<». %. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. / t<»- ^ f/. % ^ 1.0 I.I 'rfilM ilM : K III 21 12.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 -* 6" - ► ^ <9 /i />^ ^a ■^^/ ^\ .% o>. ■■> ■r# •>■ VI 'C / z;^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. U580 (716) 872-4503 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 bibliographiques 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. Q D D D D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagee Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de t'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 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 ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film^es. The tot L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 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. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D D D D D D D Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colordes, tachetdes ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages d^tach^es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualitd in^gale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau du fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. The pos oft filnr Orii beg the sioi oth firs sioi or i Th€ sha TIN wh Ma diff ent beg rigl req me n Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires: This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X J 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grflce A la gAnArositA de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images sulvantes ont At6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire filmA, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. 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. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim^e sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iliustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmis en commengant par la prem^Are page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iliustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END "). whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". 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 cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film^s d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 u ^mJKH 4^' LETTERS AND SPEECHES ON THE UNIVERSITY QOESTION TORONTO : T. Hilt, & Sow, Caxi-on Prkss, Cor. KrNO and .Tarvis Strrkts. 1884. ■Mb ■Ji" ^*i--i!. ■-'*" '■. I'.,. '\'.'f'.- .'* -.* .-V^i#*i#«-:tA \ / 1 \ I LETTERS AND SPEECHES ON THE UNIVERSITY QDESTION TORONTO : T. Hill St. Son, Caxton Press, Cor. Kino and Jakvis Strkbi-h. 1884. PREFACE. The following selections from letters and speeches on the University Question have been made in response to numerous requests for information on the part of those who did not follow the discussion during its progress in the press. No attempt at revision, beyond a few verbal corrections, has been made. The selections here offered will form an important contribution to the history of our national system of higher education. The progress of that system has depended on the Provincial University as its main spring. During the discussion the defence of the national .system was so complete, and the responsibility of the Province to maintain its University in a state of the highest efficiency was made so manifest, that further argument on these points is at an end. It is hoped that one good result of the discussion has been to correct mistakes, if not to remove misconceptions, into which certain members of some of the religious deno- minations have fallen with reference to the State University. There seems some reason to ex[)ect that the Methodist body will now loyally assist the State in strengthening the na- tional institution. To this end two courses are open to them. They may follow the economical plan already adopted by Knox and other Colleges ; or, as Chancellor Blake points out in his Convocation Address, if there are reasons which seem to them to render that courae impossible, let them come into the union with their Arts and Theological faculties intact. The present State system is in principle adapted to meet their wants in either case. Any modi- fications of detail, consistent with the principle, which may be found advisable, would doubtless be readily conceded ; and if they are disposed to give a genuine support to that system, their union with the Provincial University will be a real addition to its sti'ength. Decebibbr, 1884. CONTENTS. LETTER BY FABIUS '""J «• <• „ 4 " WM. CAVEN 3 •I t( ,, 14 •• J AS. P. SHERATON JS " VINDICATOR ..'...... 28 SI 36 •• GEO. E. SHAW ^ " ALFRED BAKER 44 " " cohv. I will nicrrly pi-cnuHt; thut the word (InivorHity iH to ho tiiktui in what t'ollowM hh including toauhing funutionH. A huge portion of tin* pvopjc of this proviiic(\ including a ma- jority of the I'rcHbytorianH, hold that tho Statu uhould oontinut) to provido univurnity uducation of tho highcHt order, aa it haa rtant to be asHur<'«l thut th«' State has In-en right in supporting its University since 1850, l»ecause if it was justified iik creating such an institution, then it follows that it is its duty now, us it has always b(H>n, to see that it is maintained in a state of oHIciency. On this point we have the unbiassed opinion of Principal Grunt himnelf, who in his inaugural address, delivered in 1877, says : — " As far OH pruviucial action was conooriiuii, it was surely well, it seeius to me, tliat Ontario slioiild devote tlie whole endownient uccniing from the lands set apart for univerHJty erovincial (lollege was sutticient, according to Principal Grant, in 1877, he will not assert that two are required now ; and if there are others in exis- tence from local, denominational, or other necessities. Principal Grant says they have no claim upon the State, but must depend upon " the sacrifices their friends are willing to make for them." As for the Pi-ovincial University, if its lecture-rooms should at some future day become too sn7"dl, surely the sensible and economi- cal plan would be to enlarge them, not to found a new institution, as Principal Grant now seems to hold. Universities are not dupli- cated, like schools, wjuni the classes reach a certain size. All the students of all the universities in Ontario do not yet equal in num- ber those in attendance at Harvard, or the Sttite Univei-sity of Michigan ; so that, even were there no denominational colleges in the province, the time would not yet have arrived for the creation of a secoufl State College. In the growth of a univei-sity like the provincial one, the size of the classes and class rooms will ofler comparatively little difficulty, even were the students many times their present number. The main requirements will be, as they now are, for additions to the staff and the maintenance of the library, museums, and laboratories. Could all the denominations follow the good example set by McMas- ter Hall, Knox, and Wyclifte Colleges, all patriotic citizens would, I imagine, desire to see but one univei-sity and college in Ontario, jjossessed of large and complete facultit^s in law, medicine, and arts, and furnished with a splendid library, valuable museums and well equipped laboratories. Unfortunately the realization of this ideal is rendered all the more remote by the existence of the de- nominational colleges. With regard to the suggestion that the University of Toronto should increase the fees, it may be stated that it is only a short time since such a step was taken. I have no doubt that if the fees were raised as high as some people would recommend, the result would be a diminution of students instead of an increase of fees. Possibly this is the result which Principals Grant and Nelles would like to bring about. In this matter it will not be contend- ed, I imagine, that the provincial institution should deal less liber- ally with students than the denominational ones. The present scale, I am informed, was adopted by the Senate after a careful inquiry into the fees charged at the various Canadian universities ; and, so far as I can learn, it does not difiVr materially from that of the prin- cipal denominational institutions. And there is this to be added, that the Univei-sity of Toronto is not permitted to make exceptions in the ca.se of students of narrow means, whilst it is said that some, if not all the denominational colleges, not only extend a liberal consid- eration to their students under such circumstances, but give free tuition to a considisrabie number. I am futher told that there is no chai'ge for tuition to any person, of either sex, at the University of Michigan ; but on this point Principal Nelles will correct me if he has more accurate information. The question of scholarships in the Provincial University, is one, I take it, to be decided by experience. If the class lists show that many of the brightest students who have rendeied good ser- vice to the country could not have obtained a university education without the assistance rendered by scholarships, can it be asserted that the time has come to discontinue these prizes 1 On this sub- ject I have made careful enquiry, and I am in a position to answer that question in the negative, and to affirm that a serious blow would be inflicted on the province if scholarships were abolished iiL the present time. Such a step, moreovei", would be in direct opposition to the practice of British and Canadian universities, for it is a well known fact that not only in this young province, but in the Mother Country, where wealth abounds, the tendency is not to abolish scholarships but to multiply them. The proposal that the province should not devote money to perpetuate the scholai"ship system comes, I observe, not from Principal Grant, but from his distinguished lieutenant, Principal Nelles and others, who are solicitous to point out " the more excellent way " in sev- eral matters besides this. "A fellow feeling makes them wondrous kind." May I ask what is the opinion of Principal Nelles about scholar- ships in denominational colleges 1 If, as he says, " the value or need of such incentives is greatly doubted by many persons," why does he not apply the doctrine (o Victoiia College, where there is a goodly ar- ray of them ? Why does he not attemj)t to convert to this view Prin- cipal Grant, who in 1877 said that he wanted for Queen's College " additional bursaries and some really good scholarships V If, as Princijjal Nelles thinks, there is no occasion for State subsidies to young men preparing for the learned professions, does he hold that denominational colleges alone should oflei such subsidies ? ''' * Principal Grant a])parently does not like Queen's College to be styled " denominational " inasmuch as it was estaldished, as he states in his last address, '• not foi- nieic denominational ends, as is ignorantly asserted, but from the highest j)ublic motives." I con- fess that I do not see anything inaccurate, still less anything oft'en- sive, in the term. The founders of that institution were not, at any rate, ashamed of its denominational character, nor was Princi- pal Grant himself in 1877. when he used the following language, " But here the question conies up, is it wise for the Church to undertake the burden of a Faculty of Arts in connection with Queen's ? * * * The i]uestion of consolidating our various institutions (Knox, Montreal, and (Queen's) delayufl the union of the t'hurchcs for two or three years. • * » The Church in accepting Qu-en's of course nit ant to preserve, cherish, and honour her. Her special friends, in insisting upon the niaiuteiiance of her integrity, of course meant to develop and strengthen her in every department. They considered tliat * * * there was an undoubted ad- vantage in a combination of the Arts and Divinity Faculties ■when the constitueniiy was large enough to supi>ort l)otli ; * ♦ * that she (Queen's) was retiuired by the Church now, and might be still more required in the future." If such language does not indicate a denominationsd institution, then there are no such institutions in existence. The question of State aid to denominational colleges is one with " bich the University of Toronto has no concern at present, and with which it did not meddle when the grants to them were with- drawn by the Government of the late Hon. Sandtield Macdonald. Principal Grant may now assert the claims of Queen's College if he will ; but, if he thinks his claims just, why does he not apply directly to the Legislature ujion the merits of his own case, with- out attempting to embarrass the just claims on the State of the Provincial University ? In the event, however, of such an appli- 8 cation on his part, I would advise him not to quote in its support his own words ; — " If others (than the provincial college) are in existeuce from local, de- nominational, or