2.  Natural science has of late years assumed a title to which it has no claim, and calls itself simply “Science”—­presumably “for short,” but to the great confusion of young minds, or rather with the effect of contracting their range of vision within very narrow limits, as if theology and Biblical study, and mental and moral, and historical and political science, had no place of mention in the rational order where things are studied in their causes.

Inquiry was made in several schools where natural science was taught according to the syllabuses of the Board of Education.  The question was asked, “What is science?”—­and without exception the answers indicated that science was understood to mean the study of the phenomena of the physical world in their causes.  The name “Science” used by itself has been the cause of this, and has led to the usual consequences of the assumption of unauthorized titles.

Things had been working up in England during the last few years towards this misconception in the schools.  On the one hand there was the great impetus given to physical research and experimental science in recent years, so that its discoveries absorbed more and more attention, and this filtered down to the school books.

On the other hand, especially since the South African war, there had been a great stir in reaction against mere lessons from books, and it was seen that we wanted more personal initiative and thought, and resourcefulness, and self-reliance, and many other qualities which our education had not tended to develop.  It was seen that we were unpractical in our Instruction, that minds passed under the discipline of school and came out again, still slovenly, unobservant, unscientific in temper, impatient, flippant, inaccurate, tending to guess and to jump at conclusions, to generalize hastily, etc.  It was observed that many unskilful hands came out of the schools, clumsy ringers, wanting in neatness, untidy in work, inept in measuring and weighing, incapable of handling things intelligently.  There had come an awakening from the dreams of 1870, when we felt so certain that all England was to be made good and happy through books.  A remedy was sought in natural science, and the next educational wave which was to roll over us began to rise.  It was thought that the temper of the really scientific man, so patient in research, so accurate and conscientious, so slow to dogmatize, so deferential to others, might be fostered by experimental science in the schools, acquiring “knowledge at first hand,” making experiments, looking with great respect at balances, weighing and measuring, and giving an account of results.  So laboratories were fitted up at great expense, and teachers with university degrees in science were sought after.  The height of the tide seemed to be reached in 1904 and 1905—­to judge by the tone of Regulations for the Curricula of Secondary Schools issued by the Board of Education—­for in