3. Not poverty but pluck wil win the coveted aid, and the recipient wil not be a dependent upon the bounty of another, but wil receiv the wages he has fairly ernd.

4. Let Scholarships no longer be made a means to secure funds upon which to make a show of living.

If the remedies suggested be properly applied, there wil be a complete change in the system. Scholarships as now known wil entirely disappear. Young men without means wil stil be encouraged to secure an education, but it wil be through judicious help, givn at proper times, and in the best way-the way of a loan without interest-by men who know the persons they ar aiding. Any young man who knows the source of his help, will make better use of the means furnisht him. If he feels that he is to repay what he is using, his expenditures wil be more carefully guarded. The security which one who loans money demands, wil be found, in this case, in the known character for probity and energy which the borrower possesses. Only such a character is worthy the aid. Loans, therefore, seem to me the safer and altogether the better form of assist

ance.

Let any young man feel that the money in his hands is his own, to be used at his pleasure, and many temptations to expenditure find a redy yielding. But let him know that it is only the use of the money which he can claim, and that the principal must be returnd in du time to the real owner, and his power of resistance to temptation is greatly strengthend.

A trifle added each year in the way of a Life-Insurance premium, wil make the payment of the loan more secure, in case of the deth of the recipient before his education becomes productiv capital.

There is a place for Scholarships. At the end of a Collegiate Course of Study, the peculiar aptitudes of the graduates wil appear. Devotion to some one line of study wil increase greatly the man's power, and help to this end wil be most wisely bestowed. The foundations for such Scholarships should designate some particular line of study, Philosophy, Mathematics, Natural or Physical Science, etc., or better yet, a more special department of each. The income from these Scholarships should be sufficient to giv the recipient a comfortabl support while pursuing his chosen studies. The selection of recipients will be a delicate task. country grows in welth, there wil be more leisure for practical studies. Institutions wil be establisht which hav for their curriculum only postgraduate studies. To such institutions may be left the selection, real merit being the only condition affixt.

As our

The discussion was opened by JOHN HANCOCK, of Dayton, Ohio, who thought it a waste of funds to help a student, merely because he is poor. The business of the college is to develop talent, and to the attainment of this end, he recommended that Scholarships be conferred upon the successful competitors in an examination, to be held at the beginning of the college course. He doubted the expediency of conferring Scholarships for post-graduate study.

LEMUEL MOSS, of Bloomington, Indiana, believed that the records of Educational Boards would show not more than ten per cent of failures among beneficiary students preparing for the ministry. No profession does more for liberal culture than does the ministry. While some schools of law and medicine number among their students less than three per cent of college graduates, few theological seminaries have less than seventy-five per cent. Educational bodies, and others having charge of important trusts, are very largely composed of ministers, and among these the percentage of failures has been very small. Assistance might wisely be extended to students who are not candidates for the ministry.

J. A. ROBERT, of Dayton, Ohio, said that in this country, as well as in Europe, students whose tuition was paid for them, could support themselves by their own labor, and that they were better men for their work and self-denial. Such discipline would develop a manly independence. The promotion of a sound Scholarship demands the establishment of fellowships for the prosecution of special post-graduate studies by young men who have displayed extraordinary proficiency during their college.

course.

ALBERT C. HALE, of New York, doubted whether the best talent should always be selected for Scholarships. The best scholar in the Freshman class does not always prove to be the best in the Senior: The pupil who is not the most brilliant, sometimes returns the best income for the investment made in assisting him. A short competitive examination is not always a fair test of ability.

C. R. ABBOTT. of Brooklyn, thought that students should be selected with reference to physical ability as well as mental. Sickly young men should not be permitted to share in the funds of educational boards.

I. W. ANDREWS, of Marietta, did not believe in cheap Scholarships or low tuition. The price of a permanent Scholarship ought to be so much that the interest upon it would pay the full tuition, and the disposition of such Scholarships might wisely be left in the hands of the College itself. E. T. TAPPAN, of Kenyon College, Ohio, said that some young men of ability have been starved out of college. The changed condition of industries makes it more difficult for a student to support himself than it was a few years ago.

J. A. ROBERT admitted the truth of this, yet insisted that the estimates of college expenses are unnecessarily large. There is a growing disposition on the part of students to indulge in extravagant expenditures. Too much is spent on secret societies and class suppers.

L. S. THOMPSON, of Lafayette, Indiana, asked why nothing had been said of Scholarships for ladies.

President PICKARD thought greater care should be taken to protect theological seminaries against unfit candidates. None should be admitted to College Scholarships but those whose character is above suspicion.

At the close of the discussion the following members of the Education Council were chosen from this section:—JAMES MCCOSH, New Jersey, E. T. TAPPAN, Ohio, I. W. ANDREWS, Ohio.

Adjourned.

MARTIN R. ANDREWS, Secretary pro tem.

Fourth Day's Proceedings.

FRIDAY AFTERNOON, JULY 16, 1880.

The Department met in the Amphitheatre.

ELI T. TAPPAN, President of the Department, delivered the following address

ON THE COMPLEXITY OF CAUSES.

In the history of human thought, the present age is distinguished by two things,-progress in the study of philosophy, and care for the education of youth. In the life of this nation, the most wonderful element consists in the variety and the extent of the schools of all kinds. The great increase of population-the widening of the national boundaries—the wars, foreign and civil-the abolition of slavery-none of these events compares in magnitude and importance with the growth of schools. This growth has not been caused by any war or revolution; it has not been the work of any sect or of any party; it has not been forced forward by protective legislation; the schools of this country have grown as a tree grows, thrusting limbs in every upward direction to the sky, with branches expanding wider in the light of every science, and with roots reaching into every home, and clinging about the hearts and hopes of every family.

