698 Literature v. Science . [December^ 
Mr. Arnold says that ten years ago he “ could not help 
being moved with a desire to plead with the friends of phy- 
sical science on behalf of letters.” These very words reveal 
one of his cardinal mistakes. He might as well plead with 
the Poles on behalf of Russia, or, going back a few years, 
he might as rationally have pleaded with the Italians on the 
part of Austria, or with the Abolitionists of New England in 
favour of the Slave system ! The question lies in a nut- 
shell : Science is fighting for liberty, Literature for dominion. 
We have been living in a state of bondage which even yet 
is far from having come to a complete end. In how many 
schools is Science placed upon anything approaching to an 
equality with classical studies ? In which of our universities 
can a man devote his whole time and energies to the know- 
ledge of Nature ? In Mr. Arnold’s own University, Oxford, 
the student whose aim in life is to qualify himself for re- 
search — e.g ., in biology — has first to pass “ Responsions and 
Classical Moderations,” which will take up his attention for 
a year. When the Yorkshire College was instituted it was, 
indeed, first planned and named as the “Yorkshire College 
of Science ” — whereupon there arose a loud clamour from 
those whom Prof. Huxley happily designates as the “ Levites 
of culture.” A college for Science alone was, they cried 
out, a “ one-legged affair ” ; Literature must be added ! 
Strange that they never felt or saw any “ one-leggedness ” 
in the many schools and colleges where, till lately at least, 
Science was totally excluded ! In the case of the Yorkshire 
College the friends of Science yielded. And it was not until 
Sir Josiah Mason’s munificent endowment, in Birmingham, 
that we have been able to point to at least one institution 
where those who desire to study Science alone may find 
themselves at home.* To the foundation of this College 
and to Prof. Huxley’s inaugural speech we owe Mr. Arnold’s 
counter-demonstration at Cambridge. 
But we need not enlarge further upon the position of infe- 
riority and restriction in which we find ourselves placed, and 
which Mr. Arnold naively “ pleads ” with us to accept and 
endure ! Let him plead never so eloquently and subtly we 
cannot accept it without being false to ourselves, to the 
world, and to our duty. We claim for Science full freedom, 
and an equality with “ letters ” in all educational institu- 
tions. This demand involves that classical knowledge shall 
not be demanded from the student of Science at any point 
* Sad that this College should in one direction have barred the door against 
research. 