other necessities, let the necessity be proved by the sacriHces their friends are willing to make for them, and the real extent of the necessity by the survival of the fittest." And perhaps it would be just as well for his own sake that he should not allude to the fact that the Scotch colleges, though all of them have thelogical faculties, derive assistance from the State. People in Ontario will be apt to suspect that the system of an established Church in Scotland has had something to do with the present state of things there. It seems obvious from the utterances of the principals of Queen's and Victoria and of the chancellor of Trinity University that their present hostile attitude is the result of concerted action. It becomes, therefore, all the more lu'cessary for the friends of the Provincial University, numerous and influential as they at a in all the denominations, and not least so amongst the denominations maintaining separate colleges, to rally to the support of that in- stitution, and the great principhss of which its existence is the embodiment. ''''' * '■' "' Yoius, ifec, November 17, 188:i. KAHIUS. THE UNIVERSITY QUESTION. Sir, — The question of ai)plication to the Provincial Legislature on behalf of the University of Toronto and University College, is one of great importance, not only in relation to higher education, but in my opinion, to the entire educational system of the Prov- ince. In common with many, I should not like to see that system destroyed or marred, nor any principle sanctioned, the application of which might eventually prove fatal to it. There is no reason to believe that the gentlemen who opj)Ose the seeking of further aid to the University are hostile to our public school system ; nevertheless, it seems to me, that most of them argue upon princi- ples which are inconsistent with any Stiite system of education, whet' imary, secondary, or highei- ; unless, indeed, a system whic . ould 8ubsi of educator there would havti been no education at all .prejudiced students of Canadian history will not hesitatci tu say that the Methodist and Presby- tei'ian churches did a right and necessary thing in founding Vic- toria and Queen's Colleges. An exclusive and tyrannical reginte, now happily quite passed away, left these Churches no option in the matter, and most praiseworthy exertions were made to establish the Colleges named. Their record is highly honourable, and no sup- porter of the Provincial University has any interest in depreciating the excellent work they have done, or the eminent teachers connected with thein. It will, however, be very unfortunate should these univtirsities consider the position which they have come to occupy a reason for opposing the adequate development of the Provincial Institution by the party under primary obligation to care for it. Should thej' do tliis, impartial history will regret their narrowness of view, even as it has condemned the arrogant exclusiveness of old King's College. But tinless it can be shown that th(* University and College retjuire additional revenue, which no practicable measures of I'e- trenchnient or economy can adequately provide, there is no case with which to go to tht> Legislature. As to the first point — the need of increased revenue — it is only necessary to say that the Uni- c i 10 veraity requireH enlarged accommodation tor examination purposes, and that the teaching faculty of the College is undeniahly defective as long as Latin and Greek are entrusted to one chair, Mathematics and Physics to one chair, Logic, Psychology, and Ethics to one chair ; wliile there is no provision at all for teaching Political Science oi- Jurisprudence. It may, of course, be replied that the other colleges are not more fully eqiiipped, or have even fewer chairs. But this is nothing to the purpose ; for surely no enlight- ened man will say that because all our colleges cannot receive ade- «juate development, therefore none of them should, and that Ontario — Canada — should not have a singh' college that can claim to rank in its outtit with the great seats of learning in other lands. It seems too clear that we cannot at present have live or six col- leges that shall do so ; and I must say that I cannot admire the policy, which for fear of placing other colleges at a disadvantage, would not allow us to have one. It is quite true that for a long time we cannot have a university with 225 professoi"s, as Berlin has ; but it will not be creditable to us should we not aim at a reasonable progress in academic, as in othei- mattera. But, it is alleged, a good deal of the funds of the University is wasted in fellowships and scholai-ships. Should the University retrench in these and increase tuition fees, sutticient revenue, we are told, would be provided for all neces.sary purposes. I rej)ly that the Fellows are all tutors — assistants of the professors in whose depart- ments they are, and that after very deliberate consideration these fellowships have been lately instituted as an economical method of increasing the teaching power of the College. This action may be thought wise or not, but certainly the fellowships should not be referred to as an instance of extravagance. As to scholarships, the Senate sonu^ months ago resolvcnl that " there shall be no scholarships, or prizes, or medals awarded, except at the examina- tions for junior matriculation and tir«t y«'ar." If, as many still think, scholarhips really promote the ends of a university, they shoidd not be stigmatized as a waste of funds; but, in any case, the Senate has shown its anxiety to economize. I may add, that were the remaining scholarships al)<)lished the sum released would still be totally inadequate to the necessities of the Univei-sity and College. Fees are now as high, I think, as in other 11 Canadian universities, and to ruise them very much would be to change the character of the Uuivoi'sity as a popular institution. It is quite possible, as it has been declared, that some of the pro- fessions are overcrowded, but to make fees high with the view of limiting the ntimljer of those who shall take a university courae, is, in my judgment, a very doubtful remedy for the evil. Would it not be better to raise the literary standard for the professions, and secure that an increasing proportion of candidates for them should become university men ? Again, it is said that the endowments of Upper Canada College should be reclaimed by the University and applied to their proper pui'pose ; thus $10,000 would be added to the aimual revenue, and application to the Legislature rendered unnecessary. Now, I shall here offer no opinion as to whether Upper Canada College should be maintiined in its present character or not. It is sufficient to say that the Univei-sity Senate has no power to reclaim these en- dowments. They are entirely in the hands of the Provincial Government. If, on application for funds being made, the Government shall entertain the matter, it will be for the Govern- ment itself to determine from what source the funds shall be sup- plied. The introduction of U.C.C. into the discussion is quitti ir- relevant. But why those who object to the University " putting its hand into their pocket " should suggest this solution I cannot see, for the endowments of U.C.C. are as certainly their |)roperty as any other funds at the Government's disposal. Still further, we are told that if the University must have more money it must look to its friends, as the denominational col- leges do. It is injustice, robbeiy, to give provincial funds for the benefit of a section of the community : and how can we exi>ect those who are maintaining their own colleges to submit to taxation for the sake of a college which they do not patronize ] Either, therefore, no college must draw upon the public treasury, or all the colleges must partici})ate. Now, it is sufficiently obvious that if injustice would be done to the supporters of denominational colleges by giving increased aid to University College, injustice exists sis long as the College and University remain in the possession of their present endowment. The argument, if good for any thing goes the length of breaking up IS the endowment, ami distributing it among tlie several collegun, or, at all events, of reclaiming it by the Province for general purposeH. Those who demand that U.C(J. endownieutH Hhuuld be restonid to the University, may Hurely demand that the entire (Jniversity en- dowment should be restored to the Frovince, I.e., the people. But if we are told that this is not sought, and that i-ather than cause too much disturbance a measure of injustice will be quietly endur- ed, then I beg to ofler the following remarks on the entire position assumed : — 1. The University is a Provincial institution, and is therefore entitled to Provincial su})port. It belongs to the Province, and the Province should see that it is adequately provided for. It is the child of the Province, and naturally looks to its parent U) nourish it. One may take the ground that the State should not have a University, but having conceded this point, he is bound to admit that the State should give proper development to its Uni- vei-sity and make it as efficient as possible. Unless kept in a con- dition of efficiency it cannot serve the purpose of giving assurance that university education shall be conducted by all the colleges according to a high standard — the ground on which some would tolerate, or even approve, its existence. The Province should do its work well, and not allow a timid parsimony to keep so great an interest as the higher education in a state of depression. The denominational colleges are not in the same position as Uni- versity College, and have not the same claims for Provincial sup- port. It is no indignity to them to say this. I am not suggesting that their work is inferior to that of the Provincial Establishment, or their usefulness less. But they do not belong to the State, and are not under its control, and hence they have no claim upon the public purse. It is no " ultra voluntary ism " which leads me to say this, but my desire to see a principle, for the recognition of which Canada has toiled and suffered not a little, consistently applied. It is poor patriotism that would throw the old apple of discord into the midst of us again. Let Ontario, let Canada, conserve the fruits of her victory over a system which, more than anything else, embittered both her public and her social life for over thirty years. What the duty of the Province toward the colleges now denomina- tional might be in the event of their oflfering themselves to the 13 StJite aH a part of tlie jmhlic syHtHiii, I am not hei*e called to con- Hulor. This question is not before >is, and T fear ^'^'■^8 offence \>y even n'ferrinj^ to it; for tlic^ advocates of the denominational sys- tem evidently rej^ard tlieinselves as on the higher ground. Fiut in any (?ase till these colle<,'Ps an; ort'en^l to the State anH- tion in tluH Hlmti'a(;t way. Who dn-aniH of touching our Connnon HcIiooIh or High ScIiooIh / Dr. KyciHon, thu founder of ('omiuon ScIu)oIh, approved of denominational colleges. 1 had, indeed, ex- presHly Haid that I gave the gtMitlemen on the other hide credit for loyalty to our Common School HVHtem, and ry number of the AJuil in which my theorizing was ridic\ded. The provost writes an fol- lowH : — " Christian nion tleoui the I'uldic .School sjHtoin unmitiHtiiotoiy. * * It may of oourbe come alunit it the (iovuriuuent rufuwcB to accede to the maHoiiablc ilemandis of CliriHtiiiu people of the I'roviiice, liaHed, &n thiit demand Ih, njion the Connnon .Soliool .Act, that they may be forced into the formation of Separate Schools on a large Hcale. In thi« case they would certainly claim exemption from the ordinary taxation." The Provost says that the Church has been forced to withdraw from a "secular Univei*sity,' ami in like manner she may be forced to act separately in Common School education. Is our educational system then not threatened i For surely the allies of the Provost will not allege that he, too, is a dreamer. 