IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 /. 
 
 
 'VLP 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 141 m l|Z5 
 ' IS 112.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 U ill 1.6 
 
 6" 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 873-4503 
 
 V 
 
 iV 
 
 % 
 
 .V 
 
 <r 
 
 
 :\ 
 
 \ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 1^ 
 
 -.igb 
 
 <> 
 
 <b 
 
 ^^N- 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1980 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibiiographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 n 
 □ 
 
 □ 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 I I Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiqiies en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 
 D 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relid avsc d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intirieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas dt6 filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires.- 
 
 L'institut a microfilm^ le meillaur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t4 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages pndommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxei 
 Pages d6color6es, tacheties ou piqudes 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d6tach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualit6 indgaie de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 I I Pages damaged/ 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 I I Showthrough/ 
 
 I~~| Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I I Only edition available/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6td filmies d nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 a 
 
 / 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 7 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exempiaire i\\m6 fut reprodult grfice d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 The inrrages appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filnr)ing contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les Images stiivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de rexemplairo film6, et en 
 conformity avec les coiiditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires orig:naux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film^s en commen^ant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diff6rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour §tre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir 
 de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
' 
 
 With Chancellor Fleming's Compliments. 
 
 PRINCIPAL GRANTS 
 
 INAUGURAL ADDRESS, 
 
 DELIVERED AT 
 
 Queen's University, Kingston, 
 
 ON 
 
 UNIVERSITY DAY. 
 
 TORONTO 
 PRINTED BY THE GRIP PRINTING AND PUBLISHING COMPANY. 
 
 1885. 
 
 i- 
 

 « 
 
 ] 
 
r 
 
 PRINCIPAL GRANT'S 
 
 INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 
 
 DELIVERED AT 
 
 Queen's University, Kingston, 
 
 ON 
 
 UNIVERSITY DAY. 
 
 TORONTO: 
 PRINTED BY THE GRIP PRINTING AND PUBLISHING COMPANY. 
 
 1885. 
 
 ^ 
 
Queen's Univebsity, Nov. Ist, 1885. 
 
 I feel it my duty to transmit to you the Principal's Address 
 delivered at Convocation on " University Day," this Session. 
 
 I wish to invite your attention to the Address and to point out to 
 those who have the best interests of the University at heart, the con- 
 clusions at which the Principal has arrived with respect to the future 
 of Queen's. 
 
 May I ask you to take immediate steps to enrol yourself and others 
 as members or associate members of the Endowment Association. The 
 year 1886 will be the first year of membership, and we earnestly 
 desire to enter the year with a good list of members. Ladies are to be 
 enrolled as associate members, and the subscription for gentlemen or 
 ladies may be one dollar or upwards, per annum. The amount is 
 entirely optional. It is felt that a large number of members at a low 
 rate of subscription will much more effectively promote the objects of 
 the Association, than a small number at a high rate. Pray do not 
 'delay returning the accompanying form filled up for membership for 
 
 the year 1886. 
 
 SANDFORD FLEMING, 
 
 President Queen's University Endowment Association. 
 
PRINCIPAL GRANT'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 
 
 ;, 1886. 
 Address 
 
 nt out to 
 , the con- 
 le future 
 
 Eind others 
 ion. The 
 
 earnestly 
 3 are to be 
 tlemen or 
 imount is 
 3 at a low 
 
 objects of 
 j,y do not 
 ership for 
 
 relation. 
 
 The subject of University education has been pretty well discussed 
 and conferred about for the past two or three years, and now that 
 there is a lull, it may be well to ask ourselves what was the object of 
 the discussions and the conferences. It is necessary to have clear con- 
 ceptions on this point, in order that we may ascertain whether any 
 progress has been made, and what our duty is at the present time. It 
 is all the more necessary, because the subject was complicated with so 
 many side issues, personal and local, sectarian and political, that it is 
 little wonder that the general public got a somewhat hazy idea of what 
 was actually involved, and consequently became rather wearied with 
 what seemed a never-ending, still-beginning war of words. The 
 subject was looked at persistently from the standpoint of " Denomina- 
 tional Grants" by writers who forget nothing and never forgive. 
 Local and sectarian prejudices animated gentlemen who protested most 
 loudly their special freedom from every kind of bias. Some, whose 
 idea of a great concert is " all the fiddles of the country in one big hall," 
 were willing to sacrifice the money and rights of other people and 
 other places to any extent in order to have a " great " University. To 
 many the question at issue was between what they called State and 
 Sectarian Universities respectively. To them every University had to 
 be labelled " provincial " or " denominational." They were placidly 
 ignorant of the fact that such terms, far from giving any real informa- 
 tion, are simply misleading ; that Oxford and Edinburgh are denomina- 
 tional, yet national ; and that a living University has always the 
 warrant for its existence in itself, and is to be judged by what it is and 
 what it is actually doing. Two or three illustrations may be given to 
 show the haze through which people saw the subject. One paper 
 published in Toronto, by way of deprecating heated discussion, 
 remarked that it was of little consequence whether University College 
 did or did not get a few hundred dollars a year more than its present 
 revenue. A wise remark, but the writer hardly hit the point at issue. 
 At a meeting of the Senate or Convocation of Toronto University, held 
 last spring, a distinguished professor explained the draft of the con-, 
 federation scheme that has been given to the public. Being asked how 
 much money it would cost to carry out the scheme, he answered, 
 " Forty or fifty thousand dollars," and his questioner then asked with 
 
