IX

A NATIONAL UNIVERSITY AS RELATED TO

DEMOCRACY

IN reviewing the history of the movement for a national university, one is impressed with the great names connected with the project, the strength of the reasons in its favor, and the increasing clearness of thought regarding the need and functions of such an institution. Still more impressive are the high ideals for democracy maintained by the many advocates of the cause. The affirmative arguments have always appealed to me as fundamental, broad, and farsighted. They show a comprehensive and hopeful view of civilization.

That the conception of a national university, and even the reasons for its need, should change in more than a century was to be expected. But, from the first expression of the idea by George Washington to the present, its scope was to be greater than that of existing American universities. The plan as it now appears may be described briefly: At the national capital are scores of departments and bureaus connected with the

government, which might contribute to various lines of research. Vast sums are invested in libraries, museums, and laboratories. A large body of scientific men are employed in what may be called the educational service of the departments. It is proposed to establish by act of Congress a university of the United States; give it a board of trustees guarded from political bias and influence; include the scientific agencies, mentioned, in the university scheme; invite the co-operation of various organizations privately endowed; choose a faculty of eminent men, including those now prominent in the scientific work of the government, whose duty, in conjunction with the trustees, would be to utilize present resources and plan lines of future development. Of course the proposed plan would necessitate adequate buildings independent of the various departments of the government, and large financial support. The functions of such an institution in many fields of applied science are obvious. But its scope would rapidly enlarge. To some extent facilities are now found in the departments for special investigation in the natural sciences, agriculture, engineering, and medicine; in history, political science, economics, and law; in anthropology and education; in literature. In a university organization these would be strengthened and supplemented. A national university should represent profound

scientific knowledge, its application to the practical needs of the country, the study of all economic, political, and social problems, every phase of human betterment, in short all that pertains to the welfare of a people. Moreover, it should aim to enlarge the boundaries of knowledge, to teach an idealistic philosophy, and to emphasize the spiritual side of our civilization. And all this should be done to an extent and with a thoroughness possible only in such an institution. In other words, there should be at the center of government, as the highest interest, complete opportunity for studying the vital problems of the nation.

History does not show an exact parallel to our proposed national university, although two noted institutions are suggestive examples, the University of Berlin and the University of Paris-one the Royal University of Prussia, the other the most prominent national university of France. For a century the University of Berlin has been a great factor in the growth of Prussia and a surpassing influence far extended on university standards and ideals. The University of Paris, by its relation with many educational agencies of the great capital, will create a new chapter in the history of education.

The remarkable development of Germany has been due in no small part to the intimate relation of higher education to the state. More

than a hundred years ago great leaders in Prussia saw in it the means of increasing the strength of the nation. They understood the vital force of an education that seeks foundation principles, that increases knowledge, that gives power of appreciation, that opens up large spiritual visions, that places men trained in scientific power at the service of the state. They knew that its influence in time would pervade the whole nation and change the spirit of the people. The University of Paris, under its present organization, comes nearest to our conception of a national university. It has its own buildings and faculties, but it has also a cooperative relation with many centers of liberal and scientific knowledge in Paris. The national and municipal resources for study and investigation are serviceable to the University. While organically Oxford is not a national institution, yet in a more important sense, in spirit and history, it has been closely related to the political affairs of England. It has represented state, church, and the form of society. That it has been a large factor in England's greatness goes without saying.

It has often been argued that an independent foundation should take the place of a national university, or that some private agency should control the resources of the government for research. The contribution of independent col

leges to learning in the past and their value for the future are not questioned. They represent an element of freedom helpful in progress. But this proposition defeats one of the chief purposes of a national university, namely, its reciprocal relation to democracy. Moreover, to intrust the control of the government bureaus to any private organization would be an obvious absurdity.

It is claimed that education is not a function of the general government. In avoiding some Old-World evils we limited the powers of Congress, but the constitutional argument against a national university has never been taken seriously. Moreover, it was never intended that Congress should be merely a lawmaking machine without the higher motives and interests. And here I may speak of that larger view of the functions of government which extends beyond police regulations and commercial affairs. In the Old World are seen everywhere evidences of a culture which has been fostered by a broad governmental policy. If rulers had never been the patrons of art and letters, our civilization would be less rich in its most valuable elements. Here is a vital question in studying the problems of democracy.

The national commissioner of education some years ago said he did not dare to ask for a fuller recognition by Congress of his bureau, fearing it