G , . o ^ G 
 
 V ft- <>* fe u> *t* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ■<$• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0° 
 
 .& 
 
 r$ ^ V* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 6 °^ 
 
 0? 
 
 
 
 
 ,0v- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A.V . °^ *••• A. V "^ <V °^ *•-« 
 
 V 
 
 o. 
 
 ,0' 
 

 
 A, 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 v 
 
 <<Jv c o " " * <£ 
 
 
 :X* ^ 
 
 
 
 1 * V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 c » * G * O^ • l ' ' * O 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 "V 
 
 
 
 -*■ 
 
 
 -,- »<» 
 
 a ,V 
 
 
 cv 
 
 !**• 
 
 
 
 V 1 : ' *°° 
 
 
 ^ cr 
 
 »1'°* ^ 
 
 \* 
 
 
A HISTORY OF 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM 
 
 FROM 1800 A.D. TO THE PRESENT TIME 
 
 WITH SUGGESTIONS TOWARDS A COMPLETE 
 
 SCHEME FOR THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CAMBRIDGE 
 
 BY 
 
 A. I. TILLYARD, M.A., 
 
 St. John's College, Cambridge 
 
 Cambridge : 
 
 W. Heffer and Sons Ltd. 
 
 1913 
 
Y, 
 
 v*4 
 
 <2^ 
 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 A few words of explanation may be given as to how 
 this book came to be written. In July, 1907, Bishop Gore 
 raised a discussion in the House of Lords on University 
 Reform, and so brought the question prominently forward. 
 I spent the summer of that year in thinking out and 
 writing down my own ideas on it. In October an outline 
 of them was published in The Cambridge Independent 
 Press and also in the now defunct London daily paper, 
 The Tribune. It then occurred to me that it might be 
 of advantage if an account of the views held by those 
 who had advocated reform in the past, and of the main 
 changes effected by legislation, could be put into the 
 hands of the public. The present volume is the result. 
 I have discovered to my great satisfaction how little 
 originality there was in my suggestions. The germs of 
 the chief of them had been in print for many years, 
 though at the time I did not know it. 
 
 The task of writing the book has not been easy, 
 because two classes of persons have had to be borne in 
 mind— those who know Oxford and Cambridge from 
 within, and those who, though interested in education, 
 have never been through either the one or the other. 
 To give this latter class full explanations on every point 
 of difficulty as it arose in connexion with two very 
 complex institutions would have required a separate 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 volume, but an effort has been made to meet their case. 
 It is for their benefit that the introductory chapter has 
 been compiled, and if the unacademical reader will study 
 that carefully and then go forward in patience, he will 
 find things falling gradually into their places, and ought 
 to finish with a fairly good conception both of the history 
 of the Universities and also of their present condition. 
 
 A further word of explanation may be given of 
 my own particular standpoint. It has been my fortune 
 ever since the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 to be 
 associated with the public administration of Secondary 
 Education. The question therefore which interests 
 me most is how the ancient Universities can best be 
 fitted into our present educational system. I have not 
 attempted to chronicle all the many internal changes 
 which Oxford and Cambridge have brought about by 
 their own action, but have sought rather to trace the 
 course which criticism, more or less detached, has taken, 
 and to tell of the reforms which have been effected by the 
 external action of Parliament. I may add that though I 
 have taken a degree at Cambridge and have lived for 
 more than forty years within the statutory mile and a 
 half of Great St. Mary's Church, I have never held 
 any University or College office. To that extent I have 
 written as an outsider. As regards Oxford I am an out- 
 sider altogether. There is no possibility of concealing 
 my consequent shortcomings from the initiated, and I 
 crave their indulgence accordingly. 
 
 The suggestions towards a complete scheme of reform 
 for the University of Cambridge will, I trust, not be 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 looked upon as unpardonably presumptuous, because a 
 complete scheme seems now the one thing needful. 
 Legislation in 1854 and in subsequent years proceeded 
 on practical English lines, that is to say it dealt with 
 obvious abuses and deficiencies, and avoided as far as 
 possible decisions on questions of principle. But the 
 obvious abuses are nearly all gone. Both the University 
 and the Colleges are trying to do their best, and if the 
 result is not all that could be desired, it is because they 
 are struggling with a bad system. If Parliament is 
 prepared only to deal with abuses, it is questionable 
 whether it is worth its while interfering. What is 
 wanted is that reformers should have an ideal and see 
 how far Oxford and Cambridge can be brought up to it. 
 Are there not still, in Mark Pattison's words, some 
 " University men who betray rather an impression that 
 something should be done, than a reasoned conviction as 
 to what that something is " ? If my suggestions do no 
 more than provoke criticism and so help to clarify opinion, 
 they will not have been put forward in vain. 
 
 A. I. TILLYARD. 
 
 Fordfield, Cambridge, 
 June 23rd, 1913. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 INTRODUCTORY'. 
 
 Legal definition of the Universities— Their earliest form— Origin 
 of— Mullinger's picture of in 1150 A. D.— Youthful undergradu- 
 ates—Arts and Faculties— Degrees— Latin and Greek — Teach- 
 ing and Examinations — The Professoriate — Regents and Non- 
 Regents— The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor— The Proctors 
 — A picture of Convocation— The foundation of the Colleges- 
 New College and King's College— The idea of a College- 
 Scholars— Fellows— Masters— College Statutes — The rule of 
 study— The rule of life -Visitors — Growth of the Collegiate 
 system— The Elizabethan Revolution — The Caput Senatus — 
 Action of James the First— The Laudian Statutes — Their 
 result — Goldwin Smith's statement— Vicissitudes of fortune — 
 Effects of the Reformation— The Restoration and after- 
 Cambridge in 1800— Oxford in 1800 ----- Pages 1-18 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Beginnings of Criticism. 
 
 Cardinal Newman's account — -First attack by the Edinburgh Review 
 — Espriella's " Letters from England " — Review of La Place's 
 "Mecanique Celeste" — Review of Strabo — Review of Edge- 
 worth's "Essays on Professional Education" — Copleston's 
 Reply— Mr. T. E. Kebbel's views — Criticism thereof — Copleston's 
 account of the Oxford Examinations — Dr. Jebb's account of 
 the Cambridge Examinations - - 19-36 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Second Attack by the EDINBURGH REVIEW. 
 
 Sir William Hamilton at Oxford — His Articles and Appendix — 
 Encounter with Whewell— Analysis of Hamilton's Article of 
 June, 1831 — Employment of the historical method — The 
 University of Oxford — The Colleges — The Oxford System 
 de jure — The Professors — The Tutorial System — The System 
 de facto — The transition from the legal to the illegal system — 
 Effected by the Colleges— The action of Laud— The Remedy— 
 Reply and Counter-reply — Admission of Dissenters— The 
 Appendix— Oxford as it is — Oxford as it might be— The ends 
 of a University — Things primary— Things secondary — Action 
 in the House of Lords— Action in the House of Commons — 
 Mark Pattison's criticism of Hamilton — Goldwin Smith's views 
 — Hamilton's charge of illegality — Dean Peacock's account — 
 Hamilton's merits — He is the Father of University Reform — 
 First hint of the University Extension movement - - - 37-68 
 
X TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTEE IV. 
 
 University v. Colleges (Cambridge). 
 
 Cardinal Newman on the controversy — Sir Charles Lyell— His 
 " Travels in North America " — Incidental attack on the College 
 system— Science exiled from the Universities — Criticism of 
 Whewell — Whewell replies to Lyell— Opposes a Royal Com- 
 mission — A Cambridge pamphlet, "The Next Step" — 
 Co-operation between Colleges and University desirable — 
 Wratislaw's "Observations on the Cambridge system" — 
 Suggestion of the Common University Fund — College system 
 corrupt and exclusive — Donaldson upholds Hamilton and 
 Wratislaw — Condemns subordination of University to Colleges 
 — Higher standard for admission necessary .... 69-82 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 University v. Colleges (Oxford). 
 
 Professorial Lecture v. Tutorial Class— Copleston's view — 
 Hamilton's view — Pusey and H. H. Vaughan— Bonamy Price's 
 first pamphlet — Excessive labour imposed on Tutors — Best men 
 leave the University — No provision for learning — A scheme 
 propounded — Bonamy Price's second pamphlet — What are 
 University requirements ? — The best men still leaving — The 
 promotion of Research — Unsatisfactory position of the Pro- 
 fessors — And of College Tutors— University education in the 
 hands of young men — Teaching and fees should belong to the 
 University — A Graduated Professoriate — Tutorial functions 
 to be left to the Colleges — Newman's verdict — University has 
 no jurisdiction over the Colleges — Want of Entrance Examina- 
 tions— Goldwin Smith's view — Mark Pattison's view - - 83-99 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Royal Commission of 1850. 
 
 Results of fifty years agitation — Spread of Competitive Examina- 
 tions — Their origin — Mr. Christie's motions in 1844 and 1845 — 
 Mr. Hey wood's motion in 1850 — Prime Minister announces 
 issue of Royal Commission— Opposition by Cambridge Residents 
 — Action by New College and King's College — The Oxford 
 Commissioners — Their reception — Recommendations on Univer- 
 sity Teaching — Restoration of the Professorial system — 
 Fellowships — University Government — Matriculation — The 
 Cambridge Commissioners — University Government — Division 
 of Tuition — General Council of Studies— Special Boards of 
 Studies — New Professorships — College Contributions — Salaries 
 of Professors — Appointment of Professors — Recommendations 
 as to the Colleges — An Executive Commission — Cost of a Univer- 
 sity Course — Non-Collegiate System rejected — Affiliated Halls — 
 Religious Tests — University Library— Concluding remarks — 
 Difference between Oxford and Cambridge Reports — Far- 
 reaching nature of Cambridge Report 100-132 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XI 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 The University Acts of 1854 and 1856. 
 
 Change of Government— Lord Palmerston's Letter— Appointment 
 of Syndicate at Cambridge— Mr. Gladstone frames the Oxford 
 Bill— The idea of an Executive Commission— Lord John Russell 
 introduces the Bill— His Speech— Disappointment of the 
 Nonconformists— The Second Reading— Proceedings in Com- 
 mittee — Amendments carried against the Government — The 
 Bill in the House of Lords— Preamble of Act— Hebdomadal 
 Council— Congregation — Mark Pattison on the Heathcote 
 Amendment— Private Halls— Their failure— Colleges to frame 
 new Statutes— And to contribute to the University— Partial 
 Abolition of Tests— The Cambridge University Bill— Introduced 
 by Mr. Bouverie— His Speech — Bill in Committee — House of 
 Lords Stage— Royal Assent — The Executive Commission- 
 Chief Clauses of the Act— Results of the two Acts— Mark 
 Pattison's criticisms — Their comparative failure— Change in 
 the character of the agitation 138-161 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 1856-1871. 
 
 Mark Pattison's " Suggestions "—Of Legislative Interference— A 
 State-appointed Chancellor— The Hebdomadal Council— Congre- 
 gation— Convocation — The Vice-Chancellor— A Financial Board 
 — Centralised management of College property — Costliness of 
 University education — Scholarships and Exhibitions — Un- 
 attached Students — The true economy — Fellowships — The 
 general education position — What University Reform is — The 
 organisation of Science— The reformed College— The German 
 model — The revival of the Faculties — Law — Historical Studies 
 — Amalgamation of Colleges— The Faculty of Arts — The 
 Graduated Professoriate — The Pass Examinations — The 
 Honours Examinations — The existing system of Oxford 
 Education — Division between General and Special Studies — 
 Training of Teachers — Length of Terms— The University 
 course in detail — Pattison's scheme not practical but ideal — 
 Goldwin Smith's "Reorganisation of Oxford University" — Re- 
 jects Pattison's ideal — The Fellowship system — Headships — 
 Teaching by University and Colleges combined — Division of 
 labour between them — Revival of the Faculties — Abolition of 
 Pass Examinations — An Entrance Examination— Congregation 
 — The Hebdomadal Council — The Vice-Chancellor — Delegacies 
 — Control of education by the Universities — Visitors — The State 
 and the Universities — Points of agreement between Pattison 
 and Goldwin Smith 162-197 
 
xii TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 The Legislation of the Seventies. 
 
 First attempt to abolish Tests— Subsequent attempts— Effects ot 
 the Acts of 1954 and 1856— Lord Derby's Speech in 1854— The 
 Bill of 1870— Lord E. Fitzmaurice's Speech— Bill of 1871— 
 Proceedings in the Commons— In the Lords— Lord Salisbury's 
 amendment — The Bill carried— Preamble of the Act— The 
 Operative Clause— Royal Commission of 1872— Mr. Gladstone's 
 Letter — The Commissioners— Cambridge Memorandum to Mr. 
 Gladstone— The Conservatives take office— Mark Pattison's 
 conjectural history of Lord Salisbury's Bill — Lord Salisbury's 
 Speech on the Oxford University Bill in 1876— Dr. Tait's Speech 
 — Proceedings in the Lords — University of Cambridge Bill in 
 Commons— Both Bills withdrawn— The Joint Bill of 1877— 
 Introduced in Commons— Amendments in Committee — Royal 
 Assent — Preamble of the Act — The Executive Commissions- 
 Clauses 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 44, 52, 53, 54— Effects of the Act— Mr. 
 Arthur Gray's description — Abolition of Clerical Fellowships — 
 The new Statutes— Terms — College Contributions — Common 
 University Fund— The Financial Board — Special Boards of 
 Studies— General Board of Studies ------ 198-232 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 The Latest Suggestions from Oxford and Cambridge. 
 
 Lord Curzon's "Principles and Methods of University Reform" — 
 Introductory Chapter — Nine classes of suggestions— Constitu- 
 tion of the University — The Council — Congregation— Convoca- 
 tion — The Admission of poor men — Needs of the Working- 
 Classes— The Non-Collegiate system— Hostels— Working men's 
 Colleges— The Poor of other classes— Cost of living in Colleges- 
 Fees and Dues— Scholarships and Exhibitions — A Redistri- 
 bution scheme — Fellowships— University Examinations — The 
 Pass Men — A Business education — Relations of the Colleges and 
 the University — Educational relations — Growing strength of 
 University — Colleges still dominate University — Boards of 
 Faculties — Proposed reforms — Executive Machinery — Vice- 
 Chancellor — University Staff — Encouragement of Research and 
 of Advanced Study— Summary— The latest suggestions from 
 Cambridge— Memorial of 1909 to the Council— Reconstitution of 
 Electoral Roll — Functions of Senate and Electoral Roll — The 
 Council's Report — Rejection of its recommendations - - 233-263 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 The Financial Resources of Oxford and Cambridge. 
 
 Report of 1852 here defective — Royal Commission Report, 1874 — 
 Origin of University and College endowments — Trusts — Lands 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. xiii 
 
 — House Property — Tithe and other Rent-charges — Stocks and 
 Shares — Other properties — Income of the Universities and the 
 Colleges— External — Internal — Their Expenditure — Cambridge 
 University Chest, 1883 and 1913— Common University Fund — 
 Gross Corporate Income of Colleges, 1883 and 1913 — Fluctu- 
 ations in Land, Houses and Tithe — Imperfect College returns 
 — The corresponding Oxford statistics — The Quarterly Review — 
 "A Plea for Cambridge " — Extension of Studies at Cambridge — 
 Corporate Income of Colleges — Heavy Expenditure on Estates 
 — The same at Oxford— Headships— Fellowships— Scholarships 
 — Tuition Fund — Balance — University Income and Expendi- 
 ture — Lord Curzon's Chapter VII— University Accounts partial 
 — University Balance - sheet — Colleges Balance - sheet — The 
 Published Accounts — College Contributions — College Financial 
 Administration — Management of College Estates — Financial 
 Policy of the University — Suggested Board of Finance — Statute 
 establishing the same 264-291 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Suggestions for a Scheme of Reform for the University 
 of Cambridge. 
 
 Section I. 
 Definition of University Reform— Its three branches — A Problem 
 in Federalism — Mark Pattison's objection examined — Antici- 
 pated resistance of the Colleges— Encouragement from the 
 progress of events— Opinion at Oxford — Examination of the 
 Collegiate System — Numbers and resources of the Cambridge 
 Colleges— Disparity in size and wealth— Competition for entries 
 —Proportion of Honours to Matriculations— Proportion of Poll 
 Degrees to Matriculations — Mr. Venn's figures — Number of 
 First Classes, 1898-1907— Great differences between the Colleges 
 — Influence of Athletics — Differences in tone and temper — 
 Fluctuations in numbers— Difficulties of a small College — 
 Multiplicity of Offices— Co-operation between the Colleges — 
 The essence of the College System — Lies in its Tutorial and 
 Domestic functions — Administrative work of the Colleges — 
 Centralisation of administration— Bursars — The Colleges as 
 land owners— Scattered College farms— College sentiment 
 adverse— Lord Curzon's picture — The Times on Oxford College 
 estates — The economic facts— House property — A Central 
 Board needed— Stewards — A like suggestion — College standards 
 of expenditure— Provision in the Act of 1877 — Public Auditing 
 of Accounts — Depreciation of investments — The Organisation 
 of Teaching — The Poll men — The Honours men— Existing 
 division of teaching between the University and the Colleges — 
 A Lecture List analysed — Report of the Cambridge University 
 Reform Committee on present system — Increasing co-operation 
 between the Colleges — Additional powers for the General 
 
x iv TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Board of Studies and Special Boards of Studies— Reform of 
 these bodies— Tutorial work of Colleges not to be touched- 
 Grouping of the Colleges — Authorities for such a step- 
 Clause 22 of the Act of 1877— How it might be given effect to— 
 A Scheme of Grouping— The University point of view— Training 
 of Teachers— A career at Oxford or Cambridge— The Fellow- 
 ship system— Its cost— Its history— Effect of the Acts of 1855 
 and 1856— Prize Fellowships — Embody principle of emula- 
 tion — Their disadvantages — Decrease in their number- 
 Career Scholarships as a substitute— Fellowships as payment 
 for College work— As Pensions— For Research— Examinations 
 for Fellowships— The awarding of Fellowships— The title only 
 to be retained — A career for Teaching — Position of Masters — 
 Elasticity of the Federal principle— An appeal to the Colleges. 
 
 Section II. 
 University Organisation — The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor — 
 The Council of the Senate — Ex officio members — The Electoral 
 Roll— Proposals of the Reform Committee and the Council — 
 Plan for keeping the Universities in touch with national life — 
 Limitation in numbers — Power of initiative — Anomalous rela- 
 tions between University and Colleges — The Senate— Diffi- 
 culties of the Reform Commitee — Senate impossible as govern- 
 ing body — The Suspensory Veto — Solution of Women's Degrees 
 difficulty. 
 
 Section III. 
 The Universities and National Education — Entries from 1850 to the 
 present time — Slow rate of progress — Increase in subjects taught 
 — In teachers — In buildings — Expense the obstacle — Statement 
 of the Reform Committee — Criticism of it — Scholarships and 
 Exhibitions — The actual awards — Helping poverty — Failure of 
 Hostels and the Non-Collegiate System — How to reduce 
 expenses — Scholarships a necessity — How and when to award 
 them — Probable opposition by the Colleges — Necessity for a 
 University Entrance Examination — Previous Examination 
 becoming an Entrance Examination — Cambridge Memorial on 
 the subject — Action at Oxford — Examinations — Examiners not 
 trained — Dean Merivale's views — Board of Examinations 
 required — Defects and contradictions of present Triposes — 
 Unrestricted competition has been modified — Overloaded 
 Examinations— The Classical Tripos — The Law Tripos — The 
 multiplicity of Examinations — Principles of Examination 
 Reform — Many University graduates still uneducated — Sir 
 Clifford Allbutt's statement — Pass Examinations — A sugges- 
 tion — Degrees— Advanced Studies — The Endowment of Research 
 — Board of Advanced Study and Research required — The Library 
 Question — Necessity for a Royal Commission — Intentions of 
 Parliament must be carried out 292-380 
 
 Summary of Suggestions 381-384 
 
CORRECTIONS. 
 
 p. 87 (note), for pp. 13-14 read pp. xiii-xiv. 
 
 p. 89, line 16, after pamphlet insert entitled Oxford 
 Reform. 
 
 p. 94 (note), for Historical Studies read Historical 
 Sketches. 
 
 p. 145, line 32, insert quotation marks after canvas. 
 
 p. 203, last line, for Ward read Wood. 
 
 p. 228, line 30, for to, define read to define. 
 
 p. 289, line 28, for Oxford University Gazette read Oxford 
 University Gazette. 
 
 p. 297 (note), for University Calendar read University 
 Calendar. 
 
 p. 345, line 26, insert comma after Vice-Chancellor. 
 
 p. 362, line 29, insert comma after Classics. 
 
 p. 363, line 23, insert comma after Non-Regent House. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 " The University of Cambridge," says the Report of 
 the Royal Comniission of 1850, " is a lay corporation, 
 possessing various privileges under Charters of the Crown 
 and Acts of Parliament or by prescription. The earliest 
 Royal Letters Patent which can now be traced as 
 authentic are of the reign of King Henry the Third. 1 
 These, however, do not found the University, but recog- 
 nise it as already existing, with an organised constitution 
 and regular form. Other Letters and Charters were 
 granted from time to time by subsequent monarchs, of 
 which the most ample and the most important is the 
 Charter granted by Queen Elizabeth in the third year of 
 her reign (dated April 26, 1561),' 2 confirming former and 
 conferring new privileges. In the thirteenth year of the 
 same reign (June 7, 1571) an Act of Parliament was 
 passed whereby it was enacted that ' the Chancellor, 
 Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge ' 
 should be incorporated with perpetual succession under 
 that title; and that the Letters Patent of the Queen, made 
 in the third year of her reign, and also all other Letters 
 Patent by any of Her Majesty's progenitors or prede- 
 cessors, should be good in law to all intents." 3 
 
 The Oxford Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 
 says of this same reign of Henry III., " At that time the 
 University of Oxford was, we may almost say, the chief 
 charity school of the poor, and the chief grammar-school 
 
 hooper gives the following account of the earliest documents. 
 " It seems that at this time (a.d. 1231), the ruling powers of the Univer- 
 sity experienced considerable inconvenience from the want of authority 
 to punish offenders against academic discipline, from the claims of 
 disorderly persons to the character of scholars in order more safely to 
 pursue their malpractices, and from the exorbitant sums demanded by 
 the townspeople for the rent of the hostels in which the scholars lived. 
 In order to remedy these grievances the King issued four several writs, 
 all tested at Oxford, the 3rd of May in this year." — Annals of Cambridge, 
 Vol I., p. 41. 
 
 2 The Charter is given in Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, Vol. II., 
 pp. 165-168. 
 
 ! lb. Vol. II., pp. 274-276. b 
 
2 UNIVERSITY REFOKM. 
 
 in England, as well as the great place of education for 
 Students of Theology, of Law and of Medicine. The 
 oldest of the great Public Schools was not yet founded. 
 The Inns of Court and the Schools of Medicine had no 
 existence, and many students from foreign Universities 
 thought their education incomplete until they had visited 
 the most celebrated seat of English learning." Though 
 the exact origin of Oxford and Cambridge is thus not 
 precisely known, there is not the mystery about it which 
 is generally imagined. "The constitution of the Univer- 
 sity of Paris formed the model on which that of Oxford 
 and that of Cambridge were formed ; the course of study, 
 the collegiate system, even the regulations of the 
 Sorbonne, were imitated with scrupulous fidelity." 1 
 Some time then during the 12th century arose these 
 ancient institutions whose history we have begun to 
 trace. 
 
 Oxford and Cambridge were thus Schools and Uni- 
 versities in one, open to all comers. " If we picture 
 to ourselves some few hundred students, of all ages from 
 early youth to complete manhood, mostly of very slender 
 means, looking forward to the monastic or the clerical 
 life as their future avocation, lodging among the towns- 
 folk, and receiving such accommodation as inexperienced 
 poverty might be likely to obtain at the hands of practised 
 extortioners, resorting to one large building, the grammar 
 schools, or sometimes congregated in the porches of their 
 respective Masters' houses, and there receiving such 
 instruction in Latin as a reading from Terence, Boethius 
 or Orosius, eked out by the more elementary rules from 
 Priscian or Donatus, would represent— we shall probably 
 have grasped the main features of a Cambridge course 
 when Irnerius began to lecture at Bologna, Vacarius 
 at Oxford, and when Peter Lombard compiled the 
 Sentences" 2 (i.e. about 1150 A.D.). 
 
 Reference is made in this extract to the early age, 
 it was fourteen or even under, at which undergraduates 
 entered. 3 There was the more necessity for this because 
 
 1 Mullinger, The University of Cambridge, Vol. I., p. 67. 
 2 lb. Vol. I., p. 341. 
 3 " In the old matriculation books at Cambridge, many students have 
 ' Imp.' i.e. Impubes written after their names, showing they were under 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 3 
 
 a long course lay before them. To begin with there were 
 "arts" to be learned to the mystical number of seven. 
 These were divided into two courses, the Trivium of three 
 — Grammar {i.e. Latin), Logic and Rhetoric, and the 
 Quadrivium of four — Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy 
 and Music. To each Art a year's study was supposed 
 to be given, so that the seven Arts took seven years 
 to finish. To the Arts there were added later the three 
 Faculties properly so-called of Theology, Law and 
 Medicine. Theology took twelve years, Law and 
 Medicine six each, so that the whole University course 
 occupied from thirteen to nineteen years. Certificates 
 of proficiency were awarded at four stages, and were 
 called Degrees, or steps, gradus, because they marked 
 the point at which a student had arrived. At the end 
 of three years the student could become a Bachelor of 
 Arts, Baccalaureus Artium, at the end of seven years 
 a Master of Arts, Magister Artium, or to give the 
 process in more detail, "the following were the 
 successive stages which marked the progress of the Arts 
 student : that of the Sophister, or disputant in the 
 Schools,— of the Bachelor of Arts, eligible in turn to 
 give subsidiary or cursory lectures, — of the incepting 
 Master in Arts who has received his licence to teach in 
 any University in Europe — and of the Regent Master of 
 Arts who lectured for a definite term as an instructor 
 appointed by the University." ' " The possession of a 
 Degree," the same writer also points out, " was originally 
 nothing else than the possession of a diploma to exercise 
 the function of teaching; a right which at a later 
 period was equally recognised as a duty. The Bachelors 
 expounded the Sentences (of Peter Lombard) and the 
 Scriptures, the Doctors and Masters taught systemati- 
 cally in the Schools ; but all those who had gained the 
 degree of Licentiate, Master or Doctor were held bound 
 to devote a certain period to imparting again the learn- 
 
 fourteen." Venn, Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations, p. 5. This 
 practice of early entry continued to a surprisingly late date. Vicesimus 
 Knox in his Liberal Education published in 1781 writes, "Boys should 
 not be sent to the University so young as they often are. It is really 
 cruel to let a boy of fifteen be precipitated into drunkenness and 
 debauchery." Works, Vol. IV., p. 142. 
 
