TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION B, 689 



whicli we are all so well acquainted. Bat tbe present-day book on qualitative 

 analysis differs widely from ' Giessen Outlines ' in this respect, that whereas in the 

 latter the tables introduced are mere indications of the methods of separation to 

 be employed, and are of such a nature that the student who did not think for 

 himself must have been constantly in difficulties, in the book of the present day these 

 tables have been worked out to the minutest detail. Every contingency is 

 provided for ; nothing is left to the originality of the student ; and that which, no 

 doubt, was once an excellent course has now become so hopelessly mechanical as 

 to make it doubtful whether it retains anything of its former educational value. 



The question which I now wish to consider more particularly is whether the 

 system of training chemists which is at present adopted, with little variation, in our 

 colleges and universities is a really satisfactory one, and whether it supplies the 

 student with the kind of knowledge which will be of the most value to him in his 

 future career. 



Those who study chemistry may be roughly divided as to their future 

 careers into two groups — those who become teachers and those who become 

 technical chemists. Now, whether the student takes up either the one or the other 

 career, I think that it is clear that the objects to be aimed at in training him are 

 to give him a sound knowledge of his subject, and especially to so arrange his 

 studies as to briilg out in every possible way his capacity for original thought. 



A teacher who has no originality will hardly be successful, even though he 

 may possess a very wide knowledge of what has already been done in the past. 

 He will have little enthusiasm for his subject, and will continue to teach on the 

 lines laid down by the text-books of the day, without himself materially improving 

 the existing methods, and, above all, he will be unable, and will have no desire, 

 to add to our store of knowledge by original investigation. 



It is in the power of almost every teacher to do some research work, and it 

 seems probable that the reason why more is not done by teachers is that the 

 importance of research work was not sufficiently insisted on, and their original 

 faculty was not sufficiently trained, at the schools and colleges where they received 

 their education. 



And these remarks apply with equal force to the student who subsequently 

 becomes a technical chemist. 



In the chemical works of to-day sound knowledge is essential, but originality 

 is an even more important matter. A technical chemist without originality can 

 scarcely rise to a responsible position in a large works, whereas a chemist who is 

 capable of constantly improving the processes in operation, and of adding new 

 methods to those in use, becomes so valuable that he can command his own terms. 



Now, this being so, I think it is extraordinary that so many of the students 

 who go through the prescribed course of training — say for the Bachelor of Science 

 degree — not only show no originality themselves, but seem also to have no desire 

 at the conclusion of their studies to engage in original investigation under the 

 supervision of the teacher. That this is so is certainly my experience as a teacher 

 examiner, and I feel sure that many other teachers will endorse this view of the 

 and case. 



If we inquire into the reason for this deficiency in originality we shall, I think, 

 1)6 forced to conclude that it is in a large measure due to the conditions of study 

 and the nature of the courses through which the student is obliged to pass. 



A well-devised system of quantitative analysis is undoubtedly valuable in 

 teaching the student accurate manipulation, but it has always seemed to me that 

 the long course of qualitative analysis which is usually considered necessary, 

 and which generally precedes the quantitative work, is not the most satisfactory 

 training for a student. 



There can be no doubt that to many students qualitative analysis is little more 

 than a mechanical exercise : the tables of separation are learnt by heart, and every 

 substance is treated in precisely the same manner : such a course is surely not 

 calci^lated to develop any original faculty which the student may possess. Then, 

 again, when the student passes on to quantitative analysis, he receives elaborate 

 instructions as to the little details he must observe in order to get an accurate 



1900. y Y 



