Page images

In the president's address allusion is made to the large increase in enrollment and attendance and the large decrease in resources. In the year 1891-92 the average of attendance of pupils was 10,370 and the resources of the board were $459,598.62, of which $249,000 was derived from saloon licenses. These figures have been changing during the period until now, when the average attendance of pupils is 12,630 and the revenues $355,945.55, of which $195,000 came from saloon licenses. The complaint made by some that too high salaries are paid to teachers is flatly denied by the president. Cheap salaries obtain inefficient teachers; yet these are lower here than the average in other cities. It says:

"Without quoting statistics which are a matter of record, I need only refer you to the salaries paid in cities of our size which proves that we are not only paying lower salaries, but that we are even far below the average. Especially is this so with regard to the salaries paid for supervision. Cities like Kansas City are paying principals of sixteen-room buildings $1,800 per year, while we pay but $1,400."

The normal training school is reported to be doing great good, but it seems hard that its graduates "under the rules," as expressed in the address, get smaller salaries than are paid to teachers employed from other cities.

The report recommends that arrangements should be made for daily visits by superintendents to the manual training department. Even as it is it has been doing excellently well.

The kindergartens have met considerable opposition. Says the report:

"They have been called fads, nurseries, etc., and the school board accused of supplying amusements for babies under school age. The kindergarten system is no longer an experiment, and it never was a fad. No children are admitted until they have reached the school age. If kindergartens were not provided for them, we would be obliged to open new first grades, employing higher paid teachers, fitting rooms with desks, etc., all of which would make an additional cost over the kindergarten." Yet the address thinks that it was a mistake to open so large a number in the beginning. Hereafter care should be taken that the work in them be such that will assist the pupil in the work of the lowest grades, and be made part of them instead of kept separate as in this city.

The address recommends adoption by the board of civil-service rules regarding teachers who have had satisfactory experience, instead of having them subjected as now to the chances of re-election every year.

In view of increase of pupils and diminution of incomes, an earnest appeal is made to the city council to raise the levy of taxation in order to provide for this evergrowing need of greater resources. As it is, kindergartens and the lowest school grades do not enjoy full day sessions. It is admitted, however, that a mistake in economy was made in erecting so many small schoolhouses instead of a few large ones in the beginning. Some natural pride is indulged by an action of the board in 1894 whereby an insurance fund was created whose income has been invested in interest-paying warrants.

Experiment with vertical penmanship seems to have proven its decisive superiority.


Report for 1895 and 1896, Hon. H. C. Cutting, superintendent of public instruction.

It proceeds in the beginning with announcement of the general inefficiency of the laws regulating the State educational system:

"The laws governing our schools are very defective, unintelligible, and weak. There are many good points in them, as every legislature since the first has amended them, but there is no system to our school laws and none to our schools. Many of our laws are unconstitutional, others are obsolete, and there is hardly one on the statute book that can be enforced."

The present superintendent prepared a system of laws upon the subject to be submitted to the legislature of 1897. At a teachers' institute held at Elko in December last the law, with certain changes substituted by the members, was agreed to be submitted, and good hopes were indulged of its passage. This law provides that the four district superintendents be added to the State board of education, making that board consist of seven members. It provides for two grades of educational and life diplomas, grammar and high school.

The most important article in the proposed enactment is that regarding district superintendents, who now are the same persons with the district attorneys, the businesses in the twofold offices being wholly incompatible with each other. The plan is to divide the State into four educational districts coextensive with the judicial districts, and, after allowing good salaries, to exact faithful work of the superintendents. Such a change, the report contends, would systematize school

work greatly and serve to overcome the frequent meddleing with school affairs to the great hindrance of their efficient conduct. The report says:

"There are many districts in this State where a teacher with fifteen or twenty pupils is compelled to have from thirty-five to forty classes, as they do not dare to grade the school properly for fear of losing their position by offending some of the parents."

The present method of apportionment of funds on the number of children between 6 and 18 is characterized as an "absolute bid for dishonesty" and has given occasion to much dissatisfaction and strife, whereas apportionment according to school attendance would place a bounty on punctuality in that respect.

Regarding care of school property the report says: "No care whatever is taken of school property, especially in county districts, and the destruction and waste is something appalling.... Destruction of property is bad enough, but the careless and slovenly habit which such negligence fosters and breeds is ten times worse." As in the preceding, earnest appeal is made in behalf of teachers' institutes.

By act of the last legislature every county in the State was allowed to erect a high school, to be maintained at its own expense. Elko is the one county availing itself of this provision.

Some remarks are made and recommendation offered on the subject of cheaper text-books. The report concludes with commendation of the progress of the State University, education for the deaf, dumb, blind, and feeble-minded.

