New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-12-09
LARGE AAD SMALL COLLEGES.


lege relations which leading clergymen and
educators began in our columns last Monday
and continue to-day covers several distinct
topics-the necessity of sectarian schools to
UNCONVENTIONAL growth, tho propriety of giving
generous latitude to instructors Col permitting
them to say daring things" as DR.. Brooks
put it), and the value to the country Of small
and feeble colleges as compared with the
standard which great universities might main
tain if the munificence which row flows into
many educational channels were confined to a
few. OF these branches of the subject the last
is the most generally attractive. 1t is older
than most of the institutions to which 1t re-
lates, and it Is not likely to be settled in our
time. So many able men feel personal con-
Germ in establishing conclusions suggested by
their own point of view that the discussion can
be prolonged Indefinitely; and even If it were
once agreed that weak colleges had no suffi-
Gent reason for existence, the question would
be as far from settlement as ever in the alb
sence of an infallible criterion Of weakness.
To begin at the beginning, there is no ac-
copied standard of comparison. Those who
think that a seat of leaning ought to he place
where a limited number Of young men can pur-
sue liberal studies in secusion from the world
and in close personal communion with each
other and their instructors are able to make
strong appeal in behalf Of many institutions
which are commonly called obscure. though
even these Jealous advocates would find 1t hard
at the very outset to define the term - liberal
studiesu Those who think that the idea of
university is inseparable from a vast equip
1 .. 10, &c inv ttyo+
each in his own way, all contributing some
thing to q complex organism of classes clubs
and coteries. and on familiar terms with the
great world at their doors, would necessarily
find their list a very short one
DR.. Woolsey has said that the threefold OBJ
iect of q collegiate training-and we think that
it has never been more clearly stated-shoud
be, in the order Of Importance, character
culture and learning. There are many OBJ
servers who, accepting that definition, would
admit that character and possibly also learning
could be as well acquired at a small college
as at a large one, but who would strenuously
adhere to the belief that culture-the delicate
blending of spiritual and physical accomplish
ments-requires different conditions. But, on
the other hand. there is force in the argument
that no lnStltuuOn, large or SIHdll, pIeOchus
even to approach perfection, and that the vast
extent of our National domain creates an i'm
perative necessity for widely scattered colleges,
each constituting from the first, as President
Eliot remarked, centre of refinement, and
growing slowly toward n remote ideal. More
over 1t is unquestionable that large proper
tiQn of the aggregate fund expended in sup
porting feeble colleges and founding new ones
would never have been applied to public pur-
poses in any other way, so that its employment
must be regarded as a relative rather than an
absolute loss even by the donors harshest
critics.
There are many other considerations in
volved at which we have not space even to
hint. We have warned our readers not 10 OK
pect prompt decision of the question which
some of them are debating in THE TRIBUNE.
and we shall certainly offer none. But we are
not averse to saying that a vast sum of money
has been foolishly expended in the effort to
make colleges flourish in soil which was far
better adapted for the growth of corn than of
ideas; though we are very glad that we are
not compelled to say Just whore and when.