th(3 utmoHt sii'iplicity if the Professor meant that as a capital sum, or 
 the same amount annually ! Greater authorities than those to whom I 
 have referred seem to me — with submission, be it said — to have had 
 equally hazy notions on the subject. The Globe declared it to be " a 
 matter of first consecjuence, if only under such a scheme it is possible 
 to secure a University education second to no other at any seat of 
 learning on the Continent." Some of us might think this aim too 
 modest and also too ambitious. It is possible to believe that Canadians 
 can even now get at one of their own principal Universities an 
 education second to no other at any seat of learning on the Continent ; 
 and at the same time to believe that even if the four Ontario Univer- 
 sities were rolled into one, the joint product could not compete with 
 Harvard or Yale in historic associations, with Cornell or Columbia in 
 real or anticipated wealth, with Johns Hopkins in post-graduate work, 
 or with a dozen others as regards numbers of Professors or in special 
 departments of study. We might also think that any scheme that 
 proposed to improve the condition of higher education in Ontario, 
 would be worthy of the most careful consideration, even though it 
 gave no promise that the Ontario University would thereby be second 
 to none on the Continent. 
 
 According to the Week, the vital point, " the real question," is 
 whether " Ontario can hope to maintain more than one University 
 sufficiently large and sufficiently well equipped to give a first-rate 
 education, literary and scientific, according to the standard of the 
 present day." And apparently, as a standard, Cornell is pointed to 
 with a problematical endowment of ten millions. There is no man 
 with whom I would rather see eye to eye on educational matters than 
 with the chief contributor to the Week, because of his brilliant record, 
 and because his aims are high and unselfish, but his statement as to 
 the real question at issue in the University discussion, shows that he 
 looks at the subject from a high a priori point of view, from which it 
 is utterly impossible that he should either get or give light. President 
 Elliot of Harvard, says that there is not a University worthy of the 
 name in the United States. Yet, if he proposed to get such an insti- 
 tution by breaking up Harvard into two, and sending out -a boneless 
 invitation to all the other Universities in New England, or even in 
 Massachusetts, to move to Cambridge, he would be looked upon as an 
 eager aspirant for Bedlam. He knows that there is a more excellent 
 way. The way is for Harvard to go on growing as it has grown for 
 the last half century. Well, if there is no University yet in the United 
 States, a wave of the magic wand of our Minister of Education will 
 hardly call one into existence in Ontario. But, we may secure some- 
 thing that will suit our development and our environment better than 
 a University in the clouds. On the one hand, there is no need that all 
 the " scientific" education of a country should be at one centre. So 
 far as I know, there is no country, great or small, in the universe, 
 
 
il sum, or 
 io whom I 
 have had 
 i to be " a 
 is possible 
 y seat of 
 aim too 
 Canadians 
 rsities an 
 continent ; 
 
 Univer- 
 ipete with 
 lumbia in 
 late work, 
 in special 
 leme that 
 
 Ontario, 
 though it 
 be second 
 
 lestioii," is 
 [Jniversity 
 
 1 tirst-rate 
 ,rd of the 
 pointed to 
 is no man 
 ,tters than 
 ,nt record, 
 lent as to 
 rs that he 
 a which it 
 
