Chapter III: CONCURRENCE is the sequence or co-existence of impressions or (2)

We begin with the Best Known, or Victoria, and we take note that she is an independent Queen, since she has never shared sovereignty with anyone; but Mary, of "William III. and Mary," was not an independent Queen, because she did share the Sovereign Power with her husband. Hereafter, when I use the word Queen I mean an independent Queen, except when Mary, of "William III. and Mary," is mentioned, and her name will be used only in Connection with William III. England has had only four independent Queens, namely, Mary [Tudor], Elizabeth, Anne, and Victoria.

(I.) Victoria is the _last_ queen and Mary was the _first_ queen [Exclusion between _first_ and _last_, or Ex.], and Mary, _first_ queen, was preceded by the _last_ Edward, or Edward VI. [Ex.] And Mary, the _first_ queen, was followed by the the _first_ and only Elizabeth [In.] And the _first_ and only Elizabeth was followed by James the _First_, or I. [In.] Again, _Queen_ Elizabeth was followed by _King_ James, making a clear case of Ex. Again, Anne, the _third_ queen, was preceded by Wm. the _Third_, or III., and Mary [In.] And these _two_ co-equal Sovereigns were preceded by James the _Second_, or II. [In., between cardinal number _two_ and the ordinal number _Second_]. This series of Queens concludes with Victoria the _fourth_ Queen, who was preceded by William the _Fourth_, or IV. [In.], and William the _Fourth_, or IV., was preceded by George the _Fourth_, or IV. [In.]; and George IV. by George III., and he by George II., and he by George I.,--a concurrence reversed, and William IV. was preceded, as we have seen, by William III. and Mary--and William III. by William II., and William I. at the very beginning of the series--Con.

Now let us recall in the forward and reverse order what we have learned so far. William I., William II., Edward VI., Mary, Elizabeth, James I., James II., William III. and Mary, Anne, George I., George II., George III., George IV., William IV., and Victoria, and the order reversed is Victoria, William IV., George IV., George III., George II., George I., Anne, William III. and Mary, James II., James I., Elizabeth, Mary, Edward VI., William II., William I.

(II.) Disregarding for the moment the four periods of what is usually called the Commonwealth, we see that between Elizabeth and William III. and Mary, are four monarchs, the two James and the two Charles. We have already learned that Elizabeth was followed by James I. and that William III. and Mary were preceded by James II. Hence we see that the two Charles must come _between_ the two James, and, of course, that Charles I. must precede Charles II., and that the order of these four monarchs _must_ be James I., Charles I., Charles II., and James II.--a plain case of Con. reversed. We saw that there were two of these four monarchs before the Commonwealth; there must then be two after it, making James I. and Charles I. before the Commonwealth and Charles II. and James II. after it.

On the day that Charles I. was executed (January 30, 1649), the Parliament (the House of Commons) abolished the kingly office and House of Lords, and appointed a Council of State of 41 members, which with the House of Commons was to be the government. Intermediate then between Charles I. and Charles II. there came--

Council of State and Parliament.
Oliver Cromwell.
Richard Cromwell.
Council of State and Parliament.

Here we see there was a Council of State and Parliament at the beginning and close of these intermediates, and between them came Oliver Cromwell and his son, Richard Cromwell. Charles I., followed by Council of State and Parliament, made a case of Exclusion and the Council of State and Parliament, followed by the Protector Oliver Cromwell, gives another example of Ex. and a case of In. between Oliver Cromwell and his son Richard, who inherited the protectorate, but a case of Ex. again between the powerful Oliver and his weak son Richard, and another example of Ex. between the protectorate of Richard Cromwell and the Council of State and Parliament, and another between the latter and the full-fledged monarchy of Charles II.

Now review what we have learned so far and we have William I., William II., Edward VI., Mary, Elizabeth, James I., Charles I., Council of State and Parliament, Oliver Cromwell, Richard Cromwell, Council of State and Parliament, Charles II., James II., William III. and Mary, Anne, George I., George II., George III., George IV., William IV., and Victoria. Reverse the recital and we have Victoria, William IV., George IV., George III., George II., George I., Anne, William III. and Mary, James II., Charles II., Council of State and Parliament, Richard Cromwell, Oliver Cromwell, Council of State and Parliament, Charles I., James I., Elizabeth, Mary, Edward VI., William II., and William I.

(III.) We now proceed to learn the eighteen kings intermediate between William II. and Edward VI. We notice at once that the _first_ and _last_ of these intermediates are the _first_ and _last_ Henrys [Ex.], viz., Henry I. and Henry VIII. We see also that Henry the _First_, or I., is followed by Henry the Second, or II. [Con.], with the _first_ and only Stephen as the _first_ single intermediary [In.]. Returning to Edward VI., we see that he, the _last_ Edward, is preceded by Henry VIII., or the _last_ Henry [In.] We also notice that Edward VI. is preceded by Henry VI., and Henry VI. by Henry III., or the half of six [In. by W. and P.]. Finally we observe that between William II. and Mary, there are three series of kings completed--eight Henrys, six Edwards, and three Richards. Making the three Richards _reference_ points we can easily fix the residue of the eighteen kings for we see that Richard I. or the _First_, is preceded by Henry II. and followed by Henry III., with the _first_ and only John as the _second_ single intermediary [In.] and that Richard II. is preceded by Edward I., Edward II., and Edward III., or three Edwards, and followed by Henry IV., Henry V., and Henry VI., or three Henrys, and that Richard III. is preceded by Edward IV. and Edward V., or two Edwards, and followed by Henry VII. and Henry VIII., or two Henrys.

