(2) The curriculum of the college should be made such that the youth of average ability and faithfulness who enters it well prepared can pass it well in three years' time. That is to say, the college course should be reconstructed as a three-years' course; but, at the same time, it should be made a true college course — a modern and revised edition of what was for its time the very honorable and effective curriculum of the original American college. The average college graduate would then be about twenty years of age.

(3) This reconstructed college curriculum should consist of graded and disciplinary courses in the three great classes of subjects with which, as has already been said, all truly liberal education, of whatever time or representing whatever stage of human culture, has to do. The curriculum should carry the student along, as far as the time will permit, in all three of these subjects, in a fairly balanced adjustment of the interests and values of each of the three, and by the use of the most improved modern methods of instruction and disciplinary study. Fully threequarters of this curriculum - including each one of these three classes of subjects should be required of every student, with liberty, however, to add the remaining one-quarter to such interests as the individual might especially desire to cultivate, and with a certain considerable elasticity during the last year as respects the choice of teachers and the particular aspects of the subjects to be studied.

(4) The professional schools should be greatly strengthened and improved, after being strictly excluded from tampering with the non-professional studies of the college curriculum. And side by side with these schools should be built up-but only by the greater universities — a graduate school, in which provision should be made for the prolonged technical pursuit of all the higher studies in science, art, literature, and philosophy. These graduate non-professional studies should be arranged in courses requiring four years of work, and leading to the degree of Ph.D.

I know very well what the outcry will be against the four proposals which have just been made for the reconstruction of the present disintegrated and disorganized curriculum of the higher institutions of learning in this country. We shall hear most loudly expressed the objections, first, that this would be "lowering the standard," so far as numbers (1) and (2) are concerned; and, second, that it would be "taking the back track," so far as abolishing the college elective system, or number (3), is concerned. But these phrases do not disturb me any more than does the corresponding outcry about "hauling down the flag," and "retreating from territory once occupied," when the present course of the Govern

ment is under discussion. If the standard of general education now required of the man who does not propose to be a specialist is too high, then this standard should be lowered. If we have been taking the wrong track in respect of the kind of education we have been giving to this average man, then the more promptly we get back into the right track the better for him and for us.

I deny, however, that the policy which has just been recommended will really lower the standard of the current college education. On the contrary, it will really elevate that standard. Nor do I hesitate for a moment to say that I would far rather have any young man in whom I was interested leave college at twenty after going through with such a disciplinary training, about the precise character of which he had not himself exercised much choice, than have him graduate at twenty-two, after two years' more of the miscellaneous and ineffectively taught courses which constitute the present elective college curriculum. As a teacher, moreover, who has had no little experience in training other teachers in his own specialty, I have no hesitation in further saying that I should much prefer to receive for advanced graduate work the younger man, with the more strictly disciplinary, well-balanced, and enforced preliminary education. And, finally, as a student of my own specialty, while I regret that I was so little and so poorly taught at college in the natural sciences and in the modern languages, I can never be too grateful that I was educated under a system which had not then developed the infelicities and inefficiency of the present elective system.

But all who are well inside of the innermost educational circles know that the real reasons which prevent the prompt and efficient reconstruction of the curriculum of our institutions of the higher education are not those to which reference has just been made. The real reasons are, in general, much less honorable than the honest but mistaken fear of “lowering the standard," or of "taking the back track," etc. The best of them are certain genuine embarrassments affecting the disposition of men, the acquiring and disposing of funds, the number of students, and the popularity consistent with the average ignorance as to what the higher education ought to be. The worst of them areas happens, alas! to every class of men under similar conditions-tinged with personal prejudices and jealousies, or strongly flavored with a somewhat bigoted over-estimate of the value of each one's own specialties, and an underestimate of the value of the favorite studies of others. In a word, the most imperative need, in order to the reconstruction of the college curriculum, is the reconstruction, by means of a large increase of true liberality and

genial, well-informed culture, of the college presidents and faculties themselves.