Noteworthy is the diminishing number of school children. From 10,592 in 1880, the year in which it was greatest, it descended in 1896 to 9,089.



One of the most important events of the year in scholastic circles was the celebration by Princeton University of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the original charter issued in the name of the College of New Jersey (October 22, 1746). The special significance of the anniversary which occupied three days, October 20-22 inclusive, lies in the fact that it was the chosen time for the formal assumption of the title of university, a name fitly expressing what had become the actual scope of the work even before Dr. McCosh resigned the presidency of the college. The committee of arrangements which had been for two years elaborating their plans kept two points in view, namely, the exposition of past achievements and the presentation of the distinctive lines of university life for which the college had prepared the way. These conditions were set forth in the addresses of the president and members of the faculty, which thus formed the central feature of the three days' celebration." The accompanying exercises of music, the interchange of greetings with other universities, the honors to invited delegates, etc., added greatly to the interest and impressiveness of the occasion.

As a preliminary to the sesquicentennial exercises and a recognition of the international unity of scholastic pursuits, the week preceding the ceremony was made the occasion for several series of lectures by foreign specialists.

With the exception of the course on the French Revolution and English literature, by Prof. Edward Dowden, of Trinity College, Dublin, these lectures were The efficient chairman of this committee was Prof. Andrew F. West, Ph. D.


An asterisk (*) indicates occasions on which academic costume will be used. Events indicated in brackets [], though not part of the academic programme, are given for the sake of convenience. First day, Tuesday, October 20—Reception day.

10.30 a. m. *Academic procession forms at Marquand Chapel.

11 a. m. Religious service in Alexander Hall.

[ocr errors]

3 p. m. Reception of delegates in Alexander Hall.

4.30 p. m. *Presentation of delegates in the Chancellor Green Library.

9 p. m. Orchestral concert in Alexander Hall.

Second day, Wednesday, October 21—Alumni and student day.

10.30 a. m. *Academic procession forms at Marquand Chapel.

11 a. m. The poem and oration in Alexander Hall.

2.30 p. m. [The undergraduate football teams of the University of Virginia and Princeton University will play on the University Athletic Field.].

8.30 p. m. Torchlight procession and illumination of campus.

The procession will be reviewed by the President of the United States.

10.30 a. m. 11 a. m.

Third day, Thursday, October 22-The sesquicentennial anniversary day.

*Academic procession forms at Marquand Chapel.

*The sesquicentennial celebration at Alexander Hall.

3 to 5 p. m.

Reception to the President and Mrs. Cleveland at Prospect.

3 p. m. [Glee club concert in Alexander Hall.]

addressed to specialists, and brought together a body of men distinguished in the respective lines.1

The sesquicentennial exercises were held in Alexander Hall, a beautiful building in the French Romanesque style, one of the most impressive of the new buildings, which illustrate on the material side the recent university ideal.

The body of the hall was reserved for invited delegates, including the presidents of the leading sister universities in our own country and the distinguished representatives of foreign universities. The delegates, numbering from 500 to 700, wore their academic robes, which gave a brilliant effect to the scene.

The principal exercises, in addition to the addresses by President Patton and Prof. Woodrow Wilson, here given in full, were the reception to delegates on the afternoon of the first day and the exercises attending the formal announcement of the university title on the morning of the third day.

On the former of these occasions Dr. Howard Duffield, of New York City, a son of Princeton, welcomed the delegates in an eloquent address. Responses were made by President Eliot, of Harvard University, on behalf of American universities and learned societies, and by Prof. Joseph John Thompson, of Cambridge University, England, on behalf of European universities and learned societies.

On the morning of October 22, exactly one hundred and fifty years from the date of the original charter of the College of New Jersey, Dr. Patton announced that the college "shall be known hereafter and forever more as Princeton University." This announcement, which elicited an outburst of applause, was followed by a statement as to the endowments that had been secured in anticipation of this event. The completed list was not ready, so that full details were impossible at the moment, but a total of $1,353,291 was reported, with the work of the committee still in continuance. When the enthusiasm excited by this showing had subsided the university proceeded with its first official act, which was the conferring of the doctor's degree upon a number of men eminent in letters, arts, and science.



Four lectures by Joseph John Thomson Cavendish, professor of physics in the University of Cambridge, England. Subject: The Discharge of Electricity in Gases.


Four lectures by Felix Klein, professor of mathematics in the University of Göttingen, Germany. Subject: The Mathematical Theory of the Top.


Six lectures by Edward Dowden, professor of English literature and rhetoric in Trinity College, Dublin. Subject: The French Revolution and English Literature.


Two lectures by Andrew Seth, professor of logic and metaphysics in the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. Subject: Theism.