 President 
 hy of the 
 h an insti- 
 -a boneless 
 )r even in 
 pon as an 
 i excellent 
 grown for 
 the United 
 ;ation will 
 ;ure some- 
 )etter than 
 ed that all 
 ;ntre. So 
 e universe, 
 
 when! it is so concentrated. Massachusetts students of science are not 
 limited to Harvard. The majority of them prefei- the Institute of 
 Tiichnology in Boston, not to speak fo the other Universities in Ma.ssa- 
 chusetts. In New York State oik; .student of .science goes to Columbia, 
 another to Hobokcn, anotlu^r to Rochester, anotlu^r to Cornell, another 
 to Troy, while a good many go to neighbouring Lehigh or other place.s. 
 The distributive principle is be.st. Hoboken is enaliled to otter .special 
 facilities in technical .science ; Lehigh, situated in the very centre of a 
 mining region, otters peculiar advantages to a student of mineralogy. 
 The same rule of distributiim even in the matter of scientitic apparatus 
 holds good in every part of the Old World. Sir William Thomson does 
 not think it nec(\ssary to have all kinds of apparatus at his hands even 
 in the one department of science in which he is the acknowledged 
 primate. Although in a great University in the secoiul wealthiest city 
 in ine Empire, he thinks it no hardship to run down from Glasgow to 
 conduct experiments in electricity in the Cavendish Ljiboratory at 
 Cambridge, and very likely he has gone to Paris for the same pui-pose. 
 Why should we think it necessary to bring to one city all the scientitic 
 apparatus that may be required in connection with the daily widening 
 sphere of the knowable, and to mass in the same place all students and 
 all possible means of instruction ? On the other hand, the Week has con- 
 sistently adhered to the position that for " literary " education several 
 Arts Colleges are indispen.sable. But the so-called " confederation " 
 scheme has not a single clause to secure the continued existence of the 
 colleges we now have, much less a single word indicating a desire to 
 improve them. It proposes to bring the existing colleges together, but 
 the proposal is a ghost. It has not a particle of bone, tlesh, nerve, or 
 skin. It is simply a bare invitation to the colleges to throw aside their 
 charters, associations, dignity, local strength ; to uproot themselves at 
 their own expense, and move to Toronto, just as if it were as easy for 
 a University to move one or two hundred miles as for a crab that 
 travels with its home on its back. If, then, the colleges can accede to 
 the scheme only at the sacritice of the greater part of their funds at 
 the outset, and in all probability of their continued existence as arts 
 colleges, how are you to get your " tirst-rate literary education " ? 
 Practical tee^ehers, like Mr. Robertson, of St. Catharines, may well ask, 
 " How will the scheme give us strong colleges, a high standard, and 
 above all, strong and efficient teaching and judicious examinations?" 
 and, if graduates of Toronto, will probably answer with him, that fai- 
 from giving us several good colleges they " see no security in the 
 scheme of confederation, for the main elements of one good college and 
 university, but do see that the evils which now weaken and lessen the 
 power for good of University College and Toronto L^niversity, viz., 
 somewhat ineffective teaching and bad examining may be extended, if 
 all rivalry in the form of competing Universities should be abolished." 
 Evidently the only tit parallel to the scheme is the killing the 
 
 goose 
 
6 
 
 that laid the golden eggs. Briefly then, even if Ontario could begin 
 with a clean aneet and combine all its resources on one University, it 
 could not produce an Oxford, Paris or Berlin. But it cannot begin 
 with a clean sheet, an<l it is all the better that it cannot. Wise men 
 lived before Agamemnon ; and wise men do not «lisparage the good 
 work done by their lathars or throw away the accumulated sacrifices 
 of fifty years. Besides, Ontario can do better than imitate the frog 
 that would ff 5 be a buffalo. It can recognize frankly and thankfully 
 any good Uni 3rsity within its borders. It may also offer to aid in 
 the fuller development of those that have attained to the recjuisite 
 standard of efficiency, and it can do so without sacrifice of any rational 
 principle, and according to a policy equitable to different sections of the 
 Province, and likely to stimulate local and voluntary effort. All can 
 rejoice in the prosperity of any good institution, and, abstaining from 
 sneers that could easily be paid back in kind, if it were worth while, 
 can unite in seeking the common good. 
 