1 am not saying whether Provost Body is right or wrong in his estimate of our Common School sy.stem, but merely directing attention to the far-reaching consequences of my opponent's argument, as legiti- mately applied by the Provost. I trust therefore, that my friend, Dr. Sutherland, will not conthiue to think that I " attempt to excite groundless alarm." It can only be groundless if certain tendencies plainly revealed are not of sutHcient inxportance to come into consideration. Oi- would Drs. Dewart and Sutherland prefer to lighten the ship by casting the Provost overboard i I must repeat the " truism " that the Provinces is under obli- gation adequately to support its own University. The whole case Ib gained if this be admitted. If the Provinu? will not provide for 17 tlu) >id<>qiiHt(! work in donr. The fiiuiulH of U.C uiHinUun that its t't|iii|iin«'nt '\h inad»'i|iiuto— not with refer- ence to any ideal eoinphtteni'HH, Init in view of the work which Huch a College Hhonld he |ii'e|i)irtHl to do in the present eirciiinstanceH of th(! country. I cainiot for a nioiuent allow that Ontario is in the rudimentary «'ondition which Hoint? of our o|)|ionentM allege— a mere l)ackwoods .settlement- and that it in presumptuouH to conttmiplate anything beyond the IteginningN of a colh^ge. It in time that we Hhoidd lift up our eye,s to the great heiitage bestowed upon uh, and shouhl ftfei, too, the res|>onsibilities involved. Vast suma are anniuilly expended for material improvements, but a high destiny we cannot reach unless intellectual pn»gress shall keep jtace with material. A college that shall adetjuately represent the prtssent wealth of Ontario muHt be better furnished than the college which was our pride when it entered upon its new career thirty years ago. No person desires the Legislatun; to take on tru.st represen- tations aH to the wants of U.C, which its friends may see tit to uuike, nor to give it whatever sum they may ask. Who, 1 wish to know, haa ever .said anything like this ? It will be the duty of the Legislature to make careful enquiry Ijt^fore taking action. The frieiul.s of U.C. court the most thorough invtjstigation. If it turns out that the college needs no additional profes.sors, or that rev- enue Hutlicient to meet all rea.sonal)lo demands is being wasted, its advocates will be reduced to silence. In the meantime they insist that the University and College have undeniable claims foi- further support. Dr. I)ewart is surely iu error when he argues that because the denominational Colleges " were called into existence by the same authority as King's (JolK'ge," tlu^y an; therefore not " private affairs," but j»ublic institutions, and as such entitled to (Jovern- ment aiil. Many chartered instituticms do not belong to tht* country. McMiUster Hall and Knox College are incorporated, but they do not imagine that they are part of the educational system of the Pi'uvuiix; aoid. cutitiud tu public luuuuy. The " btutc " duca 18 not mean any class or section of the people — as the Methodists or Presbyterians — but the whole body of the people united under a Government. Dr. Sutherland, too, falls into error here, arguing that the Colleges are State institutions because they are doing work for the people. The relation of uiost European Universities to the State is by no means »o intimate as is that of Toronto University to Ontario. Many of these — as Glasgow and F]dinburgh (specially named by your correspondents) — were founded by i)rivate munificence ; and though the State has seen fit to assist them, it has never stood so closely related to them as our Provincf* docs to its University. Hence you cannot argu»' that Ontario, in granting aid to the University of Toronto, should impose conditions such as the Im- perial Government imposed upon the Scotch Universities, viz., that an equal amount should be raised by themselves. I say this while avowing my desire that the government of the Univei-sity should be made still more popular, and stronger incentives fur- nished to private liberality. Provost Body thinks it his duty again to denounce the University of Toronto as " secular." Secular means nothing damaging unless it stands for irreligious. I know not on what ground it is asserted that the " majority of the people of the Province " have strong objections to the purely st^cular character of the University. A charge of irreligion is easily preferred, but its very gravity shouKl make one extremely careful as to the grounds ou which it is based. Whilst University College does not teach theology, I have no reason for thinking that its discipline and influences are less favourable to religion than those of the otliei- Colleges. No one can attest the faith and morals of all the students in any large seat of learning, but I have lieard men who had the bi'.st opportunities of comparing University College with denominational Colleges both in ("anada and the United States, assert that the atmosphere of the former was not less Christian than that of tlu^ latter. 1 may be j)ermitted to say that so far as my own ex))erience go{;s 1 have come to the same conclusion. But after the vindication of Univer- sity College from the charge of hostility or neutrality towards religion, contained in the late convocation address of its President, and in the admirable letter of Dr. Sheraton, it is superfluous to say 19 anything. There should really be an end to this reckless hurling of accusations ; and believing men, thankful that our largest College is so much under Christian influences, should lend generous aid in making it more and more a place where religion and true learning shall walk hand in hand. The spiritual thermometer will rise or fall in our universities in accordance with the religious temperature of the community ; and the Church herself is affected in the same way. In a country where nearly all the people have some Church connection, the Church cannot preserve a high and pure life unless religion is a pervasive element in society ; and if religion is j)ervasive the universities are safe whether conducted by a single Christian ilenomination or under general auspices, by men belonging to several denominations. I ask pardon for insisting on a view so elementary. When denomiii itional colleges assert the catholicity of their spirit and jtrocedure, they do but strengthen the ai'gument for making the higher education if [wssible non-deuominational. If nothing 'ax their teaching is sectarian, and if students and even professors represent a variety of religious persuasions, why should the governing body be all of one denouiiiiatioii ! The door is half open and no evil lias followed ; why not op-en it entirely ? It is not for me to offer an opinion as to whether the Methodist Commission on University consolidation was authorized to speak on the question under discussion for the large and influential communion which it represented. That the Methodist people are not a unit in opposing the claims of the University is sufficiently obvious. Queen's (College, if under the Presbyterian Church will be careful, doul>tless, not to anticipate the General Assembly by entering u])on a line of procedure which the supreme authority in that Church may not sanction. If the Council of Queen's College has com}»lete autonomy it may, of course, seek for the College relations towards the State different from those which existed at the union in '7o ; and in that case the College is no longer denominational. Tiio unofficial expression of opinion, whether by individuals or by bodies of men, no one has a right to object to. The Province has dticided against giving aid to denominational colleges, and there is every reason why the decision should remain undisturbed. Nothing but strife and contention would arise from 20 another policy. Clnirclies would be sure to enter the political arena, ecckwiastical lobbying would prevail, and the rights and interests of the. smaller denominations would be overlooked and disregarded. The Church and the State would both suffer by such Jin arrangement ; the simplicity that is in Christ might not be exhibited by the Churches in their negotiations with Government, and the politicians would be under continual leni))tation to seek Church support by doubtful methods. I do not here discuss the question whether the Chui-ch of Christ, accoi-ding to the consti- tution which her F'ounder gave her, should st^ek Governmental aid in doing her work : whether if this work be really hers she should not herself entirely provide the means for carrying it on. It were here out of place to discuss the question in its purely scriptural and ecclesiastical bearings. We may be content to hiive the mat- ter decided in the light of our own expei-ience, and if (Canadian experience is not conclusive against the subsidizing of churches, T despair of history teaching us anything. It is easy to say that " no person in his senses " dreams of setting up an Establi.shed Church in Canada. Tlie fact is that it is proposed to have a number of quasi-established churches without the bonds for good behaviour wliich most State Churches are required to furnish. Do we really wish to see Methodists, Epis- copalians, Roman Catholics, Presbyterians in eager strife pressing their respective claims for aid to their several colleges, and dealing as skilfully with their educational statistics as some of the parties in this discussion have been doing already? And whilst all this is proceeding, the denominations too small or too poor to have colleges will be made to feel that they are of no account in the land ; with the blessed compensation no doubt that they escape the temptations to which their wealthier sisters are exposed. It is purely gratuitous to complain that the adherents of U. C. claim a monopoly of collegiate education, and will tolerate no college outside Toronto. Local seltishness (;annot account for gentlemen in Peterboro' a!id St. Tliomas advocating University College Many certainly think that it were an advantage to have but one University for Ontario, but not many maintain that there should be only one College ; though it can hardly be denied that our Colleges are so numerous as to make it almost hopeless to 21 parties this is expect general efficiency in their work. T cheerfully recognize the fact that several colleires besides U. 0. nn' doins; work from which the country derives essential benelit ; and could they offer them- selves to the State, free from denominational control and i-estric- tions, T would willin<,dy, as the solution of a i)ractical difficulty, see the Province recoj^nize those ot them whose e^juipraent might really qualify them to advance the work of University education. But this could not l)f' safely done if they remain denominational. It is no silly alarm at the epithet denominational which cau.ses us to keep this ground ; it is our anxiety to maintain the sound principle, that State control must be coextensive with State supj)ort, and that no ensnaring alliances should exist between the Churches and the civil Government. Bt'sides, if denominationalism is not present in the teaching and life of these colleges, why the anxiety to retain denominational connexion? It cannot be that the Church is valued merely as the source and instrumcMit of revenue. Should the reply be, that we cannot without strict denominational connexion have adequate guarantees for the religious character of the college, negotiations for transference are not to Vje thought of ; for the Church cannot consent to any arrangement which would jeopardize the religious interests of students, and tiie State cannot consent to pay money for work done by parties not responsible to it. With a few exceptions, those who have written on the side of the denomina- tional colleges, have not so emphasized the religious superiority of their system, as to preclude hope of mutual understanding. The question of giving necessary aid to the Provincial Uni- versit)^ does not lecpiire that, as preliminary to the consideration of it, the wider question of the whole j)olicy of the Province in the matter of higher education should be determined. The duty of the Province towards its University and College is clear, i)rovided only the wants of these institutions are what their friends allege. No inju.stice is committed by Crovernineiit doing what is HMpiisite to mak(! its one recognized University efficient, even should the larger and more difficult question not be rais(»d. But, for my own part, I am not unwilling fairly to look at that question, with api)reciation of the history ami work of the other Colleges and of their legitimate aspirations. It was injustice and bad policy which 22 forced two of them at least into being, and on this account we are the more bound to be ready for conference. I would not decline the challenge to attempt the solution of this problem, and to consider what is best for collegiate education in view of the state of things actually existing. There are certain conditions of re- ceiving public money which must be respected. One is that direct denominational control shall cease, and auotliei that nothing shall be expended on any theological department. Farther, the sum which the Province may warrantably bestow for higher education must not be frittered away by unnecessary sub-division. I have not outlined a scheme, but merely indicated the direction in which I would be willing to .see solution of the problem attempt- ed. In the case of a College in which the Arts department is not under Church supervision there should be little difficulty in adapt- ing itself to the requirements of a public sy.stem. Should the de- nominational colleges not set down the foot and declare that they will suffer no change, a Commission of the Legislature might be appointed, with instructions to consider the whole subject, putting itself into correspondence with the Colleges, and thus preparing the case for the intelligent action of the House of Assembly. Ontario i-eally wishes, I am sure, to unite all good citizens in the important work of higher education. Tliere is need of combin- ing in its promotion the wealth, exptnience, and zeal of all sections of the community, and anything wliich divides our counsels is a serious evil. No considerable number of people in this country prefer a system fr3e from the presiding influence of religion, and I cannot imagine how Dr. Sutherland allows himself to say that the present policy of Ontario '' lefuses recognition and aid to these Colleges simply because they are based on Christian principles." Is it impossible to convey the idea that the ditiiculty is not their religious character but their ecclesiastical dependence ] If the patrons of the denominational colleges are willing to co-operate in developing a truly national .system of higher education — a sys- tem which shall not traverse the principles of public action, which are firmly established in Ontario— they will be met, I am sure, with frankness and sincere pleasure. WM. CAVEN. Knox College, Dec. 22nd. 28 THE REAL ISSUE IN THE UNIVERSITY QUESTION. Sir, — The position of Wycliffe College as one of a brotherhood of theological halls environing University College, and its great indebtedness to that institution, furnish ample reason why I should address you upon this important topic. The real points at issue, as they appear to me, I will endeavor, with your kind per- mission, to indicate as briefly as possible. 