48 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. VIII., No. 180 



farther.' It does not say, ' Such and such legisla- 

 tion will produce the best results ; ' but it says, 

 ' Beyond certain limits, all legislation fails.' This 

 is the natural relation of a science to an art. 

 Mechanics does not tell the bridge-builder exactly 

 how he must build his bridge ; considerations of 

 beauty and convenience must be taken into 

 account : but mechanics warns the builder, that, 

 if he disregards certain conditions of stability, 

 his bridge will fall. Nobody insists that the 

 axioms of mechanics should be modified because 

 a bridge with the maximum of stability would be 

 inconvenient or unsafe. Nor do we insist that 

 mechanics should solve all the problems of bridge- 

 building. We let mechanical considerations limit 

 the practical a^jplication of aesthetics, and we let 

 aesthetic considerations limit the practical applica- 

 tion of mechanical principles. We do not attempt 

 to fuse the two things together, and then distrust 

 both of them. 



This may fairly illustrate the relation of eco- 

 nomics and jurisprudence. Whether we shall ever 

 be able to combine them into one science may be 

 uncertain ; but we have not been able to do so as 

 yet. Each limits the practical application of the 

 other. Industrial activity is limited by legal con- 

 ditions ; legislative activity, by economic condi- 

 tions. The attempt to confuse the two, and to 

 merge them in a crude science of sociology, seems 

 for the present likely to check scientific progress, 

 and to involve us in serious practical dangers. 

 Each, as a science, is independent, authoritative, 

 and rigid ; each forms the basis of an art which 

 is subject to a thousand limitations. 



Arthur T. Hadley. 



CONVOCATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF 

 THE STATE OF NEW YORK. 



The twenty-fourth convocation of the Univer- 

 sity of the state of New York began its sessions in 

 the senate chamber of the capitol at Albany on 

 Tuesday morning, July 6. There was assembled 

 a large nimiber of college professors, normal and 

 high school teachers, and friends of education, 

 from New York and other states. 



The addi-ess of Hon. Henry R. Pierson, chancel- 

 lor of the university, was a very able and eloquent 

 defence of the work of the university and its 

 board of regents, having special reference to the 

 proposal recently made to abolish them both. The 

 chancellor examined in some detail the history 

 and organization of Oxford, Cambridge, and Lon- 

 don universities. He showed that these univer- 

 sities stand in precisely the same relation to the 

 federated colleges under their control that the Uni- 

 versity of the state of New York bears to the 



high schools, academies, and colleges of the state. 

 The history of the university amply justifies its 

 existence. Starting in 1784 with only one weak 

 college — King's college, now Columbia — under 

 its control, it embraced, in 1885, 45 colleges having 

 784 instructors and 11,702 students, and 1,571 

 graduates during the year. The total value of 

 this college property is $23,164,612.82, and their 

 yearly expenditm-e amounts to $1,787,391.51. Be- 

 sides this, there were, in 1885, 283 academies under 

 the control of the regents of the university, and 

 72,426 answer-papers were examined and passed 

 upon under tiie supervision of the regents during 

 the year. The chancellor stated that j)Ost-gradu- 

 ate courses, with corresponding examinations and 

 degi'ees, were now under consideration. He con- 

 cluded, "Eead the record of these convocations, 

 and I venture to say that no similar records of 

 educational value can be found. Shall we con- 

 sider these convocations a failure and nothing 

 worth ? It is true, the university does not confer 

 many degrees, because that is a power concurrent 

 with the colleges, and it has been thought best to 

 leave that duty mainly with them. I think I have 

 proved that in its past and present the duties of 

 the university have been defined by law, and that 

 it has performed all the duties devolving upon it ; 

 that the corporate name is not a misnomer, and 

 should not mislead ; and that the regents are 

 domg too noble a work to be abolished or merged 

 with any other body of educational workers." 



The main interest of the first morning session 

 centred in the discussion of the subject of manual 

 training, which was introduced in a paper by Prin- 

 cipal Love of Jamestown. Mi*. Love claimed that 

 the test of the practicability of manual training 

 must be its usefulness. Any system of training 

 that does not start out with the idea that the 

 scholar must become a producer is defective. 

 Principal Love detailed the workings of a system 

 of manual training introduced by him in James- 

 town, asserting that it did not detract from, but 

 rather added to, the quantity and quality of intel- 

 lectual work performed by the pupils. His account 

 showed a grfitifying success with an experiment 

 which must sooner or later become general. 



The afternoon session was given up to a discus- 

 sion of the question, 'Has the college a logical 

 place in the American system of education ? ' The 

 subject was introduced by papers by Prof. Oren 

 Root of Hamilton college and Prof. S. G. Williams 

 of Cornell. Both essayists, as well as Vice-Clian- 

 cellor MacCracken of the University of the city of 

 New York, who opened the discussion of the pa- 

 pers, combated the view expressed in some quar- 

 ters, — notably by Professor West of Princeton, in 

 a paper read before the National teachers' associa- 



