reflecting that an establishment embracing all the sciences which may be useful and even necessary in the various vocations of life, with the buildings and apparatus belonging to each, are far beyond the reach of individual means, and must either derive existence from public patronage or not exist at all. This would leave us, then, without those callings which depend on education, or send us to other countries to seek the instruction they require. * * Nor must we omit to mention the incalculable advantage of training up able counsellors to administer the affairs of our country in all its departments,-legislative, executive, and judicial, and to bear their proper share in the councils of our National Government; nothing more than education advancing the prosperity, the power, and the happiness of a nation."

*

RELATION OF EDUCATION TO MORALS AND RELIGION.

The strongest side of Jefferson's educational philosophy was its bearing upon good morals and social progress. "Education," he said, "generates habits of application, of order, and the love of virtue; and controls, by the force of habit, any innate obliquities in our moral organization. We should be far, too, from the discouraging persuasion that man is fixed, by the law of his nature, at a given point; that his improvement is a chimera, and the hope delusive of rendering ourselves wiser, happier, or better than our forefathers were. As well might it be urged that the wild and uncultivated tree, hitherto yielding sour and bitter fruit only, can never be made to yield better; yet we know that the grafting art implants a new tree on the savage stock, producing what is most estimable both in kind and degree. Education, in like manner, ingrafts a new man on the native stock, and improves what in his nature was vicious and perverse into qualities of virtue and social worth. And it can not be but that each generation, succeeding to the knowledge acquired by all those who preceded it, adding to it their own acquisitions and discoveries, and handing the mass down for successive and constant accumulation, must advance the knowledge and well-being of mankind, not infinitely, as some have said, but indefinitely, and to a term which no one can fix and foresee. What but education

has advanced us beyond the condition of our indigenous neighbors ? And what chains them to their present state of barbarism and wretchedness but a bigoted veneration for the supposed superlative wisdom of their fathers, and the preposterous idea that they are to look backward for better things, and not forward, longing, as it should seem, to return to the days of eating acorns and roots, rather than indulge in the degeneracies of civilization ?"

Ethics occupied a prominent place in the plan for university education which Jefferson proposed to the Legislature. He recognized that under the Constitution of Virginia, which placed all religious sects upon an equal footing, it would be quite impossible to institute any sectarian theology. He proposed to place the entire responsibility for religious training upon an ethical basis, where all sects could agree.

He said: "The proofs of the being of a God, the creator, preserver, and supreme ruler of the universe, the author of all the relations of morality, and of the laws and obligations these infer, will be within. the province of the professor of ethics; to which adding the developments of these moral obligations, of those in which all sects agree, with a knowledge of the languages,-Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, a basis will be formed common to all sects." Jefferson thought that it was the duty of each sect to provide its own theological teaching in a special school,' to which students might go for special instruction, as they did to their various denominational churches. An ethical solution of the theological questions in American universities has been found satisfactory in most of our State institutions, which have found themselves 1 In a letter to Dr. Cooper, November 2, 1822, Jefferson describes his plan of allowing independent schools of theology to be established in the neighborhood of the University. "In our University you know there is no professorship of divinity. A handle has been made of this to disseminate an idea that this is an institution, not merely of no religion, but against all religion. Occasion was taken at the last meeting of the visitors to bring forward an idea that might silence this calumny, which weighed on the minds of some honest friends to the institution. In our annual report to the Legislature, after stating the constitutional reasons against a public establishment of any religious instruction, we suggest the expediency of encouraging the different religious sects to establish each for itself a professorship of their own tenets, on the confines of the University, so near as that their students may attend the lectures there, and have the free use of our library and every other accommodation we can give them; preserving, however, their independence of us and of each other. This fills the chasm objected to ours, as a defect in an institution professing to give instruction in all useful sciences. I think the invitation will be accepted by some sects from candid intentions, and by others from jealousy and rivalship. And by bringing the sects together and mixing them with the mass of other students, we shall soften their asperities, liberalize and neutralize their prejudices, and make the general religion a religion of peace, reason, and morality."