Recalling the succession from William I. to Edward VI., we have William I., William II., Henry I., Stephen, Henry II., Richard I., John, Henry III., Edward I., Edward II., Edward III., Richard II., Henry IV., Henry V., Henry VI., Edward IV., Edward V., Richard III., Henry VII., Henry VIII., Edward VI. Reversing the order, we have Edward VI., Henry VIII., Henry VII., Richard III., Edward V., Edward IV., Henry VI., Henry V., Henry IV., Richard II., Edward III., Edward II., Edward I., Henry III., John, Richard I., Henry II., Stephen, Henry I., William II., and William I.

We conclude with the recital both ways of the thirty-seven Sovereigns from William I. to Victoria.

William I. VICTORIA.
William II. William IV.
Henry I. George IV.
Stephen. George III.
Henry II. George II.
Richard I. George I.
John. ANNE.
Henry III. William III. and Mary,
Edward I. James II.
Edward II. Charles II.
Edward III. Council of State and Parliament.
Richard II. Richard Cromwell.
Henry IV. Oliver Cromwell.
Henry V. Council of State and Parliament.
Henry VI. Charles I.
Edward IV. James I.
Edward V. ELIZABETH.
Richard III. MARY.
Henry VII. Edward VI.
Henry VIII. Henry VIII.
Edward VI. Henry VII.
MARY. Richard III.
ELIZABETH. Edward V.
James I. Edward IV.
Charles I. Henry VI.
Council of State and Parliament. Henry V.
Oliver Cromwell. Henry IV.
Richard Cromwell. Richard II.
Council of State and Parliament. Edward III.
Charles II. Edward II.
James II. Edward I.
William III. and Mary. Henry III.
ANNE. John.
George I. Richard I.
George II. Henry II.
George III. Stephen.
George IV. Henry I.
William IV. William II.
VICTORIA. William I.

NUMERIC THINKING.

HOW TO NEVER FORGET FIGURES AND DATES.

When my pupils have gained the quick perception and instantaneous apprehension which always reward the studious use of In., Ex., and Con., they can, amongst other new achievements, always remember and never forget figures and dates.

_Pike's Peak_, the most famous in the chain known as the Rocky Mountains in America, is fourteen thousand one hundred and forty-seven feet high. Instantly, one who is trained in the use of In., Ex., and Con., perceives that there are two fourteens [Syn., In.] in these figures, and that the last figure is half of fourteen, or 7 In. by W. and P., making 14,147. Of course, one who is not practised in analogies, in discovering similarities and finding differences would not have noticed any peculiarity in these figures which would enable him to remember them. Few people ever notice any relations among numbers. But any possible figures or dates always possess relations to the mind trained in In., Ex., and Con.

_Fujiyama_, the noted volcano of Japan, is twelve thousand three hundred and sixty-five feet high. Does any pupil who has mastered the first lesson and who is expert in the use of In., Ex., and Con., fail to notice that here we have the disguised statement that the height of this mountain is expressed in the number of months and days of the year, 12,365 feet high? These figures drop into that mould and henceforth are remembered without difficulty. These are remarkable coincidences no doubt, but are not all sets of figures similarly impressive coincidences to the trained eye, and the _active_, _thinking_ and _assimilative_ mind?

No reader of English history has failed to notice the three sixes in the date of the Great Fire in London, _viz._, 1666. The "three sixes" are generally resorted to as a signal for fire companies to turn out in full force; yet such a coincidence of figures in a distant date makes a slight impression compared to the vividness of events that happened in the year of our birth, the year of graduation from school, the year of marriage, and the year of the death of relatives, &c., &c. Keep a small blank book for such entries, not to help remember the dates or facts, but to have them together so as to rapidly deal with them, to classify them and otherwise study them under the eye. You will soon be astonished at the accumulation.

The population of New Zealand, exclusive of natives, is 672,265. Bringing the first two figures into relation with the last two we have 67 and 65--a difference of 2 only. The two groups of 672 and 265 have the figure 2 at the end of the first group, and another 2 at the beginning of the second group. These two twos are in sequence (Con.), and each of them expresses the difference between 67 and 65. _Thought_ about in this way, or in any other, the series becomes fixed in mind, and will be hard to forget.

The population of Sydney is 386,400. Here are two groups of three figures each. The first two figures of the first group are 38, and the first two figures of the second group are 40--a difference of 2. Two taken from 8 leaves 6, or the third figure of the first group, and 2 added to the first figure of the second group makes 6. The 40 ends with a cypher, and it is a case of Syn. In. that the last figure of the second group or the third figure of it should likewise be a cypher. Besides, those who know anything at all about the population of Sydney must know that it is vastly more than 38,640, and hence that there must be another cypher after 40, making the total of 386,400.

The population of Melbourne is 490,912. Here we have 4 at the beginning and half of 4 or 2 at the end of the six figures. The four interior figures, viz., 9091 is a clear case of Con.--or 90 and 91. Then again 91 ending with 1, the next figure is 2--a case of sequence or Con. But 490,912 is the population of the city of Melbourne with its suburbs. The "city" itself contains only 73,361 inhabitants, 73 reversed becomes 37--or only 1 more than 36. This 1 placed at the end of or after 36 makes the 361. Now 37 reversed is 73, and then follows 361, making the total to be 73,361.

