The _context_ helps us to know which meaning of the word was intended when the word is spoken, and the context and spelling tell the same thing when writing or print is used. Take the words "Hounds, Bark." Here Bark means the cry or yelp of the dogs. But in "Tree, Bark," the Bark of the tree is suggested. Yet the word Bark is spelled precisely the same in both cases. The word spelled "Bark" is really used to express two different things and the context generally tells which is meant in any particular case. Individual _letters_ become so strongly associated with a particular meaning that although the vocal value is exactly the same, yet the one spelling goes to one man and the other to a different man. "Spenser" would never suggest to a learned man the author of the "Philosophy of Evolution," nor would "Spencer" ever suggest the author of the "Fairie Queen." "Mr. Mil" would never mean "John Stuart Mill," although the words "Mil" and "Mill" are pronounced exactly alike. We sometimes cannot recall a Proper Name, yet we feel sure that it begins or ends with S or K or L, or that a certain other letter is in the middle of the word. We usually find that we were right. In these cases _our clue to the entire word was found in only one letter of it_. Noticing that the _same letter is in common to two words_, although _all the other letters may be different_, is one case of Inclusion by spelling. Take an example: President John Tyler was followed by President James K. Polk. Analyse the two names--Tyler and Polk. The letter "l" alone is common to the two names. Here is one _letter_ found in totally unlike contexts. If this fact is _noticed_, it cannot but help hold those two names together. The exercise of learning the names of the twenty-four Presidents is a good one for this purpose. It has a _training_ value entirely apart from its practical value in that case. And I give it for its _training_ value alone. It is infinitely better for him to learn by analysis the _order_ of the Presidents than to learn that order by the only other method the pupil has heretofore known, viz., _endless repetition_. When the pupil thinks a relation may be weak, let him consider that a weak relation _thought about_ is a hundred-fold stronger than _mere_ repetition _without any thinking at all_. It is either _thoughtless_ repetition, or _thoughtful Analysis_ that he must use. HOW TO LEARN PROPER NAMES IN A CERTAIN ORDER OF SUCCESSION. The true way to learn such lists as those of the Popes of Rome, the Kings of England and of the American Presidents is to learn them in their places in History, as parts of the Historical order of events to which they belong, as facts in the chain of causes and effects.