The leading universities of the country, as they stand toward the problem of the disintegration and reconstruction of their curriculum, are at present by no means discharging their true functions in a manner worthy of the highest confidence. Some of the foremost among them have, notably, either postponed or lost their chance of leading the country in the right direction toward the solution of this problem. And the blameworthiness is chiefly their own; for the real demand of the public is reasonable. But the answer which these universities are trying to give to this demand is not by any means in accordance with the reason or the experience of mankind. The country waits to see what university will lead it in the matter of a wisely and effectively reconstructed and modernized curriculum. GEORGE TRUMBULL LADD.

THE BOER IN BATTLE.

MR. F. C. SELOUS, certainly an impartial as well as a competent critic, in his famous letter to "The Times" of October 24, 1899, said of the Boers:

Taken as a whole they are an eminently quiet, sober, and self-restrained people, but little given to brawling and bragging. . . . I have always been struck by their moderation in speaking of their victories over our soldiers.

Twenty years ago Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, M.P., speaking at Birmingham, thus described the same nationality:

The Boers are not naturally a warlike race; they are a homely, industrious, and somewhat rude and uncivilized race of farmers living on the produce of the soil. They are animated by a deep and somewhat stern religious sentiment, and they inherit from their ancestors - the men who won the independence of Holland from the oppressive rule of Philip II of Spain-their unconquerable love of freedom and liberty.

Speaking from knowledge gained by a sympathetic study of the people and their history during nearly thirteen years' residence in their country, I have no hesitation in saying that the above estimates of the Boers in every-day life very fairly and accurately describe them. But notwithstanding the fact that they are perhaps the most peaceably inclined people in the world, it is a question whether the typical Boer is not, after all, seen at his best in times of war; for then are developed and displayed some of his best qualities. He is then found to possess, in addition to the characteristics described above, an aptitude for strategy, a resourcefulness, a power of endurance, and a degree of mobility little, if anything, short of marvellous.

It is a remarkable fact that although England has now been at war with these people for nearly thirty months, there is an extraordinary amount of ignorance still prevailing regarding the composition of the Boer army and the Boer method of fighting. The following account, therefore, should not be without some amount of interest at the present juncture. It must be premised that the Boer method of fighting is not, strictly speaking, guerilla warfare, although it is usually described as such. It is, rather, what military tacticians would call fighting in

skirmishing order, or, better still, the unit system. This remark applies to it in general and under fairly normal conditions, although during recent months it certainly has developed into something more akin to guerilla warfare.

Upon declaration of war, or in anticipation of such an event, the fieldcornets of the various wards, towns, and districts into which the country is divided are instructed to "commandeer" so many men for active service. For the purpose of choosing the requisite number of men, what is called a "wapenshouw" is convened. This is a meeting of all men available for military service; comprising practically all males between the ages of sixteen and sixty years, with some few exceptions, as, namely, certain officials, ministers of religion, schoolmasters, etc. For the first requirements of the army, men between twenty and forty-five are chosen, and subsequently, by fresh drafts, those from sixteen to twenty and from forty-five to sixty. Sixteen and sixty are the limits. of age for compulsory service; any older or younger men going as volunAs a matter of fact, during the present war there have been many gray beards much above sixty years of age fighting in the Boer ranks, and probably also as many youngsters from thirteen to sixteen years. Neither must it be forgotten that the burghers, with very few exceptions, receive no pay while on commando. Food is, of course, provided by the Government, as well as renewal of clothes when necessary; but so far as money payment is concerned the vast majority do not receive even the smallest amount. Truly a wonderful system - probably without parallel in the history of the world.

teers.

The wapenshouw being in session, the requisite number of men are chosen by the fieldcornet and are commanded to hold themselves in readiness, with horse, saddle, bridle, gun, and bandolier, to proceed to that part of the field of operations to which they may be drafted. All who have not the above equipment are provided for by the Government, and at the same time ammunition is served out. Anything else the men may decide to take with them is left to the discretion of the individual. The body of men thus chosen to serve under one fieldcornet is called a "commando," and may number anything between a few dozen and several hundreds. Volunteers have the option of joining any particular commando they may wish to serve in.

Under the fieldcornet are one or more assistant fieldcornets and several corporals; the number varying according to the size of the commando. The next grade above fieldcornet is commandant, an official who has military control over a district comprising several fieldcornetcies,