23.  “To the pupils of our public schools the acquisition of their own language, whenever it is undertaken, is an easy task.  For he who is acquainted with several grammars already, finds no difficulty in adding one more to the number.  And this, no doubt, is one of the reasons why English engages so small a proportion of their time and attention.  It is not frequently read, and is still less frequently written.  Its supposed facility, however, or some other cause, seems to have drawn upon it such a degree of neglect as certainly cannot be praised.  The students in those schools are often distinguished by their compositions in the learned languages, before they can speak or write their own with correctness, elegance, or fluency.  A classical scholar too often has his English style to form, when he should communicate his acquisitions to the world.  In some instances it is never formed with success; and the defects of his expression either deter him from appearing before the public at all, or at least counteract in a great degree the influence of his work, and bring ridicule upon the author.  Surely these evils might easily be prevented or diminished.”—­DR. BARROW:  Essays on Education, London, 1804; Philad., 1825, p. 87.

24.  “It is also said that those who know Latin and Greek generally express themselves with more clearness than those who do not receive a liberal education.  It is indeed natural that those who cultivate their mental powers, write with more clearness than the uncultivated individual.  The mental cultivation, however, may take place in the mother tongue as well as in Latin or Greek.  Yet the spirit of the ancient languages, further is declared to be superior to that of the modern.  I allow this to be the case; but I do not find that the English style is improved by learning Greek.  It is known that literal translations are miserably bad, and yet young scholars are taught to translate, word for word, faithful to their dictionaries.  Hence those who do not make a peculiar study of their own language, will not improve in it by learning, in this manner, Greek and Latin.  Is it not a pity to hear, what I have been told by the managers of one of the first institutions of Ireland, that it was easier to find ten teachers for Latin and Greek, than one for the English language, though they proposed double the salary to the latter?  Who can assure us that the Greek orators acquired their superiority by their acquaintance with foreign languages; or, is it not obvious, on the other hand, that they learned ideas and expressed them in their mother tongue?”—­DR. SPURZHEIM:  Treatise on Education, 1832, p. 107.