334 
NATURE 
[ Fed. 9, 1882 
entitled “ Universities, Actual and Ideal.’ Here the 
leading theme is that an “ideal university” should be 
open to men of all classes, and be able efficiently to 
teach all branches of knowledge. “I should like to see 
Professors of the Fine Arts in every University ; and in- 
struction in some part of their work make a part of the 
Arts curriculum.” ‘If there are Doctors of Music, why 
should there be no Masters of Painting, of Sculpture, of 
Architecture ?’’ This is one kind of knowledge ; another 
is “knowledge relating to the scope and limits of the 
mental faculties of man; a form of knowledge which, in 
its positive aspect, answers pretty much to Logic, and 
part of Psychology, while, on its negative and critical 
side it corresponds with Metaphysics.” Yet another 
class “ comprehends all that knowledge which relates to 
man’s welfare, so far as it is determined by his own acts, 
or what we call his conduct. It answers to Moral and 
Religious Philosophy.” Lastly, there is “ knowledge of 
the phenomena of the universe,’’ or science, mathe- 
matical, physical, biological, and social. Concerning the 
relative importance of these departments of knowledge, 
substantially the same opinion is expressed as in the 
previous address : “I am ashamed to repeat here what 
I have said elsewhere, in season and out of season, 
respecting the value of science as knowledge and discip- 
line,’ &c. Concerning the teaching of science, it is 
shown that the ‘ideal University’? “ought not to be 
satisfied with mere book-knowledge. . . . If I may para- 
phrase Hobbes’ well-known aphorism, I would say that 
“books are the money of literature, but only the counters 
of science.’’’ The address next goes on to the question 
_ of Medical Education, advocating the abolition of Botany 
Zoology, and Comparative Anatomy from the curriculum, 
Speaking of the study of Physiology, the Lord Rector 
says— 
“Moreover, I would urge that a thorough study of Human 
Physiology is in itself an education broader and more 
comprehensive than much that passes under that name. 
There is no side of the intellect which it does not call 
into play, no region of human knowledge into which 
either its roots or its branches do not extend; like the 
Atlantic between the Old and the New Worlds, its waves 
mark the shores of the two worlds of matter and of mind; 
its tributary streams flow from both; through its waters, 
as yet unfurrowed by the keel of any Columbus, lies the 
road, if any such there be, from the one to the other; far 
away from that North-West Passage of mere speculation, 
in which so many brave souls have been hopelessly 
frozen up.” 
In an ideal University it should be recognised that 
Science has the same right as Theology, Law, or Medi- 
cine toa 
“ Faculty of its own in which men shall be trained to 
be professional men of science . . . The establishment of 
such a Faculty would have the additional advantage of 
providing, in some measure, for one of the greatest wants 
of our time and country; I mean proper support and 
endowment of original research. . . . If a student of my 
own subject shows power and originality, I dare not 
advise him to adopt a scientific career . . . and I believe 
the case is as bad, or perhaps worse, with other branches 
of science. In this respect Britain, whose immense 
wealth and prosperity hangs on the thread of applied 
science, is far behind France, and infinitely behind 
Germany.”’ 
On the subject of Examinations Prof. Huxley says :— 
“ Examination, like fire, is a good servant, but a bad 
master ; and there seems to me to be some danger of its 
becoming our master. I by no means stand alone in this 
opinion. Experienced friends of mine do not hesitate to 
say that students whose career they watch, appear to 
them to become deteriorated by the constant effort to 
pass this or that examination, just as we hear of men’s 
brains becoming affected by the daily necessity of catch- 
ing a train. They work to pass, not to know; and 
outraged science takes her revenge. They do pass, and 
they don’t know. . . . Under the best of circumstances, 
I believe that examination will remain but an imperfect 
test of knowledge, and a still more imperfect test of 
capacity, while it tells next to nothing about a man’s 
power as an investigator.” 
While dealing with the desirability of undergraduates 
having had sufficient instruction at school to profit by the 
higher education which ought to be provided by a uni- 
versity, Prof. Huxley says :— 
“A high authority, himself head of an English college, 
has solemnly affirmed that: ‘Elementary teaching of 
youths under twenty is now the only function performed 
by the University’; and that colleges are ‘boarding 
schools in which the elements of the learned languages 
are taught to youth.’ This is not the first time I have 
quoted these remarkable assertions. I should like to 
engrave them in public view, for they have not been 
refuted.” 
Here we are less surprised at the certainly “‘remarkable 
assertions’”’ of the Rector of Lincoln, than by their un- 
qualified endorsement of the Rector of Aberdeen; for if 
“they have not been refuted”? we should suppose that 
the only reason must be because they are too obviously 
extravagant to demand refutation. That our English uni- 
versities have thrown upon them a great deal more work in 
the way of comparatively elementary education than is 
either desirable or creditable, and that in consequence a 
vast amount of money and of teaching power is mis- 
appropriately applied, no one can dispute; but to “solemnly 
affirm” that the ov/y function of these universities is that 
of boarding schools, is unwisely to overstate the evil. 
The third essay is on “ Technical Education.” De- 
livered before the “ Working Men’s Club and Institute,” 
it appropriately inculcates— 
“The truth that while under-instruction is a bad thing, 
over-instruction may possibly be a worse. Success in any 
kind of practical life is not dependent solely, or even 
chiefly, upon knowledge. Even in the learned profes- 
sions, knowledge, alone, is of less consequence than people 
are apt toimagine. And, if much expenditure of bodily 
energy is involved in the day’s work, mere knowledge is 
of still less importance when weighed against the probable 
cost of its acquirement.’’ 
The ideal of “ Technical education for handicraftsmen ” 
held out by Prof. Huxley is that of avoiding excess either 
of general or of technical instruction for “the great mass 
of mankind who have neither the liking nor the aptitude 
for either literary, or scientific, or artistic pursuits,” while 
making provision “to catch exceptional people—the 
small percentage of the population which is born with 
that most excellent quality, a desire for excellence, or with 
special aptitudes of one sort or other. .. . I weigh my 
words when I say that if the nation could purchase a 
potential Watt, or Davy, or Faraday, at the cost of a 
hundred thousand pounds down, he would be dirt-cheap 
at the money.” 
Substantially the same views are expressed in the next 