1 . Many of the letters of those who oppose the increase of Pro- vincial aid to the University, so far as I have read, have been taken »ip with matters of detail relative to the administration of the University of Toronto and University College, the economy of management, the expediency of establishing fellowships and schol- arships, the past history of the endowment, the position of Upper Canada College and kindred subjects which only indirectly touch the real question at issue. Doubtless all these points are of great importance, and deserve thorough discussion and candid considem- tion. If the University comes before the country claiming en- larged endowments, the people have a right to know what is being done with the present income, what is the quantity and quality of the work carried on, and whether all the resources of the Uni- versity are administered in the most etticient and economical man- ner. But while these questions must be discussed, they can not be settled by the mere dicta of ex-pai'fe wiiters, nor can they be allowed to cover up the radical principle at stake, and upon which the whole discussion turns. By all means let us have these mat- ters discussed upon their real merits, but let us not permit them to set aside the real point at issue. 2 The real issue turns upon the principle which forms the basis of the whole educational system of Ontario, from the Common Schools to the University of Toronto — the cope-stone of this mag- niticent structure. That principle it is not now necessary to dis- cuss. It was vindicated through conflicts, and has been more than justified by its results. Any objection taken to a Provincial Uni- versity applies with equal force to the High Schools and Common Schools of the country : to oppose the former is to condemn the latter. There are but few who have the hardihood openly to take this, the only logical and consistent position. Some obscurely mutter vague threatenings ; but the majority strongly disclaim 'i: 24 any opposition either to State-supported schools or to a State-sup- ported University. It is, therefore, at present unnecessary to vindicate the principle : but it is necessary to .show that the princi- ple is inevitably involved in the position now taken by those who oppose additional assistance fur the University of Toronto. 3. For, if the principle of a State-sup^^orted University is grant- ed, it is the boundt;n duty of the State to make it as etiicient and complete a university as its resources admit, And tht; standard of efficiency and completeni!ss must not be that of a local and de- nominational institution, but one commensurate with the true idea of a general university, and with the position, culture and neces- sities of the complex life of the Province, for whose well-being and at whose expense it is maintained. Therefore the })osition of those who admit that a Provincial University is right in principle, and necessary for the best developuH iit of our educational interests, and who yet refuse to allow the Province to make proper and siirticient provision for the maintenance; and development of her own child appears to me to be illogical and contradictory. The opponents of requisite Provincial aid to the University of Toronto must in all consistency op|)0.se the existence of the University it- self And then they must logically proceed to another inevitable stej), and confess themselves the enemies of that National system of which the people of Ontario are justly proud. Otherwise, their own admissions condemn their present attitude towarils the Uni- versity. 4. Some of those who have recently discussed this subject in your columns apj)ear to advocate the ]jlan of concuirent endow- ments, viz., that the State should bestow assistance upon each of the denominational colleges, as well as upon the Provincial Uni- versity, in proportion to the amount of actual work performed. T fail to see the consistency or justice of this proposal. Just as Government control involves Government support, so in like man- ner Government support involves (jiovernuient control. By what ..>,^r>dard is the amount of actual work to be determined t Wlm is to iost and verify the quality of the work done in the indepen dent donominational colleges] And quality here is much more iuipf>''tant than quantity. The mere oonii)arative statement of the aaiaixi of studeuts iu attcudauce upon Icotui'es, or of graduatus in 25 tate-8U[»- jssary to le piinci- loae who is grantr ient aud standard and de- true idea id iieces- teiiig and 1 of those ipie. and interests, oper and it of her ry. The Toronto ersity it- nevitahle system ise, their the Uni- iihject in L endow - each of ial Uni- raed. T Just as ke uuin- iy what Wh.. iudepen- ch more It of the uatou in Arts, is utterly fallacious. The stiidies, examinations and various requirements in such competing colleges must be brought int«i harmony and controlled by one centi-al authority, in order to ap- l)roximate to justice in any such method of apportionment. The only plan for the attainment of such an end wotild be to abolish the examining and degree-conferring ] towers of the various denominational colleges and to athliate them all, as teaching bodies, to th(i Provincial University ; and even this plan, in vi(^w of the existing vested rights aud inveterate jtrejudices, appears almost, if not altogether, inipracticable. The great difficulty would be found in so ordering the constitution of the supreme governing body that its autliority would be unimpaired, while the various colleges iiad their fair rejiresentation and intluence, and in maintaining the present high standai'd in matriculation and graduation in the face of any tendency to lower it in order to meet the exigencies of the feebler institutions. 5. The undenominational and non-sectarian character of Univer- sity College has most unjustly exi)osed it to the charge '^f irreligion and agnosticism, and comparisons have been drawn between it and the denominational colleges, liy no means flattering to th(( foinier, which has even been stigmatized as a " godless " institution. A careful analysis of the claims to superiority in this respect made by the denominational institutions fails to disclose any substantial ground upon which they can justly assert it. If they possess as teachers reputable Christian men, so does University College. If a large number of tlieii- students are j)reparing themselves for the sacred ministry, much more is this the case in University College. If upon their councils sit Cliristian laymen and ministers of religion, in like manner is the University Senate largely constituted. If they have daily piayers, so is the Divine blessing invoked daily upon the work in Univei-sity College, and prayers are ottered morn- ing and evening in the Residence. If they require of their stu- dents regular attendance upon the ministry of some Christian pastor, so also does University College, unless a student be exempted upon the written requisition of his parents. Perhaps the denominational colleges found their distinctive clairrs to religion nyton the exaction of religious tests from their irujtructoi-s. Such tests have long proved utterly falla^jioua. They «^ 26 have not secured the ancient universities of England from the in- roads of the most advanced rationalism on the ono hand, nor have they protected them against a reactionary and anti-Christian niedi- BBvalism on the other hand. Or, do these colleges rest their claims upon the fact of the association of the faculties of arts and theology under the same roof and control ] True, the latter faculty does not exist in the University of Toronto itself, but it is surrounded with four theological colleges, whose students throng University College. The difference, therefore is far more in name than in reality. The Christian credentials of our Provincial University are much more ample and satisfactory than any mere external and formal tests could furnish. On the one hand, we can point to the influ- ence exerted upon the Christian thought and culture of the land, and through its Christian activities, by graduates both clerical and lay ; and, on the other hand, we rejoice in the many tokens of a genuine and fruitful religious life among its undergraduates, all the more valuable that they are voluntary and spontaneous. Some of these may be mentioned : — a CUiristian association which num- bei"s upwards of two hundred students ; an active temperance or- ganization ; a weekly prayer-meeting open to all undergraduates ; another weekly prayer-meeting in the residence attended by a large proportion of the resident students ; cottage meetings, and other benevolent and Christian work carried on in ditf'erent parts of the city. These are altogether apart from the work done in connection with the theological colleges. Moreover, that the influences resulting from the commingling of students of various denominations, and destined for various profes- sions are powerful for good both in strengthening and broadening Christian character, and in dt^veloping Christian unity and co-op- eration is attested by those who have the best opportunities of judg- ing. In fact it would be difficult to overestimate the benefits resulting from this association in the ardent years of youth with those amongst whom the life work is afterwards to be carried on. The very fact that our theological students are thus brought into contact with so large a body of men, among whom we may reason- ably expect to find the keenest intellects and the greatest divei-sity of culture and thought, must prove a powerful factor in their edu- 27 ing of jrofes- iening C0-0|)- )enefit8 with ed on. it into eason- .^ei-sity edu- cational preparation, stimulating and arousing the sluggish and indolent, and on the other hand correcting both the self-sufficiency of the conceited, and the intolerant excluniveness of the narrow- minded. Nor will this contact tend to produce a feeble and spuri- ous lil)erali8ni. But it will bring together those who are to be the future leaders both in the State and in our various churches. They will understand one another better, and have a more correct appre- ciation of each other's po.sition, belief, and aajjirntions, of the essen- tials in which we are agreed, and the non-e.ssential8 in which we diffei-. The result will be genuine mutual riispect ; a closer draw- ing together, and a very solid and practical preparation for that Christian unity and co-operation which we should seek to promote not merely by wordy discussions but by such living and potent factors as this very co-education. 