Let the attentive pupil observe that this method does not give any set of rules for thinking in the same manner in regard to different sets or example of numbers. That would be impossible. Thinking or finding relations amongst the objects of thought must be differently worked out in each case, since the figures themselves are differently grouped.

The foregoing cases in regard to population will suffice for those who live in the Australian colonies, and to others they will teach the method of handling such cases, and leave them the pleasure of working out the process in regard to the population where they reside, or other application of the method they may wish to make.

Great encouragement is found in the circumstance that after considerable practice in dealing with numerous figures through In., Ex., and Con., new figures are self-remembered from the habit of assimilating numbers. They henceforth make more vivid impressions than formerly.

INCLUSION embraces cases where the same kind of facts or the principles were involved, or the same figures occur in different dates with regard to somewhat parallel facts--End of Augustus's empire [death] 14 A.D.--End of Charlemagne's [death] 814 A.D., and end of Napoleon's [abdication] 1814 A.D.

EXCLUSION implies facts from the opposite sides relating to the same events, conspicuously opposite views held by the same man at different periods, or by different men who were noticeably similar in some other respects, or antithesis as to the character or difference in the nationality [if the two nations are frequent foes] of different men in whose careers, date of birth, or what not, there was something distinctly parallel--Egbert, first King of England, died 837. William IV., last King of England, died 1837. What a vivid exclusion here for instance: Abraham died 1821 B.C., and Napoleon Bonaparte died 1821 A.D.

CONCURRENCES are found in events that occur on the same date or nearly so, or follow each other somewhat closely.

Charles Darwin, who advocated evolution, now popular with scientists in every quarter of the globe, and Sir H. Cole, who first advocated International Exhibitions, now popular in every part of the world [Inclusion] were born in the same year 1809 [Concurrence] and died in the same year 1882 [Concurrence].

Garibaldi [the Italian] and Skobeleff [the Russian] [Exclusion, being of different countries], both great and recklessly patriotic generals [Inclusion] and both favourites in France [Inclusion], died in the same year, 1882 [Concurrence]. Longfellow and Rossetti, both English-speaking poets [Inclusion] who had closely studied Dante [Inclusion] died in the same year, 1882 [Concurrence].

Haydn, the great composer, was born in 1732, and died in 1809; this date corresponds to that of the birth [Exclusion and Concurrence] of another famous composer [Inclusion], Mendelssohn, who himself died in 1847, the same year as O'Connell.

Lamarck [1744-1829], advocated a theory of development nearly resembling the Darwinian Theory of the Origin of Species [In.]. This he did in 1809, the year in which Charles Darwin was born [Con.]. Darwin's writings have altered the opinions of many as to the Creation, and the year of his birth was that of the death of Haydn, the composer of the Oratorio "The Creation." [Con. and Ex.].

John Baptiste Robinet taught the gradual development of all forms of existence from a single creative cause. He died in 1820, the year in which Herbert Spencer, the English Apostle of Evolution, was born [In., Ex., and Con.].

Galileo, founder of Modern Astronomy, born in 1564--Shakespeare's birth year [Con.]--died in 1642, the very year in which Sir Isaac Newton was born. Galileo's theory was not proved but merely made probable, until the existence of the laws of gravitation was established, and it was Newton who discovered gravitation. This is an instance of Inclusion as to the men, of Exclusion and Concurrence as to date of birth and death.

Two prominent _literati_ [Inclusion], one a Frenchman the other an Englishman [Exclusion], well-known for the pomposity and sonority of their style of writing [Inclusion], were born in the same year, 1709, and died the same year 1784, a double Concurrence--Lefranc de Pompignan--[pompous In. by S.], and Samuel Johnson.

General Foy, an _orator_ and artillery officer, fond of literature, was born the same year [Concurrence] 1775, as the _orator_ [Inclusion], Daniel O'Connell. He died in 1825, the same year [Concurrence] as Paul-Louis Courier, who was also an artillery officer [Inclusion], fond of literature [Inclusion], and moreover, like O'Connell, a violent pamphleteer [Inclusion].

Two illustrious, uncompromising characters [Inclusion], both brilliant composers [Inclusion], the one musical, the other literary, the one a representative of the music of the future, the other of the obsolete polemic of the past [Exclusion], Richard Wagner and Louis Veuillot, were born in the same year, 1813, and died in the same year, 1883. The last point is a double Concurrence.

Two foremost harbingers of modern thought [Inclusion], Voltaire and J. J. Rousseau, died in 1778--[Concurrence]. Both gained for themselves the reputation of having been the most reckless antagonists of Christianity [Inclusion]. And still the one dedicated a church to the service of God, whilst the other in his "Emile" wrote a vindication of Christianity [Exclusion as to each of them, Inclusion as to both of them].

A little practice makes the pupil prompt in dealing with any figures whatever. Take the height of Mount Everest, which is 29,002 feet. We have all heard that it is more than five miles high. Let us test this statement. There are 5,280 feet in a mile, multiply 5,280 by 5, and we have 26,400. Hence we see that Mount Everest being 29,002 feet high must be more than five miles high. Half of a mile is 5,280 feet divided by 2, or 2,640 feet. Add this to 26,400 and we have 29,040. Hence we see that Mount Everest is 51/2 miles high lacking 38 feet, or that if we add 38 feet to its height of 29,002, it would then be exactly 51/2 miles high. Can we then forget that it is exactly 29,002 feet high?

