capacity; in a word, he is not merely de jure the Principal of St. Mary's, but he is also de facto the Principal of the University of St. Andrews, the most ancient and most famous of the Universities of Scotland. Now suppose, for an instant, that the office were held by a layman, would this be considered a fair division of work and of pay? İn any circumstances, should the man who does most work get least pay? And if not, should the fact of his actually doing more than this-of his being a Professor as well as Senior Principal-warrant his being left at present below all the Professors in both Colleges, and his being left, prospectively, below the other Principal and two of the Professors in the same University? It is nothing to the purpose to tell us that Principal Tulloch is a theologian. The very next Principal of St. Salvator may also be a divine,-and we cannot suppose that the salaries have been arranged to suit the present holders of the offices. What we insist upon is, that the two Principalships should be at least coordinate, and that, if there be any difference, it should be in favour of the Senior Principal for the time. To say that St. Mary's is the poorest corporation is equally futile: one of the purposes of the Commission was to "revise the respective foundations, mortifications, etc.," with the view of remedying such accidental inequalities as these, and of putting the whole academic system into a creditable and efficient state. But the fact is that Principal Tulloch derives a larger portion of his income, such as it is, from his College revenues than Principal Forbes does from his. In short, the whole case is one of those mysteries of Royal Commissions which, probably, neither time nor Blue-books will ever unravel.

It will have been observed that, in speaking of this case, we have kept the circumstance of the Principal of St Mary's being a Professor of Divinity as far as possible out of view; and that simply because, as we have looked at the question, it is but slightly affected by it. If he were a Professor of Medicine or Law, our ground would be equally good. But in another view of the matter, the fact that he is a Divinity Professor is highly important. For it ill becomes the Scottish Universities to slight or to impoverish theology. Whatever they may be now, it was to a theological necessity that they owed their existence; it was for the sake of theology that the Faculty of Arts was primarily instituted, and it was only when modern enlightenment rescued Law and Medicine from the hands of the clergy, that these faculties were independently established. We concede that in modern times ecclesiasticism has wrought much mischief upon learning, as upon other things; but ecclesiasticism is not theology. And we are firmly convinced that if better provision were made for the enlightened and comprehensive study of the science of theology in our Universities, rampant ecclesiasticism would speedily be brought low. Neither do we see why theological science, in our Universities, should be the special patrimony of the clergy, far less of the clergy of any particular church. There are several Divinity Chairs, at least, which earnest and devout laymen might fill with as much propriety and advantage as men in orders; and there are none of these chairs which could not be filled, with general acceptancy and with lasting credit, by members of other Presby

This is no

terian Churches than the Established Church of Scotland. new suggestion. It was made (the latter part of it at least) by Principal Tulloch himself, so long ago as 1858, before the University Commission had issued a single ordinance. If, then, his theological connexion disqualified him for receiving his due remuneration, why was not some change introduced to remove a hardship which may equally inpinge upon every man who holds this dignified office?

There are minor points in the case which deserve a passing notice. We have already called attention to the fact that no increase has as yet been made to the Principal's salary; it is only prospective, depending, like the endowment of the Biblical Criticism Chair in Glasgow, upon the setting free of moneys at present devoted to another purpose. This seems to indicate an excessive degree of timidity on the part of the Commission, not to say a kind of paring and pinching which, in an individual, would be considered paltry and niggardly in the extreme. It is pretty well known, however, that the Senatus Academicus of St. Andrews suggested to the Commissioners a means, other sources failing, of adding in some degree to the emoluments of the Principal of St. Mary's. It is now nearly a year since this suggestion was made. Will it be believed that no answer to this communication was ever received? After the publication of the recent Ordinances the Senatus unanimously renewed their offer to supplement their Principal's salary out of College funds, backed this time by the cordial recommendation of the University Court. The offer has been finally refused! Now let it be observed what the precise nature of this offer is. It is not a petition for funds from the public purse. It is simply a request to be allowed to give a portion of what is the University's own for a most appropriate and laudable purpose, and that only temporarily, until the funds which shall make a permanent endowment possible are set loose. In these circumstances we conceive that the withholding of permission to do a simple act of justice like this, is a piece of flagrant injustice, savouring strongly of persecution. The Principal is still left living not only in, but on hope; wondering, doubtless, as we do, at this mode of administering an Act whose preamble proclaims the expediency of University Reform with a view to "the advancement of religion and learning.'

