78 



NATURE 



[May 28, 1891 



King's Colleges — excepting the Professorships of Anatomy, 

 Physiology, Pathology, and Forensic Medicine — and the crea- 

 tion of independent clinical schools attached to the North 

 London and Lincoln's Inn Hospitals ; {b) the nomination of a 

 medical professoriate for the new University by representatives 

 of all the London medical schools, vacancies to be hereafter 

 filled up on the recommendation of the Senate of the Uni- 

 versity ; {c) the recognition, under conditions, by the new Uni- 

 versity, of the clinical teaching in each of the London hospitals, 

 and the admission of students to its medical degrees on condi- 

 tion of having passed the prescribed examinations of the 

 University and of having pursued not necessarily more than 

 one-half of the entire curriculum under the professors of the 

 University. The University might also be required to re- 

 cognize (in exchange -for a like concession) the examinations 

 in certain subjects of the Conjoint Board as excusing candidates 

 from like examination by the University. 



This is undeniably a complex part of the subject. It would 

 be simplest, and probably satisfactory in the end, to grant the 

 power of giving medical degrees to the limited body (King's 

 and University) and to leave it to make such arrangements as it 

 might find expedient with the medical schools of London. The 

 professional feeling of the medical faculties of University and 

 King's Colleges would insure their making an equitable use of 

 the privilege, such as their medical brethren would heartily 

 approve. E. Ray Lankester. 



P.S. — There is one argument put forward by Mr. Dyer which 

 I have omitted to notice in the foregoing, but should like to 

 tread on. He quotes my opinion that the University may use- 

 fully examine scholars passing from the schools to the University 

 as a test both of the work of the schoolboy and of the efficiency 

 of the schoolmaster, and proceeds to mamtain that in the same 

 way an examining board may usefully check not only the work 

 of University undergraduates, but of their teachers. This is 

 advanced as an argument in favour of external or superior 

 examining boards in University examinations as opposed to 

 examinations conducted by University professors with associated 

 external examiners. Mr. Dyer has, however, omitted to cite 

 the reply which I had already given to his specious argument. 

 It is this : the University is the highest term in the educational 

 hierarchy. It may fittingly examine students who are about to 

 pass from the school to continue their studies on a higher level, 

 viz. its own. But who jor what are the persons recognized as 

 standing above the University professoriates ? I do not know of 

 any such body. It is precisely the arrogation of this position for 

 the Senate of the University of London which renders it 

 objectionable. There is necessarily a limit to the organization 

 of authority in educational matters, and it is as absurd for the 

 members of a central examining board to control the teaching 

 of those who are ex hypothesi the most capable teachers in the 

 country as it is for the Home Office to control the details of the 

 work of the Senate of Burlington Gardens. Either University 

 professors are worthy to occupy their positions or they are not — 

 no higher branch of the educational profession exists. To coerce 

 them by means of Senates composed of retired teachers and 

 dilettanti educationists is clearly injurious : to set them to work 

 to criticize and worry one another as " impartial examiners " is 

 odious and a waste of their time. The only thing to do is to take 

 such measures as are possible for insuring that no one who is not 

 fit for the position shall hold office as a professor in a chartered 

 University, and to so arrange that it shall be to the interest of 

 the professor, and also to that of his University, for him to 

 discharge his duties efficiently. 



If we are to have an indefinite series of authorities one above 

 the other, who, one would like to know, is to control the 

 examining board which sits over the professors ? And who 

 again to control these controllers? 



The bureaucratic machinery which seems to find favour with 

 Mr. Dyer is, in my opinion, superfluous. The most efficient 

 Universities (in two differing directions), those of Germany and 

 of Scotland, have no authority in educational matters above that 

 of the professoriate, and are not subject, like Oxford, Cam- 

 bridge, and London, to the interference of graduates in the 

 form of convocation. 



