lowest grade of a gymnasium does not show many opportunities for displaying profound learning; nor, for that matter, does the highest grade of the school. The disadvantages also are seen in this fact, that teachers without having had a pedagogical preparation, and being suddenly placed in charge of a class, require considerable time before they can find their level and a suitable mode of intercourse with their pupils. (This has recently been obviated by the institution of seminaries for secondary teachers). On the other hand, it must not be forgotten that the old view, which saw a learned scholar in the teacher of a gymnasium, has had great advantages. Upon it rests the high estimate enjoyed by the profession of secondary teacher in Germany compared with that in other countries. This will not change in future. In the hierarchy of the state officers the teachers will never stand at the head; the only way in which they can maintain their position is by scientific exertions. This determines the character of our gymna sium-it still has something of the school for the learned, that directs the attention of the student toward scientific labor and research. If the faculty of such a school has only one really learned man, he will give the school its character. Thus we see cause and effect. The character of the secondary school requires learned men from the philosophic faculty and the entire university. They cultivate learned men because the teachers of gymnasia lay just claims to being learned men.

Doubtless the great abundance of scientifically prepared workers in all dominions of human exertion, of whom Germany is so justly proud, is partly owing to this. The surplus may at times be felt uncomfortably, but let us not forget that the remarkable working power of the German nation in all fields of scientific investigation, especially in philologic and historic research, is owing to this apparent surplus.

A Frenchman has recently expressed an opinion upon this point, the like of which a German would scarcely dare to express, or even entertain. Ferd. Lot says in his interesting little study (L'enseignement supérieur en France, 1892):

The scientific predominance (hégémonie) of Germany in all domains of thought, without exception, is at present acknowledged by all nations. It is a confirmed fact that Germany alone produces more than all other parts of the world together; its superiority in science is similar to that of England in the commerce on the ocean. Perhaps it is even greater in comparison.

It is probable that this is to be taken with some allowance. But M. Lot is not mistaken when he says that the organization of the German universities, their uniform constitution as corporations, their liberty in teaching and learning, and above all, the tendency of their instruction toward investigation, are the chief causes of their superiority. This is particularly true with regard to the philosophic faculties. In them the peculiar character of the German universities, as nurseries of scientific investigation and research, is prominently apparent; they draw the other faculties into the same channels. Hence whatever would threaten

to rob the philosophic faculties of this character would endanger the German universities, and the position of Germany in the scientific world.

Finally, let us not forget, that all this exists and acts in intimate connection with historic life. The vital air of the German universities is the historic spirit which surrounds them all, and each one in its individual form. There is scarcely one of them which has not in the life of our nation, or in some science, at one time, played an important rôle; not one that may not be proud of a few distinguished names of abiding importance in the history of science. He who sets foot on this ground feels the breath of historic life. And he who enters the lists becomes conscious that he accepts certain obligations. Not all feel it in the same degree, yet it may be said that in some way everyone feels it who enters a university as a teacher, and in some way almost everyone feels it who enters as a student. And every graduate takes some of that spirit with him into his practical profession. For the German clergyman, physician or judge does not wish to be merely a practitioner, but also a little of a learned man, at least in so far as is necessary to keep his interest awake for what is produced and accomplished in his profession by others. This is particularly true (I repeat it emphatically) of the German high-school teacher; he feels himself not only as an officer and teacher, but also as a scholar, and not a small portion of them succeed, though often under very restrictive and oppressive circumstances, in taking active part in scientific investigation in their professional dominion.

That is what heretofore has given the German gymnasium its character; its pride.has ever been to be a school for the learned, and to become, in its own manner and in a small compass, something similar to what a university is, not only a school for lessons and recitations, but an institution where. scientific work is performed, and where the students learn to work scientifically.

It is to be hoped that the tendencies which aim at an ever increasing extension of the system of examination and supervision, and which would convert the teachers into mere officers and the schools into knowledge shops, will not succeed in finding general favor. If our gymnasi should lose their character of schools for the learned, the universities would not be able to maintain their position in future.

II.-THE GERMAN UNIVERSITIES IN THEIR RELATION TO STATE, CHURCH, AND SOCIETY.

Their relation to the State.-That the universities should be state institutions, seems to us quite self-evident; but it was not always so, and it is not necessarily so. Scientific investigation and scientific instruction are not, in the nature of the case, a state enterprise. The first universities were private corporations, which, under the general protection of the state, conduct scientific investigation and instruction. Like other guilds, they governed themselves; they made their

own laws, elected their own officers, had jurisdiction over their own members, and perpetuated themselves by admitting new masters of arts, in which act, it is true, a formal coöperation with the church took place. The English universities live in this way to the present day.

In Germany the state university has developed from historic necessity. In the beginning, as has been said before, the German universities were founded by heads or princes of the separate states. Since the fifteenth century the princely power has become predominant, and has made itself felt in the universities, by regulations for reform and ordination; though the corporations claimed the right to make their own laws, the princes enforced their own rules without much ceremony.

