The author, before proceeding to the task of summing up, takes the precaution to protest that he does not intend to deny absolutely all truth to the sect who follow the maxim similia similibus; he only claims more truth for the conflicting rule of contraries; which is not, perhaps, very logical at bottom. But all the practical applications of the Homœopathists he finds absurd. He concludes then against them in substance as follows: That maladies are not, as Hahnemann will have it, immaterial essences; for if so, material medicines could have no action upon them. (This, I think, is a decided non sequitur.) That maladies are not to be regarded as consisting of the mere external group of symptoms, but as the result of a deeper cause; which lurking cause, and not the symptoms, is what the physician should aim to extirpate. That to make each case a different malady, requiring special treatment, would be to do away "with all experience" (a proposition which, though partly true, is generally awkward as an argument, since, on the contrary, it is experience that thus inclines to individualizing.) That the division of chronic maladies by the Homoopaths is arbitrary; consequently, that the curative system thence deduced must be defective practically. That the alleged similarity between the pathogenetic and the pathologic systems can never be complete; consequently, that the principle of similia similibus can never be anything but words—(the simpler reader may require to know, that the pathogenetic system means the process whereby Homœopathists produce or generate malady; or a set of symptoms resembling those presented by the illness to be cured, and that the pathologic system is the learned term for the latter.) Our author proceeds to sum up, that the dilutions of the Homœopathists must in the last degree transcend the lowest atomic divisibility; consequently, that the medical efficiency must be null. That Homœopathists are inconsistent, seeing that their principle demands a specific for every distinct case of illness to which the human flesh is heir, whereas they have but twenty or thirty in their whole materia medica. That the method which pretends to cure a certain order of diseases by inoculation with the same virus, or the tape-worm by the tape-worm, and which is termed Isopathy, is "Homœopathy run mad;" (and yet a treatise of two large volumes appeared some time ago in this city, filled with cases of alleged cures upon the former of these "insane" principles.) That, in a word, "the Hahnemannic doctrine reposes upon false assertions, and upon principles that are absurd, ridiculous, and contradictory.”

This literal version will give a taste of the French amenity of the writer. He admits, however, that there may be "some honest persons in the practice of this molecular and cloudy issue from the dream-land of Teutonism; but that, in general, it is the refuge of mountebanks and scoundrels." I must protest against the truth as well as form of this invective, in the name of our own republic, where Homœopathy is in large repute. Besides the testimony of this experience, I think the author is scarcely competent to sit in philosophic judgment upon either Allopathy or Homœopathy. But this is not the place to discuss a question of that nature. I conclude with notifying the reader that the foregoing series of assertions are attempted to be duly proved throughout the body of the work.

II. HIGHER EDUCATION IN GERMANY.

BERLIN, November 27th, 1855. MR. EDITOR,-The Universities of Germany have probably a more extended influence than those of any other country. Unlike the renowned institutions at Cambridge and Oxford, they are closed to no class of the community; and they are freely open, also, to citizens of all other countries. But not only are they thus accessible to all, as are the colleges of our own land, but a much larger proportion of the population avail themselves of the advantages they offer. Every professional man must pass his examination upon the studies of the University; and no theologian would be permitted to preach, no lawyer to plead, no physician to practise, no engineer to build roads, unless he had his certificate in his pocket that it had been passed satisfactorily. It is the only way in which to become a teacher in the gymnasia, (or state schools,) or to reach a professorship in the University. Thus the whole educated community are brought under the influence of the Universities, and the "gebildete" (that is, educated) are spoken of and referred to as a distinct class in the community. The arrangements of the universities are, for the most part, admirable, tending to produce thoroughness in the student, and to secure for him the best possible instruction.

The Gymnasia may be considered component parts of the University; they are, in fact, its necessary presupposition. No student (that is, German student) can attend University lectures until he has passed the examination of the gymnasia; this is his ticket of admission. The course in the gymnasium is nine years, though this period may be shortened by entering an advanced class. It is not usual, however, to do this. No boy is admitted younger than nine years of age, and he is expected at the first to possess the common rudiments of German education, and a little knowledge of Latin. During the nine years' course he is carefully instructed in Latin, Greek, the elements of mathematics, and history; usually, also, in the French and English languages; and, besides, if he is to study theology, in Hebrew. During so long a course, he learns thoroughly what he is taught. When he enters the University he can write and speak Latin with tolerable correctness and facility. Indeed, many of the recitations of the higher classes in the gymnasia are conducted entirely in Latin. Greek is read with ease; and, in fact, with all the languages, the difficulty of translation is past. They are tools ready to be used in theology, for the purposes of exegesis, and in philology for the higher criticism of the text, style, &c., of the classic authors. In fact, the universities correspond more to our professional schools than to our colleges, though they embrace departments which scarcely exist as yet among us.

