NOTES.-The number 66,747 means year's courses, and not necessarily individuals in attendance. Owing to the varying lengths of courses of study at times during the history of the University, two, three, four, five years, it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine from the records the exact number of individuals who have attended the University from 1740 to 1892. As equipment had to be made during that time for the whole number of students in attendance, whether they remained for entire or for partial courses, the number above, 66,747, represents practically the attendance upon the University. The charity schools, out of which the University grew, as shown in the chapters on Franklin by the editor, and by the papers by Judge Pennypacker and Mr. Stewart, were organized in 1740 and ceased in 1876. From the catalogues extant, from scattering records, and from conservative estimates the attendance in them is stated to be 15,182. This attendance was chiefly from Peunsylvania. The catalogues of the college department before 1806 are incomplete and the attendance in the college during that period is the number of the alumni for the period and is, therefore, about one-half of the actual attendance. It is believed, therefore, that the final total above, 66,747, falls considerably below the real figure were the data accurately known.-EDITOR.

CHAPTER III.

THE SCOPE OF THE UNIVERSITY.

The organization of the University of Pennsylvania has proved itself capable of assimilation and development. Its early form was determined by controversies between the State and the college of 1755, which are described fully elsewhere. From this struggle, which lasted from 1779 to 1791, the University emerged with a charter and organization bearing traces of political and religious concessions. The governor of the Commonwealth becomes by virtue of his office a member and President of the Board of Trustees. This board consists of twenty-four members, in addition to the governor for the time being; they constitute "a corporation and body politick, in law and in fact," with power of continuance by filling vacancies in their number. The spoliative · act of Assembly of 1779 sought to enforce religious equality in the board by providing that the senior ministers of the Episcopal, Presbyterian, Baptist, Lutheran, German Calvinist and Roman churches in the city of Philadelphia should be members. Although this provision is not explicitly embodied in the act of 1791, which is the final act of fundamental legislation affecting the grant of rights to the University, it may be asserted that careful regard has always been had for its spirit and intention. At the present time, the board contains representatives of the following religious bodies, named in alphabetical order: Baptists, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Quakers, Roman Catholics, and Unitarians. It is needless to enlarge upon the further simple statement that denominational considerations have no influence in the policy of the University or in the selection of its officers of instruction.

It is partly due to the location of the University in a large city with abounding opportunities for religious worship, and partly to the absence of any predominant denominational influence, that the official religious activity of the University has hitherto been limited to an obligatory daily chapel service for the College Department only, and an annual baccalaureate sermon to its graduating classes. In 1888 it was provided that graduates of the University who should after gradua tion have pursued an approved course of study in a theological seminary might receive the degree of bachelor of divinity. At the commencement in 1891 this degree was conferred on three such candidates.

It is impossible to avoid an expression of the hope that ere long funds will be available to realize the cherished plan of a Department of Theology organized upon the highest plane of scholarship and efficiency with a University church upon the grounds, and a corps of University chaplains serving in rotation.'

The principle of government of the University is by committees whose reports and recommendations are submitted to the full Board of Trustees. As each successive department has been grafted on the central body, a standing committee has been created to exercise supervision over, and to promote the development of the new work.

At the present time the number of these standing committees is as follows:

(1) On the School of Arts.

(2) On the Towne Scientific School.

(3) On the School of Biology.

(4) On the Wharton School of Finance and Economy.

(5) On the School of American Institutions and History.

The above in connection with certain additional courses, such as that

in architecture, constitute the College Department. These committees often meet in joint session.

(6) On the Department of Medicine and on the Auxiliary Department of Medicine.

(7) On the University Hospital.

(8) On the Department of Law.

(9) On the Department of Dentistry.

(10) On the Department of Veterinary Medicine.

(11) On the Department of Physical Education.

(12) On the Graduate Department for Women.

(13) On the Department of Hygiene.

(14) On the Laboratory of Marine Zoölogy.

(15) On the Museum of Archæology and Paleontology.

(16) On the University Library.

In addition to these, there are the two great business committees of the board.

(17) On Buildings, Estates, and Property, and

(18) On Ways and Means.

All of these standing committees, with the exception of the last one, are appointed annually by the Provost at the January meeting of the board. The Committee on Ways and Means is elected by ballot at the same meeting.

The large size of the board renders it possible to secure the representation of each leading department by one or more men with special knowledge of and active interest in its affairs. This mode of govern

I am happy to be able to announce that on January 1, 1892, a staff of University Chaplains, five in number, entered upon their official duties, which consist in serving in rotation in the conduct of chapel service and in daily attendance at the College Department for consultation with the students,

ment seems eminently adapted to its purposes. The committees are of convenient size. All questions referred can be considered deliberately and thoroughly; if necessary, repeated meetings may be held; the advice or the presence of members of the faculties or of outside experts may be secured; so that the reports made to the Board of Trustees habitually represent the final and united judgment of competent authorities, and such their consideration by the board, though frank and free, usually results in adoption, or at least, in recommittal for further study by unanimous consent. An acrimonious debate or the decision of any important question by a close vote is unknown. It would be accepted as proof that the subject needed further careful and impartial consideration in committee.

The above list of the committees indicates the large and ever widening scope of the work undertaken by the University. It suggests also the large responsibilities assumed by the board.

Doubtless there was a time when the position of trustee of the University was simply an honorable sinecure; but of late years the quickened intellectual life of the community, the increasingly numerous and varied demands upon our great institutions of learning and the closer competition between these latter, have been exacting more and more close attention to the educational and financial interests of the University. Not only from this aspect is it advantageous to have our great educational institutions in large cities. The members of the governing body are able to bestow much more close and constant care than would otherwise be possible. Moreover, under such conditions the services of the highest talent can always be secured in the faculties of the various professional schools, since one can practice his profession actively while holding a professorship. It is unnecessary to dwell upon the many conspicuous examples furnished by all of these schools in our University. Further, an opportunity is afforded to associate in various fields of university work many able men and women who are not members either of the board or of the faculties. It is impossible to overestimate the value of the reinforcement that may thus be secured. The vigorous and elastic organization of the University presents many good illustrations of this principle. For example, the gratifying prosperity of the University Hospital is chiefly due to the fact that from its inception the management has been entrusted to a separate board, containing only a minority of trustees, while the majority comprise representatives of the medical faculty, of the contributors, and of the Board of Women Visitors. It seems clear that if the establishment and management of this important branch of the University work had devolved exclusively on the Board of Trustees it would have been an onerous addition to their large responsibilities.

No less marked has been the success following a similar method of organization for the Museums of Archæology and Palæontology. An association with numerous membership has been formed; and the board