 1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 358. 
 
4 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 ing they had acquired" l The preliminary studies, the 
 examinations, the licence to teach thus followed in a 
 natural order. When a student had completed his Arts 
 course, he was free to proceed to one of the Faculties, in 
 which there were also two steps, Bachelor and Doctor. 
 
 In passing it may be remarked that Oxford from 
 the first showed a preference for the Trivium and Cam- 
 bridge for the Quadrivium, and that this distinction 
 can be traced even to the present day. The language of 
 instruction was Latin, the then universal tongue of 
 science and learning, so that students coming from 
 abroad were no strangers as far as their speech was 
 concerned. Greek there was, broadly speaking, none. 
 For that and for the classical education which has 
 prevailed so long in our Public Schools and Universities, 
 we are indirectly indebted to the Turks. As these 
 barbaric invaders pressed more hardly upon the Eastern 
 Empire centred at Constantinople, the Greek scholars 
 retreated to the West carrying the literature of Greece 
 with them. Classical learning penetrated these remote 
 islands, took a hold of Oxford which it has never relin- 
 quished, and disputed with Mathematics the mastery of 
 Cambridge. 
 
 The teaching in the early times was necessarily oral, 
 as there were no printed books and manuscripts were 
 rare and dear. It was either explanatory or dialectical, 
 the latter method being the favourite. Every possible 
 point was thrown into a quaestio and then discussed 
 2)ro. and con. Examinations were oral also, and these 
 again took the form of disputations or discussions, 
 the defensive and offensive parts in them being called 
 respectively " responsions " and " opponencies." The 
 examiner held the balance even between the disputants 
 and controlled the arguments so they did not wander 
 into devious paths. Hence such terms as " Responsions " 
 and "Moderations" at Oxford and "Moderator" (or 
 Examiner) and "Wrangler" which still survive in the 
 Mathematical Tripos at Cambridge. This system of 
 teaching and examination had its drawbacks. " It was 
 undoubtedly from the prevalence of this method of 
 teaching that disputation became the besetting vice of 
 
 1 lb. Vol. I., p. 78. 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 5 
 
 the age. ' They dispute,' says Vives in his celebrated 
 treatise, ' before dinner, at dinner and after dinner ; in 
 public and in private ; at all places, and at all times.' " x 
 So difficult is it to hit on the best methods either of 
 imparting or testing knowledge. 
 
 At the beginning and for some centuries, the Uni- 
 versity gave its own instruction, in its own public 
 schools, by means of its Masters of Arts and superior 
 Graduates. The principle of the University doing its own 
 teaching was extended and confirmed by the establishment 
 of the Professoriate. The earliest foundation at Cam- 
 bridge was that of the Lady Margaret Professorship of 
 Divinity which dates from 150'2. Lady Margaret, Countess 
 of Richmond, was the mother of Henry VII., and to this 
 munificent lady Cambridge owes not only its first 
 Professorship but two of its Colleges, Christ's and 
 St. John's. King Henry VIII. followed in 1540 with the 
 five Regius Professorships, of Divinity, Civil Law, Physic, 
 Hebrew and Greek. He endowed them with what was 
 thejt an ample income — £40 a year, a sum which is 
 still paid from the imperial Exchequer, less £7 2s. 8d. 
 mysteriously intercepted on the way. 
 
 The University was originally a self-governing unity, 
 an association of teachers united by mutual interest, 
 divided into two Houses, that of the Regents, who were 
 actually engaged in teaching, and of the Non-Regents, 
 who had passed through the office of teacher. At the 
 head was a Chancellor elected for two years by the 
 Regents, who might on extraordinary occasions be con- 
 tinued in office for a third year. He summoned Convo- 
 cations or Congregations of both the Houses to consult 
 together for the common good and general interests of 
 the University. No Graces, i.e. legislative proposals, could 
 be proposed or passed without his assent. He was a King 
 with a real power of veto. He was not allowed to be 
 absent from the University for more than a month while 
 the lectures or readings of the Masters of Arts were going 
 on,. though a Vice-Chancellor might be appointed by the 
 Regents from year to year to relieve him of some portion 
 of his duties. In later times the Graces before they 
 were submitted to the general body or Senate were 
 
 1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 361. 
 
6 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 submitted to the discussion and approbation of a Council 
 or Caput Senatus, which was usually appointed at the 
 beginning of each Congregation. 
 
 The two Proctors were after the Chancellor and 
 the Vice-Chancellor the most important administrative 
 officers in the University. They were chosen annually 
 on the 10th of October by the Regents. They regulated 
 absolutely the times and modes of reading (i.e. teaching), 
 disputations and inceptions in the public schools, and 
 the public ceremonies of the University ; they super- 
 intended the markets with a view to the supply of wine, 
 bread, and other necessaries to the undergraduates at 
 reasonable rates; they had charge of the University 
 finances ; they could suspend a gremial, or resident, from 
 his vote and a non-gremial from his degree ; they collected 
 the votes and announced the decisions of the House of 
 Regents whose peculiar officers they were, they examined 
 the candidates for degrees (Questionists) by themselves 
 or their deputies ; they superintended or controlled all 
 public disputations and exercises, either by themselves 
 or by their officers the Bedels ; they administered the 
 oaths of admission to all degrees, and they alone were 
 competent to confer the important privileges of the 
 Regency. 1 
 
 We can thus picture another scene. The Chancellor 
 has decided upon a Grace. The bell sounds and the 
 Senate or Convocation assembles, the Chancellor attended 
 by his Bedels presiding. The Caput approves the Grace. 
 The two Houses vote upon it, the Proctors taking the 
 votes in the Regent House, the Scrutators (appointed 
 for the purpose at each Congregation) taking them in 
 the Non-Regent House. Both bodies approve and the 
 Grace is forthwith added to the Statute law of the Uni- 
 versity. Non-residents had no part or lot in this 
 arrangement. There was no post wherewith to acquaint 
 them with the intended proceedings of the residents, nor 
 railroads to bring them up to the scene of action. 
 
 The most momentous event in the history of Oxford 
 and Cambridge was the foundation of the Colleges, yet 
 none saw its significance, so quietly and naturally did it 
 
 1 See Peacock, Observations on the Statutes, pp. 15, 24, quoted in 
 Mullinger, Vol. I., pp. 140-144. 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 7 
 
 come about. The youthful students lodged with the 
 townspeople, or in hostels kept for them by the graduates. 
 Neither plan worked satisfactorily. The students com- 
 plained of the exactions of the townspeople. The towns- 
 people retorted disagreeably of the disorderly conduct of 
 the students and of the non-payment of their just and 
 lawful debts. Thus began the age-long quarrel between 
 " town " and " gown." The hostels too, so it was alleged, 
 were not always what they should have been, in that they 
 were conducted for the benefit of the Heads rather than 
 for that of the Students. Above all it was necessary to 
 help the poor and struggling members of the University 
 through their long and arduous course. Hence the idea 
 occurred to two pious founders almost simultaneously, to 
 Walter de Merton, at Oxford, in 1270, and to Hugh de 
 Balsham, Bishop of Ely, at Cambridge, in 1284, to found 
 a House for the reception of students. This was the 
 origin of the Collegiate system and explains why the 
 Masters of the Colleges are still called Heads of Houses. 
 A forewarning of the attitude which the Colleges were 
 destined afterwards to take up towards the University 
 was given at the foundation of New College at Oxford and 
 King's College at Cambridge, the one connected closely 
 with Winchester, the other made up entirely of scholars 
 from Eton. As for the latter, in addition to the various 
 privileges granted, with the sanction of Parliament to it, 
 the King obtained bulls from the Pope exempting the 
 College and its members from the power and jurisdiction 
 of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Ely, and 
 the Chancellor of the University ; and on the 31st of 
 January, 1448-9, the University by an instrument under 
 its Common Seal, granted that the College, its Provost, 
 Fellows and Scholars, should be exempt from the power, 
 dominion and jurisdiction of the Chancellor, Vice- 
 Chancellor, Proctors, and Ministers of the University. 1 
 
 Men even when making a new departure like to found 
 themselves on what is old, so it was natural that these 
 pious founders should look round them for a model. 
 What could serve their purpose so well as the monasteries, 
 many of which had been conspicuous as homes of learning ? 
 
 1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 309. 
 
8 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Colleges were not monasteries, they might even be 
 anti-monastic in their intentions, but they were fashioned 
 on monastic lines. The College buildings bear witness to 
 this fact with their enclosed quadrangles, their chambers, 
 their halls for common meals, and chapels for common 
 worship. These same buildings are a difficulty in the 
 way of the innovator when he wants to adapt them to 
 modern requirements, and provide baths for the under- 
 graduates and houses for the married members of the staff. 
 
 As for the inmates of the Colleges they dedicated 
 themselves to learning as the monks dedicated them- 
 selves to religion. A College was made up of a 
 Master, Fellows, and Scholars, who were accordingly said 
 to be " on the foundation." The Scholars were made 
 members of the foundation by a solemn ceremony, but 
 they were excluded from the administration of the College 
 property and business, and from the elections. They were 
 the novices in the monastery of learning. The Fellows 
 were first known in common with the Scholars as 
 Scholares, because both were learners. At Christ Church 
 they were called Studentes, and the terms Junior Student 
 for Scholar and Senior Student for Fellow survive there 
 till this day, but generally they were called Socii, members 
 of the societas and sharers in its endowments. They 
 were commonly ordered to be chosen from the founder's 
 own kin or relatives, from certain schools or from certain 
 counties or other definite areas, and the same restrictions 
 were made in the case of the Scholars. The Fellows 
 correspond to the monks — to the brethren in orders and 
 the lay brethren. Over all was a Head, called variously 
 Master, Warden, Provost, Rector, President or Principal. 
 He may be likened to the Abbot. The Colleges soon began 
 to teach, but they confined themselves in the first instance 
 to exercises and discussions preparatory to those in the 
 public schools, and their Praelectors or Lecturers dis- 
 coursed to the University students generally, and not 
 merely to the members of their own College. 
 
 Every College had its Statutes or rules. The objects 
 of the Statutes were the maintenance of the Society 
 under a regular government and with a regular rule of 
 life and study. Each Scholar was placed under a Tutor 
 who had to answer for his fines and expenses. The Tutor 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 as teacher is a later growth and explains the double use 
 of the word, both as guardian and instructor. The 
 Fellows took an oath of unqualified obedience to the 
 Statutes, and in some cases an oath never to suffer any 
 alteration in them. 
 
 As for the rule of study this was the old Uni- 
 versity course which has already been explained. The 
 Fellow was generally required by the Statutes, after 
 completing the Arts Course, to proceed in one of the 
 Faculties, that of Theology in the majority of instances, 
 while some would take up Law, and fewer still Medicine. 
 The business of the Fellows was to study not to teach. 
 After they had completed their education they took bene- 
 fices, or practised Law or Medicine, and thus the ranks of 
 the learned professions were filled. 
 
 The rule of life was simple. It included common 
 meals, during which the Bible was read by the Bible 
 Clerks, and silence kept, the use of the Latin tongue, 
 uniformity in dress, strict obedience to the Head and 
 College officers, terminal scrutinies for the purpose of 
 inquiring into the life, morals, and progress in studies 
 of all the members of the College, and a system of sur- 
 veillance to be exercised by the Senior Fellows over the 
 Junior. Regular attendance at the services of the Church 
 was required of all, as was residence. A non-resident 
 Fellow in those days was a contradiction in terms. 
 Poverty was much insisted on as a qualification for a 
 Fellowship. Hence the rule that no Fellow should 
 possess more than a certain amount of property. Celibacy 
 was an express obligation, and where Fellows had to be 
 in Holy Orders it followed of necessity. The Heads were 
 generally required to be in Priests' orders, and the great 
 majority of the Fellows were required to take Priests' 
 orders within a certain period after their election. Thus 
 the three monastic obligations of poverty, chastity, and 
 obedience were all well looked after. Every College had 
 a Visitor whose functions were twofold: (1) to hear 
 appeals and interpret the Statutes ; and (2) to visit at 
 certain intervals, either in person or by commission, for 
 the purposes of inspection and, if need be, of reformation. 
 
 The College system once started speedily grew in 
 riches and importance. New Colleges were constantly 
 
10 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 being founded and received endowments from their 
 founders, from benefactors, and from the Royal Bounty. 
 The University has never been successful in stirring men's 
 charity and it remains poor to this day amid the ever- 
 increasing resources of the Colleges, and where the wealth 
 is, there will the influence be also. " The instruction 
 passed into the hands of the Colleges, partly, perhaps, 
 in consequence of the decline of the Scholastic Philosophy, 
 which formed the staple of the old Academical system, 
 and the rise of the Classical studies which the Colleges 
 took up. Ultimately no one was allowed to be a 
 member of the University without being a member of 
 a College." l 
 
 This process of the University decreasing and the 
 Colleges increasing was helped on by the course of events. 
 It fell to the lot of Elizabeth after the Reformation, to 
 settle the form of the State-Church and its relations with 
 the State. In this settlement two such bodies as the 
 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, so strong, so rich, 
 and so intimately connected with the Church, could not 
 be left out of account. 
 
 The first paragraph of this chapter refers to an Act 
 of Parliament of the thirteenth year of Queen Elizabeth, 
 confirming all the rights and privileges of the University 
 of Cambridge. But there is another side to this picture 
 of royal graciousness. The Puritans at this time were 
 strong and active at Cambridge. At first they confined 
 their opposition to " wearing the cap and surplice, and 
 such like apparel, and the posture in receiving the sacra- 
 ment," but afterwards they went much further. Their 
 leader was Thomas Cartwright, a Fellow of Trinity College 
 and Lady Margaret Reader in Divinity. He openly 
 attacked the Church of England form of government as 
 unscriptural, and taught that " archbishops, deans, arch- 
 deacons, etc., were offices and names of impiety." Such 
 conduct was not to be tolerated and the Church of 
 England party in the University at once took proceedings 
 against him. It was pending these proceedings that 
 Whitgift, Master of Trinity College, informed Sir William 
 Cecil, Chancellor of the University, that it was in his 
 
 i Goldwin Smith, Reorganisation of the University of Oxford, p. 6. 
 
INTRODUCTOKY. 11 
 
 opinion necessary that the Statutes of the University 
 should be reviewed and amended. Sir William Cecil 
 approved of the suggestion, and referred the consideration 
 of the business to Whitgift and the other Masters of 
 Colleges, who prepared the draft of the new Code. This 
 was submitted to the Chancellor who, after consulting- 
 Archbishop Parker thereon, approved of the same, and 
 it received the Royal Assent on September 25, 1570. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth and her advisers had come to the 
 conclusion that the University as a single and unified 
 body was more dangerous than the several Colleges in 
 their individual capacity were likely to be. They there- 
 fore decided to favour the component parts at the expense 
 of the corporate whole. Elizabeth's second Code effected 
 what was practically a revolution. How this was brought 
 about deserves to be carefully studied. " The University, 
 in its earlier stages, was regulated, as to its internal 
 administration, by Statutes or Ordinances framed and 
 passed by its own legislative Senate" 1 ; but by the 
 Elizabethan Statutes " the Heads of Houses were con- 
 stituted a distinct and separate estate in the government 
 of the University. In the election of the Vice-Chancellor, 
 the ordinary Lecturers, the Bedels, and inferior officers, 
 they were empowered to nominate two persons, one of 
 whom was necessarily chosen by the united Houses of 
 Regents and Non-Regents on the following day ; a most 
 important privilege, which they further amplified by 
 interpretation. For the office of Vice-Chancellor two 
 Heads of Houses were always nominated, so that the 
 office still goes in rotation to the Masters of the Colleges. 
 They were united with the Doctors and Scrutators in 
 choosing the Caput Senatus. The Chancellor could not 
 expel a student or Scholar, nor imprison a Doctor or 
 Head of a House without the concurrence of a majority 
 of their number ; they were the councillors and assessors 
 of the Chancellor in matters affecting the conduct and 
 discipline of the scholars ; they fixed the times and the 
 subjects of the ordinary and other lectures ; they were 
 discharged from the performance of all exercises in the 
 public schools and elsewhere ; and an absolute veto was 
 
 1 Royal Commission (Cambridge) Report, 1852, p. 2. 
 
12 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 given to them in their own Colleges, in all elections of 
 Fellows, Scholars, officers and servants, and in the grant- 
 ing of leases and all public acts whatsoever. Finally they 
 were made the authorised interpreters of whatever was 
 doubtful or ambiguous in the new Code. 
 
 "The Caput Senatus, composed of the Chancellor, a 
 Doctor of each of the three faculties, a Non-Regent and a 
 Regent Master of Arts, was appointed at the beginning of 
 the academical year. To each of these sextumviri was 
 given an absolute veto, and no Grace, whether for Degrees 
 or for any object whatever could be submitted to the 
 Houses of Regents and Non-Regents which had not 
 received the previous sanction of every member of the 
 Caput. 
 
 " The extraordinary powers conferred upon this body 
 by their continuance during an entire year, and the exclu- 
 sion of the great body of the Senate from all share in its 
 nomination, were innovations upon the ancient constitu- 
 tion of the University of the most important and funda- 
 mental character. By the Statutes which were previously 
 in force, some at least of the members of the Caput were 
 generally appointed for one Congregation only ; and 
 whatever were the powers which they possessed in one 
 Congregation, they could not permanently retard or 
 embarrass the legislative or administrative proceedings 
 of the University. The ancient powers of the Proctors, 
 whether in the Congregation or elsewhere, were either 
 entirely abrogated or greatly circumscribed ; they were 
 formerly elected openly by the Regents, but were now 
 nominated according to a cycle of Colleges, and merely 
 submitted to the Regents for their approbation. What- 
 ever authority was given to them, by the ancient statutes, 
 of regulating the times and subjects of the public read- 
 ings and disputations, of imprisoning scholars, of sus- 
 pending gremials from their votes in the Congregations 
 or from Degrees taken or to betaken, and even in extreme 
 cases of acting in defiance of the Chancellor himself, were 
 now either abrogated or transferred to the Chancellor 
 and his assessors. The custody of the public and of the 
 private chests, and the administration of the finances of 
 the University, were given to the Chancellor and the 
 proper custodies; they no longer continued to be the chief 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 13 
 
 administrative officers of the University as the organs 
 of the House of Regents, but were made, in all their 
 functions, that of creation excepted, subordinate to the 
 authority of the Chancellor. They were still required to 
 regulate the disputations of the Masters of Arts, and to 
 control the public exercises in all the Schools (those 
 of Theology excepted) ; while the power of inflicting 
 punishments and imposing fines was given to the Chan- 
 cellor. . . 
 
 " The University continued to retain the power of 
 making new statutes ' for the increase of learning, and 
 the preservation of discipline and good conduct amongst 
 scholars,' provided they neither detracted from, nor inter- 
 fered with, the Royal Statutes ; all other statutes and 
 customs which were contrary to them were declared to 
 be abrogated and rescinded." ' 
 
 A similar policy was pursued by Elizabeth at Oxford. 
 Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, who was Chancellor of 
 the University from 1565 to 1588, carried through the 
 necessary changes in the Statutes. Under James the 
 First both the Universities were more effectively closed 
 against all who were not members of the Church of 
 England, as that monarch sent letters which enjoined 
 subscription to the three articles of the Thirty-sixth 
 Canon upon admission to Degrees, which had not 
 previously been required. It was Laud who, in the 
 reign of Charles I., by his Code, known as the Laudian 
 or Caroline Statutes (which were practically a confirma- 
 tion of those of Elizabeth), put the final impress of 
 character on Oxford. He attempted the visitation of 
 Cambridge, but the Puritans rose in arms against him 
 and he was compelled to retire. At Oxford he worked 
 his will to the full. Professor Goldwin Smith thus 
 describes what happened. 2 
 
 " The constitution of the University was subverted 
 in three ways. (1) Laud, confirming an arrangement 
 made under Leicester, took away the initiative in 
 legislation from the Convocation and vested in the 
 Board of Heads of Houses (entitled the Hebdomadal 
 
 1 Peacock, Observations on the Statutes, pp. 45-51. (Quoted in Cooper, 
 Annals, Vol. II., pp. 258-261.) 
 
 2 Reorganisation, p. 7. 
 
14 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Board), men elected by close Colleges, themselves with- 
 out educational duties, and by their social position 
 estranged from such educational activity as there might 
 be in the place. (2) The Vice-Chancellorship, which, 
 the Chancellor being now a non-resident grandee, was 
 really the chief office of the University, was made 
 rotatory among the Heads of Houses, and the University 
 was thus deprived of the power of electing its own head. 
 (3) Through the system of dispensations and the dis- 
 regard of the College Statutes respecting residence, 
 Convocation became to a much greater extent non- 
 resident, while the facilities of communication and 
 locomotion having increased, non-resident members 
 began to come up more frequently to vote; and thus 
 the University fell under the control of a non-resident 
 and non-academical body, mainly clerical, and using its 
 power for the objects of the political and ecclesiastical 
 party to which the clergy belonged. Railroads have 
 greatly intensified the last-mentioned evil. 
 
 "The constitutions of the separate Colleges also tacitly 
 underwent a momentous change. The Head was origin- 
 ally a celibate, living with the Fellows. In the case 
 of the Colleges founded before the Reformation it 
 was not necessary to bind him expressly to celibacy, 
 because he was always a priest, and a priest could not 
 be married ; in the Colleges founded after the Reformation 
 he was expressly bound. The Heads, however, of the 
 earlier Colleges took advantage of the legal flaw, those 
 of the later got the restriction repealed ; the original 
 lodgings in the tower were exchanged for a separate and 
 domestic house, and thus the Head of each College 
 became socially severed from his Fellows, and the whole 
 order from the University at large, almost absolute power 
 over which it at the same time acquired. 
 
 " The result of these untoward accidents, combined 
 with the general deadness of public duty during the 
 greater part of the last century, was not only torpor 
 but corruption within the University itself, and fatal 
 estrangement from the nation. The effect upon the 
 character of our governing class, bred up here in ignor- 
 ance and Jacobitism, was calamitous at the time, and 
 has not yet been effaced." 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 15 
 
 The same writer could accordingly describe Oxford 
 in his historical statement to the Commissioners of 1850 
 in these terms : — 
 
 " The Colleges have now become the University, and 
 have absorbed all the functions of that institution, 
 both educational and literary. Its Students must all 
 be members of one of these Societies. Their Heads 
 furnish its Vice-Chancellors, and form its Board of 
 Executive Governors ; their Fellows are its Teachers, its 
 Examiners, its Proctors, its learned men, and its ordinary 
 Legislature. The only elements of the University external 
 to the Colleges are the staff of Professors and the five 
 surviving Halls. . . 
 
 "The function of teaching has been super-added to the 
 statutable duties of a Tutor; and Tutorships, limited in 
 number, have been established in all the Colleges. The 
 Tutors are nominated solely by the Head, and are almost 
 invariably chosen from the number of the Fellows. 
 
 "The rule of study imposed by the Statutes, as regards 
 the Graduate Fellows, has, with the change of the Uni- 
 versity system, become wholly obsolete. 
 
 "The rule of life, as regards the Graduate Fellows, has 
 also ceased to be observed. Its only remnant consists in 
 the use, which is no longer obligatory, of a common Hall, 
 and the retention of a few old customs. 
 
 "Residence in the case of actual Fellows not holding 
 College offices, is in all cases entirely dispensed with. . . 
 All the statutable duties of a Fellowship having thus 
 become obsolete, the Fellowships are sinecures, with the 
 exception perhaps of those which are held by Tutors, and 
 which may be considered as forming part of their other- 
 wise inadequate stipend. A certain number may be 
 likewise regarded as forming prizes for academical merit 
 bestowed by examination. . . 
 
 "The Visitors continue to receive appeals which they try 
 privately. They have long ceased to visit their Colleges, 
 or to interfere spontaneously for the enforcement of 
 Statutes, the correction of abuses or any other purpose. 
 
 " The oaths to observe the Statutes are sworn as 
 before." ' 
 
 Professor Goldwin Smith elsewhere explains that the 
 
 1 Statement, pp. 6-8. 
 
16 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 University as the Federal bond of the Colleges retained 
 the holding of the examinations, the granting of degrees, 
 and the exercise of discipline outside the College precincts. 
 
 If any further proof were needed of the low estate to 
 which the Universities had sunk it might be found in the 
 fact that New College at Oxford and King's College at 
 Cambridge had demanded and obtained degrees for their 
 undergraduate members without any University exami- 
 nation. 
 
 The Elizabethan Codes maintained their existence 
 from 1570 till they were swept away by the Acts of 1854 
 and 1856 — a period not far short of 300 years. They were 
 consequently still the nominal law of the Universities in 
 the year 1800, but time had made them obsolete in many 
 respects and impossible of fulfilment. 
 
 Oxford and Cambridge have undergone great vicissi- 
 tudes of fortune, as they have been affected by pestilence, 
 civil war, and revolution either in Church or State. The 
 number of their students in pre-Reformation times has 
 no doubt been greatly exaggerated, but it must have been 
 very large in proportion to the population. The Reforma- 
 tion was a temporary disaster. The dissolution of the 
 monasteries and the suppression of the religious orders 
 caused a complete cessation of the flow of monks and 
 friars. As the University of Oxford put it, addressing 
 Sir Thomas More, " Abbots are ordering their monks 
 home, nobles taking away their sons, and priests their 
 nephews and kinsmen. The number of scholars is 
 decreasing, our halls are going to decay, and all liberal 
 studies waxing cold. The Fellows of Colleges are almost 
 the only residents left." 1 But as the clergy went out, the 
 laity gradually came in, and " in the first quarter of the 
 seventeenth century both Universities were as large as 
 they were destined to be for over two hundred years, until 
 1850, in fact." 2 The Restoration brought peace, but it can 
 hardly be said to have brought prosperity. A period of 
 lethargy set in during which Oxford fell to almost in- 
 credible depths. The old examination system had become 
 obsolete, and nothing had been put in its place. A Conti- 
 nental observer, Wendeborn, who travelled through 
 
 1 Wood, quoted by Mark Pattison, Suggestions, p. 130. 
 2 Venn, Matriculations, p. 3. 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 17 
 
 England before 1788, gives an amusing account of what 
 he saw. The Presiding Examiner, the Respondent, or 
 candidate for a Degree, and the three Opponents came 
 into the Schools and amid profound silence passed the 
 statutory time in the study of a novel or other enter- 
 taining work. 1 Oxford in fact gave its Degrees without 
 any examination to all who had paid their fees and kept 
 the required number of terms. Cambridge was saved 
 from falling quite so low by the influence of Sir Isaac 
 Newton and his successors. It required a certain amount 
 of mathematics before granting a Degree. 
 