Shakespeare was born in 1564 and died in 1616. The First Folio Edition of his works was printed in 1623, the Second in 1632, the Third in 1664, and the Fourth in 1685. Can we fix these events infallibly in our memories? We can begin with whichever date we prefer. If we add together the figures of the year of his birth, 1564, they make 16. All the dates hereafter considered occurred in 1600, &c. We can thus disregard the first 16 and consider only the last two figures which constitute the fraction of a century.

Let us begin with his death in 1616 in the _sixteens_. Is not this a vivid collocation of figures? Can we forget it as applied to the great dramatist? Now if we double the last 16, it gives us the date of the second Folio in [16]32 and 32 reversed gives us the date of the first Folio. Again, seven years after his death ["seven ages of man"] his first Folio was published in 1623. The second Folio was published in 1632 or 23 reversed, and the third Folio in 1664, or 32 doubled, and just 100 years after his birth in 1564. His birth might also be remembered as occurring in the same year as that of the great astronomer Galileo. The fourth Folio appeared in 1685 or 21 years after the third Folio. This period measures the years that bring man's majority or full age.

Attention to the facts of reading will be secured by increased power of Concentration, and a familiarity with In., Ex., and Con. will enable us to assimilate all dates and figures by numeric thinking with the greatest promptitude, especially the longer or larger series.

Try the case of Noah's Flood, 2348 B.C. Here the figures pass by a unit at a time from 2[3] to 4, and then by doubling the 4 we have the last figure 8--making altogether 2348. Another method of dealing with this date is very instructive. Read the account in Gen. ch. vii., vv. 9, 13, and 15. Now we can proceed.

They went into the Ark by _twos_. This gives the figure 2. Now let us find the other figures. Noah's three sons and their wives make three pairs of persons, or _three_ families. This gives the second figure 3. Then counting Noah and his wife, and his three sons and their wives, there were four pairs of human beings altogether. This gives the figure 4. Finally the total number of human beings who entered the ark were 4 pairs or _eight_ persons. This gives the figure 8. Thus we have the entire set of figures, 2348 B.C. Take the date of the creation according to the accepted biblical chronology as 4004 B.C. We could say the date has _four_ figures, that the expression of it begins and ends with the figure 4, and that the two intermediates are nought, or cyphers; or that the figures are expressed by 40 and _forty reversed_ as 40-04--or 4004.

A SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT.

Having met several persons who claimed that they always remembered figures by reasoning about them [whatever that may have meant], and yet all such persons having shown an inability to remember many dates or numbers, I inferred that they were honestly mistaken in supposing that they could remember numbers, or else that such a method was not adapted to their idiosyncrasies. At that time, I did not suspect that their failure may have arisen from lack of _training_ in In., Ex., and Con. From the circumstance that I myself could use this method with promptitude and certainty, I determined to test it in a strictly scientific way.

I made the experiment two years ago, and all my experience since has corroborated the conclusion then arrived at.

I experimented with the two groups of 20 pupils each. Neither knew any method of dealing with dates and numbers. The first group had had no training in In., Ex., and Con.; the second group had been well practised in those laws. I then gave each member of each group several very difficult cases of dates and numbers to be memorised--one example containing 24 figures. To save time and space in exposition, I have heretofore only mentioned 12 figures, or the half of the amount. All of the first group failed except one. He, however, could not memorise the 24 figures. All of the second group handled all the new examples with success, and only two of them met with much difficulty in dealing with the 24 figures.

Since this decisive experiment, I have heartily recommended the method of finding relations amongst the numbers themselves, to all who are proficient in the use of In., Ex., and Con.

The example of 24 figures must conclude this exposition. They represent respectively the number of the day of the month in which the first Saturday in each month falls in 1895 and 1896. To one without practice in applying analysis to figures, there seems no hope of memorising this long group of figures except by endless repetition. The 24 figures are

522641637527417426415375.

Yet reflect a moment and all will be clear. Divide the 24 figures into 2 groups of 12 figures each and number the first group, divided into four sections, thus:--

(1) (2) (3) (4)
522, 641, 637, 527.

Now bring the first and fourth groups into relation, and you see at once that the fourth group is larger than the first group by only _five_. Bringing the _second_ group into relation with the _third_ group, we find they differ only by _four_. Again: the third group is larger than the fourth by 100 and by 10, that is 527 becomes 637, the seven alone remaining steadfast. Beginning with the fourth group and passing to the third group we have the fourth group with 110 added. The second group is the third group with only four added, and the first group is the fourth group with only five subtracted. Thinking out these relations you can recall the groups as groups or the separate figures of each group or the entire 12 figures either forwards or backwards--and you have achieved this result by _Attention_ and _Thought_.

The other twelve figures are easily disposed of. They are 417426415375. Divided into groups of three figures each we have

(1) (2) (3) (4)
417 426 415 375.

Bringing the first group into relation with the third group, we notice that it is larger by two--and considering the second group with the fourth group, we find that the second group is as much and one more above 400 as the fourth is below 400. Other minor matters could be noticed, as that the first two figures of each group are respectively 41--42--41--37, and that the last figure in each group is 7--6--5--5. But these relations are hardly worth observing.

