734 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



work in this hall we do all honor, bnt we do not think of it as a 

 new hall, nor a new creation. It is simply a natural outgrowth of 

 the work of Burrill and Forbes. Ever since, in 1878, I visited the 

 little zoological workshop of Dr. Forbes in the old school building 

 at Normal, and ever since, in 1882, 1 saw toadstools and bacteria in 

 the little room across the way which Dr. Burrill called his own, I 

 have been able to prophesy the growth of this building. We care 

 nothing for the brick building, its desks, its shelves, and its mi- 

 croscopes, as things in themselves. "We are thinking of Forbes and 

 Burrill. The building is only a better tool-house in which these 

 master workmen can shelter their tools. Their work will be what 

 it was before ; and their impulse and example are our best guaran- 

 tee that so long as this building stands we shall find in it master 

 workmen. Another Forbes, another Burrill, another Rolfe shall 

 fill the gaps when these lay down their work; and the University 

 of Illinois shall live through the years, because the men who com- 

 pose it are truthful, devoted, and strong. 



THE FESTAL DEVELOPMENT OF ART. 



By Prof. DAVID J. HILL, 



PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER. 



f^\ OETHE says that art is called art simply because it is not 

 v3T Nature. Unquestionably it has its impulse and its laws in 

 the constitution of man. We- may, therefore, accept as useful to 

 the proper comprehension of it, in its most general sense, the defi- 

 nition given by Thomas Davidson : " Art is an expression of 

 man's inner nature imprinted upon matter, so as to appeal to his 

 senses, which deal only with matter, and through which he ob- 

 tains experience." But, while every product of art is the work of 

 human personality, neither man nor his works can be understood, 

 or even intelligently considered, separate from Nature. He is 

 himself a part of her, and yet he is different from any inferior 

 part, for he alone can, in any degree, fathom the depths of natural 

 process or formulate natural law. When, therefore, we say with 

 the great poet-philosopher that art is called art simply because it 

 is not Nature, we can not mean that art is in no sense a natural 

 activity. On the contrary, while we must accept the antithesis, 

 we must still seek the explanation of the origin and development 

 of art in the operation of the natural forces which are present, 

 and the natural laws which are dominant, in the nature of man ; 

 for he, although he is Nature's child, has come into possessions 

 which are his own. 



The faculty of artistic production, aided indeed by all the 