 In 1800 there was at Cambridge the same number 
 of Colleges, 17, as there is now, the youngest of them, 
 Downing, having been incorporated into the University 
 on September 22nd of the same year. The list of Colleges 
 in order of foundation is St. Peter's or Peterhouse (a.d. 
 1284), Clare (1326), Pembroke (1347), Gonville and Caius 
 (1348), Trinity Hall (1350), Corpus (1352), King's (1441), 
 Queens' (1448), St. Catharine's (1473), Jesus (1496), Christ's 
 (1505), St. John's (1511), Magdalene (1519), Trinity (1546). 
 These 14 may be accounted pre-Reformation Colleges. 
 The remaining are Emmanuel (1584), Sidney Sussex (1596), 
 and Downing (1800). There was but one examination for 
 a Degree, the Mathematical Tripos, the first list of which 
 is for the year 1747-8. Classics had been encouraged by 
 the institution of the Chancellor's Medals, first given by 
 the Duke of Newcastle in 1751. Until 1871 inclusive, 
 candidates for these medals were required to have passed 
 the Mathematical Tripos and to have gained a place 
 among the Senior Optimes at least. There were also 
 in 1800 twenty-one Professors — three of Divinity, the four 
 Regius Professors of Civil Law, Physic, Hebrew and 
 Greek, two of Mathematics, two of Astronomy, two of 
 Arabic, four of the Natural Sciences, Chemistry, Anatomy, 
 Botany and Geology, and also the Professors of Moral 
 Philosophy, Music, Modern History and the Laws of 
 England. 
 
 At Oxford in 1800 there were 20 Colleges— Merton 
 (founded a.d. 1270), University (1280), Exeter (1314), Oriel 
 (1326), Balliol (1340), Queen's (1340), New (1386), Lincoln 
 
 1 Quoted in Hamilton, Discussions, p. 759 (note). 
 
18 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 (1417), All Souls (1438), Magdalen (1457), Brasenose (1509), 
 Corpus Christi (1516), Christ Church (1525). These may 
 be counted as the pre - Reformation Colleges. There 
 followed Trinity (1555), St. John's (1555), Jesus (1571), 
 Wadham (1612), Pembroke (1624), Worcester (1714), and 
 Hertford (1740). The last - mentioned College subse- 
 quently became extinct, but by an Act of Parliament 
 passed in the year 1874 Magdalen Hall was re-endowed 
 under this name as a close Church of England founda- 
 tion. Keble College, another close Church of England 
 foundation, was admitted into the University in 1871. 
 It enjoys all the privileges of a College except as regards 
 the status of its Head, who is not eligible for the office 
 of Vice-Chancellor. It is also the only College at Oxford 
 which has no Fellows, while All Souls has Fellows but 
 no undergraduates. 
 
 The Professoriate has had much the same history at 
 Oxford as at Cambridge. There also the Lady Margaret 
 founded the first Professorship, that of Divinity, in 1496. 
 Henry VIII. followed in 1535 with five Regius Professor- 
 ships as at the sister University. Besides the above there 
 were in 1800 thirteen other Professorships, one Praelec- 
 torship, and one Readership, the subjects being Astronomy 
 (2), Moral Philosophy, History (2), Music, Arabic (2), Poetry, 
 Botany, Anglo-Saxon, Law, Medicine, Natural Philosophy 
 and Anatomy. Instruction was thus provided as pleased 
 benevolent founders, and not as the University discovered 
 its own needs. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 
 
 Cardinal Newman in the Discourse introductory to 
 his hook entitled "The Idea of a University" 1 has the 
 following passage: — "About fifty years since, the English 
 University of which I was so long a member, after a 
 century of inactivity, at length was roused, at a time 
 when (as I may say) it was giving no education at all to 
 the youth committed to its keeping, to a sense of the 
 responsibilities which its profession and its station 
 involved. . . The course of beneficial change made 
 progress, and what was at the first but the result of 
 individual energy and an act of the academical corpor- 
 ation, gradually became popular, and was taken up and 
 carried out by the separate collegiate bodies of which 
 the University is composed. This was the first stage of 
 the controversy. Years passed away, and then political 
 adversaries arose against it, and the system of education 
 which it had established was a second time assailed. . . 
 In the former of these two controversies the charge 
 brought against its studies was their remoteness from 
 the occupations and duties of life, to which they are the 
 formal introduction, or, in other words, their inutility ; 
 in the latter, it was their connexion with a particular 
 form of belief, or, in other words, their religious exclu- 
 siveness.'''' 
 
 The writer recurs to the subject in the seventh 
 Discourse of the same book — that on Knowledge and Pro- 
 fessional Skill. " This question (the respective merits of 
 a ' liberal ' and a ' useful ' education) formed one main 
 subject of the controversy, to which I referred in the 
 
 1 This book consists of a series of nine lectures addressed to the 
 Catholics of Dublin. It was first published in 1852 under the title of 
 "The Scope and Nature of University Education" and was republished 
 later on under the altered title. 
 
20 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Introduction to the present Discourses, as having been 
 sustained in the first decade of this century by a 
 celebrated Northern Review on the one hand, and 
 defenders of the University of Oxford on the other. 
 Hardly had the authorities of that ancient seat of 
 learning, waking from their long neglect, set on foot 
 a plan for the education of the youth committed to 
 them, than the representatives of science and literature 
 in the city which has sometimes been called the Northern 
 Athens, remonstrated, with their gravest arguments and 
 their most brilliant satire, against the direction and 
 shape which the reform was taking. . . It was not 
 to be expected that they would be allowed to walk at 
 leisure over the field of controversy which they had 
 selected. Accordingly they were encountered in behalf 
 of the University by two men of great name and influ- 
 ence in their day ; . . and the defence thus provided 
 for the Oxford studies has kept its ground to this day. 
 . . . These defenders, I have said, were two, of whom 
 the more distinguished was the late Dr. Copleston, then 
 a Fellow of his College (Oriel), successively its Provost, 
 and Protestant Bishop of Llandaff. . . His peculiar 
 vigour and keenness of mind enabled him, when a young 
 man, single-handed with easy gallantry, to encounter 
 and overthrow the charge of three giants of the North 
 combined against him. I believe I am right in saying 
 that, in the progress of the controversy, the most 
 scientific, the most critical, and the most witty, of that 
 literary company, all of them now, as he himself, removed 
 from this visible scene, Professor Playfair, Lord Jeffrey, 
 and the Rev. Sydney Smith, threw together their several 
 efforts into one article of their Review, in order to crush 
 and pound to dust the audacious controvertist who had 
 come out against them in defence of his own Institu- 
 tions." 
 
 These sentences from Newman may serve as a 
 starting - point for this history. It was in 1800 that 
 Oxford, " waking from its long neglect," passed its new 
 Statute instituting examinations for a Degree. Cam- 
 bridge had long anticipated it by establishing the 
 Mathematical Tripos in 1747-8 though it delayed the 
 Classical Tripos till 1824. The "hardly" of Cardinal 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 21 
 
 Newman covers a period of ten years. 1 Copleston pub- 
 lished in 1810 his Reply to the " Calumnies of the Edin- 
 burgh Revietv against Oxford," in which he complains 
 of " covert insinuation, and open railing, sarcastic sneers 
 and allusions " and then of " bold accusations against 
 the English Universities and especially against Oxford " 
 (p. 10). Let us deal with each of these charges in turn. 
 
 An example of the first may be found in some extracts 
 from Don Manuel Espriella's "Letters from England." 2 
 Espriella was an imaginary Spaniard who was supposed 
 to have come to England in 1802. 
 
 " In another part of the book, while on a visit to 
 Cambridge he (Espriella) makes some observations, from 
 which we may gather his opinion of both Universities. 
 I inquired of one whom I met what were the real 
 advantages of these institutions to the country at large, 
 and to the individuals who study in them. ' They are 
 of this service,' he replied, 'to the country at large, 
 that they are the great schools by which established 
 opinions are inculcated and perpetuated. I do not know 
 that men gain much here, yet it is a regular and essential 
 part of our education ; and they who have not gone 
 through it always feel that their education has been 
 defective. A knowledge of the world, that is to say, of 
 our world, and of the men in it is gained here ; and 
 that knowledge remains when Greek and Geometry are 
 forgotten.' I asked him which was the best of the two 
 Universities ; he answered that Cambridge was as much 
 superior to Oxford, as Oxford was to Salamanca. I could 
 not forbear smiling at his scale of depreciation ; he per- 
 ceived it, and begged my pardon, saying, that he as 
 little intended to undervalue the establishments of my 
 country, as to overrate the one of which he was himself 
 a member. ' We are bad enough,' said he, ' Heaven 
 knows ; but not so bad as Oxford. They are now at- 
 tempting to imitate us in some of those points wherein 
 
 1 " The first Statute for the awarding of Honours by Public Exami- 
 nation was passed in 1800. In 1807, this Statute was abrogated on the 
 ground that it needed improvement in several points." Oxford Reform and 
 Oxford Professors, by H. H. Vaughan, p. 6. It may be this second 
 Statute which Newman had in his mind. 
 
 2 Edinburgh Review, Vol. XL, pp. 378-379. Jan. 1808. 
 
22 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the advantage on our part is too notorious to be disputed. 
 The effect may be seen in another generation — meantime, 
 the imitation is a confession of inferiority.' " 
 
 The Reviewer continues : — 
 
 " To the question whether we might regard the 
 Universities as the seats of learning and the Muses, we 
 have the following particularly smart answer : ' As for 
 the Muses, Sir, you have traversed the banks of the Cam, 
 and must know whether you have seen any nine ladies 
 who may answer their description. We do certainly 
 produce verses, both Greek and Latin, which are worthy 
 of gold medals, and English ones also, after the newest 
 and most approved receipt for verse-making. Of learning, 
 such as is required for the purposes of tuition, there is 
 much ; beyond it, except in Mathematics, none. In this 
 we only share the common degeneracy. The Moham- 
 medans believe that when Gog and Magog are to come, 
 the race of men will have dwindled to such littleness, 
 that a shoe of one of the present generation will serve 
 them for a house. If this prophecy be typical of the 
 intellectual diminution of the species, Gog and Magog 
 may soon be expected in the neighbourhood of their own 
 hills.' l 
 
 " ' The truth is, Sir,' he continued, ' that the institu- 
 tions of men grow old like men themselves, and, like 
 women, are always the last to perceive their own decay. 
 When Universities were the only schools of learning, they 
 were of great and important utility ; as soon as there 
 were others, they ceased to be the best, because their 
 forms were prescribed, and they could adopt no improve- 
 ment till long after it was generally acknowledged. 
 There are other causes of decline. We educate for only 
 one profession ; when colleges were founded, that one was 
 the most important ; it is now no longer so ; they who 
 are destined for the others find it necessary to study 
 elsewhere, and it begins to be perceived that this is not 
 a necessary stage upon the road. This might be remedied. 
 We have professors of everything, who hold their situa- 
 tions and do nothing. In Edinburgh, the income of the 
 professor depends upon his exertions ; and, in conse- 
 
 1 The Gogmagog Hills are just outside Cambridge to the S.E. 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 23 
 
 quence, the reputation of that University is so high that 
 Englishmen think it necessary to finish their education 
 by passing a year there. They learn shallow metaphysics 
 there, and come back worse than they went, inasmuch 
 as it is better to be empty than flatulent.' " 
 
 To turn to the next count in Copleston's indictment 
 — the first of the " bold accusations " appears to occur in 
 a review of La Place's " Traite de Mecanique Celeste." 
 The writer says : — - 
 
 " In the list of the mathematicians and philosophers, 
 to whom physical astronomy, for the last sixty or seventy 
 years has been indebted for its improvements, hardly a 
 name from Great Britain falls to be mentioned. What is 
 the reason of this '? " His answer to his own question is 
 as follows : — 2 
 
 " We believe that it is chiefly in the public institu- 
 tions of England that we are to seek for the causes of the 
 deficiency here referred to, and particularly in the two 
 great centres from which knowledge is supposed to 
 radiate over all the rest of the island. In one of these, 
 where the dictates of Aristotle are still listened to as 
 infallible decrees, and where the infancy of science is 
 mistaken for its maturity, the mathematical sciences 
 have never flourished ; and the scholar has no means of 
 advancing beyond the mere elements of geometry." 
 
 The Reviewer, having thus demolished Oxford in a 
 single sentence, next turns his attention to Cambridge 
 and criticises it at greater length. He admits that "in 
 the other seminary, the dominion of prejudice is not 
 equally strong ; . . mathematical learning is there 
 the great object of study, but still we must object to the 
 method in which this object is pursued. . . The 
 pupil must study, not to learn the spirit of geometry, 
 or to acquire the 8wa/uus eupt]TiKrj by which the theorems 
 were discovered, but to know them as a child knows his 
 chatechism, by heart, so as to answer readily to certain 
 interrogations." 3 
 
 1 Edinburgh Review, Vol. XI., p. 279. 2 p. 283. 
 
 3 Sir William Hamilton (Discussions, p. 320) maintains that this 
 article, written by Playfair, was the means of forcing on Cambridge the 
 knowledge of the Continental analysis. According to Hamilton, Cambridge 
 then went to the other extreme and became conspicuous for the undue 
 predominance of algebraic mathematics. 
 
24 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Edinburgh Review, which dealt so scornfully 
 with Oxford mathematics, did not even spare its classics. 
 In an article on the Clarendon Press edition of Strabo 1 
 the Reviewer thus opens the attack : — 
 
 " Nothing in Europe is at all comparable, in point 
 of extent and magnificence, to the endowment of the 
 University of Oxford, — or to the veneration which is 
 there paid to the Greek and Latin languages." He 
 admits that it is " not without reason, that this learned 
 University makes the study of the Greek and Latin 
 languages, especially of the former, its first object in the 
 education of those committed to its care." He admires 
 " the spacious and comfortable abodes, and ample revenues 
 provided for the instructors, which exempt them from 
 all worldly cares, but those of learning and teaching." 
 The Clarendon Press at Oxford, too, being richly endowed, 
 always " raises the highest expectations in the mind of 
 every scholar," but somehow " the constant renovation of 
 hope has hitherto been followed by as constant a succes- 
 sion of disappointments." The edition of Apollonius 
 Rhodius was an " unhappy attempt " ; the " single and 
 minute, but very successful instance of Aristotle's Poetics 
 was produced by an auxiliary volunteer." " Of the Homer, 
 the editors appear to be at least half a century behind the 
 rest of the world in critical knowledge." The edition of 
 Strabo is then reviewed in detail and with great severity. 
 
 The third article which raised the ire of Oxford was 
 a review 2 of Edgeworth's Essays on Professional Educa- 
 tion. The writer while denying that Mr. Edge worth is 
 " either very new, very profound, or very right in his 
 opinions," yet returns him " thanks for the courage with 
 which he has combated the excessive abuse of classical 
 learning in England," and quotes with approval a passage 
 beginning thus:— "The principal defect in the present 
 system of our great schools is, that they devote too large 
 a portion of time to Latin and Greek. It is true, that the 
 attainment of classical literature is highly desirable ; 
 but it should not, or rather it need not, be the exclusive 
 object of boys during eight or nine years." 
 
 Mr. Edgeworth having attacked classics in the public 
 schools, the Reviewer on his part extends the assault to 
 
 1 Vol. XIV., p. 429. 2 Vol. XV., pp. 40-53. 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 25 
 
 the Universities themselves. " A young Englishman," 
 he says, " goes to school at six or seven years old, and he 
 remains in a course of education till twenty-three or 
 twenty-four years of age. In all that time, his sole and 
 exclusive occupation is learning Latin and Greek 1 ; he has 
 scarcely a notion that there is any other kind of ex. 
 cellence ; and the great system of facts with which he is 
 most perfectly acquainted, are the intrigues of the Heathen 
 Gods; with whom Pan slept? with whom Jupiter? — 
 whom Apollo ravished? These facts the English youth 
 get by heart the moment they quit the nursery ; and are 
 most sedulously and industriously instructed in them till 
 the best and most active part of life is passed away." 
 And again 2 : " All the solid and masculine parts of (a young 
 man's) understanding are left wholly without cultiva- 
 tion ; he hates the pain of thinking, and suspects every 
 man whose boldness and originality call upon him to 
 defend his opinions and prove his assertions, and worst 
 of all a genuine Oxford tutor would shudder to hear his 
 young men disputing upon moral and political truth, 
 forming and pulling down theories, and indulging in all 
 the boldness of youthful discussion. He would augur 
 nothing from it, but impiety to God, and treason to 
 kings." 3 As a practical suggestion the Reviewer recom- 
 mends Political Economy. " When an University has 
 been doing useless things for a long time, it appears at 
 first degrading to them to be useful. A set of lectures 
 upon political economy would be discouraged at Oxford, 
 probably despised, probably not permitted ; . . but 
 what ought the term University to mean, but a place 
 where every science is taught which is liberal and is useful 
 to mankind? Nothing will so much tend to bring 
 classical literature within proper bounds, as a steady and 
 invariable appeal to utility in our appreciation of all 
 human knowledge." 4 
 
 It was not to be supposed that Oxford would allow 
 accusations and assertions such as these to go un- 
 noticed, and in 1810 Copleston published his pamphlet 
 
 1 He adds in a footnote: — "Unless he goes to the University of 
 Cambridge, and then classics occupy him entirely about ten years ; and 
 divide him with mathematics for four or five more." 
 
 2 p. 49. 8 p. 50. 4 p. 51. 
 
26 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 "A Reply to the calumnies of the Edinburgh Review 
 against Oxford containing an account of studies pursued 
 in that University." After a general introduction he 
 deals in his first chapter with the charge from the 
 article on La Place ; in the second chapter, with the 
 review of Strabo ; in the third, with the review of Edge- 
 worth ; in the fourth he explains the course of studies 
 pursued at Oxford ; while in the fifth and concluding 
 chapter he discourses on plans of education in general 
 and particularly of English education. The final pages 
 of Copleston's pamphlet betray his sense that all was 
 not well at Oxford in spite of his valiant defence. He 
 writes : " There are some points in the constitution of 
 this place . . . which ought to be known and well- 
 considered before any comparison is made between what 
 we are, and what we ought to be. The University of 
 Oxford is not a national foundation. It is a congeries of 
 foundations, originating some in royal munificence, but 
 more in private piety and bounty. They are moulded 
 indeed into one corporation ; but each one of our twenty 
 Colleges is a corporation by itself, and has its own 
 peculiar Statutes, not only regulating its internal 
 affairs, but confining its benefits by a great variety of 
 limitations ; . . now it is certain that each of these 
 constitutions cannot be the best." 1 As for reform, he 
 pleads the sacredness of private property and the 
 sanctity of wills, and specifically rejects the proposal of 
 Mr. Cockburn, late Christian Advocate at Cambridge, to 
 limit the duration of all Fellowships to ten or twelve years. 
 The reply of the Edinburgh Review to Copleston, of 
 which Cardinal Newman gives so lively an account, is to 
 be found in Vol. XVI., pp. 158-187. It goes over the whole 
 ground again and concludes with this challenge, which it 
 is safe to say, was never replied to ; the facts would have 
 been too damning. " For his University lectures, if 
 (the author of the pamphlet) really wishes to be honest, 
 let him give to the public, 1st, a list of lecturers who 
 receive salaries and do nothing for them ; 2nd, a list 
 of lecturers who do read; 3rdly, the average number of 
 their pupils for three years past ; 4thly, the number of 
 
 l p. 133. 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 27 
 
 lectures read in the year; 5thly, the whole number 
 of undergraduates and bachelors in the University." 
 
 Copleston published in the same year, 1810, "A 
 Second Reply to the Edinburgh, Review, by the Author of 
 a Reply to the Calumnies of that Review against Oxford," 
 and in 1811 a " Third Reply," but this last was drawn 
 by a remark in a review of Woodhouse's Trigonometry 1 
 and deals with quite a minor point. The trio of Edin- 
 burgh Reviewers contented themselves with their one 
 combined article, and thus the wordy warfare finally 
 flickered out. 
 
 Mr. T. E. Kebbel in his life of Copleston in the 
 Dictionary of National Biography 2 agrees with Newman 
 as to the issue of the contest. He says : " The Edinburgh 
 Review soon afterwards published an attack on the 
 Oxford system of education, to which Copleston at once 
 replied and completely demolished his antagonist, whom 
 he convicted not only of stark ignorance of what he had 
 undertaken to condemn, but of much bad Latin besides." 
 This is surely an inadequate account of the matter. It 
 was more than a question of bad Latin or bad Greek 
 either. Of the two words of Greek quoted above one is 
 wrong, and Copleston triumphantly fastens on the long e 
 which ought to be short, though he does not notice the 
 queer spelling " chatechism " which comes immediately 
 after it and is an equally worthy object of attack. As for 
 the bad Latin there was some on both sides, and the best 
 that Copleston could say for the Oxford Latinity was 
 that it was no worse than the average modern commodity. 
 With regard to the conviction of stark ignorance, the sen- 
 tence which gave most offence was that in which Oxford 
 was described as a place " where the dictates of Aristotle 
 are still listened to as infallible decrees, and where the 
 infancy of science is mistaken for its maturity, the 
 mathematical sciences have never flourished, and the 
 scholar has no means of advancing beyond the mere 
 elements of geometry." These charges were not all 
 literally true. Copleston had no difficulty in showing that 
 the critical faculty at Oxford was occasionally brought to 
 bear even on Aristotle, that it had some scientific ideas 
 
 l Edinburgh Review, Vol. XVII., p. 126. 2 Vol. XII., p. 175. 
 
28 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 that were more than elementary, and that a scholar had 
 the means of advancing beyond the mere elements of 
 geometry. But because a man overstates his case, is he 
 thereby proved to have no case at all '? One of the above 
 assertions was literally true. The mathematical sciences 
 did not then nourish at Oxford. They do not nourish 
 there now. In 1810, Oxford almost wholly neglected 
 science, and was far too much in bondage to the authority 
 of Aristotle. On this latter point let Sir William 
 Hamilton be called as a witness. He writes, " The easier 
 parts of Aristotle's system were indeed still retained ; but 
 these might, in the circumstances, have been as well 
 omitted ; because read as fragments, and by minds 
 undisciplined to abstraction, they could neither be under- 
 stood themselves, nor stimulate the intellect to understand 
 aught else. There was no gradation from the easy to the 
 difficult, from the new to the old. Philosophy was taught, 
 philosophy was learned more by rote than by reason ; and 
 an abrupt intrusion by the tyro thinker into the Ethics 
 or Politics of the Stagirite might discourage or disgust 
 even a potential Montesquieu. Logic alone was studied 
 in a modern summary. But here too the unphilosophical 
 character of the Oxford philosophical discipline is 
 apparent. That University, having formerly adopted, still 
 adheres to the Compendium of Aldrich, not because 
 Aldrich was a learned dialectician, but an academical 
 dignitary; and the book, not overvalued by its able author, 
 after leading and misleading Oxford logicians, during 
 former generations, at last affords a more appropriate 
 text for their corrections in the present. But should 
 Alma Mater thus lag behind her alumni?" 1 He adds in a 
 note, " See Mr. Mansel's Notes on the Rudimenta of 
 Aldrich. Of these, without disparagement to the Dean, it 
 may be said — ' La sauce vaut mieux que le poisson.' " 
 
 Copleston really gave his case away when he affirmed 
 that the University was not a national institution. He 
 felt that there was nothing in existence at Oxford which 
 deserved to be called by that name, and laid the blame on 
 the twenty Colleges, some of which he admitted had 
 imperfect constitutions. The Edinburgh Reviewers 
 
 i Discussions, p. 809. 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 29 
 
 regarded the University as a national institution. They 
 criticised it from that point of view, and they found it 
 wanting. It undoubtedly was wanting, so that if the 
 formal victory is given to Copleston, the real victory must 
 be assigned to the critics. The Reviewers made little or 
 no suggestion of reform. They attacked things as they 
 stood. Their words made but slight impression at the 
 time, but they showed that the spirit of criticism was 
 alive, and inspired the hope that the effects of it might be 
 seen in days to come. 
 
 The reader may get further light by reading the 
 following accounts of the Examination system as it 
 prevailed at Oxford and Cambridge in these early days. 
 
 The first is by Copleston himself, and is to be found 
 in the " Reply to the Calumnies," pp. 138-147, and runs 
 thus : 
 
 "According to the last regulations, the University 
 honours are obtained in the following manner. 
 
 "As soon as the student enters on his third year, he is 
 subject to a public examination, which admits him, not 
 to the Degree of Bachelor of Arts, but to that inter- 
 mediate step, which still retains its old title of SopJiista 
 General is. The old exercise was a logical disputation in 
 the public Schools on three philosophical questions, which 
 had long dwindled into an insignificant form, before the 
 present exercise was substituted in its room. At this 
 previous examination he is expected to construe accur- 
 ately some one Greek and one Latin book at least ; the 
 most difficult works are not required or encouraged, as 
 there is no competition between the candidates, and an 
 accurate grammatical acquaintance with the structure of 
 the two languages is the point chiefly inquired into. 
 Xenophon, Homer, Herodotus, Sophocles, Euripides and 
 Demosthenes among the Greeks, and Virgil, Horace, 
 Sallust, Livy and Cicero among the Latins, are the most 
 usual books. Besides this, he is examined in some com- 
 pendium of Logic (generally Aldrich's), which is never 
 omitted, and in the elements of Geometry and Algebra. 
 All this is done in public. Eight candidates may be 
 examined in one day, who are all present during the 
 whole time ; and there is commonly a numerous attend- 
 ance of Junior Students. Indeed there must of necessity 
 
30 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 be an audience, because every candidate is bound to 
 attend one examination before he is examined himself. 
 The number, however, far exceeds what the Statute 
 requires, and the School is often quite full. The Examiners 
 are four in number, especially appointed by the Univer- 
 sity, and sworn to the faithful performance of their duty. 
 
