From 1857, the Commissioners had been in the habit of examining

competitively, at the request of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, such

candidates as might be nominated for cadetships in the Royal Irish

Constabulary; and, in 1861, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty

"threw open to public competition" appointments as apprentices in Her

Majesty's dockyards, and appointments as "engineer students" in the

steam factories connected therewith.

In 1870, the end so long aimed at was attained, and by an Order in

Council of June 4, open competition was made the only door of entry to

the general Civil Service.

In entire contrast with this, as has been already said, was the action

in the case of the Indian Civil Service. Here the principle of open

competition was adopted from the first, and the examination took a very

elevated start, comprising the highest branches of a learned education.

These branches were duly specified in a Report drawn up in November,

1854, by a Committee, of which Lord Macaulay was chairman; and, with the

exception of Sanskrit and Arabic, they included simply (as might have

been expected) the literary and scientific subjects ordinarily taught at

the principal seats of general education in the Kingdom. These were:--

English Language and Literature (Composition, History, and General

Literature,--to each of which 500 marks were assigned, making a total of

1,500); Greek and Latin (each with 750 marks); French, German, and

Italian (valued at 375 marks, respectively); Mathematics, pure and mixed

(marks 1,000); Natural and Moral Sciences (each 500); Sanscrit and

Arabic (375 each).

[PRINCIPLE OF SELECTION OF SUBJECTS.]

The principle of selection here is clear and obvious. It did not rest

upon any doctrine regarding the utility or value of subjects for mental

training, but simply upon this, that those subjects already in the field

must be accepted, and that (as Mr. Jowett, in his letter to Sir Charles

Trevelyan, of January, 1854, put it) "it will not do to frame our

examination on any mere theory of education. We must test a young man's

ability by what he knows, not by what we wish him to know." Indeed, this

is explicitly avowed in the Report by the author of the Scheme himself.

The Natural Sciences are included, because (it is confessed) "of late

years they have been introduced as a part of general education into

several of our universities and colleges": and, as for the Moral

Sciences, "those Sciences are, it is well known, much studied both at

Oxford and at the Scottish Universities".

Into the details of Macaulay's interesting Report, I need not here

enter. Room, however, must be found for one quotation. It deals with the

distribution of marks, and is both characteristic and puts the matter in

small compass. "It will be necessary," says the writer, "that a certain

number of marks should be assigned to each subject, and that the place

of a candidate should be determined by the sum total of the marks which

he has gained. The marks ought, we conceive, to be distributed among the

subjects of examination in such a manner that no part of the kingdom,

and no class of schools, shall exclusively furnish servants to the East

India Company. It would be grossly unjust, for example, to the great

academical institutions of England, not to allow skill in Greek and

Latin versification to have a considerable share in determining the

issue of the competition. Skill in Greek and Latin versification has,

indeed, no direct tendency to form a judge, a financier, or a

diplomatist. But the youth who does best what all the ablest and most

ambitious youths about him are trying to do well will generally prove a

superior man; nor can we doubt that an accomplishment by which Fox and

Canning, Grenville and Wellesley, Mansfield and Tenterden first

distinguished themselves above their fellows, indicates powers of mind,

which, properly trained and directed, may do great service to the State.

On the other hand, we must remember that in the north of this island the

art of metrical composition in the ancient languages is very little

cultivated, and that men so eminent as Dugald Stewart, Horner, Jeffrey,

and Mackintosh, would probably have been quite unable to write a good

copy of Latin alcaics, or to translate ten lines of Shakspeare into

Greek iambics. We wish to see such a system of examination established

as shall not exclude from the service of the East India Company either

a Mackintosh or a Tenterden, either a Canning or a Horner."

[ORIGINAL SCHEME FOR THE INDIA SERVICE.]

Now, reverting to Macaulay's Table of Subjects as above exhibited, I may

observe that, till quite recently, no very serious alterations were ever

made upon it. The scale of marks, indeed, was altered more than once,

and sometimes Sanskrit and Arabic were struck off, and Jurisprudence and

Political Economy put in their stead; but, if we except the exclusion of

Political Philosophy in 1858, at the desire of the present Lord Derby,

from the Moral Science branch, the list remained, till Lord Salisbury's

late innovation, to all intents and purposes what it was at the

beginning. Here, for instance, is the prescription for 1875:--

MAKES

English Composition 500

History of England, including that of the laws

and constitution 500

English Language and Literature 500

Language, literature, and history of Greece 750

Rome 750

France 375

Germany 375

Italy 375

Mathematics, pure and mixed 1,250

Natural Sciences, that is, (1) chemistry, including

heat; (2) electricity and magnetism; (3) geology

and mineralogy; (4) zoology; (5) botany 1,000

*** The total (1,000) marks may be obtained by

adequate proficiency in any two or more of the five

branches of science included under this head.

