the same time wrote his “Reflections,” which are immortal for their wisdom and profundity; but he wrote for the upper classes, not merely in England, but in America and on the continent of Europe.  Hannah More wrote for the lower classes, and in a style of great clearness and simplicity.  Her admirable dialogue, called “Village Politics,” by Will Chip, a country carpenter, exposed the folly and atrocity of the revolutionary doctrines then in vogue.  Its circulation was immense.  The Government purchased several thousand copies for distribution.  It was translated into French and Italian.  Similar in spirit was the tract in reply to the infidel speech of M. Dupont in the French Convention, in which he would divorce all religion from education.  The circulation of this tract was also very great.  These were followed, in 1795, by the “Cheap Repository,” a periodical designed for the poor, with religious tales, most of which have since been published by Tract Societies, among them the famous story of “The Shepherd of Salisbury Plain.”  The “Cheap Repository” was continued for three years, and circulated in every village and hamlet of England and America.  It almost equalled the popularity of the “Pilgrim’s Progress.”  Two millions of these tracts were sold in the first year.

In 1799 Hannah More’s great work entitled “Strictures on the Modern System of Female Education” appeared, which passed through twenty editions in a few years.  It was her third ethical publication in prose, and the most powerful of all her writings.  Testimonies as to its value poured in upon her from every quarter.  Nothing was more talked about at that time except, perhaps, Robert Hall’s “Sermons.”  It was regarded as one of the most perfect works of its kind that any country or age had produced.  It made as deep an impression on the English mind as the “Emile” of Rousseau did on the French half a century earlier, but was vastly higher in its moral tone.  I know of no treatise on education so full and so sensible as this.  It ought to be reprinted, for the benefit of this generation, for its author has forestalled all subsequent writers on this all-important subject.  There is scarcely anything said by Rev. Morgan Dix, in his excellent Lenten Lectures, which was not said by Hannah More in the last century.  Herbert Spencer may be more original, possibly more profound, but he is not so practical or clear or instructive as the great woman who preceded him more than half a century.

The fundamental principle which underlies all Hannah More’s theories of education is the necessity of Christian instruction, which Herbert Spencer says very little about, and apparently ignores.  She would not divorce education from religion.  Women, especially, owe their elevation entirely to Christianity.  Hence its influence should be paramount, to exalt the soul as well as enlarge the mind.  All sound education should prepare one for the duties of life, rather than for the enjoyment of its pleasures.