One lecture by Karl Brugmann, professor of Indogermanic philology in the University of Leipzig, Germany. Subject: The Nature and Origin of the Noun Genders in the Indogermanic Languages (Ueber Wesen und Ursprung der Geschlechtsunterscheidung bei den Nomina der indogermanischen Sprache). This lecture will be delivered in German in the English room, Dickinson Hall, at 10.30 o'clock, Monday morning, October 19.


One lecture by A. A. W. Hubrecht, professor of zöology in the University of Utrecht, Holland. Subject: The Descent of the Primates.

2 Doctor's degrees were conferred upon fifty-seven distinguished representatives of sister universities or men eminent for their contributions to science and art. The foreigners thus honored were: Karl Brugman, professor of Indogermanic philology in the University of Leipzig, Germany. Johannes Conrad, professor of political economy in the University of Halle, Halle, Germany. Wilhelm Dorpfeld, first secretary of the German Archæological Institute, Athens, Greece. Edward Dowden, professor of rhetoric and English literature in Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. A. A. W. Hubrecht, professor of zoology in the University of Utrecht. Utrecht, Holland. Felix Klein, professor of mathematics in the University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. Henri Moissan, professor of chemistry in the University of Paris and member of the French Academy of Science, Paris.

Edward Bayuall Poulton, Hope professor of zoology in the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. Andrew Seth, professor of logic and metaphysics in the University of Edingburgh, Scotland. Goldwin Smith, fellow of Oriel College, Oxford, and formerly regius professor of modern history in the University of Oxford, Toronto, Canada.

Joseph John Thompson, Cavendish professor of physics in the University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England.

James London, president of the University of Toronto, Canada.

The honorary degree of doctor of laws was conferred in absentia upon two persons: Lord Kelvin, professor of natural philosophy in the University of Glasgow, Scotland, and Otto Struve, formerly director of the Observatory of Pulkowa, Russia.

The exercises were closed by an address by President Cleveland, which was followed with absorbed interest and elicited unbounded applause. This address is here reproduced in full.

The singing of the national anthem and the benediction by Bishop Satterlee closed the scholastic exercises of one of the most memorable celebrations ever held in the United States.


A sermon preached in Alexander Hall on the occasion of the sesquicentennial celebration, October 20, 1896, by Francis L. Patton, president of the College of New Jersey.

(I Corinthians III, 11. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.)

The first charter of the College of New Jersey was signed by John Hamilton, president of His Majesty's council, on the 22d day of October, 1746. A second charter, still more liberal in its provisions, was obtained from Governor Belcher in 1748. It was surely the day of small things when a little company of Presbyterians in the city of New York and its vicinity interested themselves in establishing a seat of learning in the Province of New Jersey as a means of providing a liberal education for young men intending to enter the ministry. The ineffectual efforts which they had previously made and their ultimate success bear striking testimony to the religious intolerance of the times, the more enlightened policy of President Hamilton and Governor Belcher, and the liberal spirit of the founders of the new institution, who, though Presbyterians by conviction and actuated in the main by zeal for the religious necessities of their own church, accepted without scruple a charter which gave no advantage to any denomination, and beyond a scheme for liberal culture made no specific provisions for the needs of any profession.

The spirit of the founders has been kept alive in their successors. The interests of the college have always been in the hands of religious men, and of men, I may say, belonging as a rule to a particular branch of Protestant Christendom, but it has never been under ecclesiastical control. It has served the church and it has served the state without in any sense being under the authority of either. The founders of the College of New Jersey did not establish a theological school with a perparatory department in arts; they established a faculty of arts with an embryonic department of theology. There is a great difference between the two methods, and this difference has determined the course of Princeton's subsequent development. The establishment at a later date in Princeton of a theological school under ecclesiastical control made it unnecessary and unwise to continue theological instruction in the college, and from that time until now the teaching force of the College of New Jersey has consisted of a single university faculty of arts. Thanks to the liberal policy of her founders, thanks also to the wise Christian spirit of those who have guided her course, Princeton College, though over hospitable to new ideas and ever ready to recognize new truth, has, throughout her history, been true to the spirit of those who founded her, and has never had reason to feel that in any instance she has violated her charter, or been unfaithful to the moral obligations imposed by the labors and benefactions of the Christian men who have been interested in her welfare.

