236 



SCIENTIFIC NEWS. 



[Sept. 7, IE 



That teachers ought to engage in research at all is by no means 

 clear to the public and to those representatives of the public who 

 are charged with the administration of these new institutions. 

 Without going far into the discussion of the general question, 

 which is a large one, I may perhaps be allowed to offer a few re- 

 marks for the consideration of any of my audience who may per- 

 chance incline towards that opinion. 



It is only when a teacher occupies himself with research that the 

 most complete guarantee is given that he is interested in his subject 

 and that he is a learner. A popular mistake consists in regarding a 

 professor as a living embodiment of science — complete, infallible, 

 mysterious ; whereas in truth he is, or ought to be, only a senior 

 student who devotes the greater part of his time to extending and 

 consolidating his own knowledge for the benefit or those who come 

 to learn of him, not only what lies within the boundaries of the 

 known, but how to penetrate into the far greater region of the un- 

 known. Moreover, the man who has no intellectual independence 

 and simply accepts other people's views without challenge is pretty 

 certain to make the stock of knowledge with which he sets out in 

 life do service to the end. That one may be fitted to form a sound 

 judgment concerning -new theories he must be familiar with the 

 methods by which progress is accomplished. The work of investi- 

 gation then reacts beneficially upon the work of teaching; that is 

 why teachers should be encouraged, nay even required, to investi- 

 gate, and not because their discoveries may haply prove to be 

 practically useful. 



Of course it may be said that there have been distinguished in- 

 vestigators who could not teach, but the converse is not true ; every 

 teacher who has attained to eminence as a teacher, who has drawn 

 men after him, who has founded a school of thought, and has left 

 his mark upon his generation, has been an industrious worker in 

 research of some kind. All teachers cannot be expected to reach 

 the same high standard, but this is the ideal after which all must 

 strive, or fail utterly. 



The fact that there is as yet little demand among schoolmasters 

 for high attainments in chemistry is another reason why so little is 

 accomplished in the chemical schools. Here again the public is 

 really to blame. It is disgraceful that in all classes of schools, even 

 where chemistry is supposed to be taught, there are but few places 

 where serious employment is found for the well trained chemist. I 

 could point to several schools which claim the position of first-rate, 

 where chemistry is taught by masters who have never studied the 

 subject at all, but who are, I suppose, allowed the traditional "ten 

 minutes' start " with the book. Would the head-masters of such 

 places dare to employ a person to teach mathematics who did not 

 know the four first rules of arithmetic, or another to teach Latin 

 who had not even got through the accidence ? I fancy not. This, 

 however, is without exaggeration the exact parallel of the position 

 in which chemistry is placed in the majority of schools. 



There is an opportunity at the present time of correcting some of 

 these mistakes, but no advantage is being taken of it. I refer now 

 to the " technical schools " which are springing up everywhere. 

 There may be a few competent teachers of chemistry employed in 

 some of them, but I find it difficult to think of many examples. 

 The sort of person who is put in charge of these places is usually a 

 schoolmaster, who is allowed, sometimes even after his appoint- 

 ment, to get a short course of qualitative analysis in order to enable 

 him to obtain a certificate which will entitle him to earn grants from 

 the Science and Art Department. 



Three years has hitherto been regarded as the normal period for 

 study. The question arises, can a young man, previously well 

 educated, expect to become an accomplished chemht, competent to 

 apply his knowledge usefully, by giving the whole of his time to 

 study during thy ee years ? I believe not. 



By reason of the enormous development of the science the posi- 

 tion of the student of chemistry is nowadays very different from 

 what it was thirty years ago. Since that lime we have not only got 

 a few new elements, a matter of small importance in itself, but new 

 views of the nature of the elements and of their mutual relations. 

 This could hardly have come about but for the recognition of the 

 law of Avogadro as a fundamental principle, upon which we rely 

 as the ultimate criterion by which the true distinction between so- 

 called equivalent weights and molecular ratios has been established. 

 By the gradual evolution of ideas having reference successively to 

 the electro-chemical relations of elements and compounds, the 

 theory of types, and atomicity or valency, we have arrived at 

 notions of chemical constitution bas?d upon the hypothesis of the 

 orderly linking together of atoms. Thirty years ago isomerism had 

 scarcely attracted notice, and carbon compounds were only just be- 

 ginning to be arranged in homologous series. The general use at 

 the present day ol the language of the molecular kinetic theory 

 shows how deeply this theory influences our ideas of the internal 

 constitution of matter. Within the period referred to, dissociation 



has been studied, and a vast body of thermo-chemical data have 

 been accumulated. And although the larger portion of the results 

 of this work still await interpretation, dynamical ideas of chemical 

 action are now generally accepted. We have also new methods of 

 investigation, including spectroscopic analysis with all its vast train 

 of results. 



