« PreviousContinue »
the number of students at Yale, instead of falling off, has increased of late years; and Harvard College has a much larger population in its immediate vicinity than Yale or Dartmouth, though it has fewer students than either of these institutions. Still less are we inclined to ascribe this state of things to any actual change in the relative position of our University, among the literary institutions of the country. Other colleges have, indeed, greatly improved. The numerous academic corps of Yale contains professors second to none in their respective departments. The little company of instructers at Bowdoin is composed of men of signal diligence and ability; while Bowdoin, as well as Brown University, attracts much interest and patronage, from the well known and eminent talents of its presiding officer. Dartmouth College has a body of industrious and faithful teachers, and has undoubtedly raised its literary standard for the lovers of study; but its increased advantages are, in our judgment, more than counterbalanced by the introduction of a system, which dispenses with all college honors, assigns all public performances by lot, and leaves the student destitute of any stimulus from without to persevering diligence. But whatever improvements may have been made in other colleges, we cannot but think that Harvard has advanced pari passu, and still maintains her precedence of the rest, both as to the advantages directly offered, and as to all collateral encouragements and aids to a liberal education. This, we believe, is generally conceded by the alumni and patrons of other colleges; or, where any distinction is claimed in behalf of any other institution, it is at least admitted, that, if a student may acquire less, he also has the means of acquiring more, at Harvard than elsewhere. Yet, notwithstanding this, it must be confessed, that Harvard has, of late, been constantly losing ground in the esteem and patronage of the community at large, and is fast becoming simply a high school for a portion of the youth of Boston and its vicinity.
Pecuniary considerations, no doubt, deter many students from entering at Harvard. The course there is, indeed, an expensive one, for reasons entirely beyond the control of the College boards. Most of the expenses are determined by local causes, which they cannot obviate. The price of board depends on the cost of rent, fuel, and provisions,
which is necessarily high in the environs of an overflowing city. Then, too, the general style of dress and furniture is made more sumptuous than is needful, by the vicinity of the city, and by the large proportion of the students who are from rich and fashionable families. Yet in all these things there is room for economy without reproach; and an indigent young man, who sees fit to practise rigid self-denial to secure to himself the highest literary privileges, only elevates himself thereby in his social position among his fellow-students. The charges made directly by the College are low. A student, who shares with another a college room, pays but fifteen dollars a year for rent and care of room. The tuition fee, including the use of the library and the expenses of lecture rooms, is but seventy-five dollars per annum, - a large amount, indeed, compared with that charged at many other colleges, and with the ability of many students, yet less than the tuition fee at any respectable high school in this vicinity, and pitifully small, when considered with reference to the extent and variety of the privileges to which it introduces the student. Nor is it possible for the College, in the present state of its funds, to reduce this fee. li is said, indeed, that the College is rich; but its wealth in one aspect makes it poor in another. About three fourths of its invested funds were bestowed for specific ends, and are not available for the general expenses of the institution. Very few of these specific endowments are sufficient for the purposes for which they were given;— most of them require, every year, additional appropriations from other sources. Under these circumstances, the full tuition fee is absolutely needed. Nor, in truth, should we desire to see it less; but would be glad to have it raised. We like to see things appraised with some reference to their true value. A liberal education is too good a gift to be offered at a paltry price. Raise its cost, and it will be more highly esteemed, and more ambitiously sought. We have heard complaints of college bills from men who would spend more than a year's tuition fee on a single dinner-party, and whose servants' wages a professor's entire salary would hardly pay. Now we can see no reason why the parent, who denies himself and his family no indulgence or luxury which can be bought with money, should sue in forma pauperis before the College faculty, and expect to pay less for his son's education, than the boy will
pay to his boot-black. The College ought, however, to be enabled to remit all charge for tuition to students both indigent and meritorious, so that those who cannot pay may be taught without price. We would earnestly recommend a provision of this kind, as one of the most useful forms which private munificence could take. The donor might, it is true, gain more éclat by founding a professorship, which should bear his name down to posterity in connection with its honored incumbents ; but in no way could he act so surely upon coming generations for the advancement of literature and science, as by removing the obstacles which poverty puts in the way of so many youth of genius and promise.
