 
The Davidson Monthly takes The Archive to task for a failure in the use of “respectable” grammar, and refers to Reed and Kellogg, page 147, where it says information may be obtained, and where is found the following: “Caution.—Unless you wish to affirm, do not use two negative words so that they shall contradict each other;” also “Caution.—Do not use adverbs for adjectives or adjectives for adverbs.” The first caution refers to use of negatives, therefore the critic cannot mean this one. Does he mean the second caution? Does he mean that ‘most’ is an adverb where an adjective(?) should be used, or that ‘most’ is an adjective(?), and that an adverb is here needed? Perhaps the critic meant that it is a case of improper comparison, such as ‘roundest,’ ‘straightest,’ etc., which the old grammars vehemently denounced, though the best writers use them. It was perhaps a little irregular to consider ‘too patent’ as an adjectival term of degrees, and we thank our courteous critic for his suggestion of ‘almost’ for ‘most.’ Still such terms as this are in common use, and we confess a desire to conform to the many. The Charlotte Chronicle of Jan. 27th, contains a very earnest appeal for the endowment of Trinity. The editor says: “We confess we are impatient about the matter.” Also there occurs, in a February number of the same, a complimentary notice of the college and its work. The Chronicle is a broad-gauge paper whose zeal, not only in the interest of Trinity College, but in all educational interests, is worthy of the object. The Wilmington Messenger is one of the newsiest, most successful dailies of the State. For its success, editor Bonitz, who has striven against trying difficulties, deserves much commendation. Henry Ward Beecher’s average grade while at Amherst was but 57 on a scale of 100.—Exchange. The Vanderbilt Observer announces the marriage, in China, of Chas. J. Soon, Trinity’s Chinese ex-student. Governor Foraker says: “I would rather be a sophomore in college than Governor of Ohio.”—Exchange. The Governor either must never have attended college, or, while there, must not have gotten a proper conception of a sophomore; or probably there was a difference in the sophomore of his day and this. There is a growing sentiment, meeting the approval both of Faculties and students, among the colleges, favoring the abolition of the grading system. In a recent number of the Student, a journal devoted to the educational interests of the Society of Friends, occurs an article which advocates dispensing with grades, or, if there must be such a system, protests against its being made a motive force to study. As long as the working system remains, so long will students work for figures and not for knowledge. Grades are not measures of scholarship, but only indicate the result of a week’s “cramming.” Knowledge thus acquired makes the head very full one week, but leaves it very empty the next. Cornell has given the non-grading system a trial and the results have proved it satisfactory in every way. A prominent politician, not a thousand miles from here, was heard to say a few days ago: “Jeff Davis ought to have been hung at the close of the war, and a monument erected over the grave of the truly great John Brown.” The speaker was a Southern man, a Democrat, and a Prohibitionist.—Exchange. The “speaker” may have been a Southern man, but is not one now. The man who says that Davis ought to have been hung is at heart an alien and an enemy to the South. The “speaker” has also ceased to be a Democrat, for Democrats don’t talk that way. If the “speaker” be stripped of his false apparel, he will be found to shrink into a bundle of prohibition fanaticism. This fanaticism and prejudice has robbed him—like many others—of truth and patriotism. The prohibition cause is a good one. Its advocates cannot forward it by censuring Jeff Davis, but on the other hand, will greatly damage it. The matter in the School Teacher is of a kind that cannot fail to be of peculiar interest to any one who is now engaged in teaching, or expects at some time in the future to make it his profession. It is gladly welcomed as an Exchange of The Archive. Long may it continue to advocate the cause of education and impart instruction to the pedagogues of the State! The Goldsboro Argus of February 9th contains an announcement of a change of editors. Mr. Munroe has withdrawn and his place is to be filled by Mr. J. R. Griffin. The Archive has a friendly interest in the welfare of all its exchanges, and tenders its best wishes for the success of the new management. When the Oak Leaf copies an article from The Archive it is respectfully requested to give The Archive credit; also to copy the article without verbal changes such as were made in the case of The Archive’s critique upon the article “States Rights” in the Wake Forest Student. The receipt of the Twin City Daily, the Thomasville Gazette, and the Summerfield Sheaf is acknowledged. |
|