6. In bringing this long letter to a conclusion, thei-e is another important point to which T must ask permission to draw the atten- tion of your readere. It has been stated that the Provincial sup- port extended to University College unfairly burdens the supportei-s of the denominational colleges who are taxed both for their own and the Provincial institution. This assertion will not bear exam- ination In considering the maintenance of the denominational colleges we must separute the faculties of arts and theology. In the support of the latter they are obliged to do simply what the friends of the Provincial Univei-sity are doing and no moi'e. The latter are contributing as generously for the support of their theo- logical colleges as the friends of the denominational colleges are for theirs. The buildings and annual income of McMaster, Knox, and Wycliiir! Colleges represent a capital of at least three-quarters of a million of dollars. The sup[iorter8 of these institutions be- lieve that they act most wisely in providing for themselves the special theological training, and in utilizing for the general literary training the unrivalled resources of University College. The sup- porters of the denominational colleges, on the contrary, desire the luxury of having their Classics and Mathematics taught denomina- tionally, and I presume, religiously. And for this luxury they certainly have as good right to pay, as those who. from unwill- ingness to make use of the Public Schools, secure private and spe- cial tuition for their children at their own expense. Wycliflfe College, Dec. 18th. JAS. P. SHERATON. « f^ .* *■{ A,^,. /■;^/<< 28 THE UNIVERSITY QUESTION. Sir, — The quostion of Lt^ginlutive iiid to the Univei-sity of Toronto huH now uHHumod couHidomble importiuico, if wo arc to judge by the amount of dihcuHsioii which it receiveH. You will kindly allow me some Hpace in youi* cokuiuiH to refer to one feature of the Kubject which KeuureH a Hluue in the e()ntn)V(!rHy. I refer to the viewH of many well-disposed peinouH who still appear to think that educational institutions that are not under the control of some religious denomination are of necessity defective and even objectionable, when considered from the side of morality and religion. There was a time when " Godless," as apjjlied to State schools and colleges, frightened a few sincere individuals It did good service in the gooil old days of the B'amily Comj)act, when " Church and State " was vainly struggling against iis impending doom. lu the light of Canadian history we may spare ourselves the thought that any serious contests are likely to be fought on the old battle grounds. The logic of facts and personal observations are convinc- ing. Ontario was wiser than some of tlie older countiies, in not leaving etlucation to be controlled by the different religious bodies. Our entire system of education is Christian, but unsectarian in character. From the elementary school to the Provincial Univer- sity, our institutions of learning have been an admitted success. Still we hear occasionally the whisper of former days, and now and then it is asserted that schools of a denominational character are preferable to those of which the majority of us are quite proud. It is well to consider how little such suspicions should weigh with intelligent and thoughtful people. So far as our public schools are concerned, thej have become so popular in all parts of Ontario that private oi- denominational schools for elementary education are now, in most places, nearly unknown. I venture to say that even where such schools are kept the training imparted in them from a moral and even from a religious point of view, is not superior to that given in our public schools. Fiom the nature of his position the teacher in a national institution has better opportunities for exercising proper ear that religioiiH (leiiomiuHtionH, if wiw;, will loyally sup- port our entire wyHtc^m of nationiil edumtion from the elementary school to the Provincial UnivtirHity. V^INDK.'ATOK. Ontario, Nov. 20th, ISM. THE UNIVEUHITV QUESTION. Sir, — In your issue of Monday, Nov. L'Oth, I referred to the injury which the op|iotuMits of non-denominational education are doing to the cause of Christianity. I might have followtnl up my remarks by stating that the religious body which has most fully (Unbraced the advantages of the national \uuversity stands first at the present day as regards the number of prominent positions held by its adherents. The Methodist ministers who lately ]»resumed to speak for the entire Church on the matter of university educa- tion, are evidently determined to perpetuate, if possil)le, a j)olicy already condemned by many of the denomination. The worthy editor of the (/hrisfiau Guanlian is not free to allow his columns to be tised for the expre.ssion of sentiments opposed to those of the Church on this question. For the benefit of the thousands of Methodist who read The Globe and admire its yeai-s of advocacy in favour of unsectarian education, I .shall, with your permission make some; referencs to the matter. I find no fault with those clergymen in giing ex[)ression to their own views by way of resolutions. 1 strongly object to their attempt to commit the Methodist body to a j)osition of antagonism to our national university. The friends of Queen's College would not have so V)lundered. Principal Grant is too cautious a man to urge any such resolutions in the General Assembly of the Presby- 32 terian Church. Tlic supporters of the Kingston institution would have consented to leave! the matter an open question. It would have been in better taste had Dr. Sutherlanil exhibited a similar spirit. The members of the English Church Hynod are not likely to be urged to pass resolutions hostile to national education. Would it not have been better to seek supj>ort for Victoria College without rousing up that old feeling which did the Methodist body much harm ? Have Drs. Nelles, Rice, Sutherland, and othei-s, foi- gotten the old fights? Have tliey any recollection of the memor- able contests of ISOO ? Do they recollect how a valiant attempt was made at that time to brt'ak uj» our Provincial University by dividing its endowment among the sectarian institutions'? Tlie Metliodist ministers tried to h'ud the (Jliurch, but the laity would not follow. The blundtu' was felt, and it did the church an injury. Such men as Mr. John Macdonald, of Toronto, n^cognised the mis- take, and came out in 1S6'2 as defenders of Toronto University. Again, in 18(18, the ministers of the Church had petitions circu- lated for the purpose of inducing the Hon. John Sandtield Mac- Donald to give grants to the denominational colleges. Counter petitions, with Methodist names by the thousand, were sent in, urging the Government to adhere to its dechtred j)rincijiles. Me- thodist re])resentatives supjiortcd ihe Covernment, and the Church never called them to account lor their actioii.s. Methodist parents continued in greater numVievs to send their sons to University College. Tlif "godless" cry ceased to alarm, and then another stej* had to be taken. It was thought the High Schools worked in the interest: of the Toronto University. Even graduates of Victoria did not urge pupils to go to Cobourg. An institution must be established at Dundas, which would be denomi- national and a feeder of Vicioria. It was started. It failed. One was put uiuler way in another place. It also went down. Metho- dist parents had faith in the High Schools, and hence the reason for the failure of the Church Schools. Within a few years the undergraed we could meet as brothers in one common University ; but it seems Provost Body is a more faithful friend of my church than Drs. Caven, Castle and Sheraton ! In a former ie' i.yr / |»uiiitf'd out the difference which the Uni- versity qiiestion pros iiu i jur 'Jliurch as compared with its as- pect among T'resbyteiians cno i'.jjiscopalians. The English Churcli clergymen me divid d. So arf 'mo adherents of that church. The Presbyterian clergyman u- ■ dividt ', •av. majority being friendly to Toronto. The great majority of th.? ad". . i." its of both these churches will support the Provincial University. NV^itli us the ministers are supposed to be a unit, although many of the younger men would like to see the Church assume a more friendly tone regarding the University of Toronto. The members of our Church are divided, but it is quite evident were it not for the influence of the clergy the •rrowinj' frieiuishii) for non-denominational education would soon manifest itself in resolutions in our quarterly boards, district meetings, and conferences. At every move we are urged to main- tnin the "historic" policy of the C'hurch. Few take the troul)le of making themselves acquainted with the subject, and those who are familiar with it have seldom a desire to oppose the wishes of clergymen whom they respect. The lay delegates to district meet- ings would find themselves in hot water were they to urge a de- parture from the " historic " policy. At the annual conferences, where none but ministers assemble, the question never comes up as a matter of course. I can well imagine what would be its fate if it came before the General Confereruie. The letters of Dr. Suth erland in reply to some Methodists who questioned, through your columns, the wisdom of adhering any longer to the " historic " policy, show vei'y clearly what these correspondents would be obliged to receive, were they delegates to the General Conference and were 89 kd were they to suggest the pi-opriety of saving the Church thousands of dollars by allowing Methodist undergraduates to attend University College. Under these circumstances many good Methodists prefer to contribute to the support of Victoria College, but it is going a little too far to assert that their liberality furnishes any evidence of want of confidence in Toronto University or acquiescence in any move to prevent the latter institution from receiving the assistance which it requires. 1 have one suggestion to otter. It would not be amiss for the clergy to take the laity a little more into their confidence in con- nection with this matter. A statesman shows tact wluai he watches the drift of public sentiment. If our clergy are wise they will grasp the situation. The Presbyterians hav»^ gained financially as well as educationally in utilizing Toionto University. Is there a Baptist who regrets that their School of Theology was moved from Woodstock to Toronto '{ To say, as the Christian GuanHan puts it, that the matter should have been brought up before, i.s the next thing to nonsense. I have pointed out ilic almost insuruiouutable obstacles. The worthy editor knows that the laity had to accept or reject the " Basis of Union." The friends of denominational colleges had taken care to have an aiticle in the *' basis " which committed the United Church to their policy. We were told that alterations in the agreement would not be impossible after the con- summation of union. The friends of non-denominational eilucation are willing to put their views forward in a constitutional manner after the union is fully eti'ected. Dr. Hutheiland and other mem- bers of the Methodist Commission are so anxious to injure Toronto University that they presume to give expression to views that were embodied in no article of the basis of union, and which if they had been embodied in that basis would have killed the union project itself. I am sorry to find Dr. Burwash in his lettei-s endeavoring to enlist as allies the enemies of all higher education. We have too many already who take up the arguments of levellers and socialists against State support to University education. If Dr. Burwash is not sure that the sons of poor men should have any chance to tit themselves so as to become lawyera, doctors, teachers, (). Thus using Prof. Burwash's own reasoning, and having regai'd to the number of students in Arts actually attending the colleges of Ontario, 1 believe it may again lie claimed that University (Jol- lege is doing 60 pei cent, of the university work of the Prc^vince. It may be ol interest to the friends of the University of Toronto and University College to know that for the last three years there has been an average attendance of 222 at the matriculation exanii- nations,— a fact which suthciently evidences the extent to which the country " believes in " these institutions. ALFRKD BAKKR. Toronto. Dec, 7th. 1883. THE UNIVEHSITV t^UESTlON. 8lR, — Plot. Burwash, of Victoria College, is not disposed to ac- cept the conclusions of my letter of 11th inst., in wiiich I l)elieve 1 showed that Univei'sity C-ollege is at present doing 60 per cent, of the University work ot Ontario. He replies in your issue of yesterday. The first part of his letter is occupied with an explana- tion of his mistake in the matter of the number of B.A.s educated in Uiiivcrbity College. 1 believe he fell into his onx)r without ' 48 any wish to do injustice to the Provincial institution. But it was an error none the less, and I felt it my duty to correct it. In the second part of his letter he deals with tlie question of the number in attendance at lectures. In reply I refer him and those interested in this discussion to my letter of the 11th inst. He ad- mits that the 129 names given in the Victoria calendar of 1882 did not represent the number actually attending lectures, and this was all I contended for my words being " this list of 129 students corresponds more nearly to that of the University of Toronto which includes 849." When, further on in his letter. Prof Burwash alludes to the number of High School masters in Ontario, he touches on a mat- ter that confirms in a remarkable way my 60 per cent, contention. If I am correct I ought to find that in tliose occupations to which the graduates of our Universities natvually betake themselves, e.g.. High School work, this precentage is maintained. 