 "If the student fails on this occasion, it passes sub 
 silentio. He does not receive his certificate at the close 
 of the day ; and he may present himself again the next 
 term. 
 
 "After having passed this Examination his studies are 
 directed more steadily to the other, where the honour he 
 acquires will depend entirely on his own exertions. He 
 cannot present himself till after the third year is com- 
 pleted, and it is common to defer it till the end of the 
 fourth year. He is then examined first in the rudiments 
 of Religion : a passage in the Greek Testament is given 
 him to construe, and he is tried by questions arising out 
 of it, whether he has a proper view of the Christian 
 scheme, and of the outline of sacred history. He is 
 expected to give some account of the evidences of 
 Christianity, and to shew by his answers that he is 
 acquainted with the Thirty-nine Articles, and has read 
 attentively some commentary upon them. He is examined 
 again in Logic, the object being chiefly to see that he has 
 just and firm conceptions of its leading principles; and, 
 on this occasion, selections from the Organon are often 
 introduced. 
 
 " The Examination then proceeds to Rhetoric and 
 Ethics. Upon these subjects the celebrated treatises of 
 Aristotle are chiefly used : and whoever is master of them 
 knows what an exercise of the mind it is to acquire a 
 thorough insight into the argument, and what a serious 
 discipline the student must have undergone, who has 
 accomplished this point. . . To these is often added, 
 at the option of the student, the treatise on Politics, 
 which is in fact a continuation and a completion of the 
 Ethical System. 
 
 "Besides these treatises of Aristotle, Quintilian as 
 belonging to Rhetoric, and the philosophical works of 
 Cicero, especially the De Officiis, as belonging to Ethics, 
 are admitted. And these last, as being easier of attain- 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 31 
 
 ment, are of course the choice of many candidates. But 
 neither of them are strictly indispensable. 
 
 "In examining viva voce almost two hundred candi- 
 dates every year, nearly in the same departments, much 
 skill and care is requisite lest a certain routine of 
 questions be introduced, which a student may learn, and 
 give to them some plausible answers, without having 
 drawn his knowledge from the original source. Nothing 
 but practice and constant vigilance, joined to a familiar 
 acquaintance with the several books, can effectually guard 
 against this abuse. And hence, to a bystander, the Exami- 
 nation may often seem vague and desultory, when the 
 design only is, to probe the candidate here and there, and 
 ascertain that his reading has been serious, not loose or 
 superficial, or, as might sometimes happen, none at all. 
 
 " At this Examination the student presents what 
 number of Classical Authors he pleases, provided that they 
 be not less than three, including both languages. It is 
 not unusual for those who aim at the highest honours to 
 mention Homer, Pindar, one, two, or three of the Greek 
 Tragedians and Aristophanes. Thucydides is seldom 
 omitted. The other historians, and the orators, are also 
 included, according as the student's line of reading 
 has been. Of Latin Authors, besides the poets of the 
 Augustan age, Livy, Tacitus, Cicero, Juvenal and 
 Lucretius, are the most usual. In the books that 
 he names, he is expected to be well and accurately 
 versed. . . 
 
 "Besides the questions proposed viva voce, many others 
 in the different branches of the Examination are put, and 
 answered on paper, while other things are going on. And 
 in this manner also the candidate's knowledge of Latinity 
 is tried. 
 
 "The Mathematical Examination is quite a distinct 
 business. It is conducted indeed at the same time, but it 
 is chiefly done on paper, if the student has advanced far 
 in these studies; although for every candidate who 
 presents himself in Mathematics there is an oral exami- 
 nation, in which, with a table of diagrams before him, he is 
 called upon, not to give full and long demonstrations, but, 
 as the Examiner turns over a corresponding table, to 
 answer questions relating to the properties of figures, and 
 
32 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the mode of proving certain theorems. The soundness of 
 his scientific studies is thus made known ; and he has 
 problems, which require time and close attention, to solve 
 at his leisure on paper, while the Examiner passes on 
 to others. 
 
 "It must be well known to every one who has had 
 experience in life, that notwithstanding this formidable 
 array of books and sciences, great numbers of candidates 
 must be allowed to pass, whose attainments in both are, 
 from various causes, very inconsiderable. Still if the 
 system be so conducted as to encourage exertion, it would 
 be absurd to reject those of the more moderate preten- 
 sions, who have passed through their period of residence 
 with good conduct, and a tolerably regular attention to 
 the prescribed duties. Nothing but extreme incapacity, 
 extraordinary want of school education, or gross idleness 
 at the University, will absolutely exclude a student from 
 his Degree at the regular time. Of this description some 
 few are found every year. But even these are not finally 
 rejected; they may appear at the following Examination, 
 and, unless the same insufficiency is again observed, 
 generally pass." 
 
 A companion picture of the methods in vogue at Cam- 
 bridge is to be found in Whewell's Of a Liberal Education, 
 p. 169, where he says, "I will copy Dr. Jebb's account of the 
 exercises and examinations as they existed in 1772. This 
 account was applicable with little alteration till 1827." 
 
 Dr. Jebb's account is as follows : — " The Moderators 
 are annually chosen upon the 10th of October. Their 
 proper office is to preside alternately, at the public 
 exercises of the students ; and to examine them, at the 
 time of their offering themselves for a Degree. 
 
 " These public exercises are held in the afternoon, 
 for five days in the week during term time ; the 
 Moderator appearing a little before two, and frequently 
 continuing in the schools till the clock strikes four. 
 
 " Upon the first Monday after the commencement of 
 the January term, the Moderator, whose turn it is to 
 preside, gives written notice to one of the students in his 
 list, that it is his pleasure he should appear in the schools, 
 as a disputant, on that day fortnight. 
 
 " This person, who is now called the respondent, in a 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 33 
 
 few hours after he has received the summons, waits upon 
 the Moderator with three propositions or questions ; the 
 truth of which he is to maintain against the objections of 
 any three students of the same year, whom the Moderator 
 shall think proper to nominate, and who on this occasion 
 are called ' opponents.' " 
 
 Dr. Jebb then gives specimens of these questions 1 and 
 continues : — 
 
 "A fortnight for preparation being expired, the re- 
 spondent appears in the schools; he ascends the rostrum 
 and reads a Latin dissertation (called with us a ' thesis ') 
 upon any one of the three questions he thinks proper ; 
 the Moderator attending in his place. 
 
 "As soon as the respondent has finished his thesis, 
 which generally takes ten or fifteen minutes in the 
 reading, the Moderator calls upon the first opponent to 
 appear. He immediately ascends a rostrum opposite to 
 the respondent, and proposes his 'arguments ' against the 
 questions in syllogistical form. 
 
 " Eight arguments, each consisting of three or four 
 syllogisms, are brought up by the first opponent, five by 
 the second, and three by the third. 
 
 " When the exercise has for some time been carried on 
 according to the strict rules of logic, the disputation 
 insensibly slides into free and unconfined debate. . . 
 The three opponents, having, in their turns, exhausted 
 their whole stock of arguments, are dismissed by the 
 Moderator in their order, with such a compliment 2 as in 
 his estimation they deserve ; and the exercise closes with 
 the dismission of the respondent in a similar manner. 
 
 " The Moderator, upon his return to his chambers, 
 records the merits of the disputants by marks, set oppo- 
 site to their respective names. 
 
 " This exercise, with the preparations for the subse- 
 quent examination in January, appears to be sufficient 
 employment for the last year. And the apprehension of 
 
 1 They are three in number and read as follows : — 
 
 Planetae primarii retinentur in orbitis suis vi gravitatis, et motu 
 projectili. 
 
 Iridis primariae et secundariae phoenomena solvi possunt ex 
 principiis opticis. 
 
 Non licet magistratui civem morti tradere nisi ob crimen homicidii. 
 2 For instance, OpUme disputasti. Hence Senior and Junior 
 Optimes. 
 
34 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 it is so alarming, that the student, after two years and a 
 quarter's residence, during which time no proof whatever 
 of his proficiency is required, frequently seeks to avoid 
 the difficulty or disgrace, by commencing fellow-com- 
 moner, 1 or, by declaring his intention of proceeding in 
 Civil Law. 
 
 " These exercises being duly performed, the Vice- 
 Chancellor appoints three days, in the beginning of the 
 January term, for the examination of the ' Questionists ' : 
 this being the appellation of the students, during the last 
 six weeks of their preparation. 
 
 " The Moderators, some days before the arrival of the 
 time prescribed, meet for the purpose of forming the 
 students into divisions of six, eight, or ten, according to 
 their performance in the schools, with a view to the 
 ensuing examination. 
 
 "Upon the first of the appointed days, at eight o'clock 
 in the morning, the students enter the Senate House, 
 preceded by a Master of Arts from each College, who, on 
 this occasion, is called the 'Father' of the College to 
 which he belongs. 
 
 " After the Proctors have called over the names, each 
 of the Moderators sends for a division of the students : 
 they sit with him round a table, with pen, ink and paper 
 before them: he enters upon his task of examination, and 
 does not dismiss the set till the hour is expired. This 
 Examination has now for some years been held in the 
 English language. 
 
 " The Examination is varied according to the abilities 
 of the students. The Moderator generally begins with 
 proposing some questions from the six books of Euclid, 
 Plane Trigonometry, and the first rules of Algebra. 
 From the elements of mathematics a transition is made 
 to the four branches of philosophy, viz. Mechanics, 
 Hydrostatics, apparent Astronomy, and Optics. If the 
 Moderator finds the set of Questionists capable of answer- 
 ing him, he proceeds to the eleventh and twelfth books of 
 Euclid, Conic Sections, Spherical Trigonometry, the 
 
 1 A Fellow-Commoner is an undergraduate who has commons, or in 
 other words, dines with the Fellows at the high table in Hall, while the 
 rest of the undergraduates sit at the lower tables. He pays higher fees 
 for this privilege, and in the old days could take a Degree under easier 
 conditions. 
 
BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 35 
 
 higher parts of Algebra, and Sir Isaac Newton's Principia. 
 Having closed the philosophical examination, he some- 
 times asks a few questions in Locke's Essay on the 
 Human Understanding, Butler's Analogy, or Clarke's 
 Attributes. But as the highest academical distinctions 
 are invariably given to the best proficients in mathematics 
 and natural philosophy, a very superficial knowledge in 
 morality and metaphysics will suffice. 
 
 " When the division under examination is one of the 
 higher classes, problems are also proposed, with which the 
 student retires to a distant part of the Senate House, and 
 returns, with his solution upon paper, to the Moderator, 
 who, at his leisure, compares it with the solutions of the 
 other students. 
 
 " When the clock strikes nine, the Questionists are dis- 
 missed to breakfast : they return at half-past nine, and 
 stay till eleven ; they go in again at half-past one, and 
 stay till three ; and lastly, they return at half-past three, 
 and stay till five. On the third day they are finally dis- 
 missed at eleven." 
 
 Dr. Jebb also describes the continual examination of 
 the students by the Father of the College, and how the 
 latter makes a report of a student's absolute or compara- 
 tive merit to the Moderators, and to every other Father 
 who should ask him the question. He continues : — 
 
 " The Moderators and the Fathers meet at breakfast 
 and dinner. From the variety of the reports, taken in 
 connexion with their own examination, the former are 
 enabled, about the close of the second day, so far to settle 
 the comparative merits of the candidates, as to agree upon 
 the names of four-and-twenty, who to them appear most 
 deserving of being distinguished by marks of academical 
 approbation. 
 
 " These four-and-twenty are recommended to the 
 Proctors, for their private examinations, and, if approved 
 by them, their names are set down in two divisions, 
 according to that order, in which they deserve to stand ; 
 are afterwards printed ; and read over upon a solemn day, 
 in the presence of the Vice-Chancellor and of the assembled 
 University. The names of the twelve who appear next in 
 descent are read over upon a day subsequent to the 
 former. Four additional names are generally inserted in 
 
36 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the former list (which is called the list of the Wranglers 
 and Senior Oj)times), at the discretion of the Vice- 
 Chancellor, two Proctors, and the Senior Regent. In the 
 latter list, or that of Junior Optimes, the number of 
 twelve is almost constantly adhered to." 
 
 This was all that Oxford and Cambridge had to show 
 in the way of knowledge-testing in the year 1800. The 
 reader can now form his own opinion on the merits of the 
 dispute between the Edinburgh Review and Copleston. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE SECOND ATTACK BY THE EDINBURGH 
 REVIEW. 
 
 The second attack of the Edinburgh Review on the 
 ancient Universities began in 1831 and continued till 
 1836. Sir William Hamilton was now the assailant, and 
 his articles are to be found in the Education section of 
 his collected Discussions, and the Education Appendix 
 which contains his latest contribution to this subject. 1 
 He was well-equipped for the contest, for, as may be 
 learned from the Dictionary of National Biography, he 
 was himself an Oxford man, having entered Balliol College 
 in 1807. The neglect of an eccentric Tutor left him to 
 manage his own studies. So well did he look after 
 himself that he gained the reputation of being the most 
 learned Aristotelian in Oxford. He took a First Class 
 in Litterae Humaniores, but did not obtain a Fellowship. 
 He afterwards became Professor of Philosophy at Edin- 
 burgh, and was thus acquainted with two Universities 
 from the inside. His unfortunate experiences at Oxford 
 may to some extent account for the asperity with which 
 he conducts his controversy with her. 
 
 Cardinal Newman, in the extract quoted above, says, 
 " The second charge brought against its (Oxford's) studies 
 was their connexion with a particular form of religious 
 belief, or, in other words, their religious ejccliisiveness." 
 This is by no means an adequate statement of the facts. 
 It is true that Hamilton wrote an article, published in 
 October 1834, " On the right of Dissenters to admission 
 into the English Universities," 2 and a supplemental 
 article on the same subject in January 1835/ but they 
 are far exceeded in importance by his five other articles 
 on the general question of University Reform. Of these 
 the chief is that headed "Of the state of the English 
 
 i The second edition is the one quoted from. 
 
 2 Edinburgh Revieio, Vol. LX., No. cxxi., pp. 202-230. 
 
 3 lb. Vol. LX., No. cxxii., pp. 422-445. 
 
38 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Universities, with more especial reference to Oxford," 
 published in June 1831 ' and a supplemental article bear- 
 ing the same title published in December 1831. To 
 these was afterwards added an Appendix, " On a Reform 
 of the English Universities : with especial reference to 
 Oxford ; and limited to the Faculty of Arts." 2 In the 
 Discussions the five articles are not given in strict 
 chronological order, the four already mentioned being 
 preceded by an article published in the Edinburgh 
 Review in January 1836. This arrangement is doubtless 
 intentional, as will now be shown. 
 
 In 1835 Dr. Whewell, then Senior Tutor of Trinity 
 College, Cambridge, published a pamphlet entitled 
 Thong Jits on the Study of Mathematics as a part of a 
 Liberal Education. It ran to between 40 and 50 octavo 
 pages. The first few pages discuss the respective merits 
 of mathematics and logic as aids to exact reasoning ; the 
 middle part sets forth various points in which the writer 
 considered current mathematical teaching to be wrong, 
 and finally we reach the practical inferences which 
 Whewell wishes to be drawn from what has gone before. 
 This modest publication produced a furious onslaught 
 from Hamilton, who was against anything beyond an 
 irreducible minimum of mathematics as a part of a 
 liberal education. 3 Mathematics, he contended, were 
 not philosophy, nor an improving study, did not 
 conduce to generalisation, were not a logical study, 
 nor a logical exercise ; on the contrary, they induced 
 credulity and scepticism. It would have been un- 
 necessary to refer to this controversy, but for the fact 
 that Hamilton incidentally dealt some shrewd blows 
 at Cambridge and its favourite study. " The centre," he 
 writes, " from which (this pamphlet) proceeds, enhances 
 also the interest of the publication. In opposition to the 
 general opinion of the learned world, — in opposition to 
 the practice of all other Universities, past or present, — 
 
 1 Edinburgh Review, Vol. LIII., No. cvi., pp. 384-427, and Vol. LIV., 
 No. cviii., pp. 478-504. Republished in the Discussions at pp. 401 and 450. 
 
 2 Discussions, p. 742. 
 
 :i See his article "On the Study of Mathematics as an Exercise of 
 Mind." Edinburgh Revieiv, Vol. LXII., No. cxxvi., pp. 409-455. Discus- 
 sions, p. 263. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 39 
 
 in opposition even to its oaths and statutes, the University 
 of Cambridge stands alone in now making mathematical 
 science the principal object of the whole liberal education 
 it affords ; and mathematical skill the sole condition of 
 the one tripos of its honours, and the necessary pass- 
 port to the other:— thus restricting to the narrowest 
 proficiency all places of distinction and emolument 
 in University and College, to which such honours 
 constitute a claim;— thus also leaving the immense 
 majority of its alumni without incitement, and the 
 most arduous and important studies void of encourage- 
 ment and reward. It is true, indeed, that the effect 
 of this contracted tendency of the public University 
 is, in some degree, tempered by certain favourable 
 accidents in the constitution of more than one of its 
 private colleges ; but with every allowance for petty and 
 precarious counteraction, and latterly for some very 
 inadequate legislation, the University of Cambridge, 
 unless it can demonstrate that mathematical study is 
 the one best, if not the one exclusive, means of a general 
 evolution of our faculties, must be held to have established 
 and maintained a scheme of discipline, more partial and 
 inadequate than any other which the history of education 
 records. That no Cambridge mathematician has yet been 
 found to essay this demonstration, so necessary for his 
 University, so honourable to his science, has always 
 appeared to us a virtual admission, that the thesis was 
 incapable of defence." ! 
 
 Whewell sent a letter to the Edinburgh Revieiv com- 
 plaining that the Reviewer had not fairly stated the 
 purport of his pamphlet. Hamilton retorted with a note 
 of great length. This time he has a slash at the Colleges 
 as well as at the University. In a note to his note 2 he 
 says : " It is only a private and intrusive interest which 
 has there (at Cambridge) superseded the public seminary, 
 and this has calculated for the advantage of its members, 
 and not for the national good, the education which Cam- 
 bridge has long been permitted to dispense. This private 
 interest is that of the Colleges and of their Tutors ; and 
 in Cambridge there has for generations been taught, 
 
 1 Discissions, pp. 264-5. 2 lb., p. 333. 
 
40 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 not what the ends of education, not what the ends 
 of science prescribe, but only what, and that what 
 hoiv, the College Tutors are capable of teaching. It 
 would be here out of place (and is indeed done else- 
 where) to explain the manner in which a mere Collegio- 
 Tutorial instruction must be scanty and mechanical, and 
 why the mechanism once made up, remains, and must 
 remain, long after the opinions which it chances to 
 comprehend and teach are elsewhere exploded. Suffice it 
 for an example, to take the remarkable, the notorious fact : 
 that fifty, that sixty years after Newton had published 
 his Principia, the physical hypothesis of Descartes was 
 still tutorially inculcated in Newton's own University. 
 In fact, I believe that the Cambridge Colleges were about 
 the last seminaries throughout Europe in which the 
 Newtonian doctrine superseded the Cartesian, and this 
 too in opposition to the Professorial authority of Newton 
 himself, and of his successors in the Public Chair. And 
 why ? Simply, because in these Colleges, instruction was 
 dispensed by Tutors, for their own convenience and 
 advantage ; and these Tutors, educated in the old routine, 
 were unable or unwilling to re-educate themselves for 
 teachers of the new truth. This is an example of the 
 value of Collegial, of Tutorial, authority in Cambridge ; 
 and we may be sure, that whatever are the subjects com- 
 prised in the tutorial mechanism of the time, will be 
 clamorously asserted by the collegial interest to be the 
 best possible subjects of academical education ; while all 
 beyond it, all especially that cannot be reduced to a 
 catechetical routine, will be as clamorously decried." 
 
 These extracts may be regarded as merely the skir- 
 mishes subsidiary to the main attack, but they show the 
 line it was to take — a line which Hamilton followed with 
 a persistency and a vehemence almost amounting to an 
 obsession. This main attack had been made by Hamilton 
 in June 1831, in the article already mentioned, " Of the 
 state of the English Universities, with more especial refer- 
 ence to Oxford." The year, as everyone knows, was one 
 of great political excitement which culminated in the 
 passage of the first Reform Bill in 1832. " This is the age 
 of reform," begins Hamilton. " Next in importance to our 
 religious and political establishments, are the foundations 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 41 
 
 for public education ; and having now seriously engaged 
 in a reform of ' the constitution, the envy of surrounding 
 nations,' the time cannot be distant for a reform in the 
 schools and universities which have hardly avoided their 
 contempt. . . We commence with Oxford. This 
 University is entitled to precedence, from its venerable 
 antiquity, its ancient fame, the wealth of its endowments, 
 and the importance of its privileges." l 
 
 The plan of campaign is shown in the following 
 sentence: "It is not in demonstrating the imperfection of 
 the present system, that we principally ground a hope 
 of its improvement ; it is in demonstrating its 
 illegality. . . It will not surely be contended that 
 matters should continue as they are, if it can be shown 
 that, as now administered, the University pretends 
 only to accomplish a petty fraction of the ends proposed 
 to it by law, and attempts even this only by illegal 
 means." 
 
 To effect this object Hamilton employs the historical 
 method. " When this article was written," he says, 
 " the history of our oldest Universities had fallen into 
 oblivion ; their parts and principles were not understood, 
 even by themselves ; nay, opinions universally accepted 
 touching the most essential points of their constitution, 
 were not only erroneous, but precisely the reverse of truth. 
 Criticism was therefore requisite ; and a correction of the 
 more important errors, — this a collection of original 
 documents, which I had succeeded in forming, has 
 enabled me (I hope unostentatiously) to accomplish. . . 
 The vices of the present system have been observed, 
 and frequently discussed ; but as it has never been 
 shown in what manner these vices were generated, so 
 it has never been perceived how easily their removal 
 might be enforced. 
 
 " It is generally believed that, however imperfect 
 in itself, the actual mechanism of education organ- 
 ised in these seminaries (Oxford and Cambridge) 
 is a time-honoured and essential part of their being, 
 established upon statute, endowed by the national 
 legislature with exclusive privileges, and inviolable as 
 
 1 Discussions, pp. 401, 402. 
 
42 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 a vested right. We shall prove, on the contrary, that 
 it is as new as it is inexpedient, — not only accidental to 
 the University, but radically subversive of its con- 
 stitution, — without legal sanction, nay, in violation of 
 positive law, — arrogating the privileges exclusively con- 
 ceded to another system, which it has superseded, — and 
 so far from being defensible by those it profits, as a 
 right, that it is a flagrant usurpation, obtained through 
 perjury, and only tolerated from neglect." ' Illegality and 
 perjury — these are the terms which continually recur 
 throughout all the articles. 
 
 Hamilton next sets forth the nature and constitution 
 of the two Universities. 
 
 " Oxford and Cambridge, as establishments for 
 education, consist of two parts, — of the University proper, 
 and the Colleges. The former, original and essential, is 
 founded, controlled and privileged by public authority, for 
 the advantage of the nation. The latter, accessory and 
 contingent, are created, regulated and endowed by private 
 munificence, for the interest of certain favoured 
 individuals. Time was, when the Colleges did not exist, 
 and the University was there ; and were the Colleges again 
 abolished, the University would remain entire. The 
 former, founded solely for education, exists only as it 
 accomplishes the end of its institution ; the latter, 
 founded principally for aliment and habitation, would 
 still exist, were all education abandoned within their 
 walls. The University, as a national establishment, is 
 necessarily open to the lieges in general ; the Colleges, as 
 private institutions, might universally do, as some have 
 actually done, — close their gates upon all, except their 
 foundation members. 
 
 "The University and the Colleges are thus neither 
 identical, nor vicarious of each other. If the University 
 ceases to perform its functions, it ceases to exist ; and the 
 privileges accorded by the nation to the system of public 
 education legally organised in the University, cannot, 
 without the consent of the nation, — far less without the 
 consent of the academical legislature, — be lawfully 
 transferred to the system of private education pre- 
 
 i lb. pp. 400, 403. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 43 
 
 cariously organised in the Colleges, over which neither 
 the State nor the University has any control. They have, 
 however, been unlawfully usurped." 
 
