On the issue of schools and education this is what he said:

There are thousands of stirring people now in England who are so far misled as to deem schools good in themselves. These confound education and tuition. Education is every thing that draws out the human being, of which tuition, the teaching of schools especially, however important, is comparatively insignificant.... Education comprehends all those processes and influences, come from whence they may, that conduce to the best development of the bodily powers and of the moral, intellectual, and spiritual faculties which the position of the individual admits of.... Instruction where religion is expressly excluded is little less to be dreaded than that by which it is trodden under foot. . . Our forefathers established, in abundance, free grammar schools, but for a distinctly understood religious purpose. They were designed to provide against a relapse of the nation into popery by diffusing a knowledge of the languages in which the Scriptures are written, so that a sufficient number might be aware how small a portion of the popish belief has a foundation in Holy Writ.

How would such utterances, printed and posted, look on the walls of the district and public schools of America? How far from the original purposes of education are we astray when the Bible is prohibited as a text-book, or even as a book of devotion, in any American public school? Shall we not say again with Wordsworth:

All this mischief [in our day] originates in a decay of that feeling which our fathers had uppermost in their hearts, namely, that the business of education should be conducted for the honor of God.

There are other chapters to the life and utterances of Wordsworth which are worthy of sunlight. His correspondence and conversations with Scott, Coleridge, Gray, Southey, Lamb, Montgomery, and Mrs. Hemans make a mine in which there are treasures many. Open Dean Stanley's Life of Arnold of Rugby, and we see how Wordsworth was appreciated by kindred contemporary spirits. From "Foxhorn," close to Rydal, Arnold writes in 1832:

I could still rave about Rydal. . . . Our intercourse with the Wordsworths was one of the brightest spots of all; nothing could exceed their friendliness, and my almost daily walks with him were things not to be forgotten. It was a period of five weeks of almost awful happiness absolutely without a cloud.

And yet one more testimony of great weight is that of the poet Southey. In writing to a friend, Bernard Barton, December 19, 1814, Southey thus speaks:

Wordsworth's residence and mine are fifteen miles asunder-a sufficient distance to preclude any frequent interchange of visits. I have known him nearly twenty years, and for about half that time intimately. The strength and the character of his mind you see in the "Excursion;" and his life does not belie his writings, for in every relation in life and every point of view he is a truly exemplary and admirable man. . . With the most deliberate exercise of impartial judgment whereof I am capable I declare my full conviction that posterity will rank him with Milton.

Has posterity yet met Southey's expectations? Will the morrow hasten the verdict? The book-stalls of Eastcheap and the Anglo-Saxon readers of two hemispheres are making up

but one answer.

But the end was drawing apace. Though recognized in the decline of life, and sceptered with the laureateship, he only composed one poem while in this place of honor, "An Ode on the Installation of Prince Albert as Chancellor of Cambridge University." Writing, December 23, 1839, to Henry Reed, of Philadelphia, he says:

I am standing on the brink of that vast ocean I must sail so soon. As to the impressions my poems have made and will make through the vast country to which you belong [America], I wish I could feel as lively upon this subject as you. But I must speedily lose sight of the shore; and I could not once have conceived how little I am now troubled by the thought of how long or short a time they who remain on that shore may have sight of me.

Thus his days were gliding out in that sweet calm of a harbor-approaching vessel after many oceans traversed. One glimpse into that daily life at Rydal gives the true vision and explanation of it all. Here it is as described by an eyewitness:

The hour at which the family assembled in the morning was eight. The day began with prayers, as it ended. The form of prayer used was that compiled from the English and American liturgies by Dr. Hook. An intercessory prayer was used for Miss Wordsworth, his invalid daughter. After breakfast the les

17-FIFTH SERIES, VOL. VIII.

sons of the day (morning and evening) were read, and also the Psalms. Dinner was at two, the final meal at seven or eight P. M., the intervals filled by walking, writing, reading, or con

versation.

Is not this a picture worthy to be photographed and repeated? Shall we say that ritualism destroys true religion in such a presence? Are earth's modern great ones and little ones living and dying in homes as holy as this? But wait. The candle is flickering. On Saturday, April 20, Wordsworth summons his son, Rev. John Wordsworth, to administer holy communion. "Father, are you ready to receive this?" The dying poet looks up and replies with strong voice, "That is just what I want." At twelve o'clock the following Tuesday, April 23, on the day of the birth and death of Shakespeare, and while the cuckoo clock was striking the hour, his spirit passed out forever.

"Come away, life and thought have fled together."

