May the university which commences its practical activity
to-morrow abundantly fulfil its high purpose; may
its renown as a seat of true learning, a centre of
free inquiry, a focus of intellectual light, increase
year by year, until men wander hither from all parts
of the earth, as of old they sought Bologna, or Paris,
or Oxford.
And it is pleasant to me to fancy that, among the
English students who are drawn to you at that time,
there may linger a dim tradition that a countryman
of theirs was permitted to address you as he has done
to-day, and to feel as if your hopes were his hopes
and your success his joy.
* * * *
*
Footnotes:
[1] Delivered at the formal opening of the Johns Hopkins
University at Baltimore, U.S., September 12.
The total amount bequeathed by Johns Hopkins is more
than 7,000,000 dollars. The sum of 3,500,000 dollars
is appropriated to a university, a like sum to a hospital,
and the rest to local institutions of education and
charity.
ON THE STUDY OF BIOLOGY
[1876]
It is my duty to-night to speak about the study of
Biology, and while it may be that there are many of
my audience who are quite familiar with that study,
yet as a lecturer of some standing, it would, I know
by experience, be very bad policy on my part to suppose
such to be extensively the case. On the contrary,
I must imagine that there are many of you who would
like to know what Biology is; that there are others
who have that amount of information, but would nevertheless
gladly hear why it should be worth their while to study
Biology; and yet others, again, to whom these two
points are clear, but who desire to learn how they
had best study it, and, finally, when they had best
study it.
I shall, therefore, address myself to the endeavour
to give you some answer to these four questions—what
Biology is; why it should be studied; how it should
be studied; and when it should be studied.
In the first place, in respect to what Biology is,
there are, I believe, some persons who imagine that
the term “Biology” is simply a new-fangled
denomination, a neologism in short, for what used to
be known under the title of “Natural History;”
but I shall try to show you, on the contrary, that
the word is the expression of the growth of science
during the last 200 years, and came into existence
half a century ago.
At the revival of learning, knowledge was divided
into two kinds—the knowledge of nature
and the knowledge of man; for it was the current idea
then (and a great deal of that ancient conception still
remains) that there was a sort of essential antithesis,
not to say antagonism, between nature and man; and
that the two had not very much to do with one another,
except that the one was oftentimes exceedingly troublesome
to the other. Though it is one of the salient
