Page 2

in doubt not, [be?] reformed, if they knew how to do it, without interfering with the fundamental principle of {elective studies]}. {[If a?]} the system - which is that each student shall elect the studies to which he will devote himself A comparison with other colleges is fallacious because they employ {illegible} a regular + uniform curriculum of study, + it is easy + proper to adopt a gene- ral standard of knowledge for admission. But how can this be done at this University? In most other schools, as in those of Moral Philoso- {each Student selects the school, he} phy, Natural Philosophy, Chemistry, {the school}, Med- {could attend in most of which no?]} icines + Law, no Special preliminary institution can be exected {is practicable.]} In the schools where such previous instruction is practicable, as in those of An- cient languages, + Mathemat- ics, especially, the necessary knowledge is executed. When a student wishes to learn Natural Philosophy, why should he be expected to posessess any acquaintance with Latin or if he prepares to devote his attention to Chemistry, why must he un- dergo an examination upon Mathematics? The system of elective studies which upon the whole has proved so immensely beneficial, has there- fore incident to it, + no fear in- separable incident the draw- back of tempting ill advised young men to occasionally to embark in studies for which they are unfitted by [previous?[ discipline; and yet we greatly doubt whether any instutiton of learning, if any grade, in- hibits a larger proposition of diligent + empowering students, and [illeg.], we apprehend, so many young men thoroughly in stunted in the particular handles of knowledge to which they have applied them- selves.