In the progress that has taken place in the last fifty years in the schools of America and Great Britain, no change is greater than the increased attention paid to the study of philosophy. Not only does it occupy a larger part of the college course, but more attention is given to it by students who have graduated. There were in England and America profound writers on philosophy during the past century, but the number is greater in the present. The educated public regards this view of any topic as the most interesting; and writers on all other subjects, particularly physics and natural history, give to their investigations a metaphysical aspect. Writers on the methods and principles of the Science of Education, constantly make use of results derived from psychology and metaphysics. Therefore it seems not out of place, in the opening address before the Department of Higher Instruction, that I ask your attention to some truths which are involved in the notion of Cause and Effect. Teachers who are principally occupied with more advanced classes ought to be well acquainted with this subject.

Things are related to each other in the way of Cause and Effect. This is the one declaration upon the truth of which all philosophers, and all who are not philosophers, agree. Assuming the truth of this as admitted, let us consider what it involves, and some of its immediate consequences.

An event is anything which is now, and which was not. Everything which now exists, and which has not existed from eternity, once began to exist, and this beginning of existence was an event. Every beginning, every ending, every increase, every decrease, in a word every change is

an event.

The idea of cause involves the principle that every event has a causethe cause is that without which the event does not happen.

Every act of every body, every motion of the slightest particle of matter; every fancy of the poet, every thing that is now and was not before, had a cause, a something else than itself, without which it could not have happened.

The most obvious corollaries of this principle, are what are called the primary laws of motion. When a body is at rest it must remain so till something causes it to move; when in motion, its direction and its velocity must remain unchanged until some cause changes them.

Every beginning of motion, every change in the direction or in the rate of any motion is an event, which cannot occur without force, or

cause.

When teachers recognize this simple inference, they will cease to substitute illustration for demonstration, and their pupils will know that these laws of inertia are infallible.

The rules of inductive logic constitute another set of corollaries derived from the notion of cause.

These truths have been expanded and clothed in exact language by BACON, HERSCHEL, and MILL; and are known as the Canons of Induction. It has been shown that all these laws of inductive reasoning depend on the principle of causation. Here, too, a better understanding of the laws would prevail if teachers distinctly recognized the general truth on which they stand.

My immediate object to-day, however, is to speak of the complexity of cause. Cause is always complex -effect is always complex.

Anything that is simple, not composed of parts or elements, cannot change of itself, since in itself there exists no cause for change. If a cause of change were in a thing, then the thing would be composed of more than one element; it would not be simple. To say that a simple thing changes of itself is to declare that there is an event without a cause. Anything simple and homogeneous cannot undergo change, except by means of some other thing; it cannot cease to be simple except by union with something different from itself; it cannot even move or change position, except relatively to some other thing.

Farther-if a thing which is elementary in its nature could produce an effect, independent of any other element, then it must do so when it begins to exist, but this beginning involves the existence of other elements of cause.

Hence, necessarily, every cause of an event consists of at least two elements. Of course I mean causes as they exist in nature. The elements of a cause may be distinguishable in thought, but they are inseparable in fact.

Also there is no such thing as a single effect, separate from other effects. An effect is a change, and change takes place only in two ways—either in the constituent elements of a complex thing, or in the relations of one thing to another. In both cases there are more than one element of change. Hence the notion of event implies plurality. It must be that effects in nature, like causes, are never simple.

One of the correlated truths has been very happily illustrated by Mr. HERBERT SPENCER, and the other by Mr. JOHN STUART MILL. Mr. SPENCER says: "When one body is struck against another, that which we usually regard as the effect, is a change in the position, or motion in one or both bodies. But a moment's thought shows us that this is a careless and very incomplete view of the matter. Beside the visible mechanical result, sound is produced; or, to speak accurately, a vibration in one or both bodies and in the surrounding air; and under some circumstances, we call this the effect."

་་

He proceeds to show that there is also a condensation of matter, a spark, and a chemical combination. 'Thus by the original mechanical force, expended in the collision, at least five, and often more, different kinds of changes have been produced."

Mr. MILL, than whom no higher authority can be quoted on this point, says: "The cause, philosphically speaking, is the sum total of the conditions, positive and negative, taken together; the whole of the contingencies of every description, which being realized, the consequent invariably follows." In illustration Mr. MILL. takes this example:-A stone thrown into the water, falls to the bottom. Here, then, must be a stone, and water; the stone must be thrown into the water; there must be an earth, and the stone must be within the sphere of the earth's attraction; and lastly, the specific gravity of the stone must be greater than the water.

Mr. SPENCER is certainly correct as to the multifold character of all effects, and Mr. MILL is equally correct as to the multifold character of all causes, as each so well illustrates. Take the truth stated by Mr. MILL and add to it that stated by Mr. SPENCER, and we have the whole truth. There is no instance in all things observed by the human intellect, of a single cause, or of a single effect. Mr. SPENCER says truly that effect is always complex; it is also true that cause is also complex, that is, there is more than one element in every cause.

This complexity is why the natural sciences do not afford absolutely certain conclusions, not because of any uncertainty of the laws based upon the truth of causality,-but because no man can know that he has perceived the whole of any cause, or the whole of any effect.

There is one other principle to which I wish to call the especial attention of teachers. It is this: there is the same amount of complexity, that is, the same number of distinct elements in any effect as in its cause, neither more nor less. The number of elements in the cause must be as great as in the effect, for any change in the effect is itself an event, it is a change, a something different, it must have its cause; and its cause must be something else than what brought about the rest of the effect. It must be an additional element in the total cause of the event.

In the illustration given by Mr. SPENCER, if there were any change in the motion of either body, the sound produced, its duration, its tone, or the heat evolved by the collision, such change in any of these elements in the effect must be due to some change in a corresponding element in the cause. Complication in a result necessarily implies as great compli