Slichter—Recent Criticism of American Scholarship . 9 
her present position, if the instructors in other institutions must 
remain mere teachers, and view from afar the scientific work 
of others. Matthew Arnold once said that the smallest Ger¬ 
man university contributed more to human knowledge than Ox¬ 
ford and Cambridge with all of their wealth. College trustees 
and presidents in this country could well afford to ponder over 
the significance of this criticism. 
A very good indication that America’s inferior position in 
science is due in large part to her higher educational system 
is seen when we consider those, branches of pure science in 
which America stands highest. I suppose that all will agree 
that the United States is in the very front rank in astronomy, 
geology, and meteorology. But. these are the very branches 
which are freest from the influence of the American teaching 
system. Astronomy has thrived in the National Observatory, 
in the great university observatories, and in a few private or 
independent observatories, like the Lick. In all of these cases, 
instructional requirements are either absent altogether or are 
at a minimum. Likewise geology has been fostered by the 
great government bureau, and the best geologists in the uni¬ 
versities have had opportunity to work under its auspices, with 
consequent curtailment of university instruction. Three past 
presidents of the Wisconsin Academy, Chamberlin, Irving, and 
Van Hise, have won international fame in this line of work. 
This was not due to a helpful situation at Beloit or Madison, 
but to the opportunity which the national survey afforded them. 
In meteorology the sole patron has been the general govern¬ 
ment, and the service has honored American science with a 
long list of names of international currency,—Espy, Bedfield, 
Loomis, Ferrel, Abbe. Likewise, a few purely investigative 
institutions, like Wood’s IIoll, The Museum of Comparative 
Zoology, The Missouri Botanical Gardens, etc., all bring to 
bear their share of proof that it is not lack of brains or scien¬ 
tific capacity that has kept higher scholarship out of our col¬ 
leges and universities. 
Among the many discussions of the present subject which 
fill the reviews of the current vear, there is one in a French 
periodical, La Revue, written by Jean Jussieu. T'ihs writer 