Moral Sciences, that is, logic, mental and

moral philosophy 500

Sanskrit, language and literature 500

Arabic, language and literature 500

But Lord Salisbury's changes have been great and sweeping. They are

probably in keeping with the restriction of the competitor's age to

"over 17 under 19"; but, if so, they serve only to shew all the more

conclusively that the restriction is a mistake. A scheme that

distributes marks on anything but a rational and intelligent system; a

scheme that excludes the Natural History Sciences, mineralogy and

Geology, as well as Psychology and Moral Philosophy from its scope

altogether; a scheme that prescribes only _Elements_ and _Outlines_ of

such important subjects as Natural Science (Chemistry, Electricity and

Magnetism, &c.) and Political Economy--stands self-condemned. But, to do

it justice, let us produce the Table _in extenso_:--

MAKES.

English Composition 300

History of England, including _a period selected_

by the candidate 300

English Literature including _books selected_ by

the candidate 300

Greek 600

Latin 800

French 500

German 500

Italian 400

Mathematics, pure and mixed 1,000

Natural Science, that is, the _Elements_ of any

two of the following Sciences viz.:--

Chemistry, 500; Electricity and Magnetism,

300; Experimental Laws of Heat and Light,

300; Mechanical Philosophy, with _Outlines_

of Astronomy, 300.

Logic 300

_Elements_ of Political Economy 300

Sanskrit 500

Arabic 500

Further remarks are reserved for the sequel. Meanwhile,

I give the scheme advocated by myself in the

present Essay:--

GENERAL SCIENCES:--

Mathematics 500

Natural Philosophy 500

Chemistry 500

Biology, as physiology 500

Mental Science 500

SPECIAL OR CONCRETE SCIENCES:--

Mineralogy }

Botany } each 250

Zoology } or 300

Geology }

As a substitute for language, literature, and philosophy

of Greece, Rome, France, Germany, and Italy:--

Greece--Institutions and History 500

Literature 250

Rome--Institutions and History 500

Literature 250

France--Literature 250

Germany--Literature 250

Italy--Literature 250

Modern History 1,000

* * * * *

II. THE SCHEME CONSIDERED.

The system of competitive examinations for the public service, of which

I have laid before the Section a brief history compiled from the

Reports, is one of those radical innovations that may ultimately lead to

great consequences. For the present, however, it leads to many debates.

Not merely does the working out of the scheme involve conflicting views,

but there is still, in many quarters, great hesitation as to whether the

innovation is to be productive of good or of evil. The Report of the

Playfair Commission, and the more recent Report relative to the changes

in the India Civil Service Regulations, indicate pretty broadly the

doubts that still cleave to many minds on the whole question. It is

enough to refer to the views of Sir Arthur Helps, W.R. Greg, and Dr.

Farr, expressed to the Playfair Commission, as decidedly adverse to the

competitive system. The authorities cited in the Report on the India

Examinations scarcely go the length of total condemnation; but many

acquiesce only because there is no hope of a reversal.

The question of the expediency of the system as a whole is not well

suited to a sectional discussion. We shall be much better employed in

adverting to some of those details in the conduct of the examinations

that have a bearing on the general education of the country, as well as

on the Civil Service itself. It was very well for the Commissioners, at

first starting, to be guided, in their choice of subjects and in their

assigning of values to those subjects, by the received branches of

education in the schools and colleges. But, sooner or later, these

subjects must be discussed on their intrinsic merits for the ends in

view. Indeed, the scheme of Lord Salisbury has already made the venture

that Macaulay declined to make; it has absolutely excluded some of the

best recognised subjects of our school and college teaching, instead of

leaving them to the option of the candidates.

I will occupy the present paper with the consideration of two

departments in the examination programme--the one relating to the

PHYSICAL or NATURAL SCIENCES, the other relating to LANGUAGES.

* * * * *

[COMMISSIONER' SCHEME OF SCIENCE.]

The Commissioners' scheme of Mathematics and Natural Science is not, in

my opinion, accordant either with the best views of the relations of the

sciences, or with the best teaching usages.