Harvard College has, we doubt not, lost much patronage from its supposed connection with a particular religious sect. It is often spoken of as a sectarian institution. No imputation could be more unfounded. The whole administration of the College has, in this regard, been eminently catholic. The services at the College chapel are, indeed, conducted exclusively by Unitarian divines; but the students are at liberty to attend the churches of the other denominations in the vicinity. Most of the professors and instructers, also, are Unitarians ; but Episcopalians and Calvinists have not been wanting on the board, whose religious sentiments have been well known at the time of their election; nor do we believe that a Unitarian, as such, would be elected to office in preference to another candidate of equal qualifications. We have been conversant with the administration of the College, both as a student and an instructer, and can bear our cheerful testimony, without fear of the production of a single fact to the contrary, that favoritism towards students on sectarian grounds is a thing unheard of, - that students of all denominations have been treated with equal fairness, justice, and kindness, — and that, for the petty offices, scholarships, and exhibitions, at the disposal of the faculty, the combined ratio of need and merit has constituted the only claim. Were we to make any exception to these remarks, we should refer to the presidency of Dr. Kirkland, and to his marked partiality for the beneficiaries of the American Education Society. He had, of course, no sympathy with their peculiar system of theology ; but he respected them on the score of their reputed piety, their exemplary morals, their healthful social influence, and the sacred profession for which they were destined ; and, not unfrequently, he eked out, from his own private income, the scanty cbarity on which they were dependent.
But then there is the Unitarian Divinity school, which now constitutes a distinct department of the University, and must needs, in the eyes of the public, reflect back upon the College its own theological character. There it is, standing, we admit, where it ought not. It is our earnest desire and hope, that this school may soon be divorced from the College. But its existence results from no alienation of college funds for the benefit of sectarian theology. Its building was erected, its professors are supported, by funds bestowed by Unitarians, and with the express design and purpose of providing for the education of Unitarian clergymen; and for the clerical services which the professors perform for the whole University, they are left without compensation. No trust, therefore, would be violated, should the theological endowments be separated from the property of the College, and given to a distinct board of trustees; and such an arrangement, though not within the scope of a judicial tribunal, might be authorized by an act of special legislation. The building might then be sold, or devoted to other uses, and the school removed to some town, where it should have an independent existence, and be a distinct and prominent object of interest and patronage to the denomination with which it is connected. “As friends of both institutions, we would advocate this measure. They would live best apart. The Divinity school is now overshadowed and dwarfed by the College, which, solicitous to shun the charge of sectarianism, doles out its support in scanty pecuniary justice, without extending to its interests the judicious supervision and beneficence, of which it stands in imminent need. Nor, so long as that school exists in nominal connection with the College, can the College, even by the utter neglect or disregard of its concerns, escape the imputation, among ignorant and bigoted people, of lending its influence and patronage to the growth of Unitarianism.
In this connection, we wish to say a few words with reference to the Hollis professorship of divinity. It is made a frequent ground of reproach to the University, that, while the statutes of the professorship require that its incumbent should be a man “of sound and orthodox principles,” the venerable Dr. Ware, a well known Unitarian, should have been for thirty-five years professor on the Hollis foundation. The statements made, and the documentary evidence adduced on this subject, in President Quincy's History of the University, ought to put this complaint for ever at rest. From this, it appears, that Hollis, himself a Baptist, was exceedingly reluctant to admit into the articles of his foundation any religious test, except a recognition of the Scriptures as the most perfect rule of faith and practice.” He resisted the introduction of the very words " sound and orthodox,” on the ground that New England orthodoxy laid at that time emphatic stress on the obligation of infant baptism ; and, though, in a truly catholic spirit, he claimed not the exclusive benefit of his numerous benefactions for those of his own communion, he was unwilling, in express terms, to provide for their perpetual exclusion. Wearied by the importunity of his American friends, he at length consented to the insertion of the obnoxious words; and in fact, in the case of the first professor, his apprehensions were realized, “the divine right of infant baptism” having been one of the points on which the candidate's orthodoxy was tested. The College corporation, therefore, in dispensing with all sectarian tests, in the case of Dr. Ware, complied with the expressly and repeatedly declared desire and purpose of Hollis.
But waiving this point, had an account current been kept between the salary of the Hollis professor and the endowment from which he derives his name, that endowment would have become extinct long before Dr. Ware's accession to the chair; and it would appear conclusively, that, prior to the close of the eighteenth century, the College had invested in orthodox divinity of the said century the entire principal and interest of this much vexed foundation. Hollis made provision for a salary of but forty pounds, — then deemed sufficient for the purpose, but subsequently found utterly inadequate. In fact, the funds of the professorship have long since been merged in the general funds of the College, and the continuance of the name of Hollis in connection with it is simply an appropriate expression of respect to the memory of an early and munificent benefactor. But as, in sectarian warfare, the refutation of a serious charge goes for naught, and as a professorship of divinity cannot but impart a sectarian aspect to the institution, why might it not be the wisest policy for the College to cancel that office, — now vacant,