In the little church-yard at Grasmere, under the yews and sycamores, and amid the scenes he loved, he rests for a final resurrection. One resurrection he has already had. The stone has been rolled away which a superficial public opinion had placed against the everlasting granite of his verse. He is abroad in the land—a spiritual presence in a material agepurging the world of dross and pointing it to the summits. In his lines, as in his life, there are

"Truths that wake to perish never,

Which neither listlessness nor mad endeavor,

Nor man, nor boy,

Nor all that is at enmity with joy,

Can utterly abolish or destroy."

Arthur Copeland

ART. VII.—THE DOCTRINE OF PAN-SLAVISM.

It is now evident that the Eastern Question has entered into a new phase, and Russia, the great Slavic power, will practically have to cope with western Europe in her efforts to solve in her favor this hardest of all political questions.

The Pan-Slavists of Russia declare as boldly as the censorship will allow them, that ever since the ill-fated treaty of Berlin the Russian government has followed a policy at variance with the old Muscovite traditions. As they are a great power in Russia, and may at any time succeed in forcing the bands of the Czar, it is highly important to know what are the doctrines of the Pan-Slavists, and how they propose to solve the Eastern Question. It is proposed in this article to briefly set forth the doetrines of Pan-Slavism in the words of the celebrated Slavophile writer, N. D. Danilevsky, whose great work, Russia and Europe, a View of the Intellectual and Political Relations of the Slavic World to the Germano-Romanic, has passed through three editions in Russia. The quotations are made from the last edition.

In the first chapter the learned Slavophile author casts a glance at the events giving rise to and following close upon the Crimean war, until he comes to the Schleswig-Holstein question, and shows how hostile was the attitude of western Europe toward Russia at the Crimean war, and how, though the public opinion of Europe outside of Germany was against Austria and Prussia in the Schleswig-Holstein question, yet it was not strong enough to lead any power to espouse the cause of Denmark. "Is there any rational foundation," asks Mr. Danilevsky, "for this implacable hostility to Russia?" "Russia's opponents put forth two accusations against her-that she is a colossal conquering State, constantly extending her boundaries, and consequently threatening the tranquillity and independence of Europe; and, that in herself she represents somewhat of a political Ahriman-some dark power hostile to progress and liberty." In the second chapter of his book the author refutes in extenso the accusations, and proves that though Russia occupies a vast extent of territory she has extended herself by free colonization rather than by conquest. But what about Finland, the German Baltic Provinces, and Poland?

Finland was wrested from the Swedes, but was granted perfect autonomy; the so-called German Baltic Provinces belonged to Russia and formed an integral part of the old Muscovite kingdom.

The division of Poland is regarded by many in Europe as the greatest crime against the law of nations, and Russia is supposed to deserve the greatest share of the blame. But Mr. Danilevsky proves that all that is unjust in the division of Poland-the political death of the Polish nationality-ought to lie on the consciences of Prussia and Austria, and not on Russia, for from 1815 to 1830 Russian Poland enjoyed a free constitutional government, having an army of her own and controlling her own finances. Had not the Poles risen against Russia in 1830 and 1863 Russian Poland would in all probability have been allowed to enjoy all along constitutional government under the sovereignty of the Czar.

If the author succeeds in justifying the aggrandizement of Russia in Europe he cannot have a hard task in justifying the acquisition by Russia of Siberia, the Caucasus, and the subjection of the Khanates of Central Asia. Russia, then, in the eyes of the Pan-Slavists, is not an aggressive power; she has, it is true, been forced to extend herself in Europe and to acquire vast territories in Asia, where it is admitted she is destined to exert a salutary civilizing influence; but she does not threaten the peace of Europe. In the sixth chapter the author develops at great length his view that the Slavic type of civilization is distinct from the European or Germano-Romanic. He says:

The Slavic is the seventh of the Aryan family. The great majority of the Slavs (not less, probably more, than two thirds) constitute politically an independent whole-the great Russian empire. The remaining Slavs, though not forming free political units, have passed through many conflicts, and still successfully resist German, Hungarian, and Turkish rule, having preserved their language and manners, and (to a great extent) that form of Christianity first preached to them-Eastern orthodoxy. The national and Slavic consciousness has roused the Slavs of Turkey and Austria, who only need favorable circumstances to win political independence. All historical analogy speaks in favor of the Slavs forming, like their older Arian brethren, a peculiar civilization of their own-Slavism, a term of the same import as Hellenism, Latinism, Europeanism-such a type of civilization with reference to which Russia, Bohemia, Servia, Bulgaria ought to have the same signif