 On this whole subject of University centralization and of the duty 
 of the State, the recent inaugural address of the President of the 
 British Association may well be studied by us. Sir Lyon Playfair is 
 a man of affairs as well as a man of science ; and he spoke, knowing 
 that he might soon be called upon to do all in his power to make his 
 words good. He condemns the unwise parsimony of the British Par- 
 liament to Universities, in so far, more especially, as science is con- 
 cerned. He cites the case of little Holland which, with something like 
 the population of Scotland, gives to its four Universities about five 
 times as much annually as the Imperial Parliament gives to the four 
 Scottish Universities. Holland has double the population of Ontario. 
 It gives to its four Universities nearly S700,000 a year. How long 
 would a Government stand with us if it proposed to vote one-seventh 
 of such a sum annually ? The cases of France and other countries are 
 also most striking, but I refer you for particulars to the address itself. 
 But while the President of the British Association calls on the Hercules 
 of the State to put his shoulder to what is really the State's own wheel, 
 he repudiates centralization and all its works. He calls out. for self- 
 governing Universities rather than for affiliated colleges, that " may 
 be turned into mere mills to grind out material for examinations and 
 competitions." He would not uproot even little St. Andrew's. He 
 would strengthen the four Scottish Universities, and he hopes that 
 the five in England may increase in due proportion to the population, 
 by the colleges that have been recently established in different local 
 centres developing into autonomous Universities. There are, he says 
 emphatically, " too few autonomous Universities in England." 
 
 I have been speaking of the object we had, or ought to have had, 
 in view during the recent discussions of the University question in this 
 Province and of the confusion of thought on the subject, and the in- 
 adequate or false ideas entertained in different quarters. Coming now 
 
I begin 
 
 tsrsity, it 
 
 ot Vtegin 
 
 ise men 
 
 the good 
 
 sacrifices 
 
 the frog 
 
 ankfully 
 
 o aid in 
 
 •e(|uisite 
 
 rational 
 
 >nH of th;: 
 
 All can 
 
 ng from 
 
 th while, 
 
 the duty 
 b of the 
 ayfair is 
 knowing 
 iiake his 
 tish Par- 
 B is con- 
 hing like 
 bout five 
 the four 
 Ontario, 
 ^ow long 
 s-seventh 
 itries are 
 !ss itself. 
 Hercules 
 m wheel, 
 for self- 
 it " may 
 ions and 
 v's. He 
 pes that 
 pulation, 
 mt local 
 he says 
 
 ive had, 
 
 n in this 
 
 the in- 
 
 ing now 
 
 to the utterances of President Nelles, we expect to find lucidity and 
 frankness, and we are not disappointed. No man in Canada has a 
 better right than he to speak on University matters, and the one great 
 inducement to me to consider favourably the confederation scheme, was 
 the fact that in his opinion some such scheme was workable, so far at 
 any rate as Victoria was concerned. With him, the object of the whole 
 movement was " neither federation of colleges, nor removal of Victoria 
 from the town of Cobourg, but a satisfactory system of higher educa- 
 tion for the Province of Ontario, and an honourable and effective 
 relation to that system on the part of the Methodist Church." Dr. 
 Nelles had thus two objects before him, one educational and the other 
 <!cclesiastical. The relation that Victoria bears to the Methodist Church 
 made it necessary that he should regard both objects, and from his 
 point of view the two are inextricably united. We, nowever, can dis- 
 tinguish between the two, and feel that the first must be the object of 
 every citizen, wliile the Methodist Church can be safely trusted to look 
 after the second. It would be an impertinence in us to express an 
 opinion as to what the policy of the Methodist Church should be, and 
 its own answer to the confederation scheme has not been given. 
 
 The representatives of Queen's occupied a position of peculiar in- 
 dependence during the whole discussion. They were presenting no 
 begging box to the State ; and in the Presbyterian Church there is no 
 one policy in University matters which they had to keep in view. 
 The fullest freedom on the subject is laid down in the Church's basis 
 of union. The representatives of Queen's were therefore in a position 
 to keep before their minds one object from first to last. The only 
 question they had to ask was, by wliat scheme can the most satis- 
 factory system of higher education be obtained, or in what way can 
 improvements be effected ? The relation of Queen's to State and 
 Church enabled them to take this position. Like all historic Univer- 
 sities, Queen's is self-governing. The trustees report annually to the 
 General Assembly, and the Assembly as the supreme Court of the 
 Church, every member of which is a corporator of the University, can 
 instruct them as to the policy they should pursue. But the General 
 Assembly can be depended upon to be faithful to the spirit of the 
 Union, and to the history and traditions of the institutions connected 
 with the Church. The Assembly has the power to remove Knox College 
 or Montreal College to Kingston. In my opinion it would be unwise 
 to do so, and certainly the Assembly will never do so in defiance of the 
 feelings and votes of the graduates and benefactors of either of those 
 institutions. Much less would it dream of uprooting the only Univer- 
 sity connected with the Church, so long as it is fulfilling the great 
 objects for which it was established and receives the hearty aid of 
 friends old and new, and the unanimous support of the section of the 
 country whose educational wants it specially serves, and of a thousand 
 graduates and alumni as loyal as any University in the world can boast. 
 
