not looking forward to professional or specialist work, but who are expecting to go into various lines of commercial activity, is already large and constantly increasing. They have no desire to follow out a course of study whose purpose is a technical preparation, nor is such a course well adapted for them. The demand which their presence in the college makes is for what we may call a general preparation for life, some knowledge of facts, some training of judgment and taste, sympathy with a variety of intellectual interests, such broadening and liberalizing of mind as is possible. To the instructor who teaches in the eager atmosphere of an active university such a demand may seem illegitimate, because it seems vague and weak. But this opinion is proper only to the narrow specialist who cannot see beyond the limits of his own field. The demand is perfectly legitimate; it is certain to be increasingly heard; and it is the duty of the college to meet it. It is to be remembered also that the best preparation for technical work does not omit all studies which are cultural merely, just as the best general preparation for life should embrace some training in technical lines. With these considerations in mind let us ask to which of the two ways by which the college discharges its preparatory function, technical preparation or general preparation, the study of history is most naturally adapted, and which of the purposes already stated as those the instructor may have in mind is most likely to secure the desired end. It is not easy to specify a line of professional work to which the study of history stands in a technical relation, except that of the history teacher, whose numbers are at present so small, in proportion to the college as a whole, as to be almost negligible, and who perhaps needs above all others that point of view in regard to history which a general rather than a special training will give. Law and theology come the nearest perhaps to having a technical need of historical study, and yet it is also true of them that what they need of history is not technical but general preparation. The clergyman or lawyer may need a more permanent hold upon the facts of history than does the business man. They are to him more an end in themselves rather than chiefly a means for producing a result, as in the case of the other. But preacher and business man alike need to study the same facts in the same way each for his own purpose. It is in truth the later studies of the professional man which serve to keep alive the facts which he and his classmate in business once learned in the same class room.