Occasionally, however, it may happen, that a professor may be indolent, and inaccurate in his reports; and it may be a question, whether it is not advantageous that the presiding officer should have authority to attest how often a professor really does meet his class, with the length of time expended, and the precise course of instruction adopted; and then to report to the trustees, but not to interfere himself in the rectification of abuses.

In the discussion of this subject in the Convention, Mr. Keating has committed a blunder, regarding the University of Virginia.

"He would like to see the president, in truth, the head of the university, occupying a distinguished station in the board of trustees, controlling all the faculties, superintending all the departments. It should be a situation such as an experienced and retiring statesman would be proud to fill. A good example had been set by the new University of Virginia." P. 86.

Now, the rector of that institution is merely a member of the board of visiters, chosen from out the body to preside over them, has no delegated authority, but meets the other visiters once a year, and presides over their deliberations, without, however, having a casting vote. The chairman of the faculty, chosen annually by the board of visiters, from amongst the professors, is the real president, and possesses the powers usually granted to the presidents of colleges. We are surprised, by the bye, to observe from the journal of the Convention, that the University of Virginia was entirely unrepresented there. It has now been established six years, and has been proceeding on a tide of successful experiment. It is the first effort that has been made in this country to cast off the trammels that have fettered practical instruction; to suffer each to take the bent of his own inclination in the selection of his studies, requiring for the attainment of its highest honours, qualifications only, and rejecting time altogether. Although the first attempt in this country on a large scale, the plan has been long adopted in other countries, particularly in Germany, which has been so justly celebrated for the novelty and excellence of its academic instruction; yet in no country can such an experiment be regarded with more interest than in the United States, where, for the reasons already assigned, the youth are compelled to attain, if practicable, the strictly useful, and to strive for their own support at a very early period of their career.

In the debates of the Convention, we find few allusions to that institution, and wherever it is referred to, the most lamentable ignorance of its economy is exhibited, and the greatest errors are committed. In it there is an entire separation of the legislative from the executive power; the board of visiters exercising the former—the board of professors, or faculty, the latter. This has its advantages and inconveniences. In many of our colleges for resident students, the president is, ex officio, presiding officer of the board of visiters, so that he forms a part of the two powers. Where the president is at the same time a professor this is apt to create heart burnings and jealousies, and gives him a decided, and often unfair preponderance in any dispute with his brother professors, in which the decision of the board of trustees may be requested; whilst, if the executive power have no voice in the deliberations of the superior board; and especially if the visiters reside at a distance from the institution, laws are apt to be enacted, which create great dissatisfaction and confusion, which have not been suggested by experience, and which, consequently, are either wholly inoperative, unfeasible, or impolitic. To obviate these evils the executive might have a delegate at the meetings of the legislative body, who, even if he had no vote, might be expected to take part in those deliberations which regarded the rules and regulations of the university, or the interests of the body to which he belonged; but in the discussion of other topics, his attendance might be dispensed with. In this manner, the legislative body would have the advantage of the voice of experience, and the faculty, by choosing their own delegate, could always be represented, should discussions arise between them and their presiding officer. Nothing is more certain, than that laws which seem easy of execution, and admirably conceived, are often found, in practice, to be wholly unavailable and injudicious. But the mischief does not end here. The respect of the student is any thing but increased towards the board that conceives, or the executive which attempts to fulfil such regulations. By the enactments lying before us, of almost all the well regulated institutions of this country, we find, that the board of professors are requested by the trustees to suggest to them such laws as experience may indicate; this is wise; the faculty are unquestionably the best judges, and no non-resident can possibly have the necessary experience.

Well adapted rules are the best safeguards for the success of any university, where the students reside within the precincts especially. They should be simple, yet not trivial; efficient, yet not unnecessarily rigorous, and should be drawn up, if not perspicuously, at least intelligibly. What shall we say to such cases as the following, which we copy from the published laws of one of the oldest colleges of this Union?

"No person, other than a student or other member of the college, shall be admitted as a boarder at the college table. No liquors shall be furnished or used at table, except beer, cider, toddy, or spirits and water!"

"No student shall be permitted to lodge or board, or without permission from the president or a professor, go into a tavern."

And again,—

"If offences be committed in which there are many actors or abettors, the faculty may select such of the offenders for punishment as may be deemed necessary to maintain the authority of the laws, and to preserve good order in the college, &c."