i 
 
 8 
 
 I i' 1 
 
 I; 
 
 Owing thus to the position we occupied, the representatives of Queen's 
 at the Conferences were able to give undivided attention to the one 
 question of how best to improve the higher education of the country. 
 In anticipation of the action taken by the Minister of Education, the 
 University Council, at its annual meeting in April, 1884, carefully consid- 
 ered the whole question,and came to the foljowing conclusions: — (1) That 
 a University system similar to that of Scotland ard New England was 
 the one best adapted to our history and present condition, and most likely 
 to secure the fullest development of the mind of the people and tlie 
 resources of the country ; (2) That it was the duty of the government 
 either to leave the Universities to depend upon the voluntary liberality 
 which they are certain to receive in due time, or to aid the arts and 
 science faculties in any University that was equipped and endowed up 
 to a designated standard, according to the plan recognized by the British 
 Government in i<-s dealings with the Scottish and Irish Universities, and 
 by the Government of Ontario in its regdlations regarding High Schools 
 and Collegiate Institutes. The creation of bogus and the undue multipli- 
 cation of weak institutions would be prevented by a high standard of 
 equipment and endowment, and wherever public money was given 
 there would be commensurate public control. In other words, the Uni- 
 versity Council said : — " On this subject, as on most others, the truth 
 is between two extremes. A country may have too ma ly Univer- 
 sities ; it may also have too few. Some people think that one is 
 enough for Ontario. We think that there should be at least two ; and 
 we would rather have four or five than only one." To this position 
 we have adhered from the beginning. We hold it to-day more firmly 
 than ever. 
 
 I must now refer briefly to the conferences held last year ; and 
 I shall confine myself to what w^as said by the representatives of 
 Queen's who were present. I have obtained their permission to refer 
 to the position taken by them, because they and I have observed with 
 astonishment that one or two writers have fathered the confederation 
 scheme on us, in whole or part, or assumed that we are responsible for 
 it, because we were present at, or shortly after, its incubation. I need 
 hardly say that the assumption is preposterous. At the first conference 
 I read a paper which I had previously sent to the Minister of Educa- 
 tion, containing a plea for the conclusions of our University Council. 
 But many of the gentlemen who had been invited to the conference 
 had their minds made up in favour of bringing all the arts colleges to 
 a comr on centre in connection with one University, federating at the 
 same time the theological colleges already in Toronto with the same 
 University, and allowing five theological subjecls a place in the Uni- 
 versity curriculum. Seeing this. Dr. James Maclennan, Q.C., pointed 
 out that while such a scheme might suit institutions in Toronto, or 
 that desired to migrate there, it would not apply to any established in 
 other suitable centres, and that if it was to be advocated on grounds 
 
9 
 
 Queen's 
 
 the one 
 country. 
 ,tion, the 
 y consid- 
 -(l)That 
 land was 
 )st likely 
 
 and the 
 ^eminent 
 liberelitv 
 arts and 
 lowed up 
 le British 
 ities, and 
 h Schools 
 multipli- 
 ndard of 
 '^as given 
 
 the Uni- 
 bhe truth 
 Univer- 
 Bbt one is 
 two ; and 
 5 position 
 jre firmly 
 
 '^ear ; and 
 natives of 
 to refer 
 ved with 
 'ederation 
 nsible for 
 I need 
 ionference 
 3f Educa- 
 ' Council, 
 onference 
 !olleges to 
 ng at the 
 the same 
 the Uni- 
 ., pointed 
 'oronto, or 
 blished in 
 1 grounds 
 
 of public policy, ample Government provision must be expressly made 
 for such cases, and also that it would be useless to submit any scheme 
 to the authorities of Queen's that was not fair all round. The force 
 of these remarks was universally admitted, as the minute that was 
 afterwards formulated of the first conference will show, should it be 
 called for and published. At the opening of a subsequent conference 
 the substance of the scheme was submitted that was given to the 
 public in January last. It outlined a plan that few University men 
 could regard with enthusiasm, and even those most in favour of it 
 acknowledged it to be a compromise based upon no intelligible prin- 
 ciple. It was neither consolidation nor confederation, nor did it 
 attempt to grapple with the problem of how to get a system adequate 
 to the necessities of the whole Province. It seemed to us simply a 
 scheme to enable Victoria and Toronto to unite. As a distinguished 
 member of the Senateof Toronto University said subsequently, " Queen's 
 was out of the question from the outset." Therefore, the Chancellor and 
 I took little part in the discussion, and at the close I read a paper that we 
 had drawn up, setting forth that we had attended the conferences with- 
 out prejudice, and that while we would submit the draft to the authori- 
 ties of Queen's as that of the only scheme that a majority of those 
 present thought feasible, we declined all responsibility for it, and even 
 declined to sanction its being given to the public till time was afforded 
 us to explain our position in the affair to our constituents. How gen- 
 erally and impartially it was submitted to the constituency of Queen's, 
 the Chancellor explained at last Convocation. How absolutely unani- 
 mous was the feeling evoked with reference to it you all know. From 
 professors, students, and graduates, from city, county, and Province, 
 from our friends in the other Provinces, in Great Britain and the United 
 States, the response was the same. We have taken our stand. No 
 matter what may be the action of the other Universities, and neither 
 Trinity nor Victoria has yet given a final answer — there shall not he 
 absolute centralization in higher education in this country. Queen's 
 will remain an autonomous TTriiversity. Against this decision, there 
 has not been a whisper of dissent, and i may add that among those 
 who have congratulated us most warmly on it are independent and 
 thoughtful graduates of Toronto. 
 