Coming back to the first series, we know that each figure represents the number of the day of the month to which it belongs on which the first Saturday in that month falls. The figures for 1895 are 522--641--637--527. The first Saturday in January, 1895, falls on the _fifth_ day of January, hence the second Saturday must be 5 + 7 = the 12th day of January; the third Saturday the 19th, and the fourth Saturday 26th. It is easy to know on what day of the _week_ any day in January falls. Suppose you ask on what week day the 25th of January falls? You know the 26th is Saturday, and hence the 25th must be the day preceding the 26th, to wit, Friday, the 25th. Suppose you ask on what week day the 9th of January falls. You know the 12th is Saturday (the second Saturday). You now count backward thus: 12 is Saturday, 11 must be Friday, 10 Thursday, 9 must be Wednesday. The _first_ Saturday in January, 1895, is the 5th; of February, the 2nd; of March, the 2nd; of April, the 6th; of May, the 4th, &c., &c. And we can tell on what week day any day of any of the other months falls.

EXERCISES.

1.--The Ratio of the Circumference of the circle to its diameter is expressed by the integer 3 and 708 decimals, of which I give only eight. Learning these nine figures is good practice in numeric thinking--3.14159265.

2.--The Yellowstone National Park contains 2,294,740 acres.

3.--The Monster Chartist Petition contained 3,317,702 names.

HOW TO LEARN PROSE AND POETRY BY HEART.

THE ANALYTIC SYNTHETIC METHOD APPLIED TO LONG SENTENCES.

How _unobservant_ and wholly _unreliant_ many pupils are may be seen from the fact that notwithstanding my elaborate handling of the processes of learning prose and poetry by heart, I often receive requests to send some indication of how I would learn a particular chapter or selection by heart! But a chapter consists of paragraphs and paragraphs of sentences. Learning the desired passages by heart is done by applying the methods here so profusely illustrated to the successive sentences of the chapter or selection, until practice and training in these methods will make their further application unnecessary.

In pursuance of my plan to keep the mind in an ASSIMILATING condition when trying to learn and to further aid in making the intellect stay and work with the senses, I proceed to furnish a Training Method for committing prose and poetry to memory.

_Endless repetition or repeating a sentence to be memorised over and over again_ is the usual process. After one perusal, however, the mind in such a case has sated its curiosity in regard to the meaning of the sentence and each subsequent repetition for the purpose of fixing it in the memory merely makes an impression upon the eye or ear or both, and the intellect, being unoccupied, naturally wanders away. Hence, learning by _rote_ promotes _mind-wandering_: for the Attention always wanders unless wooed to its work by all-engrossing interest in the subject which in case of a weak power of Attention is rarely sufficient, or by =the stimulating character of the process of acquirement= which is made use of. In the Method about to be given, the intellect is agreeably occupied, and thereby a Habit of Attention is promoted.

The justification for this Method is found in the Psychological maxim that the intellect can assimilate a simple idea more easily than a complex idea, and a few ideas at a time than many ideas.

The process of this New Method of Decomposition and Recomposition is as follows:--Find the _shortest sentence or phrase that makes sense_ in the sentence to be memorised. Add to this short sentence or phrase, _modifiers_ found in the original sentence, always italicising each new addition--one at a time--until the original sentence is finally restored. Suppose we wish to memorise Bacon's definition of education: "_Education is the cultivation of a just and legitimate familiarity betwixt the mind and things._" Begin with the briefest sentence and then go on: 1. Education is cultivation. 2. Education is _the_ cultivation _of a familiarity_. 3. Education is the cultivation of a familiarity _betwixt the mind and things_. 4. Education is the cultivation of a _just_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. 5. Education is the cultivation of a just _and legitimate_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. In this process, the sentence is first taken to pieces, and then reconstructed. Finding the lowest terms, "Education is cultivation," we proceed step by step to add modifiers until the original sentence is fully restored.

Each time we make an addition, we recite _so much_ of the original sentence as has hitherto been used, in connection with the _new modifiers_ laying _special emphasis_ on the new matter as represented by the italic words. The intellect is thus kept compulsorily and delightfully occupied from the start to the finish. It seeks the shortest phrase or sentence and adds successively all the modifiers, making no omissions. This analyzing and synthesizing process--_this taking to pieces and then gradually building up_ the original sentence, makes a deep and lasting First Impression.

Every time this method is used the Attention ought to be strengthened and mind-wandering diminished and the natural Memory strengthened in both its Stages.

This process admits usually of several applications in the case of a long sentence. In the foregoing example, it might have proceeded thus: 1. Education is a familiarity. 2. Education is the familiarity _betwixt the mind and things_. 3. Education is the _cultivation_ of a familiarity betwixt the mind and things. 4. Education is the cultivation of _just_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. 5. Education is the cultivation of a just _and legitimate_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. Or we might have taken this course: 1. Education is a familiarity. 2. Education is a familiarity _betwixt the mind and things_. 3. Education is a _just_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. 4. Education is a just _and legitimate_ familiarity betwixt the mind and things. 5. Education is _the cultivation_ of a just and legitimate familiarity betwixt the mind and things.

1. To keep the mind in an assimilating condition, what method is
furnished?
2. What is the usual process of memorising prose and poetry?
3. After one perusal in such a process what takes place?
4. Does learning by rote promote mind-wandering?
5. Does not the attention always wander unless wooed to its work by
great interest in the subject dealt with, or by the method of
learning which is given?
6. How is the intellect occupied by using my method?
7. Is the habit of Attention also promoted?
8. Where is the justification of this method found?
9. Can the intellect assimilate a simple idea more easily than a
complex idea?
10. Describe the process of learning by the Analytic Synthetic
Method.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE FULLY WORKED OUT.