When the student matriculates at the University, his school days are past; he is now engaged in preparing directly for his future employment in life. He is under no system of espionage; he can study or not, as suits him; can attend the lectures he pays for or not; and so, at first, he is apt to be lazy, and the first semester (half year) is usually a reaction against the strict discipline of the

gymnasium. But this state is only transitory. The fact stares the student in the face that so many courses of lectures are to be heard; and that, unless he passes a good examination upon them, all chances for success in life are lost. So the fox (as the freshmen are called here) stops frisking his tail by the end of the first semester, and turns with alacrity to his work.

Most of his instruction consists in lectures delivered on the various subjects in his department. Besides these, there is in most departments what is called a "seminar," a meeting of a certain number of students with the professors once or twice a week, for the discussion of particular topics. In the philological department these are always conducted in Latin, and consist of the discussion of the purity of text of a writer, or a disquisition on a tragedy, or something of the kind. An essay is usually read by one member; the others then discuss what he has said, and the professor sums up the argument, and gives his own opinion. Every one speaks in Latin, and is immediately corrected if he make a mistake. In Philosophy and Theology there is the same routine; save that in discussions on homiletics or dogmatics, German is spoken. The exegetical seminar is held in Latin. The student must spend three years in this manner, and must hear lectures in all the branches of his profession. He may prolong his course, if he chooses; but at the end of the sixth semester he may pass his examination. A theological student, if he wish to become a pastor, is not examined at the University, but by a council appointed by the king for the purpose, consisting of theological professors and pastors. If he wishes to teach, however, he must also be examined at the University. In most cases the students try to take the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, which term comprehends all departments. You are to be examined on a certain list of subjects; but you can make any one of them the chief one, on which you are expected to be very thorough, and on which your success principally depends.

If, in addition to this, one wishes to teach in the University, with the prospect of becoming a professor, he writes a treatise in Latin upon some subject in his department, and holds a public discussion also in Latin upon it, with three opponents appointed by the faculty. The professors attend in their robes of office, and the candidate argues in white gloves and cravat, for it is quite a state affair. After it is over he receives the clasp of the hand, the open and shut books, the ring of office, and the official kiss; and is, moreover, smothered with Latin praises from the dean of the faculty. He then has permission to read lectures, but receives no compensation from the institution, depending on the number of students who hear him for his support. At first this is small, but if he is a man of ability and learning his students increase in number, and when he has published a good book on some subject he is promoted to be Professor Extraordinary, with a small salary from the government. In consideration of this he has to read a public (or free) lecture once or twice a week. If he comes to be at all distinguished, he is, after some years, made Professor Ordinary, with a larger salary. His chief support, however, at all times comes from the students who hear him; each of whom pays about four dollars for each course of lectures, except, of course, two public lectures, which are free to all. Neither the Privat Docent (the licensed lecturer) nor any of the professors have the subjects assigned in which they shall read. Of

course they must read in their department; but they may choose any branch of it they may see fit. This, one might at first think, would cause confusion; but it is soon seen to be an admirable arrangement. If two or more professors read on the same subject, the students are not slow in finding out which is the ablest, and the inferior ones are soon left to read to empty benches. A professor thus deserted will then take up another subject; and, if he is an able man, will soon have a full lecture-room to hear his ethics or exegesis, though his dogmatics had emptied it. Thus the students are sure to have every man's best offered to them in his lectures; and the professor is not obliged to read on one subject while his heart is fixed on another. The number of subjects is thus very much varied. In Church History, for instance, one lecturer may read on the History of Doctrines; another on External Church History; another on the Gnostics; or on the history of a particular doctrine, such as the Trinity, the sacraments, &c. In the exegetical department one may read on prophecy; another on the Mosaic record; another may expound the Psalms all subjects requiring men of a somewhat different character. To have such a system, a great number of professors is required, and a great number of students too to support them. The instruction by lectures, moreover, presupposes a thorough discipline of mind, and habits of study already formed in the student: it requires, also, to make it effective, the prospect ahead of a severe examination in the lectures. But where these conditions exist, it must result in giving a fullness of information, and a thoroughness of culture, that could not be attained in any other way.

