1887] - Biological Instruction in Universities. 509 
comparatively few can be assimilated and turned to immediate 
_ practical account, while others are simply stored up in the crude 
undigested state. Observation itself is largely a process of cram- ` 
ming; and every investigator knows that science always keeps a 
large stock of these unassimilated facts on hand. the observer 
` places a high value on first-hand knowledge, he knows also how 
to appreciate results obtained by others, and how to make these 
his stepping-stones. 
But let me not be misunderstood. I do not underestimate 
the difference between feeding and cramming, while insisting that 
both processes are legitimate. The trouble now is, that we have 
too much cramming and altogether too little feeding, as a direct 
result of a one-sided course of instruction. The field of instruc- 
tion must be broadened so as to'include those branches of knowl- 
edge which are now generally acknowledged to afford the best 
means of developing the powers of observation and comparison. 
The biological sciences hold this position in the estimation of all, 
or nearly all, who are competent to judge. Elementary training 
in these branches should begin in the primary schools, as they 
do in Germany, and be carried on through the grammar and 
high schools. 
This important reform can only be effected through influences 
emanating from our higher educational institutions. They must 
make such a reform not only possible, but also necessary. So 
long as they usurp the functions of the schools, and persist in de- 
voting a large share of their time to that elementary training 
which ought to begin in the primary and end in the high schools, 
so long shall we decry in vain the evils of present methods and 
courses of school instruction. Turn over to the schools the 
_ work that belongs to them, then require it of them, and they will 
find the means to accomplish it readily enough. By all means let 
biological instruction in universities be pitched on a higher key. 
Emerson hit the truth very squarely when he said, “ Colleges 
have their indispensable function,—to teach elements. But they 
can only highly serve us when they aim not to drill, but to create.” 
Is it presumption to assert that our higher educational system, 
so far as biology is concerned, aims too low? Then it must be pre- 
sumption to affirm a truth susceptible of the clearest demonstra- 
tion. Fortunately, I may assume that such a demonstration is 
not required here. But if any one doubts the assertion, let him 
