9
tors of the Sorbonne. The ignis fatuus by which our opponents appear to be led astray, consists in not separating and distinguishing between those branches of information which are essential to each separate profession, and general knowledge. That alone which is essential in each profession is that which should constitute the ground of his admission or rejection, when an individual stands candidate for its academical honours. A physician, as well as other men, is doubtless all the better for possessing general knowledge; so would he be perhaps all the better for being a good painter, or musician, or dancer: in fact, dancing and Chesterfieldian graces may be directly and eminently useful, inasmuch as we know that many an able and excellent physician has failed to have his merit popularly and extensively drawn forth for want of them. Yet, as Lord Chesterfield failed in his endeavours to stamp on the object of his solicitude the "homme poli," so will these contemplated regulations fail in making physicians Porsons or Newtons. Does it not comport with the dictates of common sense, and with the conviction of every man of experience and sagacity, that there are innumerable individuals of great figure and talent in their respective professions, who yet have a natural or early acquired inaptitude, and an invincible repugnance, to certain other branches of knowledge; for instance to languages and mathematics? Yet, would any man in the possession
