1. Conditions of Circumstance. (a) The place must be suitable; (b) the time must be opportune; (c) the ventilation good; (d) the temperature agreeable. These are necessary elements in the effort of holding attention. But though these things be all unfavorable, their disadvantages may be overcome, if there is no lack in the second class of conditions, namely:

2. Conditions of Personality. By this I mean my personality as teacher. These conditions are (a) that of attractive power that will draw the pupil toward me; (b) that of magnetism that will hold the pupil fast to me; (c) that of enthusiasm that will fire my pupil with zeal for work; (d) that of self-withdrawal; (e) that which transfers attention from myself to my subject. If I have these personal elements in my teaching, I shall get attention and hold it. If I have not, I must cultivate them.

3. Conditions of Knowledge. These are three. I must know my subject, myself, and my pupil. A knowledge of the subject, involves a knowledge of methods. And here is the critical test with a teacher.

Notice some of the methods essential: (a) The use of illustrations apt and interesting; (b) the use of questions full of surprises and wise devices; (c) the use of elliptical readings between teacher and pupil; (d) the use of concert recitations in low tones by pupils; (e) the use of inter-questions, each pupil asking a question in turn of his fellow-pupil, and each also of the teacher; (f) the use of pictures, maps, and objects.

EDITOR’S OUTLOOK.


TWO KINDS OF LAWLESSNESS.

A mob in Cincinnati, involving the loss of many lives and much property in a three days’ reign of terror, has added another to a long list of warnings that the criminal administration of this country needs a thorough-going reform. The popular indignation which expressed itself at Cincinnati has been growing slowly into steady strength for thirty years and more. About 1845, gangs of horse thieves in northern Illinois were broken up—the law having failed—by regulators composed of the best citizens, who summarily hanged the thieves. About ten years later this history was repeated in Cedar and Linn counties, Iowa. These are two incidents among many of like type. Most readers know the history of the vigilance committee in San Francisco. The criminal administration having utterly failed, the best citizens organized themselves outside of the law and by vigorous and summary punishment restored the supremacy of the law. The mobbing of the “Dukes jury” at Uniontown is a still fresh event. In New York City, a few years ago, a citizen was brutally murdered in a public place, and the murderer, when arrested, said: “Hanging is played out.” The remark roused public feeling and refreshed the courage of the courts so that for some time hanging became the certain punishment of wilful murder. But in New York City, it is the press which really administers criminal law—by compelling the courts to do their duty. In the Cincinnati case, the last of a series of miscarriages of justice was the convicting of manslaughter in a case where wilful and mean-motived murder had been proved. The judge commented harshly upon the verdict. A public meeting listened to appropriately animated addresses, and passed strong resolutions of condemnation of the jury in that case, and of the criminal administration of the city. The excitable elements of the audience broke up there to reorganize in an assault on the jail. They were joined by a baser element, and a reign of terror followed.

The criminal system of the entire country is defective. It is not a terror to evil-doers. It tortures the conscience and the self respect of honest men. It has rendered human life much more insecure than private property. It is on the average safer to kill a man after robbing him than to rob him only. The match that lighted the Cincinnati conflagration was a murder done for the sake of robbery, and punished as if it had been robbery.