EDITOR'S TABLE. 



415 



ized self-interest, and it is precisely 

 this enemy with which our system 

 of higher education — in so far as it 

 depends on State support — is begin- 

 ning to he threatened. If the evil 

 spreads, the result will be the disor- 

 ganization of all State universities 

 and colleges, because the youth of 

 the country will not long consent to 

 listen to lectures that express, not the 

 thinking of an independent mind en- 

 riched by the thoughts of other in- 

 dependent minds, but a system of 

 doctrine carefully adapted to help 

 this or that party in its political 

 struggles. Theology was a tyrant 

 in its day, but it was a respectable, 

 high-minded, and benevolent tyrant 

 compared with the political party 

 that would attempt to capture and 

 pervert education for its own ends. 

 Theology did not object to cramp 

 men's minds if it could only save 

 their souls; but the politician would 

 do it in order to get their votes. 

 Good will come out of evil, however, 

 if the lesson is brought home to the 

 popular mind that education and 

 politics are two things that should 

 have as little as possible to do with 

 one another. 



THE NATURE OF SCIENCE. 



We have seldom seen the differ- 

 ence between the science of the an- 

 cient and that of the modern world 

 so well drawn out as it was in the 

 Harveian oration delivered a few 

 weeks ago by Sir William Roberts 

 before the Royal College of Physi- 

 cians in London, England. The an- 

 cients, the speaker acknowledged, 

 " had a large acquaintance with the 

 phenomena of Nature, and were the 

 masters of many inventions. They 

 knew," he continued, " how to extract 

 the common metals from their ores; 

 they made glass; they were skilled 

 agriculturists ; they could bake, brew, 

 and make wine; manufacture butter 

 and cheese ; spin, weave, and dye 



cloth ; they had marked the motions 

 of the heavenly bodies, and kept ac- 

 curate record of times and seasons; 

 they used the wheel, pulley, and le- 

 ver ; and knew a good deal of the nat- 

 ural history of plants and animals, 

 and of anatomy and practical medi- 

 cine." Here was a body of knowl- 

 edge "of inestimable value for the 

 necessities, conveniences, and embel- 

 lishments of life." But, the lecturer 

 went on to say, "it was not science 

 in the modern sense of the word." 

 Why ? Because it was not " system- 

 atized and interpreted by co-ordi- 

 nating principles, nor illuminated by 

 generalizations which might serve 

 as incentives and guides to further 

 acquisitions." It had been acquired 

 " mostly through haphazard discov- 

 ery and chance observation," and, 

 having no innate spring of growth, 

 "could only increase, if at all, by 

 casual additions — as a loose heap of 

 stones might increase — and much of 

 it was liable to be swept away at any 

 time by the flood of barbaric con- 

 quest." 



With the scientific possessions of 

 the modern world the case is entire- 

 ly different. They are the product 

 of the direct and purposive efforts 

 of the human mind, which some 

 three centuries ago conceived the 

 fruitful idea that the way to obtain 

 knowledge was to go in search of it 

 by means of observation and experi- 

 ment, and not to wait for chance 

 revelations. That idea is so familiar 

 to us now that it is difficult to believe 

 that it should not have been fully 

 present to the minds of the civilized 

 ancients. But the facts of history 

 make it plain that it was not present 

 to their minds. They thought acute- 

 ly on many subjects, and produced 

 an admirable literature and wonder- 

 ful works of art ; but they never 

 learned the secret of interrogating 

 Nature. Aristotle dwelt not a little 

 on the importance of experiment and 