The idea of a catholic grouping of theological seminaries around the University of Virginia was, of course, impracticable in a rural neighborhood, and it was never realized according to the Jeffersonian ideal. It is, perhaps, capable of an approximate fulfilment under modern conditions of university education in large municipal centres, where students naturally find their religious affiliations with their own form of churchlife, and where connections are easily made which lead to special theological training upon the basis of a liberal education. A practical solution of the question of religious services within the university was early found at the University of Virginia by the professors electing a university chaplain from year to year and from different religious denominations-the Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Methodist, and Baptist. Other universities have come, each in its own way, to some such representative method of religious service. Harvard has its regular university preachers engaged from the Unitarian, Episcopalian, and Congregationalist denominations. Cornell has an eclectic system, and employs occasional preachers of recognized power and reputation. The Johns Hopkins University, in the city of Baltimore, is able approximately to realize the Jeffersonian ideal, and allow its students to seek such religious associations as family training or natural preference may incline them. It is the "elective system" applied to church-going. City churches give university students free seats; and university students have, among themselves, organized Sunday afternoon services, at which city clergymen and university professors speak by special invitation. The idea of religious freedom is working itself out in university life, as it has already in the church and in the state. The exclusion of religion is not desired by any

under much the same stress of circumstances as did Jefferson amid the sects of Virginia. Moral science, social science, history, and the languages of the Old and New Testaments afford sufficiently solid and neutral foundations for all subsequent specialization in theology.

JEFFERSON ON THE MODERN LANGUAGES AND ANGLO-SAXON.

While recommending the study of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew in the proposed university, together with his favorite groups of mathematical, physical, scientific, political, legal, and philosophical studies, Jefferson takes special pains to urge the cultivation of the modern languages. His reasons for specifying French, Spanish, Italian, and German are interesting, but his early appreciation of the importance of Anglo-Saxon is especially striking, for this study had not yet found a place in America. He says: "French is the language of general intercourse among nations, and as a depository of human science is unsurpassed by any other language, living or dead. Spanish is highly interesting to us as the language spoken by so great a portion of the inhabitants of our continents, with whom we shall probably have great intercourse ere long, and is that also in which is written the greater part of the early history of America. The Italian abounds with works of very superior order, valuable for their matter, and still more distinguished as models of the finest taste in style and composition. And the German now stands in a line with that of the most learned nations in richness of erudition and advance in the sciences. It is, too, of common descent with the language of our own country, a branch of the same original Gothic stock, and furnishes valuable illustrations for us. But in this point of view, the Anglo-Saxon1 is of peculiar value. We have placed it among the modern languages because it is, in fact, that which we speak, in the earliest form in which we have knowledge of it. It has been undergoing with time those gradual changes which all languages, ancient and modern, have experienced; and even now needs only to be printed in the modern character and orthography to be intelligible, in a conacademic community. The introduction of religious liberty is what we need. That is the ideal which Jefferson attempted to realize amid great calumny and misinterpretation. And he, of all men, really solved the problem in the State of Virginia, by his statute for religious liberty, and prepared the way for its solution in all university education.

There is an interesting article on "Thomas Jefferson as a Philologist" in the American Journal of Philology (Vol. III, No. 10, pp. 213-214), by Henry E. Shepherd, president of the College of the City of Charleston. "By reference to pp. 417-418, Vol. VII, of Jefferson's Works, it will be seen," says Professor Shepherd, "that Mr. Jefferson had remarkably clear and accurate views of the invigorating influence which dialects exert upon a language. In other words, Jefferson, writing about forty years before Max Müller, seemed distinctly to apprehend the process which, in the technical language of modern philosophy, is known as 'dialectic regeneration.' He expresses himself as follows: 'It is much to be wished that the publication of the present county dialects of England should go on. It will restore to us our language in all its shades of variation. It will incorporate into the present one all the riches of our ancient dialects; and what a store this will be may be seen by running the eye over the county glossaries, and observing the words we have lost by abandonment and

siderable degree, to the English reader. It has this value, too, above the Greek and Latin, that while it gives the radix of the mass of our language, they explain its innovations only. Obvious proofs of this have been presented to the modern reader in the disquisitions of John Horne Tooke; and Fortescue Aland has well explained the great instruction which may be derived from it to a full understanding of our ancient common law, on which, as a stock, our whole system of law is engrafted." Thus, in connection with the idea of historical study of our own English language, Jefferson came to the idea of English historical jurisprudence, which he recommended to Dr. Cooper, and the possibilities of which are just dawning upon students of the present generation.

BODILY EXERCISE AND MANUAL TRAINING.