 The result is thus depicted:—" Through the suspension 
 of the University, and the usurpation of its functions and 
 privileges by the Collegial bodies, there has arisen the 
 second of two systems, diametrically opposite to each 
 other. The one, in which the University was paramount, 
 is ancient and statutory ; the other, in which the Colleges 
 have the ascendant, is recent and illegal. In the former, 
 all was subservient to public utility, and the interests of 
 science ; in the latter, all is sacrificed to private monopoly, 
 and to the convenience of the teacher. The former 
 amplified the means of education in accommodation to 
 the mighty end which a University proposes ; the latter 
 limits the end which the University attempts to the 
 capacity of the petty instruments which the intrusive 
 system employs. — The one afforded education in all the 
 Faculties; the other professes to furnish only elementary 
 tuition in the lowest. In the authorised system, the cycle 
 of instruction was distributed among a body of teachers, 
 all professedly chosen for merit, and each concentrating 
 his ability on a single object; in the unauthorised, every 
 branch, necessary to be learned, is monopolised by an 
 individual, privileged to teach all, though probably ill- 
 qualified to teach any. — The old system daily collected 
 into large classes, under the same Professor, the whole 
 youth of the University of equal standing, and thus 
 rendered possible a keen and constant and unremitted 
 competition ; the new, which elevates the Colleges and 
 Halls into so many little Universities, and in these houses 
 distributes the students, without regard to ability or 
 standing, among some fifty Tutors, frustrates all emulation 
 among the members of its small and ill-assorted classes. — 
 In the superseded system, the Degrees in all the Faculties 
 were solemn testimonials that the graduate had 
 accomplished a regular course of study in the public 
 schools of the University, and approved his competence 
 by exercise and examination ; and on these Degrees, only 
 as such testimonials, and solely for the public good, were 
 there bestowed by the civil legislature, great and exclusive 
 privileges, in the Church, in the Courts of Law, and in the 
 
44 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 practice of medicine. In the superseding system, Degrees 
 in all the Faculties, except the lowest department of the 
 lowest, certify neither a course of academical study, nor 
 any ascertained proficiency in the graduate ; and these 
 now nominal distinctions retain their privileges to the 
 public detriment, and for the benefit only of those by 
 whom they have been deprived of their significance." : 
 
 Hamilton having thus stated his case in general 
 terms proceeds to prove it in detail. He first briefly sets 
 forth the system de jure. As was pointed out in the 
 Introductory Chapter of this book, the Corpus Statutqrufn 
 by which Oxford was nominally governed in 1831 was 
 that drawn up under the influence of Laud, and solemnly 
 ratified by King, Chancellor and Convocation in 1636. 
 In 1831 every member of the University was still 
 solemnly bound by oath and subscription to their 
 faithful observance. It will be seen hereafter how 
 much Hamilton makes of this last fact. He then points 
 out that in the original constitution of Oxford, the 
 University was governed and taught by the graduates at 
 large. Professor, Master, Doctor were originally synony- 
 mous. Every graduate was under the obligation of teach- 
 ing publicly, for a certain period, the subjects of his 
 Faculty, for such was the condition involved in the grant 
 of the Degree itself. A Bachelor, or imperfect graduate, 
 was bound to read a course of lectures under a Master or 
 Doctor in his Faculty ; and the Master, Doctor or perfect 
 graduate was, after his promotion, obliged immediately 
 to commence, (incipere,) and to continue for a certain 
 period publicly to teach, (regere,) some at least of the sub- 
 jects appertaining to his Faculty. Such men were called 
 necessary regents, but as there were many voluntary 
 regents, the original period of necessary regency was 
 once again abbreviated, and even a dispensation from 
 actual teaching, during its continuance, commonly 
 allowed. The Regents alone were allowed to enjoy full 
 privileges in University legislation and government ; in 
 Oxford, the Regents constituted the House of Congrega- 
 tion, while the House of Convocation consisted of all the 
 Regents and non-Regents resident in the University. It 
 
 i lb. pp. 404, 405. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 45 
 
 was only by a fiction that those were subsequently held 
 to be Convictores, or actual residents in the University, 
 who retained their names on the books of a Hall or 
 College. 1 
 
 This system of instruction by the graduates at large 
 was modified by the rise of the Professors. The Regents 
 were entitled to exact from their auditors a certain 
 regulated fee. To relieve the scholars of this burden, and 
 to secure the services of able teachers, salaries were some- 
 times given to certain graduates, on consideration of 
 their delivery of lectures without collect or fee. It was 
 to these salaried graduates that the title of Professors 
 was at last peculiarly attributed. The unsalaried Regents 
 found their schools deserted for the gratuitous instruc- 
 tion of the privileged lecturers, and so dispensation from 
 teaching came to be universally accorded to the other 
 graduates. " The scheme thus established in law, though 
 now abolished in fact, is as follows: — Education is 
 afforded in all the Faculties in which Degrees are granted, 
 by the University itself, through its accredited organs, the 
 Public Readers or Professors — a regular attendance on 
 whose lectures during a stated period is in every Faculty 
 indispensably requisite to qualify for a Degree." 
 
 Hamilton next sketches the rise of the Tutorial 
 system which was destined so largely to overshadow 
 the Professorial. He says, " But besides the public 
 and principal means of instruction afforded by the 
 Professors and other Regents in the University, 
 the student was subjected until his first Degree to the 
 subsidiary and private discipline of a Tutor in the 
 Hall or College to which he belonged." This step 
 was rendered necessary by the extreme youthfulness of 
 the undergraduates. " With this, however, as a merely 
 private concern, the University did not interfere ; . . 
 the Tutorial office was viewed as one of very subordinate 
 importance in the statutory system. To commence tutor, 
 it was only necessary for a student to have the lowest 
 Degree in Arts, and that his learning and character should 
 be approved by the Head of his House, or, in the event of 
 controversy on this point, by the Vice-Chancellor. All 
 that was expected of him was ' to imbue his pupils with 
 
 1 lb. note, p. 407. 
 
46 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 good principles and institute them in approved authors ; 
 but above all in the rudiments of religion, and the 
 doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles. . . It is also his 
 duty to contain his pupils within statutory regulations 
 in matters of external appearance, such as their 
 clothes, boots and hair ; which if the pupils are found to 
 transgress, the Tutor for the first, second, and third 
 offence, shall forfeit six and eightpence, and for the fourth, 
 shall be interdicted from his tutorial function by the Vice- 
 Chancellor." " Who could have anticipated from this 
 Statute," exclaims Hamilton, " what the Tutor was ultim- 
 ately to become '? " * 
 
 But if the above be the theory, the existing fact is far 
 different. " The University is in abeyance. . . In none of 
 the Faculties is it supposed that the Professors any longer 
 furnish the instruction necessary for a degree. . . It 
 is not even pretended that Oxford any longer supplies 
 more than the preliminary of an academical education. 
 Even this is not afforded by the University but is aban- 
 doned to the Colleges and Halls; and now, therefore, 
 Oxford is not one public University, but merely a collection 
 of many private schools. The University, in fact, exists 
 only in semblance, for the behoof of the unauthorised 
 seminaries by which it has been replaced, -and which 
 have contrived, under covert of its name, to slip into 
 possession of its public privileges." Hamilton here cites 
 the passage quoted above from p. 183 of Copleston's 
 Reply, that " The University of Oxford is not a national 
 foundation," and remarks that it shows " how completely 
 the University is annihilated,— how completely even all 
 memory of its history, all knowledge of its constitution, have 
 perished at Oxford. He quotes in refutation Dr. Wallis, 
 some time Registrar, who speaks of the " Colleges which 
 we now have being accidental to the corporation of the 
 University." 
 
 Hamilton continues : — "As academical education was 
 usurped by the Tutors from the Professors,— so all 
 tutorial education was usurped by the Fellows from the 
 other graduates. The Fellows exclusively teach all that 
 Oxford now deems necessary to be taught ; . . (but) as 
 
 1 lb. p. 411. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 47 
 
 the Fellowships were not founded for the purposes of 
 teaching, so the qualifications that constitute a Fellow 
 are not those that constitute an instructor. The ' close ' 
 system of Fellowships was, of course, to blame for this 
 result. As at present organised, it is a doubtful problem 
 whether the Tutorial system ought not to be abated as a 
 nuisance. . . But the Tutorial system as now dominant 
 in Oxford is vicious : 1st, in its application, as usurping 
 the place of the Professorial, whose functions it is inade- 
 quate to discharge ; 2nd, in its constitution — the Tutors 
 as now appointed being incompetent even for subsidiary 
 instruction." 1 
 
 Hamilton then turns to his second subject of 
 consideration : — " How the English Universities, and in 
 particular Oxford, passed from a legal to an illegal 
 state, and from public, were degraded into private, 
 schools ? — The answer is precise : This ivas effected solely 
 by the influence, and exclusively for the advantage of the 
 Colleges." To support his contention he gives a sketch 
 of the Collegial system as it sprang up and developed in 
 Paris, Louvain, and Germany, and more especially at 
 Oxford. At the latter place the steps were three : — 
 
 (1) By the beginning of the fifteenth century it had 
 become established by law that all scholars should be 
 members of some College, Hall, or Entry, under a 
 responsible Head. The latter houses of community, 
 variously called Halls, Inns, Hostels, Entries, were 
 governed by statutes established by the University, by 
 whom also they were visited and reformed, and adminis- 
 tered by a Principal, elected by the scholars themselves, 
 but admitted to his office by the Chancellor on finding 
 caution for payment of the rent. In a few Houses, 
 foundations were made for the support of a certain 
 number of indigent scholars, who were incorporated as 
 Fellows (or joint participators in the endowment), under 
 the government of a Head. But a mistake was made in 
 not limiting these benefactions to learners and in- 
 structors, while the subjection of the Colleges to private 
 statutes and their emancipation from the control of the 
 academical authorities, gave them interests apart from 
 
 i lb. p. 417. 
 
48 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 those of the public and rendered them instead of aids to 
 the Universities, the worst impediments to their utility. 
 " The Colleges, into which Commoners, or members not 
 on the foundation, were, until a comparatively modern 
 date, rarely admitted, (and this admission, be it noted, is 
 to the present hour wholly optional) remained for many 
 centuries few in comparison with the Halls. The 
 Reformation played havoc with the Halls. 1 From being 
 thirty at the beginning of the fifteenth century, they had 
 fallen at Oxford to four or five in 1831. The collegial 
 interest, being thus left without a counterpoise, was 
 soon able to establish an absolute supremacy in the 
 University. 2 " 
 
 (2) The Fellows next monopolised the office of Tutor. 
 By University law, graduates were not compelled to lodge 
 in College ; Colleges therefore excluded them to make 
 room for undergraduates who paid fees, and also to prevent 
 their becoming Tutors. Sir William Hamilton, in his 
 supplemental article further elaborates this point.' 
 " All inconveniences and dangers would be obviated, and 
 profitably obviated, if standing on College books were 
 allowed to count for statutory residence in the Univer- 
 sity. By this expedient (which we have failed formerly 
 to notice) a revenue of indefinite amount might be realized 
 to the Colleges, by taxing standing on their books with 
 the dues exigible from actual residence;" 
 
 (3) Collegial tuition thus finally displacing Pro- 
 fessorial tuition, the University was silently annihilated, 
 and the Colleges succeeded to its privileges, and its place. 
 Not that this end was ever clearly proposed, or a line of 
 policy for its attainment ever systematically followed out. 
 But circumstances concurred, and the instinct of self- 
 interest determined a result such as no sagacity would 
 have anticipated as possible. 
 
 It was Laud who changed the original republican 
 polity into an oligarchy. " The government of the Uni- 
 versity (of Oxford) was of old exclusively committed to 
 the Masters and Doctors assembled in Congregation and 
 Convocation; Heads of Houses and College Fellows 
 
 1 In Cambridge they were known as Hostels. These came to an end 
 in 1540. The Halls there are Colleges, i.e. incorporated foundations. 
 lib. p. 432. 3 lb. p. 459. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 49 
 
 shared in academical government only as they were 
 full Graduates, and as they were Regents." Laud left the 
 legislation and the supreme government with the full 
 graduates, but he clothed the Heads of Houses with an 
 authority which rendered them the sole administrators 
 of the University weal. The Vice-Chancellor, (now also 
 necessarily a College Head,) the Heads of Houses and the 
 two Proctors were constituted into a Hebdomadal Meet- 
 ing, and no proposal could be submitted to Congregation 
 or Convocation unless it had been previously sanctioned 
 by the Meeting. The interests and the duties of the 
 Heads were thus diametrically opposed. By statute they 
 were bound to maintain and improve the University or 
 Professorial system of teaching. Their interests lay in 
 the aggrandisement of their own Colleges, and their 
 interests prevailed. " The Professorial system, though 
 still imperfect, could without difficulty have been carried 
 to unlimited perfection ; but the Heads fostered its 
 defects, in order to precipitate its fall. 1 . . With the 
 Colleges and Fellows it was all or nothing. If they 
 were not to continue, as they had been, mere acces- 
 sories to the University, it behoved to quasJi the 
 whole public lectures and to dispense ivith residence 
 after the elementary degree. This the Heads of Houses 
 easily effected." 2 
 
 Hamilton uses much strong language on this point. 
 He says 3 : "The great interests of the nation, of the 
 Church, and of the professions were sacrificed to the 
 paltry ends of a few contemptible Corporations ; and the 
 privileges by law accorded to the public University of 
 Oxford, as the authorised organ of national education, 
 were by its perfidious governors furtively transferred to 
 the unauthorised absurdities of their private — of their 
 domestic discipline"; and again: "The Heads of Houses 
 rather than expose the College usurpations to a discussion 
 by the academical and civil legislatures, not only sub- 
 mitted to the disgrace of leaving their smuggled system 
 of education without a legal sanction, but actually 
 tolerated the reproach of thus converting the great 
 seminary of the English Church into a school of perjury, 
 
 1 p. 438. 2 pp. 440-1. s p. 441. E 
 
50 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 without, as far as we know, an effort either at vindication 
 or amendment." He grounds this charge on the oath 
 which undergraduates took on entrance, and repeated 
 at each step of graduation. The Statutes which are thus 
 sworn to, " establish the University on the system of 
 Professorial instruction, and they do not come under 
 the power of Dispensation." Hamilton quotes from the 
 " Epinomis or explanation of the oatli taken by all" this 
 passage among others : " Finally as the reverence due 
 to their character exempts the Magistrates of the 
 University from the common penalties of other trans- 
 gressors so on them there is incumbent a stronger consci- 
 entious obligation. . . But since the keeping and 
 guardianship of the Statutes is intrusted to their fidelity, 
 if (may it never happen) through their negligence or 
 sloth, they suffer any statutes whatever to fall into 
 desuetude, and silently, as it were to be abrogated, in 
 that event, we decree them guilty of broken faith 
 
 AND OF PERJURY." l 
 
 As a remedy for the evils complained of Hamilton 
 advocated a visitation by the Crown, doubtless in the 
 shape of a Royal Commission. Public opinion, however 
 enlightened, could not "be expected to induce a majority 
 of the collegial bodies voluntarily to surrender the mono- 
 poly they have so long enjoyed, and to descend to a 
 subordinate position, after having occupied a principal. 
 All experience proves, that Universities, like other Cor- 
 porations, can only be reformed from without. A Com- 
 mittee of Visitation has lately terminated its labours on 
 the Scottish Universities : we should anticipate a more 
 important result from a similar, and far more necessary, 
 inquiry into the corruptions of those of England." 2 
 
 The Oxford reply came speedily in the shape of a 
 bulky pamphlet entitled " The Legality of the present 
 Academical System of the University of Oxford asserted 
 against the new Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review." 
 Hamilton made answer in a second article in the 
 Edinburgh Revieiv, 3 which he terms an "amplified re- 
 capitulation" of his first. The reply and the counter- 
 reply are a melancholy example of the tendency of con- 
 
 l lb. p. 445. 2 lb. pp. 448, 449. 
 
 3 Vol. LIV., No. cviii., pp. 478-504. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 51 
 
 troversy to evolve heat rather than light. All criticisms 
 of the Universities are " calumnies," and Hamilton writes 
 thus of the Oxford pamphlet, " The plain scope of the 
 publication is to defend perjury by imposture; and its 
 contents are one tissue of disingenuous concealments, 
 false assertions, forged quotations, and infuriate rail- 
 ings." 1 In an " amplified recapitulation " there is neces- 
 sarily much repetition, but some additional facts of minor 
 importance are given in support of the " formal charge of 
 Illegality, Treason, Perjury and Corruption."* 
 
 It may be noted that Hamilton here makes plain the 
 quarter from which he hoped for deliverance. " A Royal or 
 Parliamentary visitation is the easy and appropriate 
 way of solving the difficulty." Before the Leicester and 
 Laud legislation " the University possessed within itself 
 the ordinary means of reform ; Convocation frequently 
 appointed delegates to inquire into abuses, and to take 
 counsel for the welfare and melioration of the establish- 
 ment. But by bestowing on a private body, like the 
 Heads, the exclusive guardianship of the Statutes, and 
 the initiative of every legal measure, Convocation was 
 deprived of the power of active interference. . . To 
 the administrators of the State, rather than to the 
 administrators of the University are thus primarily to 
 be attributed the corruptions of Oxford. To them, like- 
 wise, must we look for their removal. The Crown is, in 
 fact, bound, in justice to the nation, to restore the Uni- 
 versity against the consequences of its own imprudence 
 and neglect. And as it ought, so is it alone able. . . 
 With a patriot King, a reforming Ministry, and a reformed 
 Parliament, we are confident that our expectations will 
 not be vain. A general scholastic reform will be, in fact, 
 one of the greatest blessings of the political renovation, 
 and, perhaps, the surest test of its value." 3 These high 
 hopes were not realised till 1850, and then only partially. 
 
 As Newman points out, Hamilton also discussed the 
 " religious exclusiveness " of the two Universities. But 
 even when he was affirming the right of Dissenters to 
 admission into the English Universities, he could only 
 view the question from the standpoint which he had 
 
 i Discissions, p. 454. 2 lb. p. 452. 8 lb. pp. 471-472. 
 
52 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 made so peculiarly his own. He makes this fact abund- 
 antly clear by the first sentence of his article • : — " The 
 whole difficulty of the question, in regard to the admission 
 of Dissenters into the English Universities, lies in the 
 present anomalous state — we do not say constitution — of 
 these establishments. In them the University, properly 
 so called, i.e. the necessary national establishment for 
 general education, is at present illegally suspended, and 
 its function usurped, but not performed, by a number of 
 private institutions which have sprung up in accidental 
 connection with it, named Colleges." 
 
 Hamilton thus found himself in a difficulty. " The 
 claim," he writes, " of the Dissenters to admission into the 
 public University cannot justly be refused," but there was, 
 in his view, no public University into which to admit 
 them. He adds : " The actual, that is the present, right of 
 the Colleges, as private establishments, to close their 
 gates on all but members of their own foundations, can- 
 not be denied ; independently of this right, the expediency 
 is worse than doubtful, either, on the one hand, of forcing 
 a College to receive inmates, not bound to accommodate 
 themselves to its religious observances, or, on the other, 
 of exacting from those entitled to admission, conformity 
 to religious observances, in opposition to their faith." 2 
 His solution is to be found in the following words 3 : "We 
 think the difficulty may be overcome, by simply returning 
 to the ancient practice of the English Universities, in 
 regard to the easy establishment of Halls or Hostels." 
 Hamilton's second article on this subject goes over the 
 whole ground again and the charge of perjury appears 
 once more in capital letters. Those who are curious in 
 this last matter may consult the passage beginning 
 "Oxford is now a national school of perjury." 4 
 
 Hamilton afterwards published an Appendix, " On a 
 reform of the English Universities, with especial reference 
 to Oxford ; and limited to the Faculty of Arts." 5 Internal 
 evidence shows that it was written in 1847 and revised in 
 1853. Though it was not published in the Edinburgh 
 Review it was promised in the first of the two articles 
 
 1 Edinburgh Review, Oct. 1834. 2 Discussions, p. 479. 
 
 s lb. p. 489. 4 Ib. pp. 553-554. 5 lb. pp. 742-832. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 53 
 
 already dealt with, and may be most conveniently 
 considered in connexion therewith. It is divided into 
 two parts, Oxford as it is, and Oxford as it might be. 
 The first begins with an elaborate investigation into 
 the merits of the various Oxford Colleges as tested 
 by their successes in the Schools during the ten-year 
 period ending in 1847. Balliol then as now stands at 
 the head of the list, while "four Houses (two Colleges 
 and two Halls), containing above a hundred under- 
 graduates, have during the decade no First Class 
 Honours at all." This in Litterae Humaniores. In 
 Disciplinae Mathematicae, "seven Houses (three Colleges 
 and four Halls), and with an average of undergraduates 
 considerably above two hundred, shew no First Class 
 Honours ; and of these, two (a College and a Hall) have 
 no Honours, even of the lowest" The conclusion is that 
 " some of the Oxford Houses, throwing out the worst, and 
 judging only by the most favourable criterion — that some 
 of the Oxford Houses now perform, as academical instru- 
 ments,— five, — ten,— fifteen, — ay twenty times more than 
 others." By a further table efficiency is proved to vary 
 directly as the qualifications of the Instructors. " Only 
 a single College (Balliol) has all its instructors, and these 
 amount to five, of the Highest Class ; Avhereas, in three, 
 no instructor whatever exhibited a similar Honour." 
 
 Hamilton then passes to " the remarkable contrast 
 of a College with itself, in respect of its comparative 
 efficiency at one period, and its comparative inefficiency 
 at another," and illustrates this fact by the case of 
 Christ Church, during the thirty years from the first 
 institution of classified examinations for the degree in 
 1807, and also the ten years from 1838 to 1847 inclusive. 
 Taking Double Firsts, in the three decades, Christ 
 Church has twenty-nine, whilst all the other Houses 
 have, among them, only thirty-two, i.e. Christ Church 
 has in proportion to its undergraduates 1 in 6, and the 
 rest of the University 1 in 42. In the one decade 
 (1838-1847) things are marvellously changed. " For while 
 the other Houses maintain the proportion of 1 in 45 ; 
 Christ Church, having now no Double First, sinks to 
 the negative proportion of in 186, — disappears." 
 Similar results are obtained by comparing the Honours 
 
54 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 in Litterae Human iores and Mathematics. " Such is the 
 remarkable contrast of a College, in the spirit of study, 
 to itself ; Christ Church, in the former period, rising as 
 proudly far above the level of the University, as, in the 
 latter, it has subsided humbly far beneath it." 
 
 Of the defects here mentioned one has practically 
 disappeared. The cases of a man of inferior degree being 
 elected to a College office either at Oxford or Cambridge 
 are now very rare. The inequality of the work done by 
 the individual Colleges and their fluctuations both in 
 numbers and efficiency still remain, and will some day 
 attract the attention they deserve. 
 
 Oxford as it might be begins with an examination 
 into the abstract ends of Universities in general. These 
 are defined as three : — (1) " to supply competent 
 instruction ; (2) to excite the requisite exertion ; and 
 (3) to grant a true certificate of proficiency." ' The ends 
 are subsequently expanded into : — 
 
 First as to what a University should teach. "As 
 a University cannot teach the omne scibile, and as there 
 is an order and subordination among the departments 
 of knowledge ; a University is bound to secure by pre- 
 ference those studies which are necessary, not only on 
 their own account, but for the sake of ulterior progress. 
 In other words : a University, though it cannot compass 
 the cycle of knowledge, is required to supply its intro- 
 duction. This manifest principle has, however, too 
 frequently been neglected in our modern Universities 
 — nay even reversed. Teaching everything, they teach 
 nothing." 2 
 
 Second end. "A University should supply competent, 
 and exclude incompetent instructors." 
 
 Third end. "A University should place conspicu- 
 ously before the eyes of the student high living examples 
 of erudition and ability." 
 
 Fourth end. "A University is bound to supply 
 such external incitement to the student as may render 
 his studies more pleasurable than their intermission," 
 i.e. there must be "the refreshment of honour, and the 
 stimulus of competition." 
 
 i lb. p. 764. 2 lb. p. 76-5. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 55 
 
 Fifth end. " A University, in its liberal faculty, 
 should prefer those objects of study which call forth 
 the strongest and most unexclusive energy of thought." 
 Its educational exercises should be 1. Examination ; 
 2. Disputation ; 3. Repetition ; 4. Written Composition ; 
 5. Teaching in order to learn ; 6. Conversation with, 
 and questioning of the learned ; 7. Social study. 
 
 Sixth end. "A University is further bound to 
 grant Degrees." 
 
 Seventh end. A University ought to teach the 
 physical sciences because they require costly experi- 
 ments, apparatus and collected objects. 1 Later on he 
 says, " The knowledge which depends on the ocular 
 demonstration of costly collections and experiments; — 
 this knowledge, easy and palpable, requiring an appliance 
 more of the senses than of the understanding, can be 
 fully taught to all, at once, by one competent demonstra- 
 tor. The teaching of the natural sciences, therefore, 
 ought to be Professional." 
 
 Eighth end. " A University ought to supply a comple- 
 ment of books with every convenience for consultation 
 and reading." 
 
 Ninth end. " A University should likewise possess a 
 competent board of regulation and academical patronage." 
 
 Tenth end. " A University should be able to offer 
 some not inadequate reward for the ability and learning 
 required in its instructors," in other words, teaching 
 ought to be made a career. 
 
 Eleventh end. A University ought to have a Pension 
 Fund. 
 
 Twelfth end and last. A University should, if 
 possible, afford to its alumni the means of living 
 academically together. 2 But if certain conditions are 
 not fulfilled, the evil of such an arrangement may greatly 
 outweigh the good ; but the enforcement of this regula- 
 tion should not act as a tax. The students should be 
 able to live as cheaply in the privileged Houses of a 
 University as they could in private lodgings. 
 
 i Hamilton regarded the Natural Sciences as peculiarly fitted to the 
 Pass or Poll Man, whom he would retain (p. 761). 
 
 2 lb. p. 785. 
 
56 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Third Part is entitled " Comparison of the Means 
 now at work, especially in Oxford, and the Ends there 
 actually effected, with the Ends which a University ought 
 to accomplish." The great criticism here is that Oxford 
 and the rest of the Universities do not teach Philosophy. 
 
 Oxford is next tested by each of the above twelve ends, 
 and is found to be deficient in every case. 
 
 Finally Hamilton turns to " Oxford as it might be." 
 " I do not mean," he writes, " to hazard the suggestion 
 of measures which would realise the ideal of a perfect 
 University. It is self-evident that if Fellowships and 
 Headships, etc., were made the just rewards of academical 
 merit, these offices would constitute an apparatus of 
 powerful agencies, which, as they have hitherto impeded, 
 would now be turned to promote the ends of the 
 University. But this, however I may wish, I would not 
 venture to propose." The present generation of reformers 
 may with good reason be more courageous. 
 
 Hamilton continues, " In restoring the public reality 
 of education against the private and usurping semblance 
 — in restoring the University against the Colleges, we 
 ought not to imitate the precedent of the Houses, we 
 ought not to swamp them. Our policy should be directly 
 the converse. Let ' Reform ' not ' Rescind ' be the word. 
 Restoring the University we should not supersede the 
 Colleges ; but, on the contrary, enable the best of the Col- 
 leges to do far more than they can now accomplish, and 
 compel the worst to become the rivals of the best." A 
 two-fold division of the subject is then made — into (a) 
 Things primary or constitutive; and (b) Things secondary 
 or complemental. Under (a) are included (1) The Objects 
 of Instruction ; (2) The Instructors ; (3) The Instruction ; 
 (4) The Excitement to study; (5) The Degree, or certificate 
 of proficiency. 
 
 Under (1) Hamilton reiterates his complaint of the 
 omission of Philosophy from the curriculum. 
 