 It is hardly necessary to say that this community of sentiment 
 on our part was the result not of one cause or motive. Diflerent 
 men came to the same conclusion for different reasons. Some 
 were influenced by that natural conservatism and caution "^'which 
 is part of the furniture of the most radical Scottish mind, 
 which teaches that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, 
 and that it is highly unwise to throw away your old shoes till you 
 know where you are to get new ones. ^ others were animated by a pride 
 in their alTna mater, a desire to see her go on growing with the growth 
 of the country as an independent University, a conviction that she has 
 
10 
 
 i 
 
 'i ! 
 
 a great work to do for Canada, a reluctance to let her subside into the 
 humble position of a federated college in a novel and apparently one- 
 sided confederation, and a modest confidence in their own power and 
 will to aid in her future development. Some looked no farther than 
 the benefits conferred on Kingston by the University, and in the spirit of 
 ordinary hucksters counted up the number of dollars that the professors 
 and students spent annually in the place. Others, of a far different 
 spirit, looked at the scheme from a church point of view, and, longing 
 for a strong theological college like Union, saw in it an opportunity of 
 realizing their ideal, but like true patriots the general good weighed 
 down in their estimation the special good that it promised their Church. 
 Not a few, also occupying the Presbyterian standpoint, opposed the 
 scheme because they believed that the life of the Church would be 
 fuller and richer by the preservation in their entirety of its distinctive 
 theological schools. These men appreciate Queen's because of the 
 spirit of its students. They do not estimate a school of thought by 
 the number of its professors or the number of its students, or its money 
 power. For Divinity students, they would rather have one man like 
 Dr. Cook than a dozen ordinary teachers, and they believe that if a 
 professor does his duty to twenty, thirty, or forty students, he is not 
 eating the bread of idleness. Some of our best University men were 
 at the outset in favour of a greater concentration of our scanty educa- 
 tional resources, and with these, in my moments of despondency, 
 I sympathized ; but they demanded as prime conditions of their assent 
 to any change full compensation for the losses that would be incurred 
 in removal, and also that no invidious distinctions should be made 
 between the component parts of the new University. When there was 
 any hesitation in granting these conditions they suspected the honesty 
 of those who talked confederation, and when they found that the 
 scheme lacked both, they rejected it with more vehemence than any- 
 body else. To these men the provision by which the arts curriculuir 
 was to be partly theological for as many candidates as chose, condemned 
 the whole scheme. Such a provision was contrary to all their ideas of 
 what the B. A. degree should represent. Others were from the outsdl 
 opposed on principle to both the teaching and examining concentration 
 sought for. They pointed out that wherever and whenever the intel- 
 lectual life of a country is vigorous it has manifested itself in the 
 establishment of colleges and Universities of different types at every 
 important centre ; that we have no example in history of the best 
 results flowing from a monopolizing of all higher educational work 
 by one institution ; and that here in particular the results would 
 simply be a great consumption of red tape and hopeless stagnation in 
 University matters. Whatever the views of this or that section of our 
 friends, they all came to the same conclusion, and last June the Chan- 
 cellor informed the Minister of Education accordingly. 
 
