devotion to this barren
subject. But a Cambridge Examiner is not in that position. The
University is a national body, for education of young men: and the
power of a Cambridge Examiner is omnipotent in directing the education
of the young men; and his responsibility to the cause of education is
very distinct and very strong. And the question for him to consider
is--in the sense in which mathematical education is desired by the
best authorities in the nation, is the course taken by this national
institution satisfactory to the nation?

I express my belief that it is _not_ satisfactory. I believe that many
of the best men of the nation consider that a great deal of time is
lost on subjects which they esteem as puerile, and that much of that
time might be employed on noble and useful science.

You may remember that the Commissions which have visited Cambridge
originated in a Memorial addressed to the Government by men of
respected scientific character: Sabine was one, and I may take him as
the representative. He is a man of extensive knowledge of the
application of mathematics as it has been employed for many years in
the science of the world; but he has no profundity of science. He, as
I believe, desired to find persons who could enter accurately into
mathematical science, and naturally looked to the Great Mathematical
University; but he must have been much disappointed. So much time is
swallowed up by the forced study of the Pure Mathematics that it is
not easy to find anybody who can really enter on these subjects in
which men of science want assistance. And so Sabine thought that the
Government ought to interfere, probably without any clear idea of what
they could do.

I am, my dear Sir,
Yours very truly,
G.B. AIRY.

_Professor Cayley_.

* * * * *

DEAR SIR,

I have to thank you for your last letter. I do not think everything
should be subordinated to the educational element: my idea of a
University is that of a place for the cultivation of all
science. Therefore among other sciences Pure Mathematics; including
whatever is interesting as part of this science. I am bound therefore
to admit that your proposed extension of the problem of billiards, _if
it_ were found susceptible of interesting mathematical developments,
would be a fit subject of study. But in this case I do not think the
problem could fairly be objected to as puerile--a more legitimate