"Attention is the will directing the intellect into some particular channel and keeping it there." 1. Attention is the will. 2. Attention is the will _directing the intellect_. 3. Attention is the will directing the intellect _into a channel_. 4. Attention is the will directing the intellect into _some_ channel. 5. Attention is the will directing the intellect into some _particular_ channel. 6. Attention is the will directing the intellect into some particular channel _and keeping it there_. Or we may take this course: 1. Attention is directing the intellect. 2. Attention is directing the intellect _into a channel_. 3. Attention is directing the intellect into _some_ channel. 4. Attention is directing the intellect into some _particular_ channel. 5. Attention is directing the intellect into some particular channel _and keeping it there_. 6. Attention is the _will_ directing the intellect into some particular channel and keeping it there.

A LONG LEGAL DEFINITION.

"An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some uncertain event whereby the estate may be either originally created or enlarged or finally defeated."

1. An estate is one. 2. An estate _upon condition_ is one. 3. An estate upon condition is one _which depends upon the happening of some event_. 4. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening _or not happening_ of some event. 5. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some _uncertain_ event. 6. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some uncertain event _whereby the estate may be created or enlarged or defeated_. 7. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some uncertain event whereby the estate may be _either_ created or enlarged or defeated. 8. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some uncertain event whereby the estate may be either _originally_ created or enlarged or defeated. 9. An estate upon condition is one which depends upon the happening or not happening of some uncertain event whereby the estate may be either originally created or enlarged or _finally_ defeated.

1. In this process, what is first done with a sentence?
2. After a sentence is thus taken to pieces, what is then done with
it?
3. How do we proceed after finding the lowest terms?
4. Do we revive any part of the original sentence each time we make
an addition?
5. How much of it?
6. Is the intellect kept occupied in this way?
7. Does this not make a deep and lasting first impression?
8. Every time this is used what should be the result?
9. Should the natural Memory be strengthened in both stages?
10. Does this process admit of more than one application in the
case of a long sentence?

MODERATION ADVISED.

The practice of the above method is so attractive to a beginner when it is applied to single sentences, that he is apt to work at it too long at a time. Let him not at the outset analyse and reconstruct more than from 3 to 4 sentences at one sitting or lesson, but let him do what he attempts in the most thorough manner, and after a time he will not find it necessary to apply this method in future memorisations.

EXAMPLES FOR PRACTICE.

1. A bachelor is a wild goose that tame geese envy.

2. Law is a trap baited with promise of benefit or revenge.

3. Conversation is the idle man's business and the business man's recreation.

4. Attention is adjusting the observer to the object in order to seize it in its unity and diversity.

5. Assimilative Memory is the Habit of so receiving and absorbing impressions and ideas that they or their representatives shall be ready for revival or recall whenever wanted.

INTERROGATIVE ANALYSIS USED FOR SHORT SENTENCES.

Interrogative Analysis or intellectual Inquisition is another and most effective mode of inciting the intellect to pass from a passive into an active =assimilating= condition when trying to learn by heart as well as to help create the habit of the intellect staying with the senses. The process consists of two parts: (1) _To not only ask a question on every important word in the sentence to be memorised_, but, (2) _to repeat the entire sentence in reply to each question, while specially emphasising_ that word of the sentence which constitutes the _answer_ to the question. Take the passage from Byron:--

"Man!
Thou pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear."

1. _Who_ is a pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear? "_Man!_ thou pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear." 2. What function does man perform 'twixt a smile and tear? "Man! thou _pendulum_ 'twixt a smile and tear." 3. 'Twixt a tear and what else is man said to be a pendulum? "Man! thou pendulum 'twixt a _smile_ and tear." 4. 'Twixt a smile and what else is man said to be a pendulum? "Man! thou pendulum 'twixt a smile _and tear_." 5. By what word is the relation between "pendulum" and "a smile and tear" described? "Man! thou pendulum _'twixt_ a smile and tear." 6. Is the pendulum which man is said to be 'twixt a smile and tear addressed in the first, second, or third person? "Man! _thou_ pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear."

The pupils will see that the above method is fundamentally unlike the ordinary question and answer method. In the latter procedure, a question is asked and the answer is given by "yes" or "no," or by the use of one or more words of the sentence. To illustrate: What is "man" called in this passage? Ans. A pendulum. What swings betwixt a smile and tear? Ans. A pendulum, &c., &c.

1. Define Interrogative Analysis.
2. What does it incite the intellect to do?
3. What does the process consist of? What are they?

But in my Method the aim is _to repeat as much of the sentence as is possible informing the question and the whole of it in each reply_; and in _question and reply_ the _word_ that _constitutes the point of both_ is to be especially _emphasized_, and in this way _the mind is exercised on each word of the sentence twice_ (once in question and once in answer), and _each word of the sentence is emphasized in reference to the whole of the sentence_. And in all these separate steps it is impossible for the mind to remain in a passive state, but must be _active_ and _absorbing_ throughout, and thereby a most vivid =first impression= is secured, and the remembrance of it assured.