1 have found my antici])ation completely fulfilled. In applying this test, Prof. Burwash quite imj)roperly counts against the Toronto graduates those of Cambridge, Aberdeen, etc.: we uuist confine ourselves to the graduates of Ontario Universities. The report of the Minister of Education for 1882 gives of head masters of High Schools 47 to Toronto, 18 to Victoria, 8 to Queen's, 5 to Albert, and 5 to Trinity, i. e., 57 j)er cent, to Toronto. Jn the Report two Trinity graduates are credited to Toronto ; but two marked " certificate " are Toronto graduates, leaving the 47 unchanged. If the graduates of these colleges who at present are assistant masters in High Schools be included, this percentage rises to 03 ; and if the undergiaduates who occupy like positions be added, it increases to 68. Again, if the number of scholars attending High Schools presided over by gi'aduates of these colleges be considered, it will be found that the Provincial institution can claim 6.'{ per cent. Prof. Burwash is not correct in saying that in estimating the present graduating strength of these colleges I selected 1882 to secure a " snap judgment." 1 selected it without knowing what the graduating class for 1883 numbered ; but 1 believe that if this last year be taken my conclusions will not materially change. ALFRED BAKER. Toronto, Dec. 18, 1883. 40 it was I of the d thoBe Head- )f 1882 md this tndents which 1 to the a inat- tention. D which ves, e.g., e found It, Prof, laduates ielves to Minister dIs 47 lo Trinity, raduates Toronto of these ihools be raduates ^gain, if over by ,hat the ting the ll882 to |ig what It if this ^e. Er. WHAT COLLEGE REPRESENTS THE CHURCHES. To the, Editor of the Mail. Sir, — It has been asserted in behalt of the Church Colleges that ithey represent the denominations whose name they bear. I ask your leave to present a few statistics which may serve as a test of "the validity of this claim. I take for this purpose the graduates of 1883, the first year in which University (!olI<(ge ceased to use what her opponents call the " unfair inducement " of lower fees (and here let me express en pnrentheae my surprise that no one has yet shown, what is notoriously the fact, that the competing colleges use the much more " unfair," nay, tlie dishonourable, inducement of a lower standard of examination, as shown by their calendars and examination paj)tus) ; and I take the students attending the Arts courses in this current academic year 1883-84. These figures will therefore show what j)ro|tortion of the secular education of the various denominations each college is now doing. I may add that close examination of the religious returns of University College has convinced me that the figures of any other year would, on the whole, be just as favourable to her, if not auore so. (a) University College sent out, as B.A.'s of the University of Toronto, in 1883, 29 Presbyterians ; Queen's, only 24 B.A.'s, of whom an unknown j)roportion Ijelonged to other denominations. University College now has l.')0 Presbyterian students in Arts ; Queen's College, according to Principal Grant, 13") of all denomi- nations. So that the former is now educating more Presbyterians than Queen's is students of all denominations. (6) Methodism is alleged by Dr. Sutherland to be a " unit " in support of the sujterior claims of Victoria College on that body. Now, University College graduated 8 Methodist B.A.'s in 1883, while Victona graduated 20 of all denominations ; and University College has this session 63 Methodist students in Arts taking the full course ; while Victoria has 80 of all denominations. No doubt on examination of Victoria's religious statistics it will be found that there are not many more Methodist students in her halls than in our own. (c) That Trinity College is still farther from representing ti religious " unit" will lie seen from the following figui-es : — l^inity 50 College turned out in 1883 the imposing nunibei' of 9 B.A.'s, while University Colk'gr graduated 20 KpiHcopalian li.A.'s alone, or more than double the number. Trinity College has now, I believe, 33 students in Arts : University College has 62 Episco- palians, or nearly double. No doubt the Rev. Provost will say that these figures " do not materially alter the 40 per cent, theory," for in his last letter, when forced to admit that University College was doing 55 per cent, instead of 40, he coolly declares that " Mr. Baker's 60 per cent, is as far off as ever." (d) The •ther religious denominations, IJoniiin Catholics, Bap- tists, Congregational ists, etc., are beyond dispute a practical unit in fheir support of Uni\ersity College. It is plain, then, from these figures, that Univtusity College has a better right to call herself a representative of the Presbyterian and Episcopalian bodies, respectively, than Queen's or Trinity ; that she has as good a right to s|)eak for the Methodists as Victoria ; and that she has no rival in the representation of the other religious tlenomiiiations. (Jommending the.se figures to tlie attention of Messrs, Cirant «t Co., 1 remain. Yours, &c., PI. Toronto, Dec jntli I'HK UNIVERSITY QUESTION. A RETROSPECr. 7'u /he Editor of the Mall. SiK, — ^in the xMail of December 14th Provost Body asserts that the land set apart in 1798 for the purposes of higher education in Ontario, sliould. if properly managed, have been ani])ly suthcient for the University to-day, and suggests a searching enquiry into the way that institution has husbanded this oriuinal endowment of " princely i)ro}u)rtions." As the learned Provost seems anxious to get information, per- haps he will allow me to contribute (as a first instalment) a few facts which may not be familiar to one who is not yet acclima- tized : — 51 1. The endowment of 225,000 acres, altliough originally in- tended for a national University, open to all classes and creeds, became for a time the property of King's College, an exclusive High Church University, whose charter was obtained by Bishop Strachan in 1828 on representations whidi wcmc not in strict iw- cordance with the facts. 2. From 1828 to 1850 the management of the endowment was in the hands of the Council of King's College, whilst the Council was in the hands of Bisliop Strachan. During this period iibout 134,n00 acres were sold, realizing ai)out $670,000, all of which was either spent or lost by the year 1850. During the first 15 years (1828-1842) Ujiper Canada College received about $160,000, and the management of the estate cost about $60,000. Indeed, before a single lecture was delivered, the High Church compact had spent upwards of S;300,000, and during the years 1843-1850, their expenditure exceeded the income by upwaids of $77,000. The following extract from a letter dated May 2, 1840, from the Right Hon. C. Poulett Tliomson to Lord John KusselJ. will furnish a sample of the way in which the High Church party administered the trust : — " In the course of last year an investigation having been instituted by Sir ({corge Arthur into the management of King's College, the fact that the pre.sident (Bishop Strachan) was annually drawing from its funds an income of Jt'J.'iO sterling was brought to his notice. Considering that no duties of any kind, beyond those of other unpaid members of the council were attach- ed to the ofiice ; that there was no immediate prospect that the institution would be put into operation, and that every shilling taken from its rev- enues was so much deibicted from the means of education in Upper Canada, already nicjst deticient, it aj)peared to him impossible any longer to permit such an appropriation of its funds. In this opinion I entirely concur : and 1 am contident that your Lonl.-ihip will approve the course which Sir George Arthur ado]ited. It is, indeed, diliicult to understand how the consiy liad not been spent in building, it would have gorie with the whole (*nned." Ill The Mail of Dec. ,'?, Proffssor BmwaHh gives sitbstiintially the HHine story. Now I |)ni|K)se to sliow that, instcail of" one Hfheiiie, there were two sehenieH siigge.stiMl at the time, one hy tlie Senate, involving the jneservation of the endownieiit of University College, and the other l)y a eeitain ('(iiiiini.ssioii involving its parti- tion. Our clerical roniiincers make it appear that there was lnit one scheme — that oi the ( 'onimission — that it was carried through the Senate, and that the Senate Huliseiiuently ri'Versed its action- ■ all of which statements are fals(^ The Senate was no more respon- sible for thesclienie nf the Commission than it was for the deeds of Hishop Strachan, and the attempt to make them so is worthy of tliose who attriliiited the rxtravagaiice of the High Church Conncil of King's (!ollege to the present Senate of the University of Toron- to. But to proceed. The attack nuide on the Provincial University in iStid at Que- bec was followed by the ap|)ointuient of a commission, consisting of Mr. John Paton, of Kingston, Dr. Beatty, of Cobourg, and Hon. .James Patton, of Toronto, the first a partisan of Queen's Col- lege, the second of Victoi'ia College, and tlie third Yice-Chaiicellor of the I^niveisity of Toronto. Theses commisHioners were appoint- ed " to enquire into the expenditure of the funds of the University of Toronto and into the state its financial affairs," and " to enquire into the expenditure of the a])piopriations made annually for Uni- versity (.'ollege, its current expenses, and the general state of its financial affairs." T am not aware what consideration the (iovern ment gave to the financial labours of the commissioners ; but it does not appear that any material change of policy was imposed on the Senate ; nor is it clear that the i-eduction of expenditure which was afterwards effected in the management of the Imrsar's office was due to the rejiort, in which the commissioners, after sjjeaking in flattering terras of the bursar and cashier, go on to say : — "The bursar is not in any way answerable to the Senate, and it may be add- ed that he has not, under the present system, control over the expenditure (^ 58 of hiH own otlit'o. Hf ciuinot, thoreforo, )>o oonniilert'd n-Rponnililc for the prusciit Mcalti iif ixpeiitlituro, and indued liaH ropronuntcd to (iovtrnniont tliHt it may bo rednoud." Oiir cliit'f iiitfiTHt at prt'Ht'iit, however, lies witli tlio luhoiirs of t.lif crjiiiinissioiH'rH in (inotlicr ilii(H;tion. Ah tlicy itniceodfd " tliey ht'camt' stiniiL'ly coia inccd tliat ti mere tiimncial it-port, " such hh thf ( Joveniiiniit fxidiciily askt'd for, " would fall far sliorl of what was roquirfd, and that a much more important service would be inndcred if tlicv coulil accompany tht^ir report with a scheme by which the obvious defects of the present system in Upper Canada could be remedied." They accordint^ly " j^'nve a wide ranj^e to their in(|uiriea witli jnost i^ratifyiii;,' and satisfactory results." \Vi' are not informed who or what prompted tliese eminent edu- cationists to act ii/frd vireK, or to attempt to stpiare the University circle ; nor is it clear why they thoui,dit it unnecessaiy to inform either the (Joveinment or the Senate of their pious fraud. Possi- l)ly the eiul jiistilied the means, and a hint mij,dit have interfeied with "those i;ratif\ iiifj; and satisfactory results," to accomplish wiiich must have been the leal object of the (Commission, although tlif ( iovernmeut fori^ot to say so. Alliircil by " tlie substantial benetils to be secured," the commLssioners accordingly proceeded to lay their train. '" Having been led to understaiul that the heads of colleges were very desirous of a real instead of a nominal atHlia- tion," they addressed a series of questions to the Senate and heads of colleges, and on the re))lies received based what they called their scluMue " to harmonize the great interests of higher education." Before stating this scheme it nuiy lie well to explain the meaning of ■• affiliation," as detint-d by tlu' act of 1S.").'1, and to give the sub- stance of the rei)lit\s of the Senate. .\cconling to that Act '' affililiation " secures to a colleg*- repre- sfMitation on the Senate, whilst its students have the right to com- |Mtr for honouis, .scholarships and nu^dals offered by the university. In the faculty of .