Of all the Prussian universities, the one at Berlin is the chief. The number of its professors and students is by far the largest, and it excels also in the size of its library, and the richness of its collections and museums. A somewhat special account of the University itself may not be without interest to your readers.

The University building is a large and finely-proportioned pile; forming three sides of a hollow square. The court-yard thus formed opens upon the street called "Unter den Linden." One wing of the building faces the operahouse; the other faces the Prince of Prussia's palace, and the magnificent bronze monument to Frederic the Great. This building is entirely used for lecture-rooms, and the various scientific collections of the institution. The students room where they please in the town, the University exercising no oversight over them save through the University police. These lecture-rooms, which are of all sizes, to suit the distinguished or undistinguished professors, are very plain, having unpainted seats and desks, and a desk in similar style for the lecturer. The aula, where the public exercises of conferring degrees, awarding premiums, &c., take place, is very handsome and spacious.

The number of students is ordinarily about fifteen hundred; but many hear lectures who are not matriculated, and the number of these attending lectures is about two thousand. This is about the number at Munich and Vienna. As the catalogue for this year has not yet appeared, I cannot give the number of students in each department. The students of theology, however, are the least numerous, the theological faculty not being so distinguished here as in Halle and other places.

There are in all departments ninety professors and sixty-four privat docents. Of these there are in theology, five ordinary and five extraordinary professors, and four privat docents; in law, eight ordinary and four extraordinary professors, and three privat docents; in medicine, eleven ordinary and seven extraordinary professors, and twenty-two privat docents; and in the comprehensive department of philosophy, twenty-five ordinary and twenty-five extraordinary professors, and thirty-five privat docents. Besides these there are two lecturers, whose title is "Academiæ Regiæ Litter. Sodalis," five lecturers on the modern languages and literature, not included in the philosophical faculty, and instructors in fencing, gymnastics, leaping, and riding. So, taken together, there are one hundred and sixty-four instructors in the various departments.

The subjects treated are, of course, very various. As an illustration of the variety and number of topics not usually considered with us, let me quote a few of the lectures in the theological department: Thus, Professor Hengstenberg reads a public lecture on "the History of the Jews from the Time of the Exile;" Professor Nitzsch reads on "Catechetik," or the mode and uses of teaching the Catechism. Then there are lectures on the "Ancient Semitic Geography;" "The Method and Encyclopedia of Theological Study;" "The Syriac and Semitic Languages;" "The Influence of Philosophy, since the Time of Spinoza, upon the Christian Religion and Theology." Dr. Erdmann reads on "Patristic," or the lives, works, and doctrines of the Church fathers; Licentiate Schneider on the "History of Ecclesiastical Poetry;" others on "Symbolik," or the history of confessions and creeds, while the "History of Doctrines," beginning now to be somewhat considered by us at home, is a branch very widely cultivated.

But it would be tedious to go thus through the various departments. Suffice it to say, that almost all branches are carefully treated even in their minutiæ. Indeed, the division of labour is as remarkable here as it is in our factories where machinery has been extensively introduced. I will, however, give some explanation of the philosophical faculty; for, from its name, it would not be generally understood among us.

The philosophical department, then, includes all those subjects which cannot come under the other departments, and which can be philosophically treated. Thus, history, philology, and the natural sciences are comprehended in it, as well as philosophy proper. This faculty in Berlin includes a great many of the most distinguished men belonging to the University. For instance, Bekker and Boeckh, the distinguished Greek editors; Lepsius, who may be said to be to Egypt what Niebuhr was to Rome; Ranke and Von Raumer, the celebrated historians; Carl Ritter, the great geographer; Haupt, the Latin professor; Trendelenberg, so distinguished for his philosophical writings; Kiepert, the author of the historical maps; Michelet, the Hegelian philosopher,

and others.

It is quite bewildering, and positively amusing, at times, to see the topics which are treated of. Not only are there lectures on the various works of the classic authors of Greece and Rome, but numerous individuals hold themselves ready (mind, I do not say read) to read in Chaldee, Sanscrit, Persian, and the