 . 
 
into the 
 itly one- 
 )wer and 
 ;her than 
 B spirit of 
 )rofessors 
 different 
 
 longing 
 iunity of 
 weighed 
 r Church, 
 posed the 
 would be 
 istinctive 
 of the 
 ought by 
 its money 
 man like 
 that if a 
 he is not 
 men were 
 ity educa- 
 pondency, 
 leir assent 
 J incurred 
 [ be made 
 there was 
 le honesty 
 I that the 
 than any- 
 lurriculuir 
 londemned 
 ir ideas of 
 the outsdl 
 icentration 
 the intel- 
 ielf in the 
 i at every 
 f the best 
 onal work 
 dts would 
 gnation in 
 tion of our 
 the Chan- 
 
 el 
 
 Mr. Micawber would think that the matter was now settled. But, 
 Mr. Micawber was not a graduate of Queen's. To our view a heavier 
 responsibility rests on us than ever before. The object of the move- 
 ment, in which all of us have taken part, was a desire to improve 
 higher education. We desired this for its own sake and in the interest 
 of all education, for it is a sound maxim that if you would improve 
 the education of a country you must begin at the top. This being the 
 case, our duty is plain. We must go on building on the broad founda- 
 tions laid by our fathers till we make Queen's in reality all that it is 
 in our dreams. Should the Government in the general interest estab- 
 lish a school of science here, we would be enabled to develop more fully 
 other sides of the University, but we would not thereby have the 
 voluntary burden lightened which we have assumed. We were 
 tempted to throw the burden off! In what we believe to be the best 
 interests of the country, we have resisted the temptation. But if we 
 now go to sleep, it would have been better had we yielded. Univer- 
 sities all over the world are doing their utmost to make their grasp 
 commensurate with the widening field of knowledge. They are calling 
 loudly upon Governments, and with far more hope upon those who 
 believe that wealth is a trust, to do their duty. The call in our day is 
 something like that which was made to Europe at the revival of learn- 
 ing between the fourteenth and sixteeth centuries. Nobly did princes 
 and bishops, lords and ladies, individual burghers and cities, country 
 gentlemen and humble priests, then respond to the call. Their founda- 
 tions have been fountains of generous influence to all tne generations 
 that have come after them. Their names have been inspirations to the 
 scholars who from age to age have lit the torch of learning at their 
 shrines, for their own enlightenment and the light of the world. And 
 now these ancient Universities, enriched with benefactions and un- 
 earned increment for three, four, five, six centuries or more, do not 
 hesitate to tell the public that they are not rich enough to do the work of 
 the nineteenth century. Is it any wonder that I should have to state 
 from time to time what are our immediate needs, and is not this a fit 
 time ? Instead of wondering that I should do so, you ought to be 
 astonished at my moderation. 
 
 We should have, within the next few years, five additional profess- 
 orships in arts and science, formed chiefly by dividing, in almost every 
 section of the curriculum, work that is too extensive for one man. 
 Professor Ferguson will give his whole time to history, whenever we 
 can get a chair of English language and literature. If that ca>inot be 
 done at once, we shouH. as a temporary arrangement, engage an 
 assistant. A chair of inodern languages is also one of our first 
 necessities. In the present condition of natural sciences, to ask the 
 same man to teach botany, geology, and zoology is almost an absurdity. 
 The chairs of ancient classics and mental and moral philosophy should 
 be divided. We require an additional building for the science depart- 
 
12 
 
 !i i. 
 
 ment, some good travelling fellowships, and an assistant or tutors in 
 connection with almost every chair on account of the increasing 
 number of our students. We should have at least a thousand dollars 
 a year more for the library and a fund from which appropriations 
 could be made for the museum, the laboratories, and the observatory. 
 Dr. Williamson states that $4,000 is needed for a new equatorial, with 
 spectroscopic and photographic. appliances, and other modem equip- 
 ment for the observatory, and he himself has done so much to add to 
 the apparatus of the University that this modest demand should be 
 attended to promptly. 
 