It is interesting to note in Jefferson's report the suggestion of certain modern ideas of physical, manual, and artistic training now be coming more and more prominent in our modern systems of education. "We have proposed," he says, "no formal provision for the gymnastics of the school, although a proper object of attention for every institution of youth. These exercises with ancient nations constituted the principal part of the education of their youth. Their arms and mode of warfare rendered them severe in the extreme; ours, on the same correct principle, should be adapted to our arms and warfare; and the manual exercises, military manoeuvres, and tactics generally should be the frequent exercises of the students in their hours of recreation. It is at that age of aptness, docility, and emulation of the practices of manhood that such things are soonest learned and longest remembered. The use of tools, too, in the manual arts is worthy of encouragement, by facilitating to such as choose it an admission into the neighboring workshops. To these should be added the arts which embellish lifedancing, music, and drawing; the last more especially as an important part of military education. These innocent arts furnish amusement and happiness to those who, having time on their hands, might less disuse, which in sound and sense are inferior to nothing we have retained. When these local vocabularies are published and digested together into a single one, it is probable we shall find that there is not a word in Shakespeare which is not now in use in some of the counties in England, from whence we may obtain its true sense.' Mr. Jefferson's views in regard to the relations of Anglo-Saxon to English are probably better known to scholars than his opinions upon the points cited above. He held that Anglo-Saxon was 'Old English,' and that it could be turned into intelligible English by simply divesting it of its antique orthography. He has given us some entertaining illustrations of the mode in which this transformation might be effected. His conception of Anglo-Saxon is in one aspect essentially the same as that held by the school of Freeman, Morris, and Sweet in our own time. The process by which he arrives at his conclusions is of course different from that adopted by scientific philology. During the recent visit of Mr. Edward A. Freeman to Baltimore, I showed him Mr. Jefferson's essay on the Anglo-Saxon, which was published by the board of trustees for the University of Virginia in 1851. He examined it with great interest, and upon returning it remarked: Jefferson had the right view. It [Anglo-Saxon] is only Old English.' He further remarked: 'It seems so strange to see Jefferson quoting Bosworth. It is like Washington quoting Stubbs.""

inoffensively employ it. Needing, at the same time, no regular incorporation with the institution, they may be left to accessory teachers, who will be paid by the individuals employing them, the university only providing proper apartments for their exercise." Jefferson had somewhat the same ideas of the relation of bodily accomplishments to the higher education as have long prevailed at West Point and in Germau universities. In the matter of physical training, American universities have advanced far beyond the Jeffersonian ideal, but there is still great room for improvement in the training of bodily powers to some useful or artistic end, as in drawing and other skilled exercise of the hand and eye.

JEFFERSON ON STUDENT SELF-GOVERNMENT.

It is very generally known that at the University of Virginia exists a remarkable system of student self-government, by which a high morale and a manly tone of self-reliance have been successfully maintained. In sharp distinction to the old-time method of tutorial supervision and professorial espionage, this system of self-government has developed the most honorable relations between faculty and students. It has established a frank and kindly spirit of co-operation between master and pupil. It has repressed all dishonorable practices of cheating in recitations and examinations, so common under the old reign of terror, and it has promoted a spirit of independence and self-respect. This condition of student society in Virginia is in no small degree the result of the teachings of Jefferson. While his ideal of student selfgovernment was not immediately realized in that lawless period fol lowing the first introduction of his ideas, yet a wholesome harmony between liberty and law was soon and easily secured. In the light of modern tendencies towards constitutional and self-government in American colleges and universities, the following extract from Jeffer son's report may prove interesting:

"The best mode of government for youth in large collections is certainly a desideratum not yet attained with us. It may be well questioned whether fear, after a certain age, is a motive to which we should have ordinary recourse. The human character is susceptible of other incitements to correct conduct more worthy of employ, and of better effect. Pride of character, laudable ambition, and moral dispositions are innate correctives of the indiscretions of that lively age; and when strengthened by habitual appeal and exercise, have a happier effect on future character than the degrading motive of fear. Hardening them to disgrace, to corporal punishments, and servile humiliations can not be the best process for producing erect character. The affectionate deportment between father and son offers, in truth, the best example for that of tutor and pupil; and the experience of other countries, in this respect, may be worthy of inquiry and consideration with us."

Jefferson adds, in a foot-note, that "a police exercised by the students themselves, under proper discretion, has been tried with success