Considered in respect to nations and periods that are characterized by immobility, the lapse of a hundred and fifty years is not a matter that need call for special commemoration. But in this country the beginning of such a period antedates the national life. Princeton shares with her older sisters, Harvard and Yale, the distinction of a life coeval with our national independence, and she claims for herself a distinction, shared in equal degree by no other institution, of being a large factor in the making of the nation. Of the part that Princeton played in the revolutionary struggle; of President Witherspoon, who signed the Declaration of Independence; of the Princeton men, and particularly of Madison and Patterson and Oliver Ellsworth, who helped to make the Constitution of the United States; of the meeting of the Continental Congress in this place and under the roof of Nassau Hall, you will in all probability be told by another speaker on a later occasion. It is enough for me, having mentioned these names in connection with the political history of the country, to add to them the names of Henry and Guyot in science; of Jonathan Edwards and James McCosh in philosophy; of the Alexanders and Hodges in theology, and then to ask if I am making an empty boast when I say that Princeton has won for herself a conspicuous place in the intellectual history of America.

It has been the aim of those who have governed this institution to make and keep it a Christian college. The men who have contributed to its endowment and administered its affairs and taught in its class rooms have been Christian men. They have been men of deep conviction regarding God and his government, and they have

had high ideas respecting their responsibility for the use of time and money. There is in the history of the college, in what she has done and in what she has been saved from doing, in what she has achieved and in what she has escaped, abundant reason for profound gratitude. Filled, then, with these thoughts of the past, and standing upon the threshold of a new period in the history of this institution, let us give thanks to God for the good that has been done in His name by the men who have served it and the men who have gone out from it; and let us pray that to us upon whom devolves the responsibility of opening a new era in the educational policy of Princeton there may be granted that wisdom which shall save us from mistakes, and that grace which shall enable us to use for God's glory the power and influence that are given to us by reason of our place in the organic life of a great institution.

Our history, as I can not help believing, is also a prophecy. There has been ample time in that history for the line of tendency along which we are likely to develop to reveal itself, for there is an analogy between the history of an institution and the growth of an organism, and growth is recalcitrant to interference from without. You may shapo your block of marble as you will, but you must be content to see the process of self-realization go on in the organism according to the logic of its inner life. There are universities that are made in obedience to the wills of their founders and with no tradition to conserve. They are free to shape their policy in unhampered independence of the past. But it is not so with us. We have come to be what we are through the slow growth of a hundred and fifty years.

We have our own ideas of education, which are in part the result of our experience and in part perhaps an expression of our conservatism. We give large place in our curriculum to contemporaneous knowledge, but we are unwilling to part with our heritage of Hellenic culture. We believe in specialization, but we also believe that the student makes a mistake when in his haste to win his spurs in some narrow field of inquiry he foregoes the advantage of a broad general education. Intellectual discipline is good, but it is not so important as high manhood; and eager though we may be to turn out from year to year a few men of high intellectual attainment, we deem it far more important that the great body of our graduates should be men of moral courage and religious convictions, public spirited, patriotic, and possessed of clear, balanced, and discriminating judgment in regard to public questions.

Princeton has a great work to do in science, philosophy, and literature. I have no doubt that she will do it well. I hope she will continue to do it in Christian rubrics without any loss of moral initiative or religious faith.

I confess that I am not without my anxieties when I think of the future of our American institutions in relation to their religion. I see no reason why I should not feel anxiety in regard to Princeton, for we can not hope to escape altogether from the operation of the forces that are potent elsewhere.

I feel inclined to-day, speaking not to Princeton men alone, nor in regard to Princeton specifically, to employ the time allotted to me in considering the relation of religion to the university. I do not know of any subject that could more properly be considered in a sermon addressed to an academic audience, nor do I know of a time when this theme could be more seasonably treated than that which is given me in connection with these religious services with which we begin our sesquicentennial celebration that is designed to commemorate the history of the College of New Jersey and to inaugurate Princeton University.


I cannot better begin what I have to say on this subject than by reminding you of the fact that religion, and by that I mean, of course, the Christian religion, is the genetic antecedent of the university. It is true that we cannot impute a distinctively religious origin to the universities of Salerno and Bologna, and if we are looking for an explanation that will apply equally to all the medieval universities, we must pay for our comprehensiveness by being correspondingly vague; and then we can do no better than say with Mr. Rashdall that the rise of the university is due to the spirit of association that spread over Europe during the middle ages, and that the universities were simply guilds of learning. Even then, however, it might be worth while to ask whether these guilds as illustrating the fellowship of kindred minds, did not receive a new impetus from Christianity, which itself was an expansion of the idea of higher kinship as expounded by the Saviour when he said, "Whosoever doeth the will of my Father in Heaven, the same is my mother and sister and brother." But whatever be the origin of the Southern universities, those of the North (and they are the prototypes of our American colleges and universities) were undoubtedly the outgrowth of Christianity. The religion of Christ gave man new ideals. It turned them from the quest of pleasure and the love of plunder to a life of contemplation and the pursuit of knowledge. It made them thoughtful, serious and reverent. Thinking is also religion, I believe Hegel somewhere says, and whether he is right or not, it is certain that the man who takes a serious view of life and has

« PreviousContinue »