 Under (2) there is a long discussion of the rival merits 
 of Professorial and Tutorial teaching, i.e. of teaching by 
 the University and teaching by the Colleges, the main 
 contention being " that in so far as higher individual 
 learning and ability afford a superior instruction, the 
 Professorial system, if properly organised, is preferable 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 57 
 
 to the Tutorial, even at the best." But in so far as the 
 efficiency of an education depends on the greater number 
 of such teachers, the Professorial is inferior to the 
 Tutorial. Each has thus its separate utilities. Hamilton's 
 suggested plan was " to draw the Tutors from their isola- 
 tion in the private House, and to employ them in larger 
 or smaller pluralities, in exercising the academical alumni 
 collected into University or public classes. . . A 
 plurality of Tutors can do what can be done by no 
 individual Professor." The Tutors were of course to take 
 the Primary Highest Honours, but their appointment 
 was not to be withdrawn from the Collegial Head. " At 
 the same time, in the smaller Colleges, it might be advan- 
 tageous, if two at least combined, and had in common a 
 single complement of Tutors." Hamilton even argued 
 that one condition — a sufficiency of academically 
 authorised books, gave a decided advantage to the 
 Tutorial over the Professorial system of education. 
 
 He winds up thus : " It would in my humble opinion 
 be far safer to elevate the education at Oxford by Tutors, 
 than, subverting that, to return to its old education by 
 Professors, (still statutory though this be,) even with the 
 best prospects of improvement." In a subsequently writ- 
 ten Note he further upholds this proposition and expresses 
 his disapproval of Mr. Bonamy Price's views as set forth 
 in his pamphlet, " Suggestions for the extension of Pro- 
 fessorial teaching in the University of Oxford." There 
 would thus be collegio-tutorial classes for the students to 
 begin with, to be followed by academico-tutorial classes 
 of a more advanced character. It follows of necessity 
 that the University is bound to select special books, as 
 the materials of explanation by the Tutors in the Col- 
 leges, and of exercise by the Tutors in the Schools. For 
 this work a Board of Studies must be instituted. The 
 academical courses collected and composed by such Boards 
 in other Universities are " some of the most valuable con- 
 tributions which have ever been made to learning and 
 philosophy." 
 
 A minor reform which Hamilton incidentally advo- 
 cates was the abolition of the various grades — Nobleman, 
 Fellow Commoner, etc. He would have had all students 
 admitted on a footing of equality as Pensioners. 
 
58 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Hamilton had his own ideas about Examinations and 
 Degrees. He viewed with the greatest suspicion both the 
 new Triposes at Cambridge and the new Schools at 
 Oxford, which he regarded as an imitation of them. His 
 peculiar views on Mathematics have already been stated. 
 He was equally severe on Science. " The Natural 
 Sciences," he says, " are essentially easy ; requiring com- 
 paratively little talent for their promotion, and only 
 the most ordinary capacity for their acquisition. Their 
 study, therefore, does not cultivate the mind." He would 
 accordingly have given degrees of different value for 
 different subjects. The highest honours he would 
 have confined to two departments, Humane Letters t 
 and PJiilosojjJrtj. Humane Letters " should in a great 
 measure be limited to the domain of Greek and Roman 
 letters." Philosophy would comprehend in its proximate 
 sphere, Psychology, Logic, Morals, Politics; in a less 
 proximate sphere, Grammar, Rhetoric, Poetic ; and in 
 a remoter sphere, Mathematics and the Natural Sciences, 
 These last, therefore, would not be rewarded with the 
 highest honours. Our author's views on Examinations, 
 including the comparative rating of books and the 
 adding together of the marks obtained in a first and 
 second part, may strike the reader as fantastic, but 
 Hamilton at least saw the necessity of making Examin- 
 ations systematic and scientific, and he held that the 
 new Schools at Oxford were neither the one nor the 
 other. In fact if they were persisted in, he threatened 
 to withdraw his opinion that " Oxford was the British 
 University susceptible of the easiest and most effectual 
 regeneration." 
 
 Things secondary and supplemental include (1) a 
 scheme of academical Patronage and Regulation accom- 
 modated to the circumstances of the English Universities, 
 and (2) a scheme for the erection of new Halls. New 
 Halls should be erected (a) to supply additional demand 
 for entrance, (b) to prevent a slovenly tuition in the older 
 Houses, (c) to keep down expense and afford a cheaper 
 education to poor students, (d) to accommodate Dissenters, 
 (e) to reward academical zeal and ability especially in 
 their Headships. 
 
 Other measures under this head are only named. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 59 
 
 They are a general taxation of the necessary collegia I 
 expenses, the means of remunerating the academical 
 instructors, of retaining talent in the University, of 
 pensioning emeriti, libraries, musea. 
 
 According to the Dictionary of National Biography 
 Sir William Hamilton's articles in the Edinburgh Review 
 had one astonishing result. They led to an attempt at 
 legislation in the House of Lords. It was the Earl of 
 Radnor who took action. The noble lord had already 
 distinguished himself for his zeal in the cause of religious 
 liberty, having in 1835 brought in a Bill to do away 
 with subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles at 
 the Universities. In the year 1837 he introduced the 
 Bill to which the Dictionary of National Biography 
 refers. It recited that the Colleges and Halls estab- 
 lished at Oxford and Cambridge are possessed of great 
 estates and funds, bestowed with the intention of 
 providing for poor and indigent persons, of promoting 
 religion and virtue, and of encouraging learning and the 
 liberal arts ; that many of such Colleges and Halls were 
 founded in times of remote antiquity, and nearly all 
 of them before the reign of Queen Elizabeth ; and that 
 the statutes prescribed by the original founders had been 
 altered, and latterly many even of their more recent 
 statutes had also been long and habitually disregarded 
 in the ordinary administration of their affairs. The 
 Bill accordingly enacted that Commissioners should 
 be appointed by the King, under the Great Seal, to 
 enquire into the amount, nature and application of the 
 estates and funds of the said Colleges and Halls, and into 
 the said statutes and the ordinary administration of the 
 affairs of each College and Hall, and also how far the said 
 estates and funds might be made more conducive to the 
 objects intended by the founders and benefactors, and for 
 which they were endowed, and to the diffusion of religion 
 and virtue, and the encouragement of learning and the 
 liberal arts. 
 
 The second reading of this Bill was moved by the 
 Earl of Radnor on April 11th, and it was the redoubtable 
 Bishop Copleston himself who moved the customary 
 amendment that it be read a second time that day six 
 months. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Duke 
 
60 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 of Wellington followed on the same side, while Lord 
 Holland, Viscount Melbourne, and Lord Brougham 
 expressed their approval of the proposed measure. The 
 amendment was carried without a division, but the 
 Earl of Radnor, Lords Holland, Brougham, Hatherton, 
 Sommerhill and Duncannon entered a protest against 
 the decision of the House. 
 
 The noble Earl with astonishing pertinacity renewed 
 his efforts on May 8th, and this time moved for the 
 appointment of a Select Committee to enquire into the 
 practice and statutes of the Colleges and Halls in the 
 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and to report 
 whether any legislative measure was necessary to enable 
 the governing bodies to make alterations and amend- 
 ments. 1 Dr. Copleston again took part in the debate. 
 The Duke of Wellington and the Marquis Camden, the 
 Chancellors of the two Universities, having intimated 
 that the greater portion of the Colleges were willing and 
 desirous of entering upon a revision of their statutes 
 through the instrumentality of their Visitors, the Earl of 
 Radnor withdrew his motion. 
 
 Nor had this question of University Reform gone un- 
 noticed in the House of Commons. On May 4th, Mr. 
 Pryme, 2 one of the members for the Borough of Cambridge, 
 moved the House of Commons to address the King to 
 issue a Commission to enquire into the state of the 
 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge and the respective 
 Colleges therein. Mr. Edward Bulwer Lytton seconded 
 the motion. Mr. Spring Rice, the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer, who was the other member for the Borough 
 of Cambridge, suggested that the Crown should be left to 
 act on its own sense of public duty without the inter- 
 position of the House, and intimated that he should move 
 
 1 This Earl of Radnor seems to have been a remarkable man. Cooper 
 (Annals, Vol. IV., p. 607, note) records that as Mr. Bickersteth, and 
 one of the four Senior Fellows of Caius College, he had been a Trustee of 
 the Perse foundation. About 1830 he voluntarily returned to the College 
 nearly £800 which had been paid him out of the Perse fund, but to which 
 he did not consider himself justly entitled. 
 
 2 Mr. George Pryme, Professor of Political Economy in the University 
 of Cambridge, was elected for the Borough of Cambridge along with Mr. 
 Spring Rice in 1832, after the passage of the Reform Bill. He and his 
 colleague were re-elected in 1835. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 61 
 
 the previous question if his colleague pressed the motion 
 to a division. After an explanatory speech from Mr. 
 Goulbourn, one of the members for the University of 
 Cambridge, who stated that the Universities themselves 
 would make such regulations as the change of circum- 
 stances required, the motion was withdrawn, Mr. Pryme 
 expressing a hope that Ministers would take the necessary 
 steps on their own responsibility. 
 
 Turning aside from the field of practical politics, we 
 may now return to Sir "William Hamilton and endeavour 
 to determine the precise value of his services to the cause 
 of University Reform. His criticism of Oxford was based 
 on two grounds, the one historical, and the other legal. 
 How far was he right in his history and in his law ? 
 
 As for the history let us listen to the defence 
 made in reply to Hamilton by Mark Pattison, in his book, 
 " Suggestions on Academical Organisation." l Pattison 
 as Rector of Lincoln College, was himself one of the 
 Heads of Houses whom Hamilton had so unsparingly 
 attacked. He writes: — 
 
 " Who is in fault for the renunciation by the Uni- 
 versity of her high vocation (the encouragement of learn- 
 ing as such), and her having taken up with the easier 
 business of schoolkeeping? Not, most assuredly, the 
 University itself. This opinion is almost universal ; but 
 it is a historical error. It is, indeed, an error of long 
 standing, but perhaps the articulate enunciation of it 
 was not made before the celebrated attacks on Oxford 
 in the Edinburgh Review, and particularly in an article 
 " On the State of the English Universities," in June 
 1831. At that time, the history, in fact, of Oxford, and 
 the theory of University education, were all but unknown 
 in this country. Sir W. Hamilton, with an antiquarian 
 learning on the subject which is still unequalled, and 
 with a firm grasp of the principles of education, came 
 forward, and in his masterly essays put both the theory 
 and the fact in a clear and striking light. But his 
 righteous indignation at the degeneracy of his own 
 University led him into one great and striking injustice. 
 He argues throughout that the higher courses of the 
 
 i pp. 127-129. 
 
62 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Professors were discouraged, and finally put down, by 
 the Heads of Colleges, on system, from motives of self- 
 interest, in order to give the monopoly to the Fellow- 
 Tutor. This is certainly not the history of the sinking 
 of the level of instruction in Oxford. The level of 
 learning fell in the Universities because it first fell in 
 the National Church. It fell in both because the 
 sovereign authority used its power over both Church 
 and Universities for political ends. . . There was 
 an abundance of new life, and a promise of a glorious 
 classical revival in Oxford, at the beginning of the 
 sixteenth century, when Corpus and Cardinal (Christ 
 Church) Colleges were founded as homes for the new 
 studies. . . These prospects of a new life were 
 crushed in the next century, not by any malfaisaflce 
 within, but by the violence of the ecclesiastical revolution 
 without. So far from the death of learning in Oxford 
 having been occasioned by the corrupting influence of 
 over-endowment, it died hard, and yielded up its breath 
 not without many a struggle. The grasp of ecclesiastical 
 tyranny was on its throat ; and the twenty-three years of 
 Leicester's Chancellorship (1565-1588) left it pretty much 
 what it remained up to the present century, without 
 independence, without the dignity of knowledge, without 
 intellectual ambition, the mere tool of a political party. 
 . . It was the Government, and not the University 
 itself, which crushed that academical freedom, without 
 which learning cannot flourish. It was the Government 
 which closed our gates to Nonconformists, and compelled 
 us to forget our proper duty, by occupying us as a 
 spiritual police to maintain an arbitrary juste milieu 
 of Church government and doctrine. When Sir W. 
 Hamilton pretends that it was the Board of Heads who 
 in the seventeenth century silenced the Professors, he 
 forgets that, long before the Laudian Statutes of 1636, 
 the Professors had ceased to have a class, because there 
 were no longer any students sufficiently advanced to 
 attend them." ' 
 
 1 The same question is argued from another point of view by the Rev. 
 W. M. Campion in Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 173-175. "The Tutor" 
 says the writer, "followed the text-book"; in other words it was the 
 printing-press which displaced the Professors. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 63 
 
 The historical controversy may be summed up in the 
 following passage from Prof. Goldwin Smith 1 : — 
 
 " The Colleges in absorbing the University saddled 
 it with their mediaeval statutes, with the local and family 
 preferences which founders had thought themselves at 
 liberty to indulge in the selection of literary almsmen, 
 but which were fatal to the fair bestowal of prizes, or the 
 right selection of Tutors ; with restrictions on the 
 possession of property suitable only to eleemosynary 
 institutions ; with the mediaeval rule of celibacy ; with 
 clericism, which assumed a new significance when the 
 Clergy, from being a great estate embracing all the 
 intellectual callings, became at the Reformation, in the 
 strict sense, a profession, animated by strong professional 
 feelings, and placed in constant antagonism to Dissent ; 
 with a mediaeval rule of life and a mediaeval rule of 
 study, which growing obsolete, and being inevitably 
 cast aside, notwithstanding the oaths taken to observe 
 them, left nothing but sinecurism in their place. The 
 conjoint operation of celibacy, clericism and sinecurism 
 reduced the educational staff of the Colleges (which, the 
 Professoriate having fallen into total decay, was also that 
 of the University) to a few clergymen waiting in College 
 for College livings, and filling up the interval by a 
 perfunctory discharge of the duties for which they 
 received Tutors' fees. All studies but those connected 
 with the clerical profession, or adopted by the Clergy — 
 that is to say the learned languages and divinity — fell 
 into decay. The Faculties of Law and Medicine dwindled 
 to shadows, the substance departing to the Inns of Court 
 and the London Hospitals. Even the Faculty of Theology 
 itself, the Anglican Church having developed no scientific 
 theology to replace that of the Middle Ages, became 
 almost a name. 
 
 "The connection between Church and State cut us off 
 from the Nonconformists, a growing element in the 
 nation ; and in addition to this, clericism bound us to the 
 political party to which the Clergy were allied, and which, 
 at the same time, as the party opposed to change, was 
 most congenial to the holders of large sinecure endow- 
 ments. 
 
 i Reorganisation, p 6. 
 
64 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 "It was mainly the exclusively clerical character of 
 the University that shut the door against Science. At 
 Cambridge, through a combination of historical accidents, 1 
 the clerical spirit was less strong, and a turn had been 
 given to study, at a critical moment, by Newton." 
 
 Hamilton, then, is admitted to be right in the main 
 as to his facts, though in his explanations as to the causes 
 of some of these facts, he is open to correction. His 
 statement of the legal position has never been refuted. 
 Dean Peacock, in his " Observations on the Statutes " 
 thus describes what happened. 2 " The process of change, 
 by which we have passed from the conditions of manners, 
 opinions, and knowledge, which the ancient Statutes 
 contemplated, to those which prevail in modern times, 
 has been so gradual, as to be nearly insensible to con- 
 temporary observation, and to present no point or period 
 of transition sufficiently marked and considerable to call 
 the attention of those who were subjected to their 
 enactments very suddenly or forcibly to the great 
 separation which time had effected between the written 
 law and practice of the University. It will be found, 
 however, that those provisions of the Statutes which 
 affected the personal rights of members of the same 
 society, were generally enforced by the vigilant obser- 
 vation of those who had a direct or indirect interest in 
 the penalties attached to their violation, whilst the most 
 solemn injunctions which were addressed to their con- 
 sciences merely, and not to their personal interests or 
 fears, have been in many cases either entirely disregarded, 
 or their observation has been disguised under some 
 unmeaning form and ceremony, which satisfied the letter, 
 whilst it totally violated the spirit of the law. . . 
 The substantial fact remains established of the great 
 separation which exists between the written and 
 obligatory law and the actual practice of the University." 
 
 Though Hamilton was right in his legal criticism, 
 he made it in an exaggerated and offensive form. The 
 
 i The story of some of these " historical accidents " has been told in 
 the Introductory Chapter. Incidentally they explain why Cambridge 
 has always been somewhat more liberal than Oxford. 
 
 2 pp. 59-61, 73. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 65 
 
 charges of illegality, usurpation and perjury, especially 
 the last, are made with wearisome reiteration. The lapse 
 of time, as Peacock so clearly explains, had made much of 
 the statute law obsolete both in the Universities and Col- 
 leges, and therefore impossible of fulfilment, and the 
 oaths so to do equally impossible. It was a wrong state 
 of things and its abolition was unduly delayed, but per- 
 jury is an offence against the law punishable with seven 
 years penal servitude, and to lay it to the charge of men 
 who had erred partly through ignorance and partly 
 through indolence repels the reader. 
 
 Sir Leslie Stephen in the Dictionary of National 
 Biography, says, "Hamilton's tone in controversy was 
 anything but conciliatory and certainly not free from 
 pedantry, but his aim was always high, and he stirred 
 some important questions." The criticism is just but the 
 praise is decidedly grudging. We may set against it a 
 sentence from Abbott and Campbell's Life of Jowett — 
 " The first beginnings of the movement for reform 
 at Oxford may be traced to Sir William Hamilton's 
 articles in the Edinburgh Bevietv of 1831-1834." l 
 Even in controversy Hamilton was able on occasion 
 to show himself both moderate and reasonable. The 
 opening paragraphs of the most important of all his 
 articles, that " On the state of the English Univer- 
 sities," contain these words : " We have no hesitation 
 in affirming, that comparing what it actually is with 
 what it possibly could be, Oxford is, of all academical 
 institutions, at once the most imperfect and the most 
 perfectible." Further on he writes, " That there is much 
 of good, much worthy of imitation by other Universities, 
 in the present spirit and the present economy of Oxford, 
 we are happy to acknowledge. . . We are no enemies of 
 Collegial residence, no enemies of Tutorial discipline. . . 
 A Tutorial system in subordination to a Professorial 
 (which Oxford formerly enjoyed) we regard as affording 
 the condition of an absolutely perfect University." At the 
 end of the article there are further words of conciliation. 
 " The strictures, which a conviction of their truth, and 
 our interest in the honour and utility of this venerable 
 school, have constrained us to make on the conduct of the 
 
 ^ol. I., p. 172. 
 
66 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Hebdomadal Meeting, we mainly apply to the Heads of 
 Houses of a former generation, and even to them solely 
 in their corporate capacity. Of the late and present 
 members of this body, we are happy to acknowledge, that, 
 during the last twenty-five years, so great an improve- 
 ment has been effected through their influence, that in 
 some essential points Oxford may, not unworthily, be 
 proposed as a pattern to most other Universities. But 
 this improvement, though important, is partial, and can 
 only receive its adequate development by a return to the 
 statutory combination of the Professorial and Tutorial 
 systems." 
 
 As Hamilton grew older, his tone grew still milder. 
 His Appendix on the Reform of the English Universities, 
 to which the finishing touches were put in 1853, reads 
 very differently from the Edinburgh Review article of 
 1831. The quotations already given from it prove this to 
 be the fact, and there are passages which may be cited in 
 confirmation. Hamilton saw clearly that the Collegiate 
 system must be maintained. " Were the institutions of 
 domestic superintendence and Tutorial instruction even 
 in themselves defective, I should be unwilling to super- 
 sede them ; for the simple reason that they are already 
 established, and consuetudinary." 1 
 
 " We are social animals," he exclaims. " He, there- 
 fore, often studies better, who does not study alone. It is 
 in conforming to this requisite of our human nature, that 
 those Universities which compel their alumni to live 
 in common, can best vindicate the utility of academical 
 Houses ; for in the community of a college life the 
 social conditions of study are most fully and certainly 
 supplied." 2 Hamilton's own plan of combining the 
 University and the Colleges, the Professorial and the 
 Tutorial systems, is only sketched in outline in the 
 Appendix ; but so far as one can judge, where so much is 
 left for the reader to fill in, it is extremely moderate, being 
 practically the Scottish system modified by the College 
 Tutors acting as Assistant Professors, with the advantage 
 on the side of the older Universities because of the 
 much larger number of subsidiary teachers who would be 
 available. 
 
 l Discussions, p. 759. 2 It. p. 779. 
 
THE SECOND ATTACK. 67 
 
 Hamilton by means of his historical researches 
 gained a clear view of Oxford University as a whole, 
 and of the Collegiate system as a whole. The University 
 stood before his mind as a unity which had of old 
 the power of self-government and self-improvement, and 
 he was convinced that to become an institution at once 
 national and worthy of the nation, Oxford must again 
 become such a unity. In his first article he does not 
 expend himself on detailed suggestions, but deals with 
 first principles and fundamental facts. In his Appendix 
 he makes detailed suggestions, but his aim is always 
 " to raise the University to its ancient supremacy above 
 the Colleges — or rather to raise the Colleges to their 
 proper level." ' 
 
 In this grasp of general principles lies, I think, the 
 secret of the influence which he has undoubtedly exer- 
 cised over those who have come after him. Newman, 
 Lyell, Whewell, Donaldson, Bonamy Price, Goldwin 
 Smith, Mark Pattison, Lord Curzon, all quote him or 
 are influenced by him. The Cambridge University Com- 
 mission Report mentions him by name. The Oxford 
 Report gives silent testimony to him. Page after page 
 of it, as Lord Curzon points out, shows the anxiety 
 of the Commissioners for the right adjustment of the 
 relations between the University and the Colleges, to 
 the need for which Hamilton is admittedly the first 
 to have called attention. Such adjustment is a far- 
 reaching principle, not a mere correction of abuses, nor an 
 improvement in details. When the Universities are re- 
 modelled in accordance with this principle, as assuredly 
 they some day will be, Sir William Hamilton will come 
 into his own, and be recognised as the Father of Univer- 
 sity Reform, Sir Leslie Stephen and the Dictionary of 
 National Biography notwithstanding. 
 
 One curious fact may be called attention to in con- 
 cluding this chapter. Hamilton has the following scorn- 
 ful Note on p. 792 of his Appendix :—" The Rev. Mr. Sewell, 
 Tutor of New College, and otherwise an able man, has of 
 late gravely proposed, — to send out to the great towns of 
 England tutorial missions, from the bodies thus so 
 
 ip. 755. 
 
68 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 brightly illuminating Oxford ; professedly, in order, that 
 any change may be averted from the system of education 
 which has wrought so admirably in that University, and, 
 at the same time, to communicate the benefit of such 
 system to the lieges at large ! " The Rev. Mr. Sewell may 
 have acted from mixed motives, but if this account is 
 correct, he must be credited with having first foreseen the 
 possibility of the University Extension Movement. This 
 movement, which began at Cambridge, has been entered 
 into with extraordinary success by the sister University. 
 It is no part of this book to treat of any reform outside 
 the Universities, but those who are interested in the 
 subject may profitably consult what Lord Curzon says 
 about it in his Principles and Methods of University 
 Reform. 1 
 
 1 See pp. 54-56. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 UNIVERSITY v. COLLEGES (CAMBRIDGE). 
 
 As Cardinal Newman furnished an introduction for 
 the second chapter, so may he furnish one for our fourth. 
 In his " Rise and Progress of Universities," ] which forms 
 the first part of his third volume of "Historical Sketches," 
 near the beginning of the XVth Chapter, he again refers 
 to the controversy begun by the Edinburgh Review as 
 " the dispute which has been carried on at intervals in 
 the British Universities for the last fifty years." He con- 
 tinues, " It began in the pages of the Edinburgh Review, 
 which at that time might in some sense be called the 
 organ of the University of Edinburgh. Twenty years 
 later, if my memory does not play me false, it was 
 renewed in the same quarter ; then it was taken up at 
 Cambridge, and lately it was going on briskly between 
 some of the most able members of the University of 
 Oxford. Now what has been the point of dispute between 
 the combatants'? This, — whether a University should be 
 conducted on the system of Professors, or on the system 
 of Colleges and College Tutors. . . The party of the 
 North and of progress have ever advocated the Profes- 
 sorial system, as it has been called, and have pointed in 
 their own behalf to the practice of the middle ages and of 
 modern Germany and France; the party of the South and 
 of prescription have ever stood up for the Tutorial or 
 Collegiate system, and have pointed to Protestant Oxford 
 and Cambridge, where it has almost or altogether super- 
 seded the Professorial." Two remarks may be made on 
 this extract. The first is that the controversy here 
 referred to was not at bottom a difference of opinion 
 about two rival methods of teaching ; what was really in 
 the minds of the disputants was whether the University 
 should be restored to its old supremacy, or whether the 
 
 i This consists of a series of articles contributed to the Catholic 
 University Gazette in 1854, and then published in 1856 under the title of 
 Office and Work of Universities. In 1872 it was republished under the title 
 given in the text. 
 
70 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Colleges should retain the domination which they had in 
 fact, if not in name, won over the University. When 
 Newman heads his XVth Lecture, " Professors and 
 Tutors," the title is really equivalent to that of " Univer- 
 sity v. Colleges," which is prefixed to the present chapter. 
 The second remark is that Sir William Hamilton, though 
 he was the foremost fighter for the ancient status of the 
 University, as has been made abundantly clear, yet 
 insisted that the Collegiate system must be retained, the 
 worst Colleges being brought up, if possible, to the level 
 of the best. 
 