It has always been thought essential that a student of chemistry 

 should have some knowledge of physics. It is now more than ever 

 necessary that this knowledge should be extensive, sound, and 

 based upon a good foundation of mathematics. Thirty years ago a 

 hundred pages of Fownes contained all that was thought necessary, 

 but no one nowadays could be satisfied with that. It is now 

 asserted that a young chemist who expects to find a career in indus- 

 trial chemistry should also have learnt drawing, and more import- 

 ant still that he should have a good general knowledge of mechanics, 

 steam, and building construction. I suppose everyone will agree in 

 adding French and especially German. You see how the require- 

 ments expand. 



The inference from all this is that it now takes longer to make 

 a chemist than formerly. This is a point of considerable practical 

 importance. 



My estimate that a well-educated and intelligent young man will 

 now require five years for the study of chemistry and accessory 

 subjects before he is likely to be of much use will not appear ex- 

 travagant. 



Here one may remark that in order to become a chemist it is 

 before all things necessary to study chemistry. If the greater part 

 of a student's time is to be taken up with other things it is not very 

 clear how this is to be done. 



A reform all round is wanted. The mathematics, modern lan- 

 guages, and drawing properly belong to the antecedent school 

 period, and I believe the Institute of Chemistry would greatly pro- 

 mote the interests of the profession, if it would impose upon candi- 

 dates for the Associateship not only a three years' course of training 

 with an examination in practical chemistry at the end, but a severe 

 examination in mathematics, in the English, Frenc'n, and German 

 languages, and perhaps drawing before matriculation or registra- 

 tion. 



A consideration of the present position of the student of chemistry 

 leads naturally to a review of the methods o f teaching the subject. 

 Speaking broadly, I suppose nearly all professional chemists who 

 have had the advantage of systematic training have, up to the 

 present time, passed through very much the same kind of course. 

 This consists, as everybody knows, very largely of analytical work, 

 qualitative and quantitative, preceded or followed by the preparation 

 of a number of definite chemical compounds, besides practice in 

 certain very necessary physical determinations, eg., relative density 

 of solids, liquids, and gases, melting points, boiling points, and so 

 forth. There seems now to be a disposition in some quarters to 

 depart from this time-honoured curriculum in favour of a course in 

 which the student is early engaged in some semblance of investiga- 

 tion, and in which he is encouraged to attack difficult problems, 

 which from their fundamental importance offer considerable temp- 

 tation. I venture to express a hope that this will not be carried 

 too far. Already we are in danger of losing the art of accurate 

 analysis. One constantly meets with young chemists who are ready 

 enough to discuss the constitution of benzene, but who cannot 

 make a reliable combustion. And according to my own experience, 

 attempts at research among inexperienced chemists become abor- 

 tive more frequently in consequence of deficient analytical skill than 

 from any other cause. 



Bat though it does not appear to me to be wise to encourage 

 beginners, without sufficient experience or manipulative skill, to 

 attempt original work, one of the best possible exercises prepara- 

 tory to original work is to select suitable memoirs, and not only to 

 read them but to work conscientiously through the whole of the 

 preparations and analyses described, following the instructions given. 

 Many of Dr. Hofmann's papers afford excellent examples. So also 

 do the writings of Dr. Perkin and Dr. Frankland, besides those 

 of many other chemists which could easily be selected by the 

 teacher. 



An intelligent student, possessing the requisite preliminary 

 knowledge, would obtain much instruction by repeating the work 

 contained in such papers as the following, for example: — Emerson- 

 Reynolds, on the "Missing Sulphur Uiea"("J. Chem. Soc," 

 1869— i.) ; Fittig and Tollens, on the " Synthesis of Hydrocarbons 

 of the Benzol Series" (Liebig's "Annalen,' 1S64, cxxxi. 303); L. 

 Claisen and Pupils, on the " Introduction of Acid Radicles into 

 Ketones," etc. (" Beiichte," xx.) ; Lawson and Collie, on the 

 "Action of Heat on Salts of Tetramethyl-Ammonium" ("J. 

 Chem. Soc," June, 188S) ; Thorpe and Hambly, on " Manganic 

 Trioxide" ("J. Chem. Soc," March, 188S) ; besides many others, 

 including papers on analytical processes. To such as these there 



