prohibition is, in its terms, similar to that contained in the fifth amendment; and if it was intended to have an universal application, binding the states as well as the United States, why the farther provision—"No state shall pass any bill of attainder or ex post facto law?” Art. I, sec. 10. This latter provision seems to imply clearly that prohibitions in the constitution apply to the general government only, unless the states also are mentioned; but the prohibition in regard to criminal prosecutions makes no mention of binding the states.

Again, the fifth amendment was ratified in 1791, subsequent to the adoption of the constitution. Prior to this amendment each state had such a judicial system as its people were pleased to adopt. It is not at all reasonable to suppose that the states, in ratifying the fifth amendment, were desirous of securing the grand jury system in their state courts, for that security was already afforded by their respective state constitutions. Neither could the fear of being deprived of grand juries in their state courts, have been any motive for asking such an unneces

2-[VOL. II.—No. 6.]

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

sary pledge, since the constitution gave no authority to the general government to change the procedure in state courts, nor could any one state jeopardize the rights of any other. It is evident, therefore, that before the fifth amendment, the people were entirely segure, within their several state jurisdictions, in the enjoyment of such a system of judicature as seemed to them most favorable to liberty. Why, then, did they ask for that amendment, having already the control of the state courts? Evidently they wished the United States courts restricted to such a procedure as would leave the fullest security to personal freedom. They feared the establishment of a “ Star Chamber," or a « Court of High Commissions,” which in England had shown how readily the strongest barriers of law can be broken down in a day by tribunals that are the mere creatures of centralized power.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]



[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Dear Fellow Teachers: Knowing, as each one of us must, our own liability to be “led into temptation,” do we ever think of the same liability on the part of those who are committed to our care? Oh, I fear too many of us do not think of it as we ought; and mere thought will avail but little. Let our thoughts result in acts, and instead of “the good we might have done,” we shall see the good we have done. The children committed to our trust are brought to us with tender, impressible minds. It is we who may direct their minds into the right channels, and aid them in forming such correct habits as ia after life will prove a rich inheritance to them. What a responsibility is this; and how fearful will be the consequences if we are not true to it. Alinost every child has approbativeness largely developed, and will do almost anything for teacher's praise. Let us in no instance withhold the well-earned praise or the approving smile; but let us beware what temptations we lead them into to gain the coveted praise.

Which one of us would place one of these "little ones edge of a precipice, where bright-hued flowers were tlooming, and where the attempt to pluck them would cause him to lose his secure footing and fall into the yawning gulf below? Yet this is what we are doing when we adopt the " self-reporting system;" and the fall to which we expose them is the fearful one from truth to falsehood, from innocence to guilt. We adopt this system and give our smiles and praise to those who report themselves “ perfect,” while the imperfect ones are punished with the teacher's displeasure (at least), and when day after day the truthful ones see the commendations awarded to those

upon the

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

whose deportment has been as low in the scale as their own, and whose sense of truth and honor is much lower, must it not seem to them that, “ do what you are a mind to, if you only keep the krowledge of it from the teacher,” is a motto much surer of winning commendations than the “ do what you are a mind to if you only tell the teacher of it”referred to in an article in the April number cf the JOURNAL; and does it not seem to a person of mature mind that this system is very much like offering a premium on deceit? I have known the rewards for good deportment carried off by those who were hardened enough to report “perfect,” whatever might have been their fault, until the truthful ones would be dragged down into the same deplorable state, and in turn carry off the prizes and praises from others, and so on, until a whole school of innocent children had become contaminated by the practice. Let us carefully think over these thing), fellow teachers, and it is my impression and hope, that if wu do so, we shall soon see the “self-reporting system” happily out of date.


[In our April number we gave an article on Weights and Measures, by Mr. Moses B. Bliss, of West Eau Claire, formerly of Pittstown, Maine. Mr. Bliss has devised a system of his own, which he entitles, “ An Uniform American Decimal System of Weights and Measures-Revised.” The system has been submitted to the legislature of Maine, which approved of the same, and recommended its adoption by Congress. He has also received testimonials in its favor from Governor Chamberliv of Maine, Senator Sumner, Prof. Henry of the Smithsonian Institute, and various others. We give his explanations of the System, and the several Tables.-EDS. JOURNAL.]


[ocr errors]

Names of Measures.

Their Units. Money, or value,

Dollar, cent, eagle. Linear, cr length,

Yard, foot, mile. Square, or surface,

Square yard, foot, area, * acre. Cubic, or volume,

Cube, or solid square yard or foot. Balance, or weight,

Pound, quarter, hundred. Contents, or capacity,

Gallon, bushel, barrel. Circular, or time,

Degree, day, year. Universal and nautical,

Chain, pole, foot. Definition.—The sub-multiples of the primary standard units are produced and expressed by prefixing to them the following words, viz. : Deci. (tenth), Centi, (hundredth), Milli, (thousandth). They may also have binary divisions, when required for exchange purposes, as half (1), quarter (1), eighth (), sixteenth (1). The multiples of the units

* The term “area," which has not previously been used as a specific designation for superficial contents, is here applied as a medium unit of surface.

« PreviousContinue »