PRIZE POEM.* Sir John Franklin. BY ISAAC RILEY, MONTROSE, PA. LOST! lost! lost! Where fearful gloom and silence reign Lost! lost! a manly form, A stalwart arm, a flashing eye, A forehead, broad and lifted high, A heart to brave the rising storm, And wind, and wave, and low'ring sky. Lost lost! no narrow bed That loving tears can e'er bedew,-- The sails are set, the capstan manned, The cannon sends its last adieu. From deck, and shroud, and taper mast The look of fond regret is cast Toward cliffs and towers, that quickly fall Beneath the far horizon wall; While shaded brow and bosoms' swell Of sad but hopeful partings tell. With bending yard and tightening chain, And longs to brave the Arctic breeze. *This Poem, on one of the Subjects proposed to the Class of 1858, received a Prize in June last, but its publication has been unavoidably delayed till the present Number. [EDs. From out the fog and twilight gloom Brave hearts that scorn the winter's ire, Of Memnons and of cloudless skies, Of Parian cliffs, 'neath which the Greek The Summer rears her flaming plume; She storms each ice embattled hight, And sunders wide the walls of night Toward colder seas and darker skies; And arches spanning caverns dark, And pillared fanes, like that which crowned While o'er the starry fields of space With flying rope and tattered sail, At last the fleeting days that twined And silence, save of billows' blow, Of wailing wind and crashing floe. The crew desert the sinking ship, And trace across the heaving pack With sledge and boat their cheerless track. One lingering hope alone remains, It hovers near on radiant wings, Funereal torches o'er their grave. The Political Economy of a College. It is not that a Valedictorian has a stand of 3.50 quadrennially, but that fifty lower-appointment men have each a stand of 2.50, that is true college wealth and well-being.—Bowen on Laing altered. WHAT in the world does that mean! Can it be a proposition to reconstruct the College system of finance, to remodel the plan of endowment, to push forward the University scheme? Or is it designed to retrench a student's expenses and show him how-like the Irishman with two rotary stoves-he can save all his fuel and even lay up money in his "course"? Or is there lurking in that word political, a cabalistic meaning bearing upon First Presidencies and Junior Coalitions? No, gentle Reader, nothing of the sort. But Dr. Chalmers wrote the "Political Economy of a famine," (we never read it,) and why shouldn't we attempt the Political Economy of a College, particularly as a philosophical title, like a philosophical oration, gives a man an air, a stand, so to speak, without entailing the necessity in either case of being philosophical; only serving in both cases like the Judges' stand at a horserace, as a good place to start from. If then, kind Reader, you are in clined to mount with us on condition of getting down whenever you are tired, you shall see what you shall see, and we shall be glad of your company. Our country has been stigmatized by foreigners (in effect if not in words) as a dollar hunting-ground. But sharp sentences must always be taken like round numbers, as only an approximation to the truth. In this case, to be sure, we cannot deny that there is some justice in the charge; we cannot deny that money-making and moneyworshiping are prominent features in our national character. We do not, however, propose to reproduce the ordinary commonplaces on this topic, but to inquire why it is that this deference to wealth, so prevalent in the nation, apparently finds no place in College? Why it is that, though we have here men of every variety of fortune, from the gentleman, flashing with jewelry and patent leather, to the ploughboy, all whose flashing is in his eye,-why it is that no one takes the trouble to ask whether his classmate's father is a millionaire or a mendicant; whether he is a member of the senate or a woodsawyer! Why it is that if the property-question is raised at all, it is not to do homage to the property holder, but to know where to borrow in case of need a case, by the way, that like the "ablative of means,"* cannot be regarded as an unusual occurrence in one's college experience. We have intimated that deference to wealth apparently finds no lodgment in college, and we hope in the sequel to make the pertinency of the adverb appear. Wealth, say Political Economists, is of two kinds, material and immaterial; and we intend no play upon the word where we affirm that the wealth of College is eminently of the latter kind. The College world is an exceedingly complex idea, but we shall try to analyze it, and by (a metaphysical, of course, not an actual) abstraction, get at its wealth. Setting the real and personal estate of College, its funds, stocks, investments, its good will and the Faculty, out of the account, as not coming into the question, and looking only at the students, we may define the wealth of College to consist, 1st, in the scholarship, 2d, the social qualities, and 3d, the official position of its undergraduates. These are the elements of its wealth and they are genuine and legitimate. The world outside may not be able to estimate them all. Neither can a savage correctly apprehend the advantages of civilization. What then? The It is perhaps a fair question for grammarians, whether the existing finan. cial condition of students does not demand a vocative of "means." |