Rey John Bethune

Acting Principal of McGill University 18.35-1846.

From a painting in possession of Strachan Bethune Esq. Montreal.

THE MCGILL UNIVERSITY. MAGAZINE.

In this number of The McGill University Magazine our readers will find an article written by an Englishman in reply to two articles ⚫ntributed to the Monthly Review by Mr. Bourassa, a well known member of the Canadian Parliament, and entitled The French-Canadian in the British Empire. The articles appeared in the September and October numbers of last year. On account of the strong and, to many Fadishmen, novel light in which they present the aspirations of the pople for whom Mr. Bourassa speaks, they seem to have been read wiely and with much interest, and to have made the editor of the Monthly Review feel that a speedy reply was desirable. Accordingly, ajortion of the November editorial grappled with the main bearings of the French-Canadian question on the Empire. Whatever may be w of his utterances on the platform, in the Monthly Review Mr. rissa addresses himself to his subject in a temper that its gravity ds, for although he presents his case with much vigour and in no it of compromise, he judiciously abstains from seasoning his lanwith expressions that repel rather than convince open minds. article of Mr. Bourassa's opponent being of similar tone, we have the slightest hesitation in printing it, especially when we reflect the vital way in which the issues involved in the controversy bear national and imperial progress and destiny. And we are reminded that the writer, after graduating at Oxford, began a tour through the pire with a prolonged visit to McGill.

The educational attitude of Ontario towards other provinces was hed on in the December editorial. Some desire to modify

THE MCGILL UNIVERSITY MAGAZINE.

In this number of The McGill University Magazine our readers will find an article written by an Englishman in reply to two articles contributed to the Monthly Review by Mr. Bourassa, a well known member of the Canadian Parliament, and entitled The French-Canadian in the British Empire. The articles appeared in the September and October numbers of last year. On account of the strong and, to many Englishmen, novel light in which they present the aspirations of the people for whom Mr. Bourassa speaks, they seem to have been read widely and with much interest, and to have made the editor of the Monthly Review feel that a speedy reply was desirable. Accordingly, a portion of the November editorial grappled with the main bearings of the French-Canadian question on the Empire. Whatever may be said of his utterances on the platform, in the Monthly Review Mr. Bourassa addresses himself to his subject in a temper that its gravity demands, for although he presents his case with much vigour and in no spirit of compromise, he judiciously abstains from seasoning his language with expressions that repel rather than convince open minds. The article of Mr. Bourassa's opponent being of similar tone, we have not the slightest hesitation in printing it, especially when we reflect on the vital way in which the issues involved in the controversy bear on national and imperial progress and destiny. And we are reminded that the writer, after graduating at Oxford, began a tour through the Empire with a prolonged visit to McGill.

The educational attitude of Ontario towards other provinces was touched on in the December editorial. Some desire to modify

McGill as worthy of con-
The Minister of Educa-

it by acknowledging the protests made by sideration, appears to exist in official life. tion in Ontario is seemingly ready to compare notes with Principal Peterson, with the object, we suppose, of ascertaining how far McGill actually meets the requirements in Arts now in force in Ontario, and, consequently, to what extent a modification of our present curriculum is necessary in order to satisfy doubters and give the University the standing it justifiably demands. In view of the reconstruction of the curriculum in Arts only five years ago, searching changes are hardly entertainable now, nor, indeed, would they be warranted by the end that is sought. Whatever conditions Ontario might advance, McGill could meet, but any system that McGill has found to be vital to its academic effectiveness must remain essentially unimpaired. And it may not be irrelevant to add, quite quietly, as a fact and not as a vaunt, that the personnel of the McGill Faculty of Arts is not excelled in quality by that of any university in the Dominion.

It is a matter of every-day note how easily grounds of debate are shifted, either unintentionally or wilfully. With the University of Toronto, McGill has, in this question, no concern. The University of Toronto is occasionally brought into the discussion, as if the chief object of the disputants was to pit rival universities against each other, and then, after making calculations tinged by bias and prejudice, point to the impossibility of doing anything to get rid of a state of affairs that is felt to be damaging to true educational interests. Sensible persons belonging to both universities are ready to confess that above them both stands the educational welfare not of provinces regarded as such, but of the country as a whole. It is, indeed, preposterous to suppose that the function of universities can be rightly discharged unless they minister to the needs of the country without let or hindrance. Nor, we repeat, should the fear be entertained that inefficiency would cause disaster if educational barriers were altogether removed. That feeling is sometimes harped on by way of thwarting efforts to rise to higher academic conceptions. But in the educational as in the natural world things sink quickly to their destined levels, and an inefficient university soon finds it impossible to keep on the surface. It is obvious that educational vigour is increased by promoting healthy academic rivalry, and equally obvious that no step could be better taken to excite it than the step which removes the obstacles provincialism has erected.