_and that no party apprehended the occurrence of injury_.” Injury was however inflicted by unhallowed hands, and a school was set up “on opposite principles.” In page 202, when speaking of Joseph Lancaster, Mr. Wilderspin says, “with one part of his system I was always charmed, and, so far from the feeling diminishing, it is even now increasing in vigour,—_I mean its freedom from all shackles_—_its entire exemption from sectarianism_—_its benevolent and catholic spirit_, _which urges not merely to the establishment of schools_, _but_ ‘SCHOOLS FOR ALL.’ Often have I regretted that this is not universally discoverable. There are still some who wish to confine the element of water to their own well, and to find the full ripe corn only in their fields:—with them I confess I have no sympathy; _on the broadest principle I have hitherto labored_; _and on that_, _and that alone I propose to act through the remainder of my life_.” But I must conclude these testimonies, which might be greatly multiplied, by recording a sentence or two from page 259, respecting Sheffield. “Five Schools,” says Mr. Wilderspin, “containing little short of one thousand infants, are now in full and efficient operation. _The harmony of Churchmen and Dissenters in the work is here most delightful_; and as a specimen of the generosity displayed, it may be stated, that one gentleman built a school, at his own expense, which cost £1000.” These quotations abundantly prove that “the originator of Infant schools,” who has visited many of the towns in the three kingdoms, and who is perhaps better qualified than any other person to form an opinion as to the best mode of conducting them, is decidedly opposed to the exclusive system advertised for Norwich. He has “no sympathy” with it—and he declares, as the result of his extensive observation and experience, that “the union between Churchmen and Dissenters is delightful.”