In the classification of the Sciences, the first and most important

distinction is between the fundamental sciences, sometimes called the

Abstract sciences, and the derivative or Concrete branches. My purpose

does not require any nice clearing of the meanings of those technical

terms. It is sufficient to say that the fundamental sciences are those

that embrace distinct departments of the natural forces or phenomena;

and the derivative or concrete departments assume all the laws laid down

in the others, and apply them in certain spheres of natural objects. For

example, Chemistry is a primary, fundamental, or abstract science; and

Mineralogy is a derivative and concrete science. In Chemistry the stress

lies in explaining a peculiar kind of force, called chemical force; in

Mineralogy the stress is laid on the description and classification of

a select group of natural objects.

The fundamental, or departmental sciences, as most commonly accepted,

are these:--1. Mathematics; 2. Natural Philosophy, or Physics; 3.

Chemistry; 4. Biology; 5. Psychology. They may be, therefore, expressed

as Formal, Inanimate, Animate, and Mental. In these sciences, the idea

is to view exhaustively some department of natural phenomena, and to

assume the order best suited for the elucidation of the phenomena.

Mathematics, the Formal Science, exhausts the relations of Quantity

and Number; measure being a universal property of things. Natural

Philosophy, in its two divisions (molar and molecular), deals with one

kind of force; Chemistry with another: and the two together conspire to

exhaust the phenomena of _inanimate_ nature; being indispensably aided

by the laws and formulae of quantity, as given in Mathematics. Biology

turns over a new leaf; it takes up the phenomenon--Life, or the

_animated_ world. Finally, Psychology makes another stride, and embraces

the sphere of _mind_.

Now, there is no fact or phenomenon of the world that is not comprised

under the doctrines expounded in some one or other of these sciences.

We may have fifty "ologies" besides, but they will merely repeat for

special ends, or in special connections, the principles already

comprised in these five fundamental subjects. The regular, systematic,

exhaustive account of the laws of nature is to be found within their

compass.

[ORDER OF THE FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCES.]

Again, these sciences have a fixed order or sequence, the order of

dependence. Mathematics precedes them all, as being not dependent upon

any, while all are more or less dependent upon it. The physical forces

have to be viewed prior to the chemical; and both physical and chemical

forces are preparatory to vital. So there are reasons for placing Mental

Science last of all. Hence a student cannot comprehend chemistry without

natural philosophy, nor biology without both. You cannot stand a thorough

examination in chemistry without indirectly showing your knowledge of

physics; and a testing examination in biology would guarantee, with some

slight qualifications, both physics and chemistry.

Let us now turn to the other sciences--those that are not fundamental,

but derivative. The chief examples are the three commonly called Natural

History sciences--Mineralogy, Botany, Zoology. In these sciences no law

or principle is at work that has not been already brought forward in

the primary sciences. The properties of a Mineral are mathematical,

physical, and chemical: the testing of minerals is by measurement, by

physical tests, by chemical tests. The aim of this science is not to

teach forces unknown to the student of physics and chemistry; it is to

embrace, under the best classification, all the bodies called minerals,

and to describe the species in detail under mathematical, physical, and

chemical characters. It is the first in order of the _classificatory_

sciences. Its purpose in the economy of education is distinct and

peculiar; it imparts knowledge, not respecting laws, forces, or

principles of operating, but respecting the concrete constituents of

the world. It gives us a commanding view of one whole department of

the material universe; supplying information useful in practice, and

interesting to the feelings. It also brings into exercise the great

logical process, wanted on many occasions, the process of

CLASSIFICATION.

[CLASSIFICATORY SCIENCES.]

So much for an instance from the Inorganic world, as showing the

distinction between the two kinds of sciences. Another example may be

cited from the field of Biology; it is a little more perplexing. For

"biology" is sometimes given as the name for the two concrete

classificatory sciences--botany and zoology. In point of fact, however,

there is a science that precedes those two branches, although blending

with them; the science commonly expressed by the older term,

'Physiology,' which is not a classificatory and a dependent science, but

a mother science, like chemistry. It expounds the peculiarities of

living bodies, as such, and the laws of living processes--such processes

as assimilation, nutrition, respiration, innervation, reproduction, and

so on. One division is Vegetable Physiology, which is generally fused

with the classificatory science of botany. Animal Physiology is allied

with zoology, but more commonly stands alone. Lastly, the Physiology of

the Human animal has been from time immemorial a distinct branch of

knowledge, and is, of course, the chief of them all. Man being the most

complicated of all organised beings, not only are the laws of his

vitality the most numerous, and the most practically interesting, but

they go far to include all that is to be said of the workings of animal

life in general. Thus, then, the mother science of Biology, as a general

or fundamental science, comprises Vegetable, Animal, and Human

physiology. The classificatory adjunct sciences are Botany and Zoology.