Besides the habit of exhaustively considering and weighing a sentence which is created by this method, it not only secures the faithful recollection of the passages to which it is applied, but it gives another great advantage. What usually makes a person dull in conversation? Setting aside timidity, we find that well-informed persons are sometimes good listeners, but no talkers. Why is this? In conversation their minds are apt to remain in a _recipient passive_ state. Hence no trains of thought arise in their own minds. And having nothing in their minds which seeks utterance, they remain quiet. Now the practice of Interrogative Analysis compels such persons to interrogate--to propose questions--to think. And when such mental activity becomes strong, it will break out in conversations by interrogatories and critical and often original interesting remarks.

1. Is this method like the ordinary question and answer method?
2. How are answers given in the latter procedure?
3. What is the aim in my method?
4. How much of the sentence is repeated in each reply given to the
question?
5. What word is to be especially emphasised?
6. How often is the mind exercised on each word of the sentence?
7. In all of these separate steps, is it possible for the mind to
remain in a passive state? Must it not be active and absorbing
throughout?

Teachers often complain that they can never induce some of their pupils to ask questions on their tasks. The reason is that their pupils remain in a passive state of mind. Had they been thoroughly drilled in Interrogative Analysis as I teach it, they would quickly have questions to ask on all subjects.

I show them _how_ to interrogate. They cannot help practising this method. They commence with the first word of a sentence and go on to the last. And from the numerous examples I give, they see exactly how this is to be done in all other cases. But if I had merely told them to ask questions on the sentence to be learned, they would have had no guide or rule of procedure to follow. As I fully illustrate my Method the pupil at once knows how to proceed, and he gains confidence in his ability to use the method every time he tries it, and at length the Habit of active thinking has been formed, and he is almost sure to be an interrogator and thinker on all subjects.

1. What is thereby secured?
2. Is the remembrance of the first impression assured?
3. What other great advantage does the method of Interrogative
Analysis give?
4. Are all well-informed persons good talkers?
5. If not, why?
6. In conversation, in what state are their minds apt to remain?
7. Do any trains of thought arise in their own minds?
8. What does the practice of Interrogative Analysis compel such
persons to do?
9. What do teachers often complain of?
10. What is the cause?
11. What does my method show them?
12. Can they help practising it?
13. Do I not fully illustrate my method?
14. Does not the pupil gain confidence by practising this method?
15. Does not the habit of active thinking thereby grow upon him?

The following sentence will be made use of as an example for practice. I deal with it by the Analytic-Synthetic, and also by the Interrogative Analysis methods.

"The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice,
An arrow for the heart like a sweet voice!"

1. The Devil hath an arrow. 2. The Devil hath _not_ an arrow. 3. The Devil hath not an arrow _for the heart_. 4. The Devil hath not an arrow for the heart _like a voice_. 5. The Devil hath not an arrow for the heart like a _sweet_ voice. 6. The Devil hath not, _in his choice_, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 7. The Devil hath not, in his _quiver's_ choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 8. The Devil hath not, in _all_ his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice.

THE SAME BY INTERROGATIVE ANALYSIS.

1. _Who_ hath not in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice? The _Devil_ hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 2. Hath the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice? The Devil hath _not_, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 3. What hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice for the heart? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, _an arrow_ for the heart like a sweet voice. 4. For what hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow like a sweet voice? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow _for the heart_ like a sweet voice. 5. Like what sweet thing hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart _like a sweet voice_. 6. Like what kind of a voice hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a _sweet voice_.

"A bad workman blames his tools."

Who blames his tools? A _bad workman_ blames his tools. What kind of a workman blames his tools? A _bad_ workman blames his tools. What bad man blames his tools? A bad _workman_ blames his tools. How does a bad workman treat his tools? A bad workman _blames_ his tools. Whose tools does a bad workman blame? A bad workman blames _his_ tools. What things belonging to a bad workman does he blame? A bad workman blames his _tools_.

"Judgments draw interest at six per cent."

What draw interest? _Judgments_ draw interest at six per cent. How do judgments operate on interest? Judgments _draw_ interest at six per cent. What do judgments draw? Judgments draw _interest_ at six per cent. At what rate do judgments draw interest? Judgments draw interest at _six_ per cent. A part of what sum is the interest of six dollars which judgments draw? Judgments draw interest at six _per cent_.

"Effort is the price of success."

What is the price of success? _Effort_ is the price of success. Was effort the price of success? Effort _is_ the price of success. What bearing has effort on success? Effort is _the price_ of success. Effort is the price of what? Effort is the price of _success_.

"Truth seldom goes without a scratched face."

What seldom goes without a scratched face? _Truth_ seldom goes without a scratched face. Does truth ever go without a scratched face? Truth _seldom_ goes without a scratched face. What does truth seldom do without a scratched face? Truth seldom _goes_ without a scratched face. Does truth seldom go with a scratched face? Truth seldom goes _without_ a scratched face. Truth seldom goes without what? Truth seldom goes without a _scratched face_. What kind of a face is spoken of? Truth seldom goes without a _scratched_ face. Without what scratched thing does truth seldom go? Truth seldom goes without a scratched _face_.

EXAMPLES FOR PRACTICE.

1. Instinct is inherited memory.
2. Books are embalmed minds.
3. Words are the fortresses of thought.
4. A name denotes objects and connotes attributes.
5. Force is depersonalised will.
6. A somnambule only acts his dream.
7. Attention is fixation of consciousness.
8. Science is organised common sense.

The student of Interrogative Analysis can apply this method to the examples given under the Analytic-Synthetic Method. This will give the needful additional practice. But let him not attempt too much at any one time. Three to four examples thoroughly studied are quite sufficient for one session or sitting.

