the school is ever one of the first buildings erected in a new township,) that the greatest punishment which can be inflicted is that of forbidding a child to attend school during a given time. The little culprit usually gets punished at home for having allowed matters to reach such a climax. Parents or friends will come to inquire whether the punishment was really merited, and beg to have so severe a sentence remitted, or at least mitigated.

One of the subjects to which especial interest is attached in the schools of the United States is the history of their own country. The principles upon which the government is founded, and their practical application, are carefully inculcated. Not only is this subject taught in all its details, but the effort is made to impress the pupil with the utmost love and admiration for the institutions of the Republic. The starting-point is naturally the story of American independence. First is stated the origin of the resistance of the colonies to the mother country. Then it is shown that this resistance was not a mere capricious act arising from no particular cause of complaint, but that it originated in a legitimate opposition to certain illegal proceedings of the home government, which exceeded its powers by taxing the colonists, although they were wholly unrepresented in the British parliament. Thus the English government violated the principle of that inseparable union between taxation and representation which forms the basis of all constitutional liberties; nor did numerous and repeated demonstrations of the most lawful char

T

acter, such as public meetings, protests, and petitions, avail to turn the home government from its unconstitutional policy. It must not be forgotten that the Americans are supported by very high authorities in accusing the then English ministers of pursuing a course opposed to the principles of their own constitution; for in England's parliament three of the most eminent statesmen of the day-William Pitt, (Lord Chatham,) Edmund Burke, and Lord Rockingham— protested against the acts of the home government. Pitt and Burke pleaded the cause of the colonists in parliament with great eloquence and unanswerable arguments. These facts are carefully recalled by the Americans, who draw from them strong evidence in support of their cause. This point established, they make every effort to demonstrate the excellence of their own institutions. They dwell especially upon the wisdom, patriotism, and political knowledge displayed by the men who gave to America her actual constitution; placing ever foremost the honoured name of Washington.

Youth is generous: nothing is easier than to make it admire that which is constantly held up to it as great and noble. It is therefore easy to imagine how immense is the effect of the teaching just described. It is yet further increased as the youths of America grow up and realise the vast resources, the immense extent, and the ever-increasing wealth of their country. This system deposits and develops in the hearts of all classes an affection, bordering upon idolatry, for their native land; but such a result

is not without its defects and drawbacks. From it arises an exaggerated pride of country, often displayed by the American when away from home. He is apt to boast unbecomingly of his own country, and to speak of other nations and governments as quite inferior to his own. If, on the contrary, the European travels in the States, this same feeling has a very different effect, and is not unfrequently the source of much kindness and hospitality. The American is delighted to be questioned as well as to question. He willingly explains everything, and points out whatever is most worthy of observation. He is the most indefatigable of cicerones and the kindest of hosts. The traveller gives him real pleasure by studying the institutions of the country, and has every opportunity afforded him of doing so thoroughly. Proud of his country's system, and deeply attached to it, the American delights to see others examine carefully that which he so fondly loves himself. Let it not, however, be supposed that this love of country, excellent as is that feeling, is the only source whence springs that friendly hospitality which is so freely offered to the stranger in all parts of the United States.

These feelings had grown with the nation's growth, and were handed down from father to son. They were especially strong throughout the Northern States, where the national educational system has received its full and perfect development. Thus it was that, up to the memorable year 1860, the Constitution had ever been regarded as the sacred ark, so to

speak, of the Republic. To touch or change it, except by those legal means prescribed by the Constitution itself, was to commit a veritable sacrilege. It was worthy of notice how both individuals and parties sought, in their discussions, to prove that their opponents were outstepping the limits of the Constitution. Such a charge, if brought home, was annihilation to the argument of a political adversary. A cry of general indignation quickly arose against any who were even supposed to harbour ideas subversive of the institutions of the country. Did any Northerner chance to use an expression which might seem to have such a tendency, when attacking some piece of pro-slavery legislation, the South and its supporters were the first to cry out against him as being untrue to the constitutional principles of the State. This sentiment of deep-rooted love to the Union and the Federal Constitution was shown to be especially strong throughout the North, inasmuch as its people had ever been scrupulous observers of the law, who bowed at once to the electoral decisions. For many years the South had carried their own candidate in the Presidential elections, and commanded the majority in Congress: thus it shaped and directed the policy of the United States. Whenever that policy displeased the Northern statesmen, they only opposed it by the admitted constitutional means; those once exhausted,,the national will, as expressed by the majority, was acknowledged and submitted to by all. These considerations at once explain the indignation of the North at the illegal conduct of the South,

which sought to break up the Union by force, and trampled down the Constitution, merely because a President was elected who was not of their political party. For not only had the new President and his Cabinet no intention of perpetrating any illegal act, but they had not had even the opportunity of so doing. What was the course pursued by the South? It endeavoured to effect by violence a complete transformation in the constitutional order of things established by common consent, although the Constitution itself furnished, by its fifth article, the legal means of proposing, under form of amendment, any fundamental change in the Federal Union which might be thought desirable. Such a mode of proceeding, at once lawful and rational, would have given the whole nation, sole legitimate judge in such matters, the opportunity of discussing the proposed change, and deciding whether or not it should be carried into effect, according to the provisions of the Constitution.

The fifth article runs thus :

"The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution; or, on the application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or other mode of ratification may be proposed by Congress ;"

Nothing could be more illegal, then, than the course