\rts there is at present the further incidental privilege? that the college jtass examinations of the tirst and third veais are accei)ted in lieu of the univer.siry examinations. To the (juei'ies of the Commissioners, the Senate replied to the eti'ect that it was desirable to have but one university for Upper Canada, and tliat the existing system of aiHIiatioii did not provide 59 IC S III. I to the Upper )iovidt' Hufficient induoprncnts to other imiversitioH to give up or hold in ulHjyance their univerHity powerH. The Semite further HtJj,'>?eHte(l II phui of (liHtrihntinj; h-^iHlutivc iiiil to nil (•ollci,'es, except Univer sity (!oll('<^e, and in niakinj^ thiw .siit;j,'estion added ; — " It in to 111) uiuleiKtiKid tliat this Hii;;^oHtion is imt intfiiil(Ml to iiitfi-fero with till! I'liilowiiu'iit of I'liivc'i'Hity ( 'olln^f, it \>u'nm tiu^ o|iiiii(iii of tli«; Senati- that UiiivtTHity CdlU'j^o has a first claiin to a fixed I'lulovvinoiit ainjily Hiitiicient to its HU|i|iort in it.s iirt'sciit stati' of clUcMi'iicy, and that it Mhoiild have tho power to eMtaliliHli faeiiltii'H of hiw niiil nKMlioiiic. ' These are the chief points in the reply of the Senate with which wu are concerned at present. Having received this and the other replies, the Coinniissioners proceeded to formulate fhcir plan " to induce all the colK'ges having univeisity powers to nnife upon a common platform." In the tirst place, it was proposed to give S*'' >.()<)(> to each of the four colleges — Victoria, Queen's, Trinity, and Hegiopolis — for build- ing, library, and museum purposes. In the second place. Univer sity College — licence-forward to lie called King's College, to make it jiopidiii — was to receive $138,000, and each of the other four col- leges .f 10,000 annually. A further annual sum of ."?;i,500 was set apart for scholarships— .SI, 000 to the University, and !?r)00 to each of the five colleges. Th(! ( 'ommissioners had assum(>d that the in- come from the endowment would amount to iicoguizes the im|)ortance of educational interests, it is .^till of the opinion (as expressed by the Act of Ia.st session) that no college or educational institution under the contiol of iiny leligi()^l^ denomination should lecieve aid from the j)ul)lic treasury." In amendment to this amendment Mr. IJlake moved, that all the words in the amendment after " thereof " be left out, and the following words added; — "This Hou.se. while firmly adhering to the view that denomina- tional colleges should not be supported by Htate aid, is prepai-ed to give its best consideration to any schenu' which may be laifl before it for the imi)rovement of superior education and for the establish- (54 ment and maintenance, through the Provincial Univemty, of a uniform and elevated standartl of graduation." The amendment to the amendment having heen put, was carried on the following division : — Yeas, 58 ; nays, 12; and the amend- ment, as amended, having been put, was carried on the following division : — Yeas, 59 ; nays, 12. The oi-iginal motion, an amended, having been then put, was cairied on the following division : — Yeas. — MesHrs. Barber, Baxter, Heatty, Hlake, Houlter, Boyd, Caineron^ Calvin, Carling, Carnegie, Clarke, (Jloniens, Cockburn, Colqiihoijn, Cook, Coyne, Craig [(ilengarry], Craig [liiissell], Crosbie, Cumberland, Carrie, Evans, Eyre, Finlayson, Kitzsimnions, Eraser, (Jibbons, (miw, Graham [Hastings], (irahanie [York], (ircely. Hays, Hooper, bander. Lount, Luton, liyon, Mac(b)nald, Matcliett, MonttitL. Mcliouyall, McCill, MeKellar, McLeod, McMurrich, I'ardee, l^axt.m, Terry, liead, Kiehard.s, Kykert, Scott [Grey], Seaton, Shaw, Sinclair, Smith [Kent], Smith [Middlesex], Springer, Supple, Swniarton, 'i'row, Wigle, Williams [hurhain], Williams [Hamilton], Wilson and Wood. — ()(). Navs. — Messrs. Ferguson, McCall [Norfolk], MuColl [Elgin], and Secord.— 4. Among the 66 yeas above will be louud every member of the Government, and (as Dr. Sutherland well knows) such staunch Methodists as Messrs. JiJiuder, J3ejitty an attempt on the part of the denominational colU'ges to reveise the policy was unanimously repelled 1 Who are those who presume to aver that the peojjle of Ontario did ncit desire and approve of the action so taken in their name by their elected representatives 1 What fuller or more satisfactory proof of the jtolicy being theiis then can be given than my recital atibrds ? What fuller proof of the policy being still theirs can be given than the fact that the few advocates of a diflerent policy have never for sixteen years once ventured to raise their heads in its defence 1 Yours, tfec, January 9, 1884. HISTORIOUS. THE SECTARIAN v. THE NATIONAL SYSTEM OK EDUCATION. 7'o the Editor of the Mail. Sir,- -The present discussion on the Univei-sity Question has not only evoked the latent hostility of the sectarian colleges to the Provincial University, but it has also disclosed the fact that the various parts of our national system of education are threatened with attack from the same quai'ter. Tiue, some of those who are opposed to the claims of the Provincial L^niversity profess con- fidence in the system of Public and High Schools, and would not object to further aid to the State Univei-sity were they restored to the favours they enjoyed under the old Province of Canada. Others, however, entertaining no such expectations, openly avow 66 theii- hostility, not only to the University but to the Public Schools. To the latter belongs the Anglican High Church party, who, driven into the obscurity of Trinity College, and indifferent to the growth of our national system of education, can see no connection between its various component parts from the Public School to the University. This party evidently sighs for a return of the good old times of Bishop Strachan. Apparently, too, the existence of the Separate Schools has led them to believe that the national system not only lacks cohesion, but that a denominational secession is all that is required to dissif)ate a treasure which has cost the country many a struggle to amass. Now, without ex- pressing any opinion, favourable or otherwise, on the action of the Legislatiire of the old Provin(;e of Canada in granting Separate Schools to the Koman (Jutholics, 1 de.sii"e to point out that this juivilege is secured to them by the Act of (Confederation, and that in i-espect of this privilege the Roman Catholics are on a diffei'ent footing from other (](!noniinations, inasmuch as the Legislature of Ontario could not interfere with them if it would. With this exception, however, tlie Lc^gislature of Ontario has supreme control of educational matter.s : and notwithstanding the existence of Sepa- rate Schools, it is nc!vertheless substantially true that we have a complete national system of education, commencing at the Public Schools, and ending at the University, as the following statistics amply prove : — 1. In the year 16^\ the number of pii|)ils attending the Public Schools was I76,2()8 ; the number of Ivoiuan Catholic pupils at- tending the Separate Schools, was "24,81 SJ, whilst there were 50,533 Roman Catholic pupils attending the Public Schools. 2. The Public Schools number 5,238, and the Sepai'ate Schools 195. In the former there are (5,922 teachers and in the latter 374. Of the teachers in the Separate Schools, it is to be I'emarked that most of them have attended the Normal or Model Schools ; whilst many of the Public School teachers are Roman Catholics. 3. There are 104 High Schools with 13,136 pupils and 333 teachers. 4. There are two Normal Schools, and one University. Now, as the above figures amply show, notwithstanding the privi- lege confirmed to them by the Act of Confederation, the Roman 67 Public )ila at- id 33:5 e pnvi- Rornau CatbbolicB have to a very considerable extent recognized the Public School system. More than two-thirds of their children attend the Public Schools ; less than one-third the Separate Schools. And the Public School Hvsteni may receive even a larger measure of support especially in the rural districts, as Roman Catholics become more and more persuaded that it is strictly non-denominational, and posses- ses, from financial considerations, advantages which the Separate Schools cannot offer except in cities and towns. In the action of the Legislature in withdrawing grants from the denominational colleges, in 1868, the Roman Catholics acquiesced, and they now loyally recognize the High Schools, the Normal Schools, and the University. In view, therefore, of the foregoing facts and consid- erations one is amply justified in affirming that we have substanti- ally a national system of education, complete and continuous, ex- tending from the Public Schools to the University. And it is in respect of this systeu) that certain ecclesiastics now desire to raise the question whether it is to be retained in its integrity, as it at present exists, or is to be weakened and ultimately destroyed by incorporating with it more and more the elements of a denomina- tional system. Even the least aggressive of these opponents advo- cate measures which would be destructive to the giowth of the na- tional system and fatal to its higher development. They have written much and spoken loudly about the necessity for one uni- versity founded on a basis which would recognize tlie work of all the denominational colleges ; and, without giving one useful hint, they have suggested that it is the duty of the Legislature to under- take the task of devising such a scheme. Now, it is well to re- mind those who propose this course of pioceeding that it 'has been recommended before, and the Legislature emphatically declined to undertake the task. Is it not odd that now, as in 1868, the very men who know the enormous difficulty, if not imi)ossil)ility, of de- vising a scheme of affiliation which would not impair the elevated standard of graduation at the Provincial University, urge the Leg- islature to pledge itself to solve the difficulty 1 What scheme has ever been suggested in which the real difficulties surrounding the question of an elevated standard of graduation have been even con- sidered 1 The j)lan of ♦^^he Commissioners in 1862 recommended the partition of the endowment. That was the " common platform " on 68 which the weakest college was to unite with the strongest ; whilst the question whether the standard was to be elevated or depressed was one which it was thought might be comfortably settled by a senate composed of eight representatives f^om the denominational colleges, two from University College, and five nominated by the Crown. Pray, is that the " wise and patriotic " plan which the advocates of the denominational colleges have still in view I Or is it one of the many indefinite schemes to which their friends in the House referred in 1868, but which they failed to submit for consi- deration, although urgently pressed to do so 1 Ever since that date there have been vague references to a workable plan, but none has yet appeared which will stand criticism ; and we are still, in this matter, where we were in 1808, when, as I have already stat- ed, an attempt was made to commit the Legislature to undertake a task impossible for it, in the belief that some ailvantage would come to tht* denominational colleges. But independently of the difficulty of arranging the details of such a scheme, there is the further and more importiint question of the danger of initiating a policy which would lead to the multiplication of aspirants for Leg- islative aid, and open the door to all sorts of political and ecclesias- tical compacts. If denominational colleges are to be recognized, on what principle is the Legislature to proceed? Is the Anglican High Church party at 'i'rinity to be aided whilst the Anglican Low Church party at Wyclift'e pi-otests ? What would be the respective claims of the Western University which has recently got a charter, and Woodstock College, which is equally entitled thereto? Is Queen's College to be recognized in spite of the protests ot the great bulk of the Presbyterians? And what aie to be the claims of the Methodists, the Baptists, the Friends, and other Protestant sects possessing educational institutions ? And what of the Roman Catholics ? Is it imagined that under such a system the Roman Catholics with their political influence would be content with aid to their colleges at Toronto and Ottawa, and would not ask aid for Regiopolis and L'Assomption, and demand the establishment of Sep- arate High and Normal schools I Is this the policy which the Leg- islature is asked to inaugurate ? Do we not remember the assaults made on the Local Government by the Orange Vtody and other op- ponents who accused them of pandering to the Roman Catholics 1 69 Have we forgotten the complaints of the syHtem of granting aid to charitieH (although it seems to he based on general and just principles) because of the amount received by the Roman Catholic institutions'? When one remembers that the question of amount ot aid to a college or tinivej-sity must always be depended on many