Page:Calcutta Review (1925) Vol. 16.djvu/506

1925] Indian University and would thus destroy the character of that institution as an oriental seat of learning. Prof. Sarkar says that the brief press report has misrepresented the speech of Mahamahopadhyay Haraprasad Sastri in the Senate in regard to the retention of Pali Studies in the University of Calcutta. But we know that Prof. Sarkar himself has given a most garbled version of the motion and the speech of M. M. Haraprasad Sastri, who moved an amendment expressly for the total abolition of Pali groups in the Post-Graduate Department. This is not an empty assertion but an open challenge which we are prepared to stand by to the very letter. We cannot in this connection overlook another criticism, that the University is providing instruction in too many subjects or subdivisions of subjects. We can only be astonished at the colossal ignorance of true University education and culture which criticisms such as these unmistakably betray. If we compare the scope of activities of some of the modern Universities in England with the sphere of work undertaken by this University, we shall find that the Calcutta University, even with its much-criticised and so-called numerous subjects of study, lags far behind the teaching activities of even the newly constituted Universities of Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester (vide the University Year Book of the British Empire, 1924). The Calcutta University Commission, which Prof. Sarkar quotes so often, however, recognised the extremely limited character of the branches of study already existing in this University and expressed the opinion that further development was desirable in some of those subjects where the facilities for study and research, according to the members of the Commission, were inadequate. The Commission further recommended that as many as 27 new departments of studies, at present not represented in the University of Calcutta or its colleges, should be established, and that teaching in those branches ought to be undertaken if funds permit (Vide University Commission Report, Vol. V. P. 286). Again, the University Commission further suggested the