Now to turn to his modern disciples. The study of the Classics had been made the basis of the Oxford education, in the reforms which I have spoken of, and the Edinburgh Reviewers protested, after the manner of Locke, that no good could come of a system which was not based upon the principle of Utility.
“Classical Literature,” they said, “is the great object at Oxford. Many minds, so employed, have produced many works and much fame in that department; but if all liberal arts and sciences, _useful to human life_, had been taught there, if _some_ had dedicated themselves to _chemistry_, _some_ to _mathematics_, _some_ to _experimental philosophy_, and if _every_ attainment had been honoured in the mixt ratio of its difficulty and _utility_, the system of such a University would have been much more valuable, but the splendour of its name something less.”
Utility may be made the end of education, in two respects: either as regards the individual educated, or the community at large. In which light do these writers regard it? in the latter. So far they differ from Locke, for they consider the advancement of science as the supreme and real end of a University. This is brought into view in the sentences which follow.
“When a University has been doing _useless_ things for a long time, it appears at first degrading to them to be _useful_. A set of Lectures on Political Economy would be discouraged in Oxford, probably despised, probably not permitted. To discuss the inclosure of commons, and to dwell upon imports and exports, to come so near to common life, would seem to be undignified and contemptible. In the same manner, the Parr or the Bentley of the day would be scandalized, in a University, to be put on a level with the discoverer of a neutral salt; and yet, _what other measure is there of dignity in intellectual labour but usefulness_? And what ought the term University to mean, but a place where every science is taught which is liberal, and at the same time useful to mankind? Nothing would so much tend to bring classical literature within proper bounds as a _steady and invariable appeal to utility_ in our appreciation of all human knowledge.… _Looking always to real utility as our guide_, we should see, with equal pleasure, a studious and inquisitive mind arranging the productions of nature, investigating the qualities of bodies, or mastering the difficulties of the learned languages. We should not care whether he was chemist, naturalist, or scholar, because we know it to be as _necessary_ that matter should be studied and subdued _to the use of man_, as that taste should be gratified, and imagination inflamed.”