POEMS LONG OR SHORT EASILY LEARNED BY HEART.

POE'S "BELLS."

1. Before attempting to memorize any selections of Prose or Poetry, never fail _first to read it carefully_ to ascertain what it is all about, to learn its aim and _mode of development_ and its _peculiarities_, and not least of all, to look up and note down in writing the _meaning of unfamiliar_ words.

2. In this poem the average reader might have to consult the dictionary for the precise meaning of "Crystalline" [clear, unalloyed], "Runic" [old-fashioned, mystical], "Tintinnabulation" [bell-ringing], "Monody" [a monotonous sound], "Ghouls" [imaginary evil beings supposed to prey upon human bodies], and "Paean" [a song of triumph]. The pupil should understand that except in the rare cases where mere sound helps us, we learn wholly through the _meaning_ of the words and their _relations_ between the meanings, and therefore if he fails to know the import of any word or words in a selection, he cannot receive the full benefit of the methods taught in this System.

3. The reader finds that there are four stanzas in this poem, each dealing with a different kind of bell, _viz._: Silver, Golden, Brazen and Iron bells.

4. It is always best to fix in memory the order of paragraphs or of stanzas the moment the opportunity occurs for that purpose, and here, before attempting to memorise the stanzas themselves, let the order of them be fixed.

5. The order of the bells is first "silver," second "golden," third "brazen," and fourth "iron." How establish this order in mind? Silver and gold are the precious metals used for coins. They occur here in the order of their value, "silver" being first and the cheaper, and "gold" the second and the most valuable of all. Next we have "brazen," which resembles "gold" in colour, and fourth and last we have "iron," the cheapest of the four--silver, gold, brass and iron. If this analysis of the order of the subject-matter of the stanzas is retained, the student is ready to take account of other things which his first perusal of the poem has taught him.

6. Before doing so, however, let us notice a method of the old Mnemonics, which is still taught and which should never be resorted to. It is their story-telling method. A story or narrative is invented for the purpose of helping the student, as it is claimed, to memorise it. In this poem we find there are four stanzas, each occupied with a different kind of bell. To help remember that the order of the bells is silver, gold, brass and iron, the old Mnemonics advises us to invent a story--the following will answer: A couple of lovers once took a sleigh-ride, the horses carrying _silver_ bells. After a time they marry, when wedding or _golden_ bells are used. Later on their house is on fire, when alarm or _brazen_ bells are brought into requisition, and last of all, one of the couple dies, when the _iron_ bells were tolled.

Whilst such a method is a novelty to the student, he might tolerate it as such, but as a memory-aid it is always unreliable, since it is something _in addition_ to the matter to be remembered and forming no part of it, the invented story, if remembered at all, is apt to be recalled as an integral part of the selection itself.

7. In this first perusal the reader has noticed that there is a _certain uniformity of construction_ in the first line of each stanza, as in the first stanza we have: "Hear the sledges with the bells--silver bells;" in the second, "Hear the mellow wedding bells--golden bells;" in the third, "Hear the loud alarum bells--brazen bells;" and in the fourth and last, "Hear the tolling of the bells--iron bells."

8. The reader has also observed that the second line in each stanza contains a reflection in the form of an exclamation on the function or result of the uses of the bells spoken of, as in the second line of the first stanza we see: "What a world of merriment their melody foretells;" in the second stanza the second line gives us, "What a world of happiness their harmony foretells;" the second line of the third stanza reads as follows: "What a tale of terror, now, their turbulency tells;" and in the fourth stanza the second line runs thus: "What a world of solemn thought their monody compels."

9. Other points of resemblance [In.], or of unlikeness [Ex.], were noticed in the reader's first perusal of this poem, and these, as well as those already remarked upon, will greatly facilitate his learning the exact language of each stanza.

10. Now comes the _test_. It is often said that habit is "second" nature. The Duke of Wellington more truly said: "Habit is _ten times_ nature." The reader early acquired the habit of learning prose and poetry by the _rote_ method--the method of repeating the sentences over and over again almost endlessly till ear or eye retains the exact language.

Now, if the reader has gained a _clear conception_ of the Analytic-Synthetic and Interrogative Analysis methods, he is sure to be convinced of their undoubted superiority to the _rote_ method. And if he must needs learn Poe's "Bells" before to-morrow night, he would probably spend most of the intervening time in trying to learn it by the discredited _rote_ method, and most likely fail in the attempt, while he is satisfied in theory that he could memorise it by one of my methods in three hours, or in half of that time. The difficulty in his case is to induce him to exert his willpower long enough to practise my methods in learning not a few detached sentences, but an entire poem of 50 or 200 lines; but if he does this in one instance, he effectually breaks down the old bad habit of endless unassimilating repetition and introduces a good habit instead. He will then learn Poe's "Bells" by my methods in one-tenth, if not one-fiftieth, part of the time it would take him to do it by the _rote_ method.

11. I here produce the poem in the hope that every one who studies my System will learn it by the Analytic-Synthetic method, and when he has learned the first stanza he should then glance at my Analysis of it which follows the poem and compare his work with mine. Let him then learn the rest of the poem--and thereafter, as a genuine exercise of his _reviving_ power and as a training in attention, let him recall it as often as once a week for as many weeks as his desire for improvement continues, or until the recital of it becomes merely automatic.

THE BELLS.