Scholastic degrees. New Uni London. improve the education of schoolmasters, unless such improvement be brought to bear directly upon popular schools. To this end two ulterior measures appear to be indispensable:-the first, an easily recognizable mark or indication of the qualified teacher, as by a special academical degree, conferred after strict examination; the second, a provision that, after a certain period, no school shall be in any way assisted by government, unless its master be duly qualified. And to these must be added a more adequate remuneration than is afforded by the usual salaries of schoolmasters under the present system. That academical degrees, indicative at once of a certain amount of general acquirement, and of special acquaintance with the art of teaching, would tend greatly to improve schools of all kinds, is a position which, I apprehend, has little need of argument in its support. But it is obvious, that to this purpose such degrees must be universally accessible, they must represent these qualifications, and nothing beyond them. They must not, like academical degrees at present, represent in addition to attainment, either the ability to incur the expense of a certain term of residence at a particular university, or adhesion to a particular religious communion. Scholastic degrees which should be dependent on either of these conditions would utterly fail of their object-the elevation of the profession of the educator throughout the whole United Kingdom. Prior to the appearance of the charter for the new versity of University of London, it had been long and confidently hoped that the establishment of that institution would have afforded the desired means for the attainment of this object, its plan having been described "on information communicated by the government to the council" of University College, as "comprising a board of examiners to be appointed by the crown, with power to confer degrees on candidates from all parts of the United Kingdom, and from every seminary of education, whether chartered or unincorporated."* But, by means which it is needless now to describe,+ this declared intention of government was overruled, and instead thereof, it was determined to establish a university "empowered to examine and confer degrees in arts, medicine, and law, . upon the students of certain colleges, and other schools of professional education, placed in connexion with the university, either by being named in the original charter, or by a subsequent act of the crown; and upon none other." The colleges for general education so named, in the first instance, were University and King's Colleges in London. The body thus limited in its powers and objects was definitely organized in 1837.|| With the particular merits of the institutions placed in connexion with the new university, the present argument has nothing to do. Had all the institutions in the country which could possibly advance pretensions to this privilege have obtained it, the object of the friends of really universal education would have been by no means achieved, that object being twofold:-First, that acade • University of London: Statement of facts as to charter, 1835, p. 4. The whole question was entered into at the time, by the present writer, in a little pamphlet entitled Remarks on the Ministerial Plan of a Central University Examining Board, the object of which was to show that the original plan ought never to have been departed from. University of London. [i. e. University College], Address of the Senate to the Council on the proposed establishment of a Metropolitan University, p. 6. Twenty-two candidates were examined for matriculation in 1838, but no degrees were granted. In 1839 the number of candidates examined for matriculation was thirty, the number of degrees granted, thirty-one. The amounts paid to the examiners, were, in the former year, £238 4s. 10d.; in the latter, £1891 19s.—Return, &c.-Commons' Sessional Papers, 1840, No. 366. mical degrees should truly represent what they profess to represent, that is to say, certain positive acquirements or general ability; and secondly, that such degrees should be attainable by all, without exception, possessed of those acquirements or that ability, in what way soever obtained. So long as a merely factitious advantage is allowed to form part of the qualification for a degree, that factitious advantage is, pro tunto, a deduction from the real value of such degree. "Whatever," says Dr. Adam Smith, "forces a certain number of students to any college or university, independent of the merit or reputation of the teachers, tends more or less to diminish the necessity of that merit or reputation."* And if it have been determined that our ancient universities of Oxford and Cambridge, hallowed by the recollection of eight centuries, and-in despite of many abuses-possessing such strong claims on our love and admiration, shall no longer possess any exclusive prescription of this kind, is it wise or just to create new prescriptions in favour of institutions comparatively devoid of all such claims? I contend then that an examining and degree-conferring board, open to all,—and the higher the standard of acquirement the better, so that it be sound and strictly adhered to is strongly desirable, not only on account of the great advantage of affording an universally applicable test and indication of the capability of schoolmasters-albeit, that is the ground we are at present chiefly concerned with, but also because every man ought to have within his reach the means of obtaining a degree, if he have acquired the knowledge a degree professes to represent, whether the place wherein he acquired that knowledge shall have been a cloistered college, a populous city, or a secluded village. *Wealth of Nations, book 5, chap. 1. of school The propriety of insisting, after a certain period, that Licensing the master of every school in any way aided by govern- masters. ment, shall be a person whose qualifications have been ascertained by a regular examination, can scarcely be contested even by those who are the most easily alarmed at any step having the aspect of an interference, however slight, with individual liberty,-even although it be the liberty of doing wrongly,*-for without this precaution all satisfactory assurance of the efficiency of a school will be impossible. And hereafter it must become matter of grave consideration whether any man shall be allowed to take upon him the high calling of an educator, either in a private or a public school, until he have first proved that he possesses at least a moderate degree of fitness for the honest exercise of that high function.† ration of school For the well-trained and duly-licensed schoolmaster, Remunethere must needs be ensured a far more adequate remuneration, both in salary and honour, than is usually masters. provided at present, when his profession ranks as the worst paid and the least respected of all professions * "There is a liberty of corrupt nature which is affected both by men and beasts, to do what they list; and this liberty is inconsistent with authority, impatient of all restraint; by this liberty sumus omnes deteriores;' 'tis the grand enemy of truth and peace, and all the ordinances of God are bent against it. But there is a civil, a moral, a federal liberty, which is the proper object of all authority; it is a liberty for that which is just and good; for this liberty you are to stand at the very hazard of your lives, and whatsoever crosses it is not authority, but a distemper thereof."Gov. WINTHROP, of New England. "If there be any such art as the art of teaching, we ask how it comes to pass that a man shall be considered fully qualified to exercise it without a day's practice, when a similar attempt in any other art would expose him to ridicule? Henceforth, I pray you, let the ridicule be somewhat more equally distributed."-President Wayland's Introductory Discourse on the object of Intellectual Education, Boston, U. S., 1830. amongst us. Strange it is, but true, that (even with. regard to the superior class of schoolmasters) the physician who has to do with our bodies, and the lawyer who has to do with our estates, take higher social rank than the man to whom we commit the moral and intellectual education of our children, a function, which, in the awful responsibility it involves, is scarcely inferior to the ecclesiastical itself. It is to be lamented that many who are convinced of the necessity of educational reform, greatly underrate the importance of this branch of it. I cite two instances: the one, speculative; the other, practical.— In some able letters addressed some time since to members of the government, by Mr. G. P. R. James, on the educational institutions of Germany, after certain statements respecting the salaries of schoolmasters, and other expenses of popular schools in Baden, and after alluding to the difference between the cost of subsistence in that state and in Great Britain, he concludes that fifty-five pounds a year would pay for the education of one hundred children. "I know not," he says, "what may be the expense of the schools at present erected by the benevolent exertions of private individuals; but I am sure that, under a general system properly organized and superintended by the government, the annual expense of educating one hundred children would not be greater than I have stated.”* So that on this scale, the average salary of the master would be about forty-one pounds and seven shillings, even if but one master were allowed to every hundred children!† • Educational Institutions of Germany, Letter 4. + In Holland, and very generally in Germany, there is one master to every sixty children; but the best authorities recommend that, wherever possible, there should be a master to every twenty-five. Schoolmasters in Holland are very often superior to those in Prussia, notwithstanding the |