Mr. Thiselton Dyer appears to think that Fichte's ideal 

 of a University is unrealizable, unless, as he supposes, " some 

 wealthy man gives, say, half a million to found such a University 

 in some quiet country town in England, where professor and 



NO. II 26, VOL. 44] 



pupils might labour together, undisturbed by the life and move- 

 ment of a big city, or the worry of the examination-room, for 

 the advantage of knowledge." I venture to think that this sup- 

 position of Mr. Thiselton Dyer's conveys the unwelcome truth 

 that the conception of the true nature of a University has not 

 yet reached some even of that section of the British public who- 

 have earned well-merited distinction in science ; and it is as one 

 who has had experience of a Scottish and a German University, 

 in the character of student and teacher, and of two English 

 University Colleges as teacher, that I ask permission as shortly 

 as I can to place before your readers what many minds aim at, 

 in the hope that a teaching University in London, call it what 

 you will, would ultimately provide it. 



I reiterate the assertion which I lately made in a letter to the 

 Times, that a University is primarily a place for the extension of 

 the bounds of knowledge ; this is to be achieved by the labours 

 of the professors and teaching staff; by fellows, specially 

 appointed for that purpose, if the system of fellowships is 

 thought desirable, although, in my opinion and experience, 

 much may be said against it ; and by the zuhole body of the 

 students. Of course it is not to be supposed that every student 

 is capable of discovering new facts or of applying principles in an 

 original manner ; but almost every man is endowed with some 

 share of inventive faculty, which must ultimately be developed, 

 if he is to make his way in the world otherwise than as a day- 

 labourer, or as a piece-worker in a factory, or as a copying- 

 clerk ; and the object of a University should be to cultivate this 

 faculty to the utmost. An efficient medical man spends his life 

 in clinical experimentation ; a successful barrister exercises his 

 ingenuity in applying old decisions to new cases ; a competent 

 engineer not merely studies how to improve his machinery, but 

 also studies his fellow-creatures, and the chances of trade, so as 

 to bring his manufactures into new fields. If the inventive 

 faculty is not developed at the University, it will be developed 

 later, in every man who fulfils his duty to his fellow-creatures 

 and to himself. 



Now I dare to contend that the degree-stamp of the English 

 Universities, especially of the University of London, except in 

 certain cases in its highest degrees, such as the D.Mus., D.Litt.^ 

 M.D., and D.Sc. degrees (and these only as a result of recent 

 modifications), is of no value whatever in the eyes of that 

 portion of the public whose opinion carries with it. a commercial 

 reward. Speaking for myself, I have had assistants, graduates 

 of Edinburgh, of London, and of German Universities, and I 

 unhesitatingly state that the only degrees to which I should 

 attach the least importance are those of Germany, and that 

 because there is in them some evidence that the graduate has had 

 at least an initiation into the methods of research. As this- 

 assertion may be applied personally, I should wish it to be 

 clearly understood that I have no reason whatever to be in any 

 way dissatisfied with graduates from Edinburgh or from London, 

 but merely to state that the fact of their being graduates in no 

 way influenced me in their appointment. And many manu- 

 facturers, in want of assistants, actually regard an English 

 degree in the light of a disqualification ; so that most of the 

 posts of "works-chemists" are held by non-graduates. They 

 prefer, in fact, to train their own men — that is, to give them 

 such an education in research as bears on the particular problems 

 which they themselves have to solve ; or to take them from the 

 laboratories of general analysts, where new problems present 

 themselves from time to time. 



It is impossible, under existing circumstances, to give under- 

 graduates such training. They have examination on the brain. 

 They judge from the standpoint of "Will this 'pay' at an 

 examination?" not from the standpoint of "Is this worth 

 knowing?" And they cannot be blamed. It is not the fault of 

 the examiners ; it is not the fault of the students ; the pro- 

 fessors, I believe, do not, except in a general way, follow the 

 syllabuses ; it is simply that the belter students conscientiously 

 aim at what is set before them — a degree that has no market 

 value, except in the eyes of school teachers. Personally I can- 

 not complain that I do not get research done by students ; in 

 actual fact a considerable number do stay after graduation, and 

 some do not graduate at all ; I merely hold the opinion that 

 the method is on wholly wrong lines ; that a degree, if given, 

 should be the official testimony to a certain time spent with 

 diligence and profit in gaining knowledge of how to attack 

 problems — of how to acquire knowledge useful for the purpose in 

 view. 



It will be said that honours-degrees will find no place in such 