 The dispute, says Newman, was taken up at Cam- 
 bridge. The way in which this took place was roundabout 
 and curious. In 1845 Sir Charles Lyell (at that time 
 plain Mr. Lyell) published a book entitled "Travels in 
 North America." It consisted almost entirely of geological 
 observations on that country, but in chapter xiii. the 
 author describes how he went to the Annual Meeting of 
 American Geologists at Boston. During his stay in that 
 city he was bombarded with questions as to the constitu- 
 tion of the English Universities. These questions he 
 found it very difficult to answer. " The more," he says, 
 " I endeavoured to explain the present state of our 
 academical course of study, and the peculiar organisation 
 of the corps of teachers to whom its superintendence is 
 confided, the more strange it appeared to my New Eng- 
 land friends ; and I myself became the more aware of its 
 distinctive and anomalous character, when contrasted 
 with the methods followed elsewhere." He continues, 
 "Many who have been educated, like myself, at Oxford, 
 are ignorant of the system of education formerly acted 
 upon in our English Universities, and of the real nature 
 and causes of the present state of things. I shall, there- 
 fore, attempt to give, in the remainder of this chapter, a 
 brief account of the leading peculiarities of our former 
 and present academical machinery, and to point out its 
 inevitable consequence, the very limited range of studies 
 which can be pursued, so long as things remain unal- 
 tered." l Lyell gives the following description of the 
 College system : " In the first place, then, the mass of 
 
 i Travels in North America, Vol. I., p. 271. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 71 
 
 students or undergraduates at Oxford is divided into 
 twenty-four separate communities or Colleges, very 
 unequal in numbers, the residents in each varying from 
 10 in the smaller to about 140 in the larger Colleges, and 
 the whole business of educating these separate sections 
 of the youth is restricted to the Tutors of the separate 
 Colleges. Consequently, two or three individuals, and 
 occasionally a single instructor, may be called upon to 
 give lectures in all the departments of human knowledge 
 embraced in the academical course of four years. If the 
 College be small, there is only occupation and salary 
 sufficient to support one Tutor; any attempt, therefore, 
 to sub-divide the different branches of learning and 
 sciences among distinct teachers is abandoned. . . In 
 a few of the larger Colleges, indeed, some rude approach 
 to such a partition is made, so far as to sever the mathe- 
 matical from the classical studies; but even then the 
 Tutors in each division are often called upon, in the 
 public examinations, to play their part in both depart- 
 ments. Thus, a single instructor gives lectures or 
 examines in the writings of the Greek and Roman 
 historians, philosophers, and poets, together with logic, 
 the elements of mathematics and theology. . . In the 
 next place, I may state, that the choice of teachers is by 
 no means left open to free competition, like the Professor- 
 ships in most ancient and modern Universities. The 
 College Tutors are selected from graduates who are on the 
 foundation of their respective Colleges, and who may have 
 obtained their appointment originally, some because they 
 happened to be the founder's kin, or were educated at a 
 particular school, others because they were born in a 
 particular town, county or diocese ; a few only being 
 selected for merit, or as having distinguished themselves 
 in examinations open to all candidates. Most of these 
 teachers forfeit their Fellowship, and most probably with 
 it their office of Tutor, if they should marry, or if, after a 
 certain number of years, they do not embrace the clerical 
 profession. They also look to preferment in the Church 
 from their position in their College, so that they have 
 every inducement to regard the business of teaching as a 
 temporary calling. Their office as instructors is, in short, 
 a mere stepping-stone to something else ; and they hope 
 
72 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 to gain their reward, not when they are superannuated, 
 but when they are still in the prime of life. In fact, their 
 promotion is so contrived as at once to cut short the 
 career of usefulness in which they may have hitherto 
 distinguished themselves." ' 
 
 Lyell then goes into a disquisition as to the origin of 
 these evils. In this he follows Sir William Hamilton (to 
 whose article of June 1831 he refers in a footnote on 
 p. 278), but he gives his own account of the struggle 
 over the Examination Statute at Oxford in 1800 (in which 
 he naturally objects to the exclusion of the Natural 
 Sciences) and the events which followed after. He refers 
 to Dr. Peacock's book on the Statutes of the University 
 of Cambridge (p. 156) for an account of similar develop- 
 ments at Cambridge. Lyell is especially interesting in 
 what he says about the events of the year 1839. " In the 
 year 1839," he writes, " a last and most vigorous attempt 
 was made at Oxford to restore the functions of the 
 professorial body, which had now become contracted 
 within the narrowest limits. 2 The Professors of Experi- 
 mental Philosophy, Comparative Anatomy, Chemistry, 
 Mineralogy, Geology, Botany, Geometry and Astronomy, 
 sent in a representation to the Heads of Houses, in which 
 they declared their inability to discharge the duties which 
 they had undertaken, notwithstanding their unabated 
 zeal and devotion. They accompanied their petition with 
 a printed statistical table, showing how the number of 
 their classes had fallen off. It appeared that the Anatomy 
 class had dwindled between the years 1819 and 1838 to less 
 than half, and that of Astronomy to one-fifth of its original 
 numbers. The same had happened to the class of 
 Chemistry, many others having declined in like ratio. A 
 majority of the Heads of Houses were favourable to a 
 reform, and consequently proposed a new examination 
 
 i lb. pp. 272-274. 
 
 2 A similar attempt was made at Cambridge in 1843, when a Syndicate 
 was appointed " to consider whether it is desirable to take any measures, 
 and if so what, to secure a correspondence between the Mathematical 
 and Classical Examinations of the University, and the Mathematical and 
 Classical Lectures of the University Professors." The Syndicate having 
 made a report, a Grace to carry its recommendations into effect was 
 proposed on March 31st and rejected in the Non-Regent House by 27 
 non-placets to 14 placets. (Cooper, Annals, IV., pp. 659-660.) 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 73 
 
 statute, in which there was a provision requiring attend- 
 ance on at least two series of professorial lectures, as a 
 preliminary qualification for the Bachelor of Arts' Degree. 
 . . . But it was now too late — reform was beyond the 
 power of the Hebdomadal Board. Several academical 
 generations had grown up under the new order of things. 1 
 The Collegiate and private Tutors were interested in 
 opposing the new provisions, and they were accordingly 
 rejected in Convocation. Yet while they threw out that 
 part of the proposed Statute which would have gone far 
 towards reviving the Professorial Chairs, they passed 
 another part requiring the Professors of Astronomy, 
 Experimental Philosophy, Chemistry, Geology, Minera- 
 logy, Anatomy, Botany, Medicine, Civil Law, English 
 Law, Greek, Arabic, Sanscrit, Anglo - Saxon, Poetry, 
 Modern History, and Political Economy, to deliver regular 
 courses of lectures. They were, in fact, bound not only 
 by ancient statutes to require the teachers above enumer- 
 ated faithfully to discharge their duty, but since the 
 Examination Statute of 1800, they had sanctioned the 
 foundation of new Chairs, such as Experimental Philosophy, 
 Mineralogy, Geology, Political Economy, and Sanscrit, and 
 had accepted annual grants from the Crown to endow 
 certain Readerships. In homage, therefore, to the moral 
 obligations they had incurred not to render these new and 
 old foundations nugatory, they continued to exact an 
 outward conformity to the Statutes, by enforcing the 
 delivery of lectures, the efficiency of which they allowed 
 other parts of their system to defeat. Their conduct 
 reminds us of the orders issued by Charles the Fifth to 
 offer up prayers throughout Spain for the deliverance 
 of the Pope while he suffered his army to retain him 
 prisoner in the Castle of St. Angelo." 2 
 
 The results of this policy are thus depicted. "After the 
 year 1839, we may consider three-fourths of the Sciences, 
 still nominally taught at Oxford, to have been virtually 
 exiled from the University. The class-rooms of the 
 
 i i-e . that which resulted from the passing of the first Examination 
 Statute in 1810. There were no examinations and no resulting degrees in 
 Science, and therefore the undergraduates would not attend lectures which 
 from the standpoint of a degree were of no use to them. No Fellowships 
 either were awarded for Science at this time. 
 
 2 Travels in North America, pp. 291-294. 
 
74 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Professors were some of them entirely, others nearly, 
 deserted. Chemistry and Botany attracted between the 
 years 1840 and 1844, from three to seven students; 
 Geometry, Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy 
 scarcely more ; Mineralogy and Geology, still taught by 
 the same Professor, who, fifteen years before, had 
 attracted crowded audiences, from ten to twelve ; Political 
 Economy still fewer ; even Ancient History and Poetry 
 scarcely commanded an audience ; and strange to say, in 
 a country with whose destinies those of India are so 
 closely bound up, the first of Asiatic scholars gave lectures 
 to one or two pupils, and these might have been absent, 
 had not the cherished hope of a Boden scholarship 
 induced them to attend." ' 
 
 Sir Charles Lyell, having drawn this graphic picture 
 of his own University, next turns to Cambridge. " At 
 Cambridge," he writes,' 2 " the Collegiate influence has, 
 since the Reformation, caused the University to pass 
 gradually through nearly all the same phases as at 
 Oxford. . . Very recently at Cambridge, all branches of 
 knowledge taught by the Professors— in a word, every 
 subject except what is understood in our Universities by 
 Classics and Mathematics — have had sentence of banish- 
 ment passed upon them in the form of new compulsory 
 examinations, under the management of College Tutors, 
 the Oxford plan of awarding honours in classical and 
 mathematical attainments alone being adhered to. The 
 Professors of Chemistry and Anatomy, who had formerly 
 considerable classes, have only mustered six or seven 
 pupils, although still compelled to give courses of fifty 
 lectures each. The Chairs of Modern History, and of the 
 application of Machinery to the Arts, once numbering 
 audiences of several hundreds, have been in like manner 
 deserted. Yet dispensations are rarely granted for the 
 discontinuance of useless duties, even when only two 
 pupils present themselves. 
 
 " Moreover, here, as at Oxford, it is not uncommon to 
 give such Chairs as Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, 
 Chemistry, Botany, Astronomy, Geology, Mineralogy and 
 others to clergymen, who combine them with clerical 
 
 l lb. pp. 298-9. 2 lb. p. 38. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 75 
 
 duties, or throw theni up when they obtain preferment, 
 and who, however eminent, owing, as they must do, a 
 mixed allegiance, partly to their ecclesiastical order, and 
 partly to the professorial body, cannot stand up with 
 heart and courage in defence of the public, as opposed to 
 the clerical and collegiate, interests.' . . The panegyrists, 
 indeed, of the modern University system in England, seem 
 never to admit candidly this plain truth, that the Colleges 
 have no alternative in regard to the course of study open 
 to them. Take any flourishing University in Great 
 Britain or on the Continent, where a wide range of 
 studies are taught. Let the students be divided into 
 fifteen or more sections, without any classification in 
 reference to their age, acquirements, talents, tastes, or 
 future prospects. Assign to each section a separate set 
 of teachers, chiefly clerical, and looking forward to pre- 
 ferment in the Church and public schools, and from these 
 select all your public examiners. What must be the 
 result ? The immediate abandonment of three-fourths of 
 the sciences now taught, while those retained will belong 
 of necessity to the less progressive branches of human 
 knowledge." 2 
 
 As for a remedy Lyell says, " Appeal under such cir- 
 cumstances must therefore be made to an external 
 authority. A Royal Commission like those which have 
 more than once visited of late years the Universities of 
 Scotland, might prove a sufficient counterpoise to the 
 power and vis inertiae of forty learned Corporations." 3 
 
 Lyell also took occasion to criticise Whewell for his 
 views on the proper subjects of College and professorial 
 teaching. Whewell had written, "The subjects suitable 
 for University teaching are the undoubted truths of 
 mathematics, and works of unquestioned excellence, such 
 as the best classical authors. When engaged in these, the 
 student respects his instructor; they are the fit subjects 
 of College lectures. A spirit of criticism is awakened by 
 the study of philosophy, which is a fit subject of profess- 
 orial lectures." 4 Whewell had also written, 5 " Professorial 
 lectures- are especially suited to those which we have called 
 
 l lb. pp. 302-3. 2 lb. pp. 307-8. 3 lb. p. 311. 
 
 4 University Education, pp. 46-53. 5 Liberal Education, p. 112. 
 
76 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Progressive studies. . . But with regard to Permanent 
 studies, the impression which, in a Liberal Education, 
 they ought to produce upon the mind, is eminently pro- 
 moted by College Lectures such as we have described ; 
 and can, by no means, be derived from Professorial Lec- 
 tures alone." Progressive and Permanent studies had 
 been defined by W he well at p. 5 of the same work. Perma- 
 nent studies were " those portions of knowledge which 
 have long taken their permanent shape ; ancient languages 
 with their literature and long-established demonstrated 
 sciences," — i.e. Classics and Mathematics. To the Pro- 
 gressive Studies " belong the results of the mental 
 activity of our own times ; the literature of our own age, 
 and the sciences in which men are making progress from 
 day to day," — i.e. Philosophy and Natural Science. These 
 two systems of education may "with nearly equal pro- 
 priety" be treated " as practical and speculative teaching; 
 or on the one hand mathematics combined with classics ; 
 and on the other philosophy ; — or College lectures, and 
 professorial lectures ; — and we may look upon them as 
 exemplifying a respectful and a critical spirit." 1 
 
 Whewell flings aside Lyell's historical criticisms with 
 something like contempt. He writes, 2 " Mr. Lyell seems 
 to make it one of his objections to the existing system of 
 the English Universities that it is of modern origin. He 
 appears to hold, with a writer in the Edinburgh Revieiv, 
 that the ancient system of the Universities was one in 
 which Professorial Lectures were the main instrument of 
 teaching. . . But I suppose Mr. Lyell would not him- 
 self attach much weight to this argument of his, from the 
 asserted practice of a remote antiquity. The College 
 system has, as he allows, prevailed in the English Univer- 
 sities from the time of the Reformation, which is surely 
 antiquity enough, if antiquity is to guide us. The 
 defenders of the College system have never, so far as I am 
 aware, rested its defence mainly upon its remote anti- 
 quity. They have spoken of its advantages. . . If we 
 can secure these advantages, we shall not readily consent 
 to part with them in order to go back to the condition 
 which he represents as existing before the Reformation. 
 
 i University Education, pp. 52-53. 2 Liberal Education, pp. 127-131. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 77 
 
 A return to an obsolete state of things on the ground of 
 antiquity is generally a mischievous innovation." Whewell 
 does indeed make an admission about private tuition. 
 " I have no wish," he writes, " to deny either the existence, 
 or the importance of this evil. . . But I see no reason 
 whatever to believe that Mr. Lyell's remedies would avail 
 us." 
 
 Whewell was also altogether opposed to the appoint- 
 ment of a Royal Commission as suggested by Lyell. " Such 
 an interference from without, with the legislation of the 
 Universities, would, I am fully persuaded, be productive 
 of immense harm. It might destroy all the advantages of 
 the existing system ; but that anything so thrust into the 
 structure of these ancient institutions would assimilate 
 with their organisation, or work to any good purpose, I 
 see no reason to hope. Such a measure could hardly be 
 attempted without producing a sentiment of wrong in the 
 majority of the existing members of the University, which 
 would deprive the new scheme of all co-operation on their 
 part." 1 Whewell believed in "reform from within," but 
 in five years from the publication of the above remarks 
 the dreaded Royal Commission was appointed. 
 
 An echo of this controversy between University and 
 Colleges, Professors and Tutors, is to be found in a Cam- 
 bridge pamphlet entitled " The Next Step." 2 At p. 40 the 
 writer says, " One great difficulty in this question (an 
 improved system of Examinations) is that of reconciling 
 the College and University systems, or of forming a 
 general system, where much must be left to the Colleges 
 singly, and cannot be brought under one management. 
 If we legislate too minutely, we run the risk of putting 
 the University in the place of the Colleges, an alteration, 
 which, even if desirable, would stand no chance of being 
 carried. Our object must be to procure a comprehensive 
 system, which shall secure as much as possible uniformity 
 in its working without meddling too much with details. 
 To carry out any such plan to the full extent, a cordial 
 co-operation of the Colleges with the University is 
 necessary, but it is greatly to be feared that such a co- 
 operation is far from likely." 
 
 i lb. p. 127. 2 Attributed by Mr. J. W. Clark to A. R. Grant. 
 
78 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Another echo may be found in a pamphlet, " Observa- 
 tions on the Cambridge system," by A. H. Wratislaw. 1 
 "In the first place," writes Mr. Wratislaw, "the College 
 system is most singularly adapted for getting rid of the 
 best men at the very age when they begin to be most 
 useful. Extreme youth is the peculiar characteristic of 
 the College Lecturer. And most of such Lecturers, when 
 possessed of ability, soon betake themselves to situations 
 where they are better paid and can look to obtaining a 
 permanent settlement. In the large Colleges it is true 
 there is pecuniary inducement, in the one case for three, 
 in the other for two Tutors to remain for a considerable 
 period : and perhaps most of the small Colleges can offer 
 a tolerable pecuniary recompense to a single Tutor. But 
 the Tutors of small Colleges, if there be more than one, 
 and the Lecturers of all Colleges, both large and small, 
 have no inducement whatever to continue their exertions, 
 beyond the mere fact of not having yet provided them- 
 selves with satisfactory permanent situations in other 
 quarters. Thus the Public Schools and other institutions 
 have the pick of our best men. . . It is futile to talk of 
 Professorial Education entering into the Cambridge 
 system, when almost every subject of Professorial 
 Lectures is unanimously ignored by the Colleges, and it 
 is mere waste of time for a student wishing to obtain a 
 Fellowship to pay the slightest attention to them. Nay, 
 if all the Professors were swept away to-morrow, their 
 absence (except so far as the personal influence of 
 individuals is concerned) would be scarcely perceptible in 
 the University. Where any symptom of the Professorial 
 system is found, every development of the principle of 
 competition, so unsparingly applied to the students, is 
 sedulously suppressed and exterminated. With almost 
 the only exception of the quasi-professorial Lectures 
 delivered at Trinity on Plato and Aristotle to the second 
 and third years, I have no hesitation in asserting the 
 average run of College Lectures to be rarely above and 
 generally far below, the level of the lessons of the head 
 class in a well-conducted Public School, depressed as 
 such Lectures necessarily are, owing to the mixed classes 
 
 i Published in 1848 partly in reply to, and partly suggested by 
 Wbewell's Liberal Education. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 79 
 
 of ignoramuses and proficients lectured together under 
 the College system. . . The fact is that our Pro- 
 fessorial Staff is a mere hodge-podge of independent and 
 sometimes capricious foundations, and has really no 
 claim whatever upon the position it ought to assume, I 
 mean that of a body directing and superintending the 
 higher education and studies of the University. These 
 are evils which the University cannot remedy by any 
 revision or reformation of her Statutes. She has no 
 control whatever over the individual Colleges. If any 
 College were to stop lectures entirely to-morrow, close its 
 Chapel, or perform any other antic, the University would 
 have no power of interfering. These evils arise from the 
 relations between the Colleges and the University, and 
 can be remedied only by the compulsory application of a 
 portion of the revenues of the separate Colleges, at present 
 ivasted upon non-residents, to the higher purposes of the 
 University. They can therefore only be remedied by the 
 State and the two Houses of Parliament. Under these 
 circumstances, and until such State interference takes 
 place, it only remains for every individual engaged in the 
 Public Tuition of the Colleges to do his utmost to 
 alleviate the evils, which he may lament, but cannot 
 cure." 
 
 The same writer returned to the subject in 1850. In 
 a pamphlet, " Observations on the Cambridge System," 
 he says (p. 8), " The College system is utterly insufficient 
 for the higher parts of Education in every branch of learn- 
 ing. . . I dare almost assert that the University would 
 gladly reform itself, but is enslaved and imprisoned by 
 the Colleges, which at once monopolise and oppress her. 
 It is perhaps not generally known that no College con- 
 tributes a single farthing towards the Education of the 
 students, the Fellowships being either absolutely or 
 practically pure sinecures, and the Tutors and Lecturers 
 deriving their whole revenues, as such, from the pockets 
 of the undergraduates. . . Is there no call for reform 
 here ? Is there no necessity for State interference to 
 secure a fitting portion of the College revenues to their 
 use as Educational Establishments, or to that of the 
 University ? . Nor is it generally known that 
 
 while the Colleges are keeping the University in their 
 
80 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 hands, or rather in their fetters, they do not contribute 
 a single farthing towards its expenses ; that while they 
 are sending thousands of pounds annually to non- 
 residents, who are doing nothing for their money, the 
 University is penniless and almost bankrupt. 
 There is no necessity in the nature of things for the 
 continuance of the present system, which the Dean of 
 Ely 1 has shewn to have been forcibly instituted by the 
 Elizabethan Statutes, and to have caused a complete 
 revolution in the constitution of the University. The 
 Colleges were never intended to monopolise the Uni- 
 versity. . . What, then, is it that we want in the 
 University ? In the first place, freedom ; freedom from 
 the narrow thraldom of the College system. In the 
 second place, the application of the College revenues to 
 their original purposes, though not perhaps always in 
 the manner and form originally devised by the Founders. 
 And in the third place, inducements to the learned and 
 scientific to remain and reside and pursue their studies 
 amongst us. 2 . . There is a Syndicate sitting for the 
 revision of the Statutes of the University. Its grand 
 difficulty is the relation between the University and the 
 Colleges. Everybody knows how rarely and how un- 
 willingly a Corporation reforms itself ; but here we have 
 Corporations within a Corporation, the lesser Corporations 
 individually irresponsible to, and collectively monopolis- 
 ing the larger one. Over the Colleges the University 
 is powerless : what can we expect here except from State 
 interference to facilitate the progress of reform? 3 . . . 
 The fact is, that the College system is not capable of 
 further extension, and if other branches of learning 
 besides Latin, Greek and Mathematics are to be pursued 
 here, extensive organic changes must open the way for 
 an extended University system, of which the Colleges in 
 their several spheres may form a most useful and bene- 
 ficial portion. 4 . . Surely far more individuals than 
 at present might enjoy the advantages of society and 
 education at the Universities. But that they do not 
 is entirely owing to the expensive, unpractical and 
 narrow nature of the corrupt and exclusive College 
 system." 5 
 
 i Dr. Peacock. 2 pp. 9-10. 3 p. 13. 4 p. 15. 5 p. 17. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 81 
 
 Finally Dr. Donaldson's contribution to the subject 
 may be noted. It is contained in the first part of his 
 " Classical Scholarship and Classical Learning," which 
 was published in 1856, after the Royal Commission had 
 reported but before Parliament had actually legislated. 
 Into the historical survey therein contained it is not 
 necessary to enter. The author comes to the point now 
 under discussion at p. 32. " The fact that the system 
 of education is too narrow both at Oxford and Cambridge 
 . . . is alleged by all who have written on the subject 
 of University reform, and is known to be slightly, if at 
 all, qualified by the institution of new triposes. 1 And the 
 cause is as confidently and unanimously alleged to be the 
 College system, or immediately, that substitution of com- 
 petitive tests for University teaching which is referred to 
 the influence of the Colleges. The case as far as Oxford 
 is concerned, has been stated repeatedly and with great 
 ability by Sir William Hamilton." He then quotes Mr. 
 Wratislaw's pamphlet, " Observations on the Cambridge 
 System," and also the author of the " Next Step," with 
 regard to his own University. 
 
 He continues 2 : " For my own part, I am bound to 
 express my conviction that, so far as education is cramped 
 and narrowed and degraded at Cambridge in particular, 
 the cause is to be sought in the subordination of the 
 University to the Colleges, and in the admission to the 
 latter of a great number of students who are not duly 
 qualified for University teaching, and that the first and 
 main remedy would be a genuine University matricula- 
 tion. At the same time, I think that the case with 
 regard to the Colleges has not always been fully under- 
 stood and fairly represented, and that the important 
 functions, which they will perform even when the 
 University is restored to its proper independence and 
 authority, are not duly appreciated, but frequently under- 
 valued." 
 
 Dr. Donaldson then gives his own historical review, 
 and after praising the Colleges, especially Trinity and 
 St. John's, for the way in which they discharge their duties, 
 
 i The Moral Sciences Tripos, and the Natural Sciences Tripos, the 
 first lists of which appeared in 1851. 
 
 2 p. 35. g 
 
82 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 elaborates his position thus ! : — " But the very fact 
 that the best Colleges are the largest, and the smallest 
 generally the worst, seems to furnish an argument in 
 favour of the opinion, that the desired object would be 
 obtained, if the University were, what its name denotes 
 and what it once was, one community and not a number 
 of different communities. At any rate, there is no doubt 
 in the minds of those who have studied the subject, that, 
 in spite of their various merits and the importance of their 
 endowments, the Colleges interpose the greatest obstacles 
 to the free play of our academical agency. While they 
 do not spend any part of their revenues on the education 
 of the undergraduates, they oblige all undergraduates to 
 pay for such education as they furnish by becoming 
 members of some College, and, by virtue of the revolution 
 forced upon the University by the Elizabethan Statutes, 
 usurp the rights belonging to the University as such. . . 
 But it is not only by obliging all members of the Univer- 
 sity to be members of Colleges also, and then compelling 
 them to attend and pay for a sort of school-boy lessons, 
 that the College system cramps and trammels the Univer- 
 sity teaching. The Colleges are also responsible for the 
 admission and matriculation of a very large proportion of 
 members quite disqualified by their existing knowledge 
 from any intelligent participation in a course of genuine 
 academic teaching. That this should be a natural result 
 of the limitation of the University to the Colleges and 
 their members must appear to any one who reflects. The 
 Colleges are really a collection of rival boarding schools. 
 The interest and credit of each of them make it desirable 
 that they should have the largest possible number of 
 entries. Can it be surprising then that they should be 
 unwilling to reject any candidate for admission, who 
 comes to them with a plausible recommendation ? " 
 
 Opportunity will be taken hereafter to show what 
 measure of truth there still is in these accusations. 
 
 U6. p. 41. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 UNIVERSITY v. COLLEGES (OXFORD). 
 
 At Oxford the discussion of the above topic showed a 
 tendency to wander into a by-path, and to become a con- 
 troversy between the Professorial lecture and the Tutorial 
 or catechetical class, the living voice and the printed 
 book. This result was probably due to the impulse which 
 Copleston gave it in the first instance. After the descrip- 
 tion of the Examinations quoted above in Chapter II., 
 he continues as follows 1 : — 
 
 " It will be evident, from the statement here given, 
 that the students are prepared to pass this examination, 
 not by solemn public lectures, delivered to a numerous 
 class from a Professor's chair, but by private study in 
 their respective Colleges. This method of study is the 
 next thing which requires to be explained ; for upon this 
 point also the world are greatly, and in some instances 
 purposely, misinformed. 
 
 " The mode of instruction by College Lectures, which 
 prevails at both the English Universities, is an innova- 
 tion on the original plan, which formerly obtained among 
 them, and which is still practised in foreign Universities, 
 and I believe in those of Scotland. Some peculiar advan- 
 tages there are attending each method, and the best 
 method perhaps would be that which should unite both 
 more completely than is the case with any modern 
 University. If, however, they are compared one against 
 the other, as means of instruction, the preference seems 
 strongly due to that of College Lectures. 
 
