king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God." As if they had said, "Be warned-be advised-do not offend the great and good God by thus trampling upon his laws." But thinks Uzziah, "Who is the Lord, that he should order me about as he pleases, and bend my will to his will? Who is to tell king Uzziah what he shall do, and what he shall not do? These priests come to me and prate about God's anger, and God's broken law; but I am my own master, and shall not think fit to alter my course to please either God or man.”

Well, if king Uzziah will forsake and provoke God, God will forsake him, and his holy frown must rest where once his cheering smile abided!

Yes; it was so! When the king first entered the temple, God had bent his bow, and made ready his arrow upon the string: but he paused-"If so be that the rash man would repent and turn!"-but the king went on in his sin, and the arrow was launched, and came quivering down armed with God's hot displeasure and righteous judgment; for, mark! "While he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the Lord, from beside the incense altar. And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself hasted also to go out, because the Lord had smitten him. And Uzziah the king was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, being a leper."

Do you see him?—once a bright-eyed boy, rejoicing in God-now a leper! Do you see* his pale face-his hollow eye-his form muffled up to hide his sores? Forced to dwell alone-so that he could not exchange pleasant words with his soldiers, nor kiss his children before they retired to rest, nor go up with the worshippers to the temple to seek God's face. No! he sits

*See Bonar on Leviticus. p. 237.

without-every vein in his limbs running with putrid blood-his head sick and pained-a gray blister here and there rising on his forehead. His hair hangs on his brow, lank and dry-his nails are discoloured and tainted. He moves his body slowly-scarcely able to totter along and men hide their faces from him as he draws near. Poor thing! once like a young rose-tree, which is watered by gentle rains, and warmed by summer suns, whose gentle buds put forth their crimson leaves, and whose pleasant perfume scents the morning air; now like some withered shrub, stunted and shrivelled, whose leaves are covered with blight, whose branches the gardener will presently consign to the burning, and whose root will be plucked and flung aside as a useless cumberer of the ground.

Will you, too, dear boys, ask, "Who is the Lord, that he should put his laws upon us?" Will you, too, think that you may live as you please? as if there were no heaven-no hell-no eternity? Oh! there is something awful in any one-more especially a youth in the bloom of life-learning to forget God-to break his laws-to be self-willed and stubborn.

Such an one the eye of an angry God is ever tracking: on such an one God's curse is brooding. He, too, is a leper. His sins hang about him like the leper's filthy sores and corrupted garments. His heart is a good-fornothing and loathsome sink of iniquity. Instead of walking with God, as blessed Enoch walked with him, "he sits without". an enemy to God the Father, a stranger to God the Son, and a rebel against God the Holy Ghost. Yes! and hereafter he will sit eternally without, in the gloom of that darkness which is "outer" and never-ending. J. F. S.

Sleaford.

ON THE MONITORIAL SYSTEM.

INTENDED AS AN APPENDIX TO THE TWO PAPERS OF LAST

YEAR, ON THE MANAGEMENT OF THE YOUNGER CLASSES IN PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS.

THE first and best method of conducting a school must be confessed to be that in which the master overlooks and his own influence controls and superintends the whole.

The next best is that wherein he extends his influence by subordinates, who have each a small portion allotted to their care, and who are responsible to him for its proper management.

In

In schools of any size, it is practically impossible for the master to pursue his work alone, and carry on the whole machinery of the system without assistants. the majority of schools, therefore, the second plan is adopted, whereby the labour is distributed among many which could never be performed by one; but it is acknowledged in theory, and found (in how many instances by a bitter experience!) to be less perfect than the former.

In many cases these assistants are paid by a fixed salary, and will in many more when the late government minutes of education on this point take effect. In others they are unattached to the office by any pay, but are called upon as forming part of the higher classes who have gained an amount of knowledge sufficient to instruct others to perform this duty.

With the system of paid assistants, the remarks contained in this paper have nothing to do. It is intended to discuss the working and effects of the second, which generally goes under the name of the monitorial system.

It is quite clear that in large parochial schools, where there are no funds to pay hired assistants, that the monitorial system must be pursued, although the point mentioned above, with regard to its efficiency, is conceded. But even though it is so generally inefficient as compared with an undivided authority, residing in one, as the government inspectors complained in their last year's report-yet necessity requires its adoption, if any discipline is to be maintained.

We will suppose that the school contains one hun

dred pupils, from the age of three to fifteen, and that out of that number there are always sixty who required at different periods of the day-though this is a large average-monitorial superintendence. And we may

calculate that the master has twelve or fourteen boys of the school always at hand to supply this want.

Supposing each monitor's class to contain ten, he will have constant employment for six out of this number in placing them over as many classes. Is there, then, any objection to this method, which should compel him to discard it at all risks?

Some masters complain that it makes their head pupils tyrannical and unmanageable. Some parents complain that it gives birth to a double evil: first, that their children, who are taught, do not receive the master's instruction; second, that their children, who teach, are losing ground themselves. Other masters assert that it always creates confusion in their schools. The eyes, hands, and feet of their scholars all employed in doing what they ought not; and this frequently connived at by the monitor himself. In fact, there is a multiplicity of objections urged against the method, according as its particular defects have been more or less observed. But, in the first place, let not the schoolmaster (or schoolmistress) forget the physical impossibility of managing nine-tenths of the schools of England without it, and then that the system may be rendered, with care, more perfect and efficient than it is at present.

1. The first great point to be attended to is that the master have an entire control over these twelve head boys, from whom he wishes to select his monitors; a control not kept up by brute force, but by moral influence. The want of this is, I believe, a canker at the root of the efficiency of the whole system. And why should it be deemed harder to discipline the elder than the younger pupils, when you have mind to deal with, and can reason as well as awe them into subjection?

But masters often slacken the strictness of their authority as the boys grow older; and then wonder, that when they are placed as superintendents of classes, that all goes wrong! Surely it is no cause for wonder when

the discipline over them has been lax, and when they have no fear of their master to restrain their natural propensities to evil.

2. Again, the master must never select each boy without any reference to his character. Some never could govern, from inability and moral helplessness, or from absolute recklessness and want of principle. To say to such, because they are in the first class, Go, and be monitors,' is like letting so many bundles of wildfire loose in the school, to spread and reproduce themselves in every pupil under their management; or else to send the lazy drone to instil its indolent habits into every little working community of your populous hive. No; these must be passed over. Nor would I hesitate to tell them the reason.

But it may be objected, that if we choose only according to character and fitness, we shall never be able to fill the vacant places. True; but the most unpromising may be rejected, which is all I require, without any such evil resulting. Though your existing materials are bad, you may still select and choose the fittest, even though they have flaws and imperfections remaining.

Let this duty of teaching others be placed before them, as a privilege and an honour, rather than as an irksome occupation attached to their position as the first boys in the school.

In most instances it will be found that they court, rather than decline it; that it is a popular, rather than an odious employment; so that if this discrimination be made use of, you need never fear of being left without any to supply their places.

3. It is most important to be remembered, too, not to delegate your authority too much to them. Let them act as your subordinates-not as your equals. Be their referee in deciding cases of controversy and dispute-let them not decide it for themselves. If you give them the entire authority, particularly that of dispensing punishments-I mean for minor offences among their classes, you will find them become overbearing and insolent; young Jeroboams, with scorpion whips, who will soon cause a revolt in the school.