considerations besides that of numbers, and in deciding which it is so diflScult to establish, and so much more difficult to act on, a prin- ciple of efficiency, can any one doubt that there would be endless trouble as between the different sects, and that the odium, theologi- cum would introduce into our politics a new element of bitterness and discord which would be fatal alike to good government and the interests of higher education 1 Is it not then clearly the duty of Parliament to maintain by its legislation and encourage by its ma- terial aid the efficiency and development of the national and non- denominational system ? HISTORICUS. January yth, 1884. ler op- Iholics 1 UNIVERSITY EQUIPMP:NT AN1> FEES. 8iR, — Although posae.ssing great respect for some of the denom- inational colleges of this Province, and thoroughly recognizing the high qualificatious and carefrl vork of two or three gentlemen who till chairs in Victoria and Queen's, yet, under the present cir- cumstances, I cannot refrain from exj>rte e«|uipmentH than those of our Provincial University. Moreover, if the charge, so seriously made, be true that the authorities of the University of Toronto and its teaching College arc guilty of 'gross mismanage- ment" (as some of the sjieakers and writers have assertefl), " not- ably in the matter of fees," then a grt^at many other college and university authorities are likewise guilty ot a similar chaige, as the following analysis will fully show : — The figures here represent the Arts and Science departnuMits taken together. No professor or tutor is counted if he belong to the faculties of Law, Medicine, or Theology. The word '' tutors " is employeil to denote instructors, lecturers, and jissociate, assistant, or adjunct i)rofessors. Since the number of students varies from year to year I give, in round num- bers, the average attendance in Arts and Scitiices during the |)ast two or three years : — 72 Profewont. TutorH, HtudenU. Tuition Kwt, *c. Yale 42 27 820 $140.00 Oberlin 10 4 320 10.25 Cornell 25 19 500 75.00 or luilligh 13 5 120 McGiU 13 200 22.25 DlllllOUHio 8 120 21.00 New BruuHwick 6 60 23. 1 7 MiHSomi 17 2 500 11.25 Towa 11 8 250 25.00 or Wisconsin 17 13 330 18.00 or Michigan 20 '2 '2 600 25.00 or 6.25 Virginia 12 8 350 25.00 or California 17 15 220 31.25 or Indiana 10 3 180 Mississippi 8 3 200 Ohio 8 4 250 Toronto* 7 7 400 28.75 Victoria 6 2 130 28.75 Queen's 8 3 175 27.00 to 33.00 More examples could be cited, but a sufficient number is given to prove that the Provincial University and College are far behind in endowment and in the number of professors ; that the fees of these institutions, instead of being too small, are actu- ally too great, practically the same as those of Queen's, and pre- cisely the same as those of Victoria (which are admitted to be " somewhat onerous " to the students) ; and that, if any change is to be made in the matter of fees, it ought to be one of reduction and not increase. Yours very respectfully, HENRY MONTGOMERY. Toronto, Dec. 8th, 1883. THE UNIVERSITY QUESTION. Sir, — Your issue of 2l8t ult. contains a communication from Rev. Prof. Burwash which is offered as a reply to my letter of the * There are also 8 Fellows. from lof the 78 8th. That gontlonuMi hiivinj;; minihored the pointB tfiken iip, I hIdiII <1o!i1 with thcni in the siiiiic onlcr. 1. It is Htddoiu that two i'()lh'i,'t'H uho the It'iin " incidentaU " in vxactly the Haine HenHe. Theretore, in oiih'i- pioperly to compare the f'ceH of any txfo ^iven colleges one innut know the full aignifi- uanee attached to the term hy each of them. In the ulmenco of «ii('h iiiforniatiou I liave given Victoriii the l)rne(it of the inci(K'iit- als, and, lo ! the total icsnltM for tour years are one and the «am«' in Itoth coilegeN, viz., 811"». Hut j think tht- (puistion of alluring stuileutH to Turoiitu i.s iuconiph'tely ctMLsidered unleisM wo compare the coHt of hoard, nxiUis, etc., in Toioiilo, ('(jliourg. Hellevilh' and Kingston. As Prof. Burwash says of " tees for tuition, incidentals, graduation, exaniinations," "all are paid by the students." so umy we say respecting lioiird, rooui rent, and other necessaries. Then, let us compute the entire cost to the student each year in ( 'ohourg and Toronto respectively, and the chargt- uuide hy the ( !onference ( 'ommihsion, and reiterated in numerouH addresses and lotttns, now Itecomes converted from tin," gaseous to the v'Xtra-ga.seous condition. IJy the way, Ih: Sutherland appearecl to take a difhueut view from that last |)roniuIgate(l hy Prof. IJurwasli, for he ouiitted incidentals, matriculation, graduation and examination fees from his calcula- tions in the case of Toionto University. 2. To the statement that the endowments of the institutionH mentioned in my letter are .so am|)le that tiie said institutions do not need to exact fees, I have hut to answer, " That is just the sort of endowment needed l)y IJniveisity T'ollege, and by any uni- versity suited to meet the wants of the people of any Province or State in North America." In 3 and 4 Prof. Burwash says: — "The fact that fourteen or tifteen American colleges out of 370 offer free, or neaily fi-ee, in- struction, is no pioof that such a course is in the best interests of the State or of the .student, or just to thegi-eat body of the citizens. Some of these institutions may be forced, like Victoria and Queen's, by the competition of a richly endowed State university, to reduce their fees to the common level, and even to make temporary pro- vision for scholarships. Others, like Dalhousie and Toronto, may take advRutat'c of their rich cudowmtiiti; to drive lees fortunate 74 rivals out of the fn'M, as a wealtliy capitalist Homotimfs sells goods below I'OKt to seeure in the end a monopoly of th<^ trade." And again in the Tith paragraph, I'rof. Hnrwash says that the txaiiiplc of Yale, Trinity, Laval, Edinburgh, and llelfast "is abun- ilant pr(K)f that fi-es are ndl inconsistent witli a reasonable provision of higlier education." Ah I F thought Dr. Sutherland and otheis had a.sserted that the fees of Victoria and Queen's were far above •' the coninum level." And why have the fees bc(Mi redueed ? < Might evil to lie done that good nuiy conie ? Sii-, is there not a sliithoritiurwash has accre- dited with unworthy motives ( As to the scholarship (Question gratuitously thrown in here in re)»ly to a letter which contained no reference whatever to scliolarships, f have to expn'.ss the opin- ion that it cannot piope'v enter into this disc-ussion. The sum l)aid out by Toronto Utiiversity for scholai ihip purposes is very small, so small that it would be only "a drop in the bucket" if applied to the equipment of the six new chairs absolutely essential to put the University on a proj)er footing. However, since it has iieen introduced, and since tin- whole subject of fees, scholarshijis, and fellowships is one of money, i.e., a scheme by which an appeal to the fjegislature may be rendered uniu'ce.s.sary, I would re.s|)ect ftdly suggest that Prof. Burwash, who (]uotes Yule and Harvard as the gi'eat authorities on the subject of fees, should also quote these same universities on the suiije(!t of scholarships and fellow ships. It iiiay be in place for him to give a detailed accotint of their premiums ; their 8100, .$200 atul S-'^iO ju'izes ; their medals. scholarshi£)s, and S()0(), SlSOO and $1,000 fellowships, in his next letter. Again, it is somewhat remarkable that to Piof. Btirwash thi "fact that fifteen colleges offer free instruction is no proof that such a course is just," while the example of oidy tive colleges, which he names, " is aSun'iant pr;;of " of the oi)})osite. The fees of Laval University [$'Mj) are only $\.'2^ more than in Toronto. Is there " :d of individuals drawn from the ranks, of the middle or 'Ovirer classes, who, without educational facili- ties, woJild, in all prol>ability, have become " mute inglorious Mil- Ions." or " guiltless ( "romwells," but, by education they became orna- ments and blessings to their country. In this connection it may be remarked, in passing, thiit an education which unfits a man for per-^ forming manual labour that may :it any time come in his way in this new country, is a false education ; and ?io one may be misled by remarks concerning it. In my letter of Sth inst. I mentioned a ntimber of imiversities in which instruction is free, oi- nearly free, (^f the fees charged l)y universities having private or church endownu'ut I have little to say. A private citizen is ai liberty to found a college upon whatever basis may be in accord with his views or whim«. The citizens of the State have no right to object to that basis ; ntdther are they always bound to respect it. It may or may not meet with the approval of the majority of the citizens, or of those whose opinion is worth having vipon such matters. In short, a college of this kind is tuider no obligation to provide free instruction for the people, although some of them do so. Hence, I have quoted 80 universities that are not only in most instances of high standing, having now, or having had, upon their professorial roils such names as MaHet, iJoreuuis, Gildersleeve, (jiinian, DeVere, LeConte, Stone, Winchell, Goldwiii Smith, White, Wilder and Orton, but also univtirsitifs th.at are of the people and for the people, founded, supported and controlled directly by the people ; their Senate. Trustees or Regents being elected by popular vote at intervals of from three to live years. Suiely the decisions of authorities wise enough to select such gentlemen to till chairs in their colleges, and authorities who are themselves the choice of the people of their respective States, ought to merit our thoughtful consideration. With regartl to British and European universities ipiote exceedintfly j^ood. The annual salary of their professors would probably average about $3,000 : — * University of Wisconsin (State En0() students ; 1 Piofessor of English, 1 Professor of Mathematics, who is also Vice-President of the University ; 1 Professor of Astronomy, 1 Pi'ofessor of Physics, 1 Professor of Latin and History, 1 Professor of (I reek, 1 Professor of French, 1 Professor of fJerman, 1 Professor of the Scandinavian Languages, 1 Piofessor of Rhetoric and (ora- tory, 1 Professor of Civil Polity anil Political Economy, 1 Profes- sor of Mental end Moral Philosophy, who is also Pr<;.sident of the University ; 1 Professoi' of ( "heuiistry. 1 Proiessor of Agriculttiral Chemistry, 1 Profes,sor of P>otaiiy, 1 Frofi'sstu- of Znology, 1 Pro- fessor of (ieology and Mineralogy, 1 Professor of Agriculture, I Pi-otessor of Civil and Mechanical Engineering. in addition to these 19 Professors, there ar*^ i assistant Professors and 8 tutors in Latin, (xreek, French, (iernian. Mathematics, Botany, Metall- urgy, and Mechanics. There are also departments of Law and Pharniaciy, with theii- leipiired Professors. Observe that, while in other universities aforenamed, the de])art- ment of E^nglish has a Professor (in Yale theire are 3) who devotes his entire time to the duties of this department, and in some cases the Professor is assisted by two or three tutors, in Toronto Univeifiity College, Hi.story, Ethnology, and the Englisli Language and Litera- ture are in charge of 1 Professor anwing to the age of the pupils there must be a Public School at every man's ilooi'. Rach Public School draws all its juipils from its own inunediate nei<^hbouihood. Therefore local taxes may bo imposed to assist in sup[»oi'ting the school. High Schools are less munerous, because, as a matter of fact, they have fcwci' pupils ; besides, High School pupils are. in most instances, of stitKcient age to be allowed to attend school at a reasonable distance from home. Yet there is demand enough for High School instruction to i-e(piire a goodly number of them in th(! province, say 1)0 or 100. Each High School diaws its pupils mostly from its own county or riding. Accordingly, mnnicipal taxes may l)e raised to pay a ])ortion of the expenses of such a school. But University College draws its students frcun all parts and sections of the Pi'ovince, and not from Toronto or the County of York alone or principally, ilence University College should look to the Provincial (iovei-nment, iind not to county, or town- ship or city councils, for its support. To complete the national sy.stem of (MliiciitiMii the Dominion (Government might C()iitril)Ute somewhat to the suppoi't of a university for each of the provinces. Somci years ago the United States (Government granted land for such purposes, and we are well aware that University College has had several students from the oilun- ))rovinces. Yours, Arc, Toronto, Jan. U. HENRY MONTGOMERY. e>. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. z 1.0 I.I 1.25 12,5 12^ • 40 IIIIM III 2.0 1.4 1.6 ^^ />^ /^ M Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 4? \ V \\ '