It is in the various aspects of the mother science that we look for the

account of all vital phenomena, and all practical applications to the

preservation of life. Even if we stop at these, we shall have a full

command of the laws of the animate world. But we may go farther, and

embrace the sciences that arrange, classify, and describe the

innumerable host of living beings. These have their own independent

interest and value, but they are not the sciences that of themselves

teach us the living processes.

Thus, then, a proper scheme of scientific instruction starts from the

essential, fundamental, and law-giving sciences--Mathematics, Physics,

Chemistry, Biology, and Mind. It then proceeds to the adjunct branches

--such as Mineralogy, Botany, Zoology: and I might add others, as

Geology, Meteorology, Geography, no one of which is primary; for they

all repeat in new connections, and for special purposes, the laws

systematically set forth in the primary sciences.

In the foregoing remarks, I do not advance any new or debatable views.

I believe the scientific world to be substantially in accord upon all

that I have here stated; any differences that there are in the manner

of expressing the points do not affect my present purpose--namely, to

discuss the scheme of the mathematical and physical sciences as set

forth in the Civil Service Examinations.

[BAD GROUPINGS OF SCIENCES.]

Under Mathematics (pure and mixed) the Commissioners (in their Scheme of

1875), include mathematics, properly so called, and those departments of

natural philosophy that are mathematically handled--statics, dynamics,

and optics. But the next branch, entitled "Natural Science," is what I

am chiefly to remark upon. Under it there is a fivefold enumeration:

--(1) Chemistry, including Heat; (2) Electricity and Magnetism; (3)

Geology and Mineralogy; (4) Zoology; (5) Botany. I cannot pretend to say

where the Commissioners obtained this arrangement of natural knowledge.

It is not supported by any authority that I am acquainted with. If the

scheme just set forth is the correct one, it has _three_ defects. First,

it does not embrace in one group the remaining parts of natural

philosophy, the _experimental_ branches which, with the mathematical

treatment, complete the department; one of these, Heat, is attached to

chemistry, to which undoubtedly it has important relations, but not such

as to withdraw it from physics and embody it in chemistry. Then, again,

the physical branches, Electricity and Magnetism, are coupled in a

department and made of co-equal value with chemistry together with heat.

I need not say that the united couple--electricity and magnetism--is in

point of extent of study not a half or a third of what is included in

the other coupling. Lastly, the three remaining members of the

enumeration are three natural history sciences; geology being coupled

with mineralogy--which is a secondary consideration. Now I think it

is quite right that these three sciences should have a place in the

competition. What is objectionable is, that Biology is represented

solely by its two classificatory components or adjuncts, botany and

zoology; there is no mother science of Physiology: and consequently the

knowledge of the vast region of the Laws of Life goes for nothing. Nor

can it be said that physiology is given with the others. The subject of

_vegetable_ physiology could easily enough be taken with Botany: I would

not make a quarrel upon this part. It is zoology and animal physiology

that cannot be so coupled. If we look to the questions actually set

under zoology, we shall see that there is no pretence to take in

physiology. I contend, therefore, that there is a radical omission in

the scheme of natural science; an omission that seems without any

justification. I am not here to sing the praises of Physiology: its

place is fixed and determined by the concurrence of all competent

judges: I merely point out that Zoology does not include it, but

presupposes it.

The Science scheme of the London University, to which the first Civil

Service Commissioners, Sir Edward Ryan and Sir John Lefevre, were

parties, is very nearly what I contend for. It gives the

order--Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, Chemistry, Biology, Mental

Science (including Logic). In the working of that scheme, however,

Biology is made to comprehend both the mother science, Physiology, and

the two classificatory sciences, Botany and Zoology. Of course the

presence of two such enormous adjuncts cramps and confines the purely

physiological examination, which in my opinion should have full justice

done to it in the first instance: still, the physiology is not

suppressed nor reduced to a mere formality. Now, in any science scheme,

I would provide for the general sciences first, and take the others, so

far as expedient, in a new grouping, where those of a kind shall appear

together, and stand in their proper character, not as law-giving, but as

arranging and describing sciences. There is no more reason for coupling

Zoology with Physiology, than for tacking on Mineralogy to Chemistry.

In point of outward form, Mineralogy and Zoology are kindred subjects.

Practical Essays · 第 5 / 21 段