The Reformation gave to the Protestant princes church power in addition to their political power. The universities became institutions belonging to the princely rulers, and had the clearly defined purpose of educating officers for state and church service. Since the middle of the seventeenth century the state has gradually turned into a commonwealth that embraces all and attends to everything. The diminutive size of the German states favored the idea of a state that represented a single large household under absolute princely administration. During the eighteenth century this view ruled exclusively. The acknowledged principle was, the satisfaction of all essential needs of life in the community is a matter of state concern, to be attended to by state enterprise, or at least under state supervision. The Government attended to the growth of intercourse and commerce, to the opening of roads and canals, to cleaning and lighting of streets, to caring for the poor, to the promotion of industries, to the regulation of prices for labor and food, to the supply of proper intellectual food by means of books, theaters, etc. Naturally it belonged to the duties of the state to furnish the young with the necessary instruction. The German elementary school (Volksschule), which makes both the offer and the acceptation of a general elementary education a duty of citizenship, is the fruit of the eighteenth century. Naturally the universities were also drawn into the folds of this general parental Government. The Prussian civil code only formulated an existing and self-evident law when it said at the head of the chapter "Public Education":

Schools and universities are state institutions, intended to offer instruction of the young in useful knowledge and science.

The nineteenth century, it is true, has not preserved the principle of state omnipotence in its original form; the various constitutions, since 1848, express in general terms a number of limitations to the state's activity. Thus the Prussian constitution says in section 20, "Knowledge and the teaching of knowledge are free," and adds in section 22, that it is left free to every one to give instruction and establish educational institutions; but as a necessary requirement is mentioned, that he first prove to the Government his moral, intellectual, and technical ability, and submit to governmental supervision. In fact only the nineteenth

century has thoroughly carried out the plan of turning the educational system into a state institution. Foremost of all, the "schools for the preparation of the learned" (the gymnasia), which during the last century were almost exclusively city institutions, came under direct state management. Later on, by creating a department of public instruction and the requisite machinery of management, the entire system of public education found a proper representation in the hierarchy of state officials.

In sketching the present legal status of the German universities, we may say:

The universities are institutions founded and maintained by the state. Coöperation with papal or imperial power, in vogue formerly, has ceased to be. Also the power of granting degrees emanates from the state. The state grants charters and prescribes statutes. It estab lishes chairs and institutes and endows them. The professors and directors of institutes (libraries, laboratories, hospitals, clinics, etc.) are state officers. The universities are under direct supervision of the minister of education, not subject to provincial governments. In a number of universities a local representative of the minister, in the person of the curator, sometimes called chancellor, is found; his chief duties consist in a general supervision of the institution and care for the promotion of its ability in every department, especially with reference to pecuniary matters. All communications between the Department of Public Instruction and the university go through his hands.

If thus the university has been made legally a link of the entire. state system of education, it occupies nevertheless, a peculiar position, and, as it were, one of exemption. It enjoys a measure of independence and self-dependence like no other state institution; state supervision of the professors is almost imperceptible. Also essential parts of the ancient coöperative self-government have remained, chief of which is the free election of academic officers. The head of the university is the He is elected annually by the college of regular professors. He formally represents the university, the other officers are subject to his orders; he matriculates students, and exercises supervision over the associations and meetings of the students. The senate, also, is elected by the professors. Beside the members elected, it consists of the rector as chairman, the academic judge, and the several deans. The senate forms a board of general management. The application of disciplinary jurisdiction over the students is the joint duty of the rector, the judge of the university, and the senate. In Prussia the following punishments for misdemeanors of the students. are at the disposal of the rector: Reprimand, fine not to exceed $5, imprisonment, not to exceed fourteen days, suspension from the university threatened, actual relegation, and lastly, expulsion.'

'If a student is relegated from a German university he may attend another, but if he is expelled from one, he is thereby debarred from attending all other German universities. (THE TRANSLATOR.)

Like the university, so the faculties posess an important function of self-government. They each annually elect a dean from their midst, who conducts the business of the faculty. As a board the faculty supervises that which is taught, and it is their special duty to see to it that every branch of study is represented in the course or calendar of the term. Furthermore, they exercise supervision over the students in regard to their morals and scientific attainments, which supervision, however, in the usual course of events, is noticed no more than the supervision of the professors on the part of the state. They also manage the benefices and stipends, and conduct the examinations prescribed to secure them; they determine the prize questions and award the prizes. Last but not least, they conduct the examinations for academic degrees, and through their deans grant the degrees. They give to Privat Docenten the "venia legendi," and submit to the minister of education the names of suitable candidates for vacant chairs; this defines their old right of nomination.

In regard to the management of the course of study in the university, it may be said, that almost absolute liberty rules supreme. All the supervision there is confines itself in reality to the two points, that every appointed professor give lectures, and that the required branches are represented each by a course of lectures and exercises. On the other hand, no official courses of study are prescribed, as is done in schools, where contents, extent, and form of the matter are ontlined. The professor is simply commissioned to teach a certain branch; it is left to him to interpret that commission: to determine the separate parts of his branch, the number of hours he may devote to them, the matter he may treat, the method he may employ-all this is left to his own discretion. No one speaks of reports, revision, or control by means of supervisory officers.

It is reasonable to say that at no time heretofore has university instruction enjoyed a greater measure of liberty than now. Up to the seventeenth century instruction was limited by the requirement that it should, in regard to the matter taught, be in accord with the doctrines of the church with which it was affiliated; also official prescriptions regarding the matter and form of instruction were rather peremptory. During the eighteenth century the Government not infrequently meddled with the internal affairs of the instruction; it often happened that the professors (particular ones, especially) were ordered to use * certain sources of information, and to follow certain methods. Even during the first half of the nineteenth century similar orders were given; for instance, during the twenties and forties against Hegel's philosophy. At present all attempts to influence the internal management of the university have ceased; matter and method of instruction are left entirely to the discretion of the professor. While in the "schools for the learned" (the gymnasia) liberty of teaching has been more and more offensively restricted, in the university this liberty has been more and more extended, and is now admitted without reserve.