in their own peculiar jargon as unintelligible to the scholar as Greek to the multitude-which they, to a greater or less extent, have themselves discovered, the treasures of modern science. So utterly have these changed the whole mode of living of the world that, not only in science, but in the other great divisions of learning as well, the past has proved rather a millstone round the neck of the future than a source of inspiration and wisdom. One knows from experience in scientific research how easy it is to immerse oneself in a subject that was fascinating to a past generation, and waste time in the minutia of still ungleaned detail, until one finds oneself in a backwater which the main tide of discovery has left long since, and wherein one can waste a lifetime, which, if spent among the real outposts of knowledge, would have resulted in substantial and permanent progress being made.

Although science, in the sense it is understood to-day, owes but little to the past, it has already, in its conception of research, contributed to the ideals of a university immensely more than has ever been contributed by preceding ages, and the contribution it has made in its own sphere, if logically applied to the older branches of study, would be productive of the most valuable and far-reaching social consequences. The association of scientific research with the universities is mainly due to the exigencies under which it, as distinct from other creative work, can alone be pursued. One may read Parker's "Essay on the History of Classical Education" from end to end in vain to find the remotest parallel to the ideal which science holds up as the most important and the highest function of a university to-day, little as it has yet been realised even in science by actual British universities. From it there follows at once the idea I have here developed of pure Faculties of Art and

FACULTIES OF ART AND DUTY

199

Duty to carry on research and constructive work in the æsthetic and ethical questions of to-day, to inspire the applied professional faculties, the imperial and local legislature, and the primary and secondary schools, and to do, without bias or political and sectarian passion, just that for lack of which the nation perishes, the deliberate reconstruction of the social order to meet the entirely altered conditions that prevail in consequence of the growth of science. Never yet in the history of the world have such faculties found a place in the universities. In early days the university was simply a divinity faculty, and its glory was that it provided the ladder, of which we hear so much to-day, whereby children of the humblest origin could rise through the Church to the highest positions of the State, though that was not its raison d'être. Then, all business requiring education was transacted by ecclesiastics, and the spirit of research in the sense of finding out the new, not that which is old but has been lost, had not arisen. It would indeed have been very dangerous for any one to act on the view that the pagan classics and Christian writings did not between them contain all there was to know. The revival of learning was literally the re-learning of what had been known, but now was inaccessible save to those possessing the Greek, Latin and Hebrew languages. Discovery connoted rediscovery of lost territories rather than being the first entrant into some new and hitherto undreamt of world. There is, unfortunately, a tendency to confuse this sort of original investigation and research with that understood by scientific men. In those days the extraordinary idea that there was a peculiar virtue in the teaching of Latin and Greek and ancient philosophy as the foundation of a liberal education was natural and justifiable enough. Latin was the universal written language of the learned

world. It was in no sense the dead language that it is to-day, but the key to learned literature, not only of the past, but also of the present. When it became necessary for a gentleman to know how to write, it was Latin that he wrote, not his mother tongue. The Faculty of Arts has never yet, though the necessity has long since ceased to exist, dissociated itself from its original preoccupation with the teaching of dead languages, as a, then, necessary preliminary to any kind of learning and culture. Original creative work in painting, sculpture, architecture, the drama, music and so on have hitherto been pursued outside the university, and this applies also to by far the greater and most valuable part of poetry, and literature generally.

Even theology has been more progressive. After science had shown the value of the patient, unbiassed examination of data, pursued solely with the desire to elicit the truth, the traditional records, upon which theology is based, became the subject of critical examination, especially in Germany. Parker, writing in 1867, says: "Much of our embarrassment in Biblical Criticism is due to our ignorance of Hebrew and German. For Latin, as a common language, has died out, and German has now for a long time been the tongue in which all questions relating to antiquity are discussed with the most research and learning." But the popular attitude to such inquiries apparently is still similar to that which unbiassed inquiries in science evoked in the Middle Ages, and many times during the war have I read letters in the press tracing the decline of the moral forces in Germany to her eminence in theological studies, with never a protest from our own learned theologians against such bigotry.

But if to the old Faculties of Arts and Theology the ideals of science are not without application, the

CREATIVE ASPECT OF MEDICINE

201

case is even more striking when we consider the professional Faculties of Medicine and Law. Here there is the most clearly marked distinction between the interests of the country as a whole and of those who follow these professions. The worse the condition of the country the more must both these professions thrive, and, the more free from disease and litigation it is, the worse, financially, for these professions.

Until the most recent years there was nobody in this country primarily concerned with the scientific study and prevention of disease. The best and most energetic of the young doctors might, and often did, spend a few years in purely voluntary research into the scientific aspects of medicine, but so soon as their success in their profession grew, and their consultingrooms commenced to fill up, such investigations became more and more competitors with actual lucrative and bread-winning service. With the passing of the Health Insurance Act, the State, for the first time, became interested in the health of the people. At first its interest was purely a financial one, and was concerned with the solvency of the Insurance scheme, but, during the war, with the state of health revealed by recruiting statistics, its interest assumed also a military character. In consequence, just those aspects of medicine which are not of interest, financially, to the medical profession, the research aspect and the preventive aspect, are now receiving more consideration. It is clear that, from the national standpoint, it is more important to study, scientifically, the causes and character of disease with a view to its prevention and elimination than even to provide that disease, after it has been contracted and begun its work, should be properly treated. The prevention of disease is the creation of health, and modern uni

versities ought to be no mere professional schools of medicine, but primarily concerned with the research and creative aspect of their subject.

But is not the case of the Faculty of Law and its relation to the legal profession an even more forcible one? The study of the cause and character of social maladies with a view to their prevention, the elimination of the causes of dispute and litigation, the simplification and modernisation of our inherited codes with continual and timely regard to everchanging conditions, the tasks which, in an ideal university, I have assigned to the hypothetical research Faculty of Duty, to be pursued for its own sake, by students of the foundation of human law, is surely more in keeping with the real character of a university than even the training and qualification of professional lawyers. That is the true preventive medicine of social injustice and its attendant contempt for the law and tendency toward anarchy and Bolshevism. It is sad to ponder on the history of the great conflicts with which the advance in knowledge has inundated society, in which every change has been forced, as it were, at the point of the bayonet, against the existing law, and hardly a single one has been intelligently anticipated and forestalled by suitable legislation. No anomaly however glaring, no injustice however scandalous, is rectified without a wearing and demoralising political agitation. The principles of equity and justice and esteem for the higher values of life in general are, to-day, whatever was the case in the ancient world, indigenous to society and come into conflict rather with its rulers than with the masses.

Of modern times research in science has more and more been confined to universities, and the number of scientific amateurs, who once did so much good work, grows yearly less. For if it is not