190 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. [September 7, 1872. 
Well, then we are brought to face the question, How 
shall these courses of lectures he supplied ? If you make 
them compulsory, and admit that it is part of the duty 
of the Pharmaceutical Society to assist in the promotion 
of this all-important matter, the question is narrowed to 
—How shall these various courses of lectures he supplied F 
You have had that scheme which we now have a fair 
right to attribute to Mr. Reynolds ; or, without going so 
far as to attach an individual name to it, you have had 
offered to you that scheme which was presented two years 
ago by the committee appointed by the Pharmaceutical 
Society. By recent references we believe that that was 
mainly the work of Mr. Reynolds. You had that sug¬ 
gestion put before you, and that has been echoed by 
several gentlemen lately, not simply at the present meet¬ 
ing, but by writers in the Pharmaceutical J ourn al within 
the last few months. Broadly speaking, it consists in 
the recognition of a few schools throughout the country. 
Professor Attfield limits the number to about five, and 
whether it is five, six, or seven, it is a limited number. 
The doctrine supposes a limited number of schools to be 
distributed in a few centres throughout the country. 
You have had also a proposition to which is attached my 
name; and though I felt some hesitation in allowing 
that to appear, and to be especially alluded to as Mr. 
Schacht’s scheme at first, I have certainly less hesita¬ 
tion now, seeing that it has come in for a good share of 
rough handling, which, at any rate, makes it less bad 
taste for me to father it. The principle of this scheme 
is, instead of limiting the schools, to make them as far 
as possible numerous. Well those are two very opposite 
doctrines. For my own part I suppose it will not be 
deemed very wonderful that I should adhere to the idea 
which I deliberately adopted, that it is the duty, if we 
do anything in the direction of promoting education, we 
should do it as broadly and not as narrowly as possible. 
I am aware that one opinion is as good as another 
opinion if merely uttered in words, uncorroborated by 
any proof, but I ask for proof the other way, and I have 
a. fair, right to ask for proof the other way if the asser¬ 
tion is made that it will be money thrown away, and 
that the effort will be so much waste of energy. I have 
a right to ask on what ground those conclusions are ar¬ 
rived at. I have not heard them stated further than the 
one general ground that few schools of science are re¬ 
munerative and self-supporting. I am quite prepared to 
admit it. Further than that, I wish to make a very 
strong observation upon that point, because there has 
been more than once during to-day a kind of idea 
uttered that those who accept aid from the Pharmaceu¬ 
tical Society are degrading themselves into the position 
Of paupers or charity boys, a view which I oppose 
most vehemently and emphatically, and I think with 
good right, for I would like to ask any gentleman 
here to tell me what large educational establishment does 
not place its students in a similar predicament, and 
yet no one accuses a senior wrangler of Cambridge with 
a although it is more than probable 
that he has had a very large proportion, if not the main 
part, of his education paid for by other people. He is 
no charity boy for having* earned the benefit of those 
endowments which enthusiastic people, and philanthro¬ 
pists, and large-hearted people (I will not use the dis¬ 
agreeable word charitably-minded people) have left for 
his benefit. It is not to be thrown at him that he has 
adopted and absorbed the charity of others for the pur- 
pose of his own aggrandizement. He has simply availed 
himself of those opportunities which are given for the 
great cause of education, and the fostering of learning, 
which was really and truly the purpose which those great 
men ot old had in founding their endowments. Sir, I 
am myself a pupil of the Pharmaceutical Societv, and 
am delighted to remember the fact. Moreover I ‘rejoice 
LT°w d I, e an P bll o atl0n to those who organized 
Sf^n°c°k at Uo ,°.f s ^ r y S( l™re. I paid my fees, well- 
kno’wmj, those did not represent the money value of the 
education I obtained. Yet I decline to admit myself 
either a pauper or a charity boy. It is only at small 
private schools in which the students pay for what they 
get, and they do pay for what they get, and precious- 
poor stuff it is. Where there is anything like good 
education, it is always in the great establishments 
where the munificence of founders has enabled the 
governors of those institutions to provide means of 
education vastly superior to any that could be obtained 
if current fees paid for the entire expenses of the es¬ 
tablishment. One word more with reference to the 
subject cram. Now I must ask you to observe—or, rather, 
to remember, those of you who have read my scheme,— 
that the whole process adopted there is to avoid the pos¬ 
sibility of cram. Professor Attfield having been very 
vehement, as he was perfectly right in being, against the 
atrocities of cramming, after using the emphatic words 
he did, naturally felt that he was bound to put a limita¬ 
tion on the word against which he had launched those 
invectives, and he wished us to understand that the word 
cram did not apply to the process of private tuition 
which we all know more or less about. Now let me ask: 
you also to remember that in the sense in which other 
people may use the word cram, every process which is 
short of a thorough systematic and complete course of 
education is cramming. Of course, it has more or less 
degree of darkness this ugly black thing; and in some 
manifestations it presents a more ugly colour to look at 
than in others. Now, remember, I do not use any suck 
vehement expressions about this as some do; but let me 
remind you that in your own establishment at 17, Blooms¬ 
bury Square, cramming is quite possible. I was lately 
looking over the number of students who had systemati¬ 
cally attended, or who had for any portion of the time 
attended the instruction at Bloomsbury Square, and I 
was not a little surprised to find that the number wha 
had fulfilled a complete course was very far short of the 
number who were registered as students. They varied 
in the time of their attendance, from a complete course of 
ten months to a very far less complete course of one 
month. Now, if it is attempted to thrust into one 
month that amount of study which is understood 
naturally or ordinarily to occupy ten months, I can¬ 
not help thinking that that is cramming; and as we 
know that it will not fulfil its purpose, this establish¬ 
ment at 17, Bloomsbury Square more or less lends itself 
to the process of cramming. Now, I do not wish to 
make more of this fact. I do not point to it angrily or 
disagreeably ; I merely point to the fact that it is pos¬ 
sible. But I ask you whether, on the other hand, the 
scheme suggested in the report bearing my name is not 
pointed in a diametrically opposite direction ? It offers 
not one single sixpence of the Society’s property in re¬ 
turn for anything which is not absolutely performed. 
Not one single penny is asked on speculation ; not one 
single penny is asked to be given for a promise; not one 
single penny is given ultimately except for results earned 
by legitimate processes. It is required not s im ply 
that a man can pass an examination, but that he shall 
pass that examination as the result of a regular syste¬ 
matic training on the subject on which the examination 
takes place. I think that that is a point really and truly 
deserving of consideration. Following, as my observa-p 
tions do, upon the reading of papers that have been, 
especially aimed to point out that the fundamental error 
of the present system is that it becomes, in point of fact, 
a premium for; imperfect education, I think that the 
process which is exactly the reverse of that deserves 
special consideration. My purpose to-day, as it has 
been ever since the publication of my own few ideas, 
was rather to take the opinion of others. I wish not to 
enforce my own in the smallest degree. I only wish 
that jt should stand fairly upon its own merits, and 
that it should come in for a fair and judicious criticism 
and not a hasty one. As you know, this scheme bears 
some comparison and some relationship to the Govern- 
