EDITOR'S TABLE. 



843 



EDITOR'S TABLE. 



MATTHEW '. ARNOLD ON LITERATURE 

 AND SCIENCE. 



IT was hardly to be supposed that 

 Professor Huxley's address at the 

 opening of Sir Josiah Mason's College 

 would be left without some attempt at a 

 formal answer. The bare establishment 

 of a collegiate institution, from which 

 "mere literary instruction" was ex- 

 cluded, was not in itself very important, 

 as it is not expected that mechanical, 

 technical, and industrial schools will 

 give much attention to literature at any 

 rate. But when literary education, as 

 a method of culture, was attacked as 

 narrow and inadequate, and another 

 method more liberal, more efficient, 

 based upon science, and claiming supe- 

 riority upon that ground, was forcibly 

 presented so as to elicit extensive as- 

 sent, the challenge to the devotees of 

 literary cultivation could not be passed 



by. 



In tjiis crisis, Mr. Matthew Arnold 

 comes forward as the champion of lit- 

 erature. His position was recognized 

 by Professor Huxley as among the fore- 

 most in English literature, and he 

 quoted from him the positions to be 

 contested. Mr. Arnold was therefore 

 in a sense called out, and he has made 

 his response in an address before the 

 Cambridge University, which we re- 

 print from the " Fortnightly Review." 

 We are interested in seeing how an 

 eminent literary man deals with the 

 two methods of study, and from this 

 point of view the discussion will justify 

 some comment. 



Mr. Arnold first deplores what he 

 considers the crusade of science against 

 literature; and then tries to make out 

 that, properly considered, there is no 

 ground of controversy. But, because 

 he does not or will not see the other 



side, is not a sufficient reason for de- 

 nying its existence. There is undoubt- 

 edly a broad issue at the present time 

 between literature and science, as dis- 

 tinctive methods of mental culture. 

 The literary method grew up and was 

 carried to great perfection by the crea- 

 tion of the masterpieces of literary art 

 long before science appeared. That 

 method has continued to the present 

 time as a separate influence, and with 

 a distinctive ideal in the traditional 

 systems of education. It is undeni- 

 able that, as our colleges are consti- 

 tuted, a liberal, classical, literary edu- 

 cation can be obtained with but very 

 little knowledge of science, and it 

 is notorious that great multitudes ac- 

 quire a comprehensive literary culture 

 while remaining as ignorant of the sci- 

 ences as they would have been in the 

 scholastic ages. If there is to be any 

 comparison of methods, their charac- 

 teristics must be limited and defined, 

 and certainly there is no difficulty in 

 distinguishing the quality of literary 

 cultivation. 



Mr. Arnold had said, " In our culture 

 the aim being to know ourselves and the 

 world, we have, as the means to this 

 end, to know the best that has been 

 thought and said in the world." It is 

 fair to infer that the word "best" is 

 here to be interpreted by the literary 

 standard not by everything that has 

 been thought and said, but by the 

 " best," that is the choicest, the finest, 

 the most excellent, as found in the su- 

 preme literary performances of both 

 the ancient and modern mind. That 

 this was Mr. Arnold's meaning is evi- 

 dent from another passage quoted by 

 Professor Huxley. He says : " Europe 

 is to be regarded as now being, for in- 

 tellectual and spiritual purposes, one 



