In one respect, perhaps, it was fortunate that others should have borne testimony to Dr. Ryerson's work and ability, and to the greatness of the work which he had done. His own knowledge of the man and of the work was only second-hand, and he could not speak with the freshness and vividness of those who had personal knowledge of them. "_Segnius irritant animos demissa per aurem._" But although he had not direct and immediate knowledge of Dr. Ryerson, he had the opportunity of studying several of the publications which gave an account of his history, and especially of his educational work--more particularly some of those written by Dr. Hodgins. From these he had learnt something of the spirit in which the work had been accomplished, and the principles which were embodied in it; and these would account for the eulogiums which had already been bestowed upon the work and its principal doer. They might learn from such investigations something that would help to guard them from dangers which attended their educational work. It seemed to him that Dr. Ryerson's conception of the work of education was singularly simple, earnest, deep and comprehensive, free from affectation and one-sidedness. They were in danger of forgetting some of these elements, of making education showy instead of solid,--of forgetting that it was the education and discipline of the man and of the mind that we had to accomplish, and not the outward adornment of him, or the mere imparting of knowledge. Some of our dangers have been forcibly pointed out by the President of University College, Sir Daniel Wilson, in the March number of the _Canada Educational Monthly_. It would not be proper to go into details on such an occasion, but he would recommend those who were interested in these questions to study that article.