 For the most clamant of these purposes, and to provide for the 
 seven thousand dollars a year of revenue, for which we have a sub- 
 scription list good for only two years more, we need an addition to our 
 capital of quarter of a million dollars or its annual equivalent. What 
 prospect have we of getting this amount ? It is a large sum, but then 
 it is not to be wasted in peripatetics, but to be applied to doubling our 
 capacity for usefulness. As the three chairs most recently instituted 
 in Queen's, the chair of physics, the chair of chemistry, and the third 
 chair in the faculty of theology, are still dependent on fluctuating 
 annual contributions, it would be unwise to appoint any of the 
 additional professors needed in arts until our capital has been largely 
 increased. Where the money is to come from I know not. Certainly, 
 our trust is not in politicians. As for the principal and professors, 
 they intend to continue devoting their whole time and strength to 
 their proper work They assume no special responsibility in the 
 matter of finance beyond what they feel as graduates or men interested 
 in University education. 1 believe, however, that the money will come. 
 My faith may seem to some to savour of presumption, but it is enough 
 to point to the example of George Munro giving $20,000 a year to 
 Dalhousie University in Halifax, and Senator McMaster giving $16,000 
 a year to a Divinity Hall in Toronto, not to speak of what men like 
 Donald A. Smith and the Redpaths have recently done for McGill, to 
 show that Canadians are awakening to their duty, and that they can 
 be as liberal and as wise as the wealthy men of the United States. 
 Everything that I have asked from the friends of Queen's since I 
 responded to their invitation to come from the east nearly eight years 
 ago, has been done, and never were they in better heart than now. 
 They point to the significant fact that in no University in the 
 Dominion are there so many students in proportion to the endowment, 
 and their recent action shows that they are satisfied with our work. 
 With regard to what they should do now as a body, I have no better 
 suggestion to offer than that they should make the Association which 
 was organized at last Convocation a thorough success. Tha Chancellor 
 is President of the Association, and he can be depended on to do his 
 duty. But he must be supported. He asks every graduate and friend 
 of Queen's not only to join the Association promptly, but to get a list 
 
 , 
 
13 
 
 tui;ors in 
 ncreasing 
 ad dollars 
 opriations 
 ervatory. 
 )rial, with 
 m equip- 
 to add to 
 should be 
 
 e for the 
 ve a sub- 
 ion to our 
 t. What 
 but then 
 ibling our 
 instituted 
 the third 
 uctuating 
 ly of the 
 en largely 
 Certainly, 
 professors, 
 brength to 
 ty in the 
 interested 
 will come, 
 is enough 
 a year to 
 ig $16,000 
 men like 
 McGill, to 
 ; they can 
 ed States. 
 s since I 
 [ght years 
 ;han now. 
 iy in the 
 idowment, 
 our work, 
 no better 
 on which 
 ]!hancellor 
 to do his 
 md friend 
 get a list 
 
 of members in his neighbourhood. To all of these our calendars and 
 reports will be sent regularly, as well as addresses delivered from time 
 to time, and any documents published in the interests of the University, 
 This Association will show who are our friends. The larger the 
 membership the louder the answer from us that Queen's is not to be 
 eliminated in whole or in part from the higher life of the country. 
 
 A word now to the students. Gentlemen, — Remember that no 
 matter what University you attend, the professors can do little for you 
 compared to what you can do for yourselves. Have a clear under- 
 standing of what you have come here for. Not, I hope, without 
 an aim. Not, I hope, with paltry aims. Not merely to get credit for 
 passing certain classes or examinations that this or that profession has 
 made pre-requisites to a professional career; not merely to get marks or 
 to get a degree, but to get education. You cannot get that by stealing 
 other men's brains. You must work your own brain. You cannot get 
 it by any system of cram or intellectual legerdemain, or by looking out 
 foi* a soft place in the calendar. You can get it only by being infused 
 with the holy spirit of education. You can get it only by being honest 
 with yourselves. And you must be honest from the beginning of the 
 session. It has been noted as a singular fact since women have been 
 admitted to the Universities, that their average standing is higher 
 than that taken by men. Why ? Because their brains are larger, 
 stronger, better ? Not at all. I still hold to the old faith, that man is 
 tl'.e head of creation. As a rule he has the bigger brain. The credit- 
 able, intellectual stand women have taken is mainly due to their moral 
 earnestness. They are more conscientious than men. They work 
 from the beginning of the session. 
 
 Immediately after the above address was delivered the friends and 
 members of the Endowment Association who were present held a 
 meeting, when stirring speeches were made and the following resolu- 
 tions unanimously passed : — 
 
 1. Moved by Rev. K. McLennan, M.A., seconded by John Mclntyre, 
 Q. C, and 
 
 Resolved, That this meeting cordially approves of the steps already taken in the 
 formation of a University Endowment Association, to further the interests of the 
 University. 
 
 2. Moved by R. T. Walkem, Q. C, seconded by D. Smythe, Q. C, 
 mayor of Kingston, and 
 
 , 
 
ri 
 
 14 
 
 Resolved, That this meeting further recommends that diligent efforts be made to 
 secure the formation of Branch Associations in the various counties and districts of 
 the country in which sJumni and friends of the University are situated. 
 
 3. Moved by G. M. Macdonnell, Q. C, seconded by John Carruthers, 
 
 Esq., and 
 
 Beaoioed, That immediate steps be taken to obtain members in Kingston, for 
 the Association. 
 

 ) be made tu 
 districts of 
 
 Jarruthers, 
 
 ingston, for