Dissenting academies could not resemble national Universities. A variety of professors, extensive libraries, aristocratic society were beyond their reach, and polite literature and the graces of composition were but little cultivated. Too much time was given to the study of dead languages--a mistake, indeed, shared by the Universities. A keen observer, Daniel De Foe, noticed this defect, and pointed out how absurd it was, that all the time should be spent on the languages which learning was to be _fetched from_, and none on the language it was to be _delivered in_. To this error he attributed the fact that many learned, and otherwise excellent, ministers preached away their congregations, “while a jingling, noisy boy, that had a good stock in his face, and a dysentery of the tongue, though he had little or nothing in his head, should run away with the whole town.”[506] [Sidenote: NONCONFORMISTS.] Youths of all sorts were admitted into these academies, as into modern boarding-schools; hence some pupils might be of doubtful character. Also prejudices against the Church of England would naturally arise. Amongst the elder pupils the controversies of other days would be revived, and enthusiastic spirits would tilt a lance on the side of “the good old cause.” Charles I. and Charles II. would be no favourites; James II.’s Popery would be denounced; Cromwell would be excused and praised; and William III. lauded to the skies. In the common room where students unbent, there might be fun and laughter; in the private study there might be other volumes than classical and theological text-books; levity and idleness probably existed in these gatherings of great boys and young men; and damaging charges, no doubt, could be substantiated against some of them; but the character of these maligned institutions must, after all, be judged by their courses of study, by the character of their professors, and by their educational results. These tests being applied, lead to a favourable conclusion. The studies combined logic, metaphysics, and ethics, with readings in Colbert, Le Clerc, Suarez, More, Cicero, and Epictetus; natural and political philosophy, with the use of Aristotle, Descartes, and Vossius; and the perusal of Latin and Greek historians and poets. Candidates for the pastoral office read Divinity, and studied the Greek Testament with such critical helps as were afforded in those times. We are assured that in lectures the Church of England was treated with respect, the Predestinarian controversy was discussed with moderation, and Monarchical maxims of government were upheld.[507] [Sidenote: 1688–1702.] What the most distinguished teachers were, and what many of the pupils became, may be seen in preceding pages.