66

The Ordinances on Arts' Graduation are amongst the most important that the Commissioners have issued. They belong to the class of General Ordinances, for it was one of the projects of the Act to make provision for the erection of a Scottish University, embracing all the existing Universities, a scheme for which the uniformity in graduation now established, though it is itself only on the surface, will so far prepare the way. The addition of an honour" grade to the degree list is an undoubted improvement, though it is merely the systematizing of what previously existed in the somewhat arbitrary "maximum list of recent times. The provision that students fit for the senior classes in Latin and Greek might complete their Arts' curriculum in three years, was hailed as a great boon by the schools, who felt that it was equivalent to leaving their pupils a year longer than hitherto in

their hands. They have now found, however, that they had left an important element out of account. The question, it seems, whether a new student is fit for the senior class or not, is determined by the professors themselves, who, in their desire to make good scholars of all students, and in their excusable faith in their own teaching, will of course prefer that every student should pass through both or all their classes. To this arrangement we should have less objection were it imperative on all students to pass the same examination before entering the senior class. Such, however, is not the case. Those who have already spent a year in the Professor's junior class are allowed to pass into the senior class without undergoing any special examination, and merely on the Professor's general conviction that they have "satisfied" him. Those who have mastered little beyond the Greek alphabet and Mair's Introduction before entering College, are, after spending six months there, passed at once to the senior class. Those who have remained three or four years longer at school, find planted between them and the senior class a rigorous examination, so rigorous that out of twenty-four entrants at the beginning of the present Session at Edinburgh as many as seventeen were rejected. The inevitable consequence of giving such a privilege to the Universities must be, to draw students prematurely from the schools into the junior classes, where the probation of six months, with other six months of idleness, will pass them at once into the senior class; while two entire Sessions spent at school would not do so without their incurring a risk of two to one that they will have to spend a year in the junior class after all.

This is no doubt a very good arrangement for the Professors; but we insist that it is very unfair to the Burgh and Grammar Schools; very bad also, in the end, for the Universities, for it perpetuates that rivalry between the lower and the higher seats of learning, which has all along been the curse of both, and withal a national disgrace. If any are to be examined, let all be examined. By all means let all be examined; but do not let the examination be conducted exclusively by the Professors,—they are human; and, if possible, let the Burgh schoolmasters, who have so deep an interest in this matter, and whose co-operation, rather than their rivalry, the Universities have so direct an interest in securing, be in some way represented in the Examining Board. Here, as elsewhere in their ordinances, the Commissioners seem to have acted with the design of making the Universities as prosperous, and the Professorships as lucrative, as possible; forgetting that in thus preserving the professorial monopoly, they are inflicting a serious injury on institutions without which the Universities would be as useless as a head severed from its body. "Vested interests" are likely to be the only gainers by such changes-and by what are not changes, but perpetuations of time-honoured evils-so that Professors need not be expected to express dissatisfaction with these results, but may even, in some quarters, fall to lauding the wisdom, fairness, and liberality of the Commission.

We shall find, as we have hinted, the same principle of preserving the professorial monopoly tinging other parts of the policy of the Com

mission. It has led them to resist the demands of the University Reform Association for the subdivision of chairs, and the appointment of supplementary Professors. It has also led them to repel the claims of Graduates to have restored to them their ancient privilege of Open Teaching. They have not only not countenanced the revival of this system in the Faculty of Arts; they have indicated an inclination to discourage it where it already exists in the Faculty of Medicine, and have brought the Universities into an unseemly rivalry with the extramural medical schools, which is as unfair to them, as it is discreditable to great seats of learning and science. Instead of recognising the rights of Arts' graduates in the legitimate way, they have provided for the appointment of Assistants to the Professors, at salaries which must make them annual offices; a plan which will only facilitate and render permanent the monopoly of which we complain. Finally, notwithstanding a very loud blast on the subject of superannuation in June 1860, they have finished by doing nothing in the matter. Not one penny have they given in reward of life and energy worn bare in the service of letters, or in encouragement of those who may have resolved to give none but their best days to the cause of learning.

All this, and much more which we have not space at present to discuss, is disheartening enough; but it would be insufferable had we not a lingering hope left that the Universities have in their own hands, by the constitution conferred upon them in the recent Act, which the Commission has not succeeded in wholly vitiating, the means of working out a glorious future for themselves. And we are tempted to believe that the expiry of the Commission may be the signal for every part of their machinery to start into vigorous life and activity.

X. TEACHERS AND THE REVISED CODE.

[FROM the manner in which the Revised Code has been discussed in The Museum, it will be apparent that we have no sympathy with the extreme and violent agitation against it, into which their undoubted but impolitie zeal has carried many of our leading educationists. lieving, from a careful consideration of the past history of the CouncilOffice legislation, and of the present aspect of the education of the country, that some such result as the much-maligned Code was inevitable; feeling, moreover, the justness of the main principle of that measure: we have directed our attention specially to those points of detail in which we considered the scheme imperfect, unworkable, or injurious to the prospects and position of teachers. Being desirous, at the same time, that our pages should reflect every aspect of this important question, we have thought it expedient, as it is just, to afford teachers an opportunity of laying their own case before our readers. With this view we have selected for publication the following letters

from several that have been addressed and offered to us on the sub

I. THE REVISED CODE-ITS EFFECTS ON TEACHERS.