and many. This is what Mr. Oscar Browning gives
us to understand in the Quarterly Review, and it is
impossible not to read with pleasure what he says.
For what can give a finer example of that frankness
and manly self-confidence which our great public
schools, and none of them so much as Eton, are supposed
to inspire, of that buoyant ease in holding up one’s
head, speaking out what is in one’s mind, and
flinging off all sheepishness and awkwardness, than
to see an Eton assistant-master offering in fact himself
as evidence that to combine boarding-house-keeping
with teaching is a good thing, and his brother as evidence
that to train and race little boys for competitive
examinations is a good thing? Nay, and one sees
that this frank-hearted Eton self-confidence is contagious;
for has not Mr. Oscar Browning managed to fire Dr.
William Smith (himself, no doubt, the modestest man
alive, and never trained at Eton) with the same spirit,
and made him insert in his own Review a puff, so to
speak, of his own school-books, declaring that they
are (as they are) meritorious and many? Nevertheless,
Mr. Oscar Browning is wrong in [xiv] thinking that
I wished to run down Eton; and his repetition on behalf
of Eton, with this idea in his head, of the strains
of his heroic ancestor, Malvina’s Oscar, as
they are recorded by the family poet, Ossian, is unnecessary.
“The wild boar rushes over their tombs, but
he does not disturb their repose. They still
love the sport of their youth, and mount the wind
with joy.” All I meant to say was, that
there were unpleasantnesses in uniting the keeping
a boarding-house with teaching, and dangers in cramming
and racing little boys for competitive examinations,
and charlatanism and extravagance in the manufacture
and supply of our school-books. But when Mr.
Oscar Browning tells us that all these have been happily
got rid of in his case, and his brother’s case,
and Dr. William Smith’s case, then I say that
this is just what I wish, and I hope other people will
follow their good example. All I seek is that
such blemishes should not through any negligence,
self-love, or want of due self-examination, be suffered
to continue.
Natural, as we have said, the sort of misunderstanding
just noticed is; yet our usefulness depends upon our
being able to clear it away, and to convince [xv]
those who mechanically serve some stock notion or
operation, and thereby go astray, that it is not culture’s
work or aim to give the victory to some rival fetish,
but simply to turn a free and fresh stream of thought
upon the whole matter in question. In a thing
of more immediate interest, just now, than either of
the two we have mentioned, the like misunderstanding
prevails; and until it is dissipated, culture can
do no good work in the matter. When we criticise
the present operation of disestablishing the Irish
Church, not by the power of reason and justice, but
by the power of the antipathy of the Protestant Nonconformists,
English and Scotch, to establishments, we are charged