316 JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 
feature of the teaching method introduced by Huxley consists in 
the fact that the pupils are expected to Avow the structure and 
the history of the subjects studied from actual observation ; they 
are to take nothing for granted, nor to accept anything as gos- 
pel, but are to verify the information communicated to them 
regarding any organism by direct examination, or by analogy 
from the examination of allied structures. 
But in the case of such organisms as those referred to, actual 
examination is almost impossible to any but those furnished 
with excellent instruments, and who can devote hours of patient 
observation to the research. These conditions are not found 
in the best-furnished of our schools, and probably among the 
students examined, all or nearly all will be found to have acquired 
the information they possess on these subjects solely from their 
text book. 
At the other end of the list I have an equally strong objec- 
tion to the cray-fish. Nothing can be more interesting in the 
field of biology than the study of this animal, and nothing sup- 
plies better lessons in comparative anatomy and physiology. In 
a well-furnished physiological laboratory with a limited number 
of students, nothing could be pleasanter than to work out the 
structure and development of this typical crustacean. But how 
is it to be taught to a score of boys in an ordinary class-room ? 
Imagine the “ mess,” the difficulty of getting and keeping up a 
supply of “specimens,” and altogether the unsuitability of the 
thing in view of ordinary school arrangements. The result 
which will follow from putting such a subject before pupils just 
leaving our schools, will be either that they elect to eschew ele- 
mentary biology altogether; or, if they select it, they will get it 
up largely by “cram,” the very thing which it is sought to avoid. 
Of the physical sciences, chemistry is by far the most compre- 
hensive, as a correct apprehension even of its rudiments requires 
more or less knowledge of other branches of physics. As the 
result of my experience, I advance the opinion that very little 
good accrues—unless in exceptional cases—from the teaching of 
any of the physical sciences to boys and girls under fourteen or 
fifteen years of age. When the mind has reached the stage at 
which the intellectual faculties begin to manifest themselves 
conspicuously, when the possibility of abstract reasoning begins 
to show itself, then the study of physics may be most advan- 
tageously commenced. Before that period the youthful mind 
may master the facts presented to it, but it does not usually 
comprehend the why and the wherefore of them, nor can it 
deduce the results aimed at. The study of these sciences may 
in fact be commenced along with, or soon after the pupil has 
entered on, that of mathematics, but before that I think the 
teaching of it is apt to be thrown to the winds. I have always 
found that those pupils who have shown an aptitude for mathe- 
matics have as a rule made good progress in physical science, 
doing better in it than in the natural sciences; while, on the con- 