 " Under this system the pupils of one Tutor are easily 
 classed according to their capacities, and the stock of 
 learning and science they bring with them. When formed 
 into these sub-divisions, the choice of the lecture may be 
 adapted to their peculiar wants, and the lecturer can 
 perceive, individually as he goes along, how his instruc- 
 tion is received. The heaviness of solitary reading is 
 
 l Reply, pp. 145, 146. 
 
84 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 relieved by the number which compose a class : this 
 number varies from three or four to ten or twelve : a sort 
 of emulation is awakened in the pupil, and a degree of 
 animation in the instructor, which cannot take place 
 with a single pupil, and which approaches to the vivacity 
 of a public speaker addressing an audience. At the same 
 time he can address himself to individuals, satisfy their 
 scruples, correct their errors, and in so doing, the subject 
 being thoroughly sifted and handled is seen in a variety 
 of lights, aud fastens more durably on the mind of those 
 who are listeners merely. Indeed, the impression thus 
 made by theorems of science, and by processes of reason- 
 ing on every subject, is so much more vivid, and the 
 means are at hand of ascertaining so satisfactorily how 
 each pupil receives what he hears, that the business of 
 teaching is made less irksome and fatiguing to both 
 parties ; and in a few weeks the Tutor is enabled to form 
 a juster estimate of the abilities, and quickness, and 
 mental habits of his pupil, than any other system could 
 explain to him in as many years." 
 
 Hamilton naturally took the opposite view to 
 Copleston, whom he disliked and whose name he never 
 succeeded in spelling correctly. In his article " On the 
 Patronage and Superintendence of Universities " l he lays 
 it down that " Universities are establishments founded 
 and privileged by the State for public purposes: they 
 accomplish these purposes through their Professors. 2 In 
 a note on the same page he adds, " Oxford and Cambridge 
 are no exceptions. Inasmuch as they now accomplish 
 nothing through their Professors, they are no longer 
 Universities ; and this even by their own Statutes." 
 
 As we have seen, Hamilton modified his views in later 
 years, and in his Appendix he uses his milder tone. He 
 there writes,' " There are two kinds of Instructors . . . 
 Professors and Tutors. . . Tutors are now, de facto y 
 at least, the only necessary instructors in Oxford and 
 Cambridge ; Professors alone are known in the other 
 British, as in all foreign, Universities. Instruction by 
 Tutors, and instruction by Professors, have, severally, 
 peculiar advantages." 
 
 i Edinburgh Review, Vol. LIX., No. cxix., pp. 196-227 (April, 1834). 
 2 Discussions, p. 363. s pp. 802-812. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 85 
 
 The Oxford controversy alluded to by Newman arose 
 out of the evidence given before the Royal Commission of 
 1850 by Professor H. Halford Vaughan. Dr. Pusey, who 
 had himself refused to give evidence before the Commis- 
 sioners, regarding them as an unlawful body, attacked 
 Vaughan for the views he had expressed. The Professor, 
 in his pamphlet entitled Oxford Reform and Oxford Pro- 
 fessors, 1 summarising this attack, declared that Pusey 
 had maintained that the endowment of Professors and 
 their erection into importance was unadvisable for five 
 reasons, because 
 
 First, Professorial lectures do not communicate 
 knowledge well ; 
 
 Secondly, Professorial lectures do not give a discip- 
 line to the faculties ; and so on. 
 Pusey replied in a lengthy pamphlet entitled Collegiate 
 and Professorial Teaching and Discipline, in which he 
 argued, on Copleston's lines, for the superiority of 
 catechetical class teaching over Professorial discourses. 
 He also defended the College system chiefly from Conti- 
 nental examples. It is easy to understand why the 
 dispute took this turn. If College teaching methods 
 could be shown to be better than Professorial teaching 
 methods, the College system as a whole clearly showed to 
 advantage in this particular respect when contrasted with 
 the University system, and its upholders felt that they 
 had scored a point. 2 Pusey had also a theological reason 
 for the attitude he took up. The German system was 
 Professorial, and from Germany came Rationalism and 
 heterodox views about the Bible. Pusey feared for the 
 faith if the Professorial system was again exalted to 
 power at Oxford, but this second by-path would lead us 
 still further away from the main course of the history of 
 University reform. 
 
 A contribution of more enduring value, going back to 
 the broader lines, was made at Oxford by Professor 
 Bonamy Price. In this case we have the advantage of 
 
 i Vaughan has a very eloquent passage on the advantages of oral 
 teaching, which is quoted by Newman (Historical Sketches, Vol. III., 
 pp. 186-187), with a characteristic comment, and also by Donaldson 
 (Classical Studies, pp. 62-63). 
 
 2 A Cambridge contribution to this side issue may be found in Campion, 
 Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 169-173, and 175-176. 
 
86 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 comparing the views of the writer in 1850, when he had no 
 thought of ever rising to University distinction, with his 
 views in 1875, when he was seated in the Professorial chair. 
 
 The first expression of these views is in a pamphlet 
 published in 1850, entitled Suggestions for the Extension 
 of Professorial Teaching in the University of Oxford. 1 
 After enumerating the various causes which lead men to 
 desire University Reform, such as the infusion of a larger 
 amount of science and literature into the curriculum, 
 the waste of splendid endowments, the heavy expense of a 
 University education, or the defective systems of Univer- 
 sity and College government, the writer comes to the 
 conclusion that " The practical conversion of the Univer- 
 sities into Public Schools, involving as it does such 
 serious consequences to the pupils, the teachers and the 
 country at large, is, I conceive, the strongest reason 
 which calls for University Reform." 
 
 The functions of the Universities are double — to pro- 
 mote learning, and to educate the young. The latter 
 office is in many respects admirably discharged. Its 
 efficiency dates from this century (1800.) But this very 
 efficiency has caused the other duty, that of advancing 
 learning, to be neglected. The Colleges vie with one 
 another in their efforts to secure the greatest number of 
 First-Class men or high Wranglers. Hence an evil of 
 immense magnitude — the excess of educational labour 
 imposed on the Tutors. An active Tutor has no leisure 
 for reading and self-improvement. Nor would it be any 
 advantage to him if he had. If he acquired new stores of 
 learning, his pupils would reject them because they would 
 not find them of any use in the Schools, i.e. for examina- 
 tion purposes. 
 
 One obvious method of alleviating this evil would be 
 to give a wider range to the Examinations. But this 
 would be impossible with the existing College system. 
 So many separate bodies could not be induced to act 
 together, and a single College would be powerless. The 
 existing system is bad for the Tutors, because they know 
 the road to literary or scientific distinction is barred by 
 it. The nation is also the poorer through it. Thus the 
 
 i It was just after the announcement of the Royal Commission had 
 been made. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 87 
 
 best men leave the Universities for a career elsewhere. 
 " The evil has gone on increasing of late years. The 
 complaint is very general at both Universities that the 
 Tutors are much younger men than they were formerly ; 
 and that literary eminence is becoming rarer among 
 them. 
 
 " It will be said, perhaps, that the Tutors are not 
 the whole University; that there are Heads of Houses, 
 Professors, and other residents from whom great eminence 
 may be expected. . . The various modes of electing 
 Heads furnish no guarantee for profound learning. 
 They are engaged with the discipline and government of 
 the University ; they take no part in the business of 
 education." As for the Professors, " it is remarkable that 
 no class of residents at Oxford has demanded University 
 Reform with so much earnestness. They have proclaimed 
 the fact that they are outside the system and practical 
 working of the University. They point to their empty or 
 their dilettanti classes. . . With very few exceptions 
 young men do not come to them to learn in earnest the 
 Sciences which they teach ; were they removed, save one 
 or two, their loss would be felt only in the social inter- 
 course of Oxford ; . . they are not incorporated into 
 the one single business of Oxford, the preparation for the 
 degree. The loss thus inflicted on the nation is great 
 and serious. 
 
 " Many persons, however, maintain that the two 
 offices of education and of rearing learned men cannot be 
 carried on together at Oxford, 1 and that the work of 
 education is so valuable as not to allow of any rivalry on 
 the part of the other. But if one of these two duties must 
 be abandoned, it behoves those who protest against any 
 alteration of College studies to consider whether the 
 renunciation of learning is consistent with the oaths 
 and obligations of Fellows. The endowments of the 
 Fellowships were not founded to help a young barrister 
 in London, or to eke out the scanty incomes of country 
 curates, or to enable unbeneficed clergymen to wait for a 
 College living, or even to provide schoolmaster-tutors to 
 educate the young men of the land. They were destined 
 
 i Newman was of this opinion. See his Idea of a University, pp. 
 13-14. 
 
88 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 for the maintenance of students. So certainly was this 
 the design of Collegiate foundations, that there is no 
 obligation lying on Colleges to take in members not 
 attached to foundations. It rests entirely with the 
 Heads of Houses to shut or open their gates against the 
 admission of independent members ; and if they refused 
 to license the opening of Halls, the work of education 
 would be completely arrested for all except a few under- 
 graduate Fellows. No plainer proof can be needed to 
 show that the educating of young men for the various 
 professions of life is not the fulfilling of the duties laid by 
 founders on the Colleges they created. . . But there 
 need not be any collision of duties. Both may be fulfilled 
 in harmonious working." 
 
 Mr. Price's proposals were : — 
 
 I. That the first examination be placed at Matricu- 
 lation, and be required from all candidates for admission 
 at all Colleges alike. 
 
 II. The examination for the B.A. Degree to be 
 divided into two parts. The first part to take place after 
 two years residence. The remaining part to take place at 
 the end of the undergraduate course. 
 
 III. That every undergraduate be placed under the 
 instruction of Tutors for two years only in order to be 
 prepared for the first part of the B.A. examination. 
 
 IV. That the present fee for tuition, now charged for 
 four years, be paid to the Tutor for two years only ; and 
 that the fee for the remaining two years be transferred 
 in one payment, to the public Professors. 
 
 V. That there be three public Professors appointed 
 in each of the departments of Divinity, History, and 
 Philosophy; that every undergraduate be bound to 
 attend a Professor's class in each of these departments ; 
 and that he have the right, out of the three Professors 
 in each branch, to select the one to whom he shall 
 attach himself. 
 
 VI. That the Professorial fee, that is the sum now 
 charged for tuition for two years, be divided into three 
 equal parts : one part to be paid to that Professor in 
 each of the three departments in whose class the under- 
 graduate shall have enrolled himself. 
 
 VII. That a fixed salary of £400 a year be provided by 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 89 
 
 the University for each of the Professors, exclusively of 
 the fees paid by the pupils. 
 
 VIII. That there be appoipted a separate Board of 
 Examiners for each of the three departments ; and that at 
 least one of the public Professors of each department be a 
 member of the Board. 
 
 IX. That each Professor be required to give two 
 courses of lectures: one for undergraduates; a second for 
 Bachelors and other graduates. 
 
 The scheme here propounded is obsolete in many 
 respects, but it has the great merit of proceeding on 
 general principles, — an entrance examination, a systematic 
 division of teaching between the University and the 
 Colleges, provision for advanced study and a career for the 
 teacher. 
 
 The second pamphlet was published when the author 
 had become a Professor, and was stirred in his mind by 
 the Report of the Royal Commission of 1872 on the 
 Revenues of the University, and Mr. Gladstone's state- 
 ment in the House of Commons that it was " the opinion 
 of the Government that no Government can exist which 
 for a moment maintains that the consideration of Univer- 
 sity Reform, and consequently legislation of some kind 
 will not form part of its duty." He thus states the posi- 
 tion : — 
 
 " That the University has ' requirements,' that there 
 are ' University ' purposes which ought to be provided for, 
 is proclaimed by the Report of the Council and admitted 
 by every one connected with Oxford ; and thus the vital 
 question becomes, What are these requirements of the 
 University, these University purposes ? " What follows is 
 still so pertinent to the actual state of things, that no 
 excuse is needed for giving it with some fulness. 
 
 " Very inadequate ideas, I fear, prevail throughout the 
 nation at large, and even in Oxford herself, as to what the 
 University really wants, what the defects are under which 
 it labours, and what the objects which University Reform 
 should seek to accomplish. The common notion is that 
 many Professorships of various kinds ought to be founded, 
 that the mode of Professorial appointments should be 
 improved, that additional Readerships should be brought 
 into play, that facilities ought to be given for allowing the 
 
90 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 educational staff to marry, that the range of subjects 
 taught should be enlarged, whilst, on the material side, 
 funds ought to be allowed for ' buildings and institutions.' 
 I feel myself sorrowfully bound to declare my conviction 
 that if fifty Professorships and as many Readerships were 
 created, and these other purposes provided for in addition, 
 and nothing more done, University Reform will not have 
 been touched, and the call on Parliament to take up this 
 great national problem will remain as urgent as ever." 
 
 Professor Price then points out that the evil dilated 
 on in his first pamphlet remains unabated. " Oxford is 
 afflicted with a severe malady. . . The ablest and most 
 promising of her students shew a marked tendency to 
 quit the University and to devote their knowledge, their 
 talents, and their lives to other professions up and down 
 the country ; . . on every side a University career is 
 dwarfening in comparison with the brilliant prospects held 
 out by the endless pursuits spread through the national 
 life. This evil, by itself alone, loudly demands a remedy, 
 and assuredly Professorships and Readerships, as they are 
 now constituted, are no such remedy. . . There is the 
 yet graver matter that there is, speaking generally, no true 
 career of work in Oxford, no sphere presenting an ever- 
 deepening interest to the man who embraces it, no line of 
 active duty ever impelling the University teacher to make 
 the most of himself, to be constantly training himself to 
 a more efficient discharge of his office, no true and real 
 profession. . . This unhappy state of things is the 
 consequence of the unsoundness of the machinery which 
 Oxford employs. Two public duties are imposed on her : 
 . . . to make adequate provision for research ; . . 
 secondly to give the best attainable education to the 
 young men committed to her care. . . She performs 
 both these great functions, fulfils both these clear duties 
 imperfectly. 
 
 " Let us now consider the first duty of the University, 
 the promotion of research. The forethought of past ages 
 made provision by large endowments for this purpose. 
 The long array of Theological, Moral and Literary 
 Sciences figures grandly in the list of its Professors. 
 The physical sciences have made their appearance in this 
 region. . . The world supposes that these men of 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 91 
 
 deservedly high reputation are actively employed in the 
 education of those hosts of students who throng the 
 Colleges of the University. . . The supposition is a 
 pure delusion. The students of Oxford do not belong to 
 her Professors, nor the Professors to the students. There 
 is no organic connection between them, and it is high 
 time that the country should thoroughly grasp the 
 fact. . . The Professors do not teach the Under- 
 graduates, except in the physical sciences, where the true 
 relation between teachers and pupils exists. . . They 
 do not command the Examinations : their knowledge is 
 not the standard which guides the distribution of 
 honours or of fellowships. The University supplies no 
 motive to Professors to improve themselves and extend 
 its learning. That increase of learning has no value for 
 the Undergraduates who are preparing for the Examina- 
 tions. . . Nor does the University hold out to them 
 the ordinary inducements of a great profession to exert 
 and improve themselves. No prospect of reward, 
 whether of money or position, stimulates their efforts. 
 Their stipends are fixed, and in most cases miserably 
 small, if regarded as the permanent status of a whole 
 life." 
 
 Professor Price then examines the position of the 
 College teacher. "He is weighted by the University 
 with most serious disadvantages. In the first place, he 
 begins at the outset with a maximum of financial reward. 
 The Undergraduate, flushed with honours from the 
 Schools, quickly finds himself installed in a Fellowship, 
 a Tutorship and one or two College offices. More he can 
 scarcely acquire. The University holds up before him 
 no career of increasing pecuniary advantage. To become 
 a Professor is to lose income, to lose pupils, to lose 
 influence in the University as a teacher. . . Then, 
 secondly, his time is fully occupied with mechanical 
 labour in the office of teaching. . . But it is not 
 improving labour ; the germ of progress in knowledge 
 is not contained in it. . . Then there springs up 
 the painful fact, which almost demands to be called 
 a law, that the Tutors, as they move on in years, are 
 supplanted in authority and influence among the 
 Undergraduate Students by their juniors, by those who 
 
92 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 more recently emerged from the Examinations and 
 their Honours. 
 
 " What must now be said of the second great function 
 imposed upon the University, — the education which it is 
 its duty to impart ? . . . The answer is easy and 
 decisive. It is an education in the hands of young men, 
 and given by young men ; it is not, for by the nature of 
 man it cannot be, what it ought to be. . . Was Arnold 
 no more powerful teacher at the end than he was at the 
 commencement of his scholastic career? . . . There 
 are doubtless young Tutors at Oxford who possess equal 
 ability and capacity for progress with Arnold ; but he 
 was not, like them, sentenced to have his onward move- 
 ment arrested by pupils who cared only for honours to be 
 won at examinations from which the spirit of true 
 progress was absent. He was not doomed to discover 
 that his own advance in thought and knowledge would 
 have no value for his scholars, nay, would even be 
 regarded as an impediment to the attainment of a first 
 class, and to be avoided. 
 
 " And now, is there a remedy for this lamentable 
 state of things ? There is a remedy, and it will be found 
 in the removal of the cause which creates the harm. 
 The Colleges have absorbed the University, as Sir 
 William Hamilton shewed long ago, and are responsible 
 for the injuries which have ensued ; the restoration of the 
 University is able to heal the wound. The students and 
 their education belong of right to the University, but the 
 Colleges have appropriated them. The University acts 
 upon them only through the Examinations, but the 
 Examinations are in the hands of the College Tutors. 
 The Examinations can be only what the College Tutors 
 choose to make them. . . This relation — this incorpora- 
 tion of the Undergraduates into the Collegiate system 
 instead of into the University — is the source of the evil 
 which has been above described. . . The College, 
 further, receives the fees for tuition, and distributes them 
 among its Fellows at its pleasure, and with the fees are 
 necessarily connected the duty to teach, and the right to 
 enforce attendance at the College Lectures. This is the 
 decisive fact in the whole system of Oxford. . . The 
 Oxford Student is not in the possession of the Professors, 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 93 
 
 he is owned in absolute sovereignty by the College 
 Tutors. . . We are thus brought to the conclusion that 
 there is but one single remedy for the unsound machinery 
 which Oxford employs for accomplishing her two great 
 purposes— that the teaching of the students and their fees 
 should belong to the University, and not to the Colleges." 
 
 The Professor then presents a scheme in general 
 terms. " Its leading features ought to be professional 
 advancement, growing in efficiency, remuneration, 
 authority, and academical interest." The place of the 
 College Tutors would be taken by Sub-Professors. The 
 fees paid by the students would belong to the Univer- 
 sity officers, but there would be a graduated scale of 
 salaries. The ambition of the Sub-Professor would be 
 to become a Professor and chief in his own department. 
 A leading position in the work of the Examinations 
 would also be assigned to the Professors, who would be 
 appointed by improved methods. 
 
 " But now the objection will be loudly raised — such a 
 change would be a revolution. It would destroy the one 
 distinguishing characteristic of the Universities of 
 England, the College system. . . But let me ask, is the 
 College feeling, the essence of College life destroyed by 
 the system of joint-teaching by combined Colleges? . . 
 And is it not a practice growing at Oxford ... to call in 
 the aid of teachers from other Colleges, or from general 
 residents in the University? On the new system, most, 
 probably all the Sub-Professors would be Fellows of 
 Colleges, and then the relation of the College Staff to the 
 Undergraduates would be precisely what it is now in the 
 combined Colleges. The only difference would be that 
 the College Staffs would be appointed to the teaching 
 office, not by a College arrangement, but by the election 
 of the University ; the University would have to choose 
 from the same men. But the altered mode of appoint- 
 ment would place them under different conditions in 
 respect of their academical career; and this would be 
 entirely pure gain. Many of the ablest Fellows who now 
 leave the University for other professions would enlist in 
 its service ; and that would be an unmixed advantage for 
 the College, as well as for the Undergraduates and the 
 University. 
 
94 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 "But a still stronger bond may be devised for attaching 
 the Undergraduate to his College. He needs something 
 closer than the teaching of the combined Tutor or the 
 Sub-Professor. He wants a friend who knows him 
 personally and familiarly. . . A Vice-Head would 
 exactly meet these requirements. . . I conclude that 
 the objection that the College, its moral, intellectual and 
 personal value, would be deeply injured, if not destroyed, 
 by the creation of the Sub-Professoriate, has no 
 foundation in fact. The fortunes and feelings of the 
 Undergraduate would be as much bound up with the 
 College as they are now." 
 
 Newman's own verdict on the question at issue may 
 fitly close this chapter. 
 
 " I am," writes Newman, 1 " for both views at once, and 
 think neither of them complete without the other. I 
 admire the Professor, I venerate the College. The 
 Professorial system fulfils the strict idea of a University, 
 and is sufficient for its being, but it is not sufficient for 
 its well-being. Colleges constitute the integrity of a 
 University. . . Taking a broad view of history, we 
 shall find that Colleges are to be accounted the main- 
 tainers of order, and Universities the centres of move- 
 ment." 
 
 But Newman, conservative as he was, had still strong 
 and decided views on the historical aspect of the case. In 
 a later chapter of the same book he says, 2 " Such an 
 united action of the Collegiate and the National principle, 
 far from being prejudicial, was simply favourable to the 
 principle of an University. It was a later age which 
 sacrificed the University to the College. We must look 
 to the last two or three centuries, if we would witness 
 the ascendancy of the College idea in the English Uni- 
 versities, to the extreme prejudice, not indeed of its 
 own peculiar usefulness (for that it has retained) but 
 of the University itself." These views are developed 
 in the chapter entitled " Abuses of the Colleges." s 
 "The University is for the world, and the College is 
 for the nation. The University is for the Professor, and 
 the College for the Tutor; the University is for the 
 
 l Historical Studies, Vol. III., p. 182. 2 p. 224. 3 p. 228, et sea. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 95 
 
 philosophical discourse, the eloquent sermon, or the 
 well-contested disputation ; and the College for the 
 catechetical lecture. The University is for Theology, 
 Law, and Medicine, for Natural History, for Physical 
 Science, and for the sciences generally and their pro- 
 mulgation ; the College is for the formation of character, 
 intellectual and moral, for the cultivation of the mind, 
 for the improvement of the individual, for the study of 
 literature, for the classics, and those rudimental sciences 
 which strengthen and sharpen the intellect. The Uni- 
 versity being the element of advance, will fail in making 
 good its ground as it goes ; the College, from its con- 
 servative tendencies, will be sure to go back, because 
 it does not go forward. It would seem as if an University 
 seated and living in Colleges, would be a perfect insti- 
 tution, as possessing excellencies of opposite kinds." 
 
 But Newman saw that the reality was widely 
 different from his ideal picture. " This seems to me,'' 
 he writes, 1 " the critical evil in the present state of the 
 English Universities, not that the Colleges are strong, 
 but that the University has no practical or real juris- 
 diction over them. Over the members of Colleges it has 
 jurisdiction, but even then, not as such, but because they 
 are its own members also ; over the Head of the College, 
 over the Fellows, over the corporate body, over its 
 property, over its officers, over its acts and regulations 
 within its own precincts, the University has no practical 
 jurisdiction at all. The Tutor indeed is an University 
 officer by the Statutes, but the College has made it 
 its own." 
 
 Newman instances as a further proof of College usur- 
 pation that "to this day, though separate Colleges 
 properly insist on the necessary qualifications, in the case 
 of those who are to be admitted to their Lectures, the 
 University itself is not allowed to exercise its reasonable 
 right of examining its members before it matriculates 
 them." 2 Newman, however, was under no illusions as to 
 the difficulty of making the University supreme and the 
 Colleges subordinate. " The same spirit which destroyed 
 the legal incorporation of the religious principle, was the 
 
 i p. 235. 2pp. 238-9. 
 
96 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 jealous enemy also of the intellectual ; and the civil power 
 could as little bear an University as it bore a Church. 
 Accordingly Oxford and Cambridge shared the fate of the 
 Hierarchy ; the component parts of those Universities 
 were preserved, but they themselves were superseded ; and 
 there would be almost as great difficulties now in Protest- 
 ant England, in restoring its Universities to their proper 
 place, as in restoring the Church." l 
 
 A further difficulty would be found in the great hold 
 the Colleges have on their members. Here is Newman's 
 well-known picture of the College system : — 
 
 " There is no political power in England like a College 
 in the Universities ; it is not a mere local body, as a Corpo- 
 ration or a London company ; it has allies in every part of 
 the country. When the mind is most impressionable, 
 when the affections are warmest, when associations are 
 made for life, when the character is most ingenuous and the 
 sentiment of reverence is most powerful, the future land- 
 owner, or statesman, or lawyer, or clergyman comes up to 
 a College in the Universities. There he forms friendships, 
 there he spends his happiest days ; and whatever is his 
 career there, brilliant or obscure, virtuous or vicious, in 
 after years, when he looks back on the past, he finds him- 
 self bound by ties of gratitude to the memories of his 
 College life. He has received favours from the Fellows, he 
 has dined with the Warden or Provost ; he has uncon- 
 sciously imbibed to the full the beauty and the music of 
 the place. The routine of duties and observances, the 
 preachings and the examinations and the lectures, the 
 dresses and the ceremonies, the officials whom he feared, 
 the buildings or gardens that he admired, rest upon his 
 mind and his heart, and the shade of the past becomes a 
 sort of shrine to which he makes continual silent offerings 
 of attachment and devotion. It is a second home, not so 
 tender, but more noble and majestic and authoritative. 
 Through his life he more or less keeps up a connection 
 with it and its successive sojourners. He has a brother 
 or an intimate friend on the foundation, or he is training 
 up his son to be a member of it. When he hears that a 
 blow is levelled at the Colleges, and that they are in com- 
 
 lp. 230. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 97 
 
 motion— that his own College, Head and Fellows, have 
 met together and put forward a declaration calling on its 
 members to come up and rally round it and defend it, a 
 chord is struck within him, more thrilling than any other ; 
 he burns with esprit de corps and generous indignation ; 
 and he is driven up to the scene of his early education , 
 under the keenness of his feelings, to vote, to sign, to 
 protest, to do just what he is told to do, from confidence 
 in the truth of the representations made to him, and from 
 sympathy with the appeal. He appears on the scene of 
 action ready for battle on the appointed day, and there he 
 meets others like himself, brought up by the same sum- 
 mons; he gazes on old faces, revives old friendships, 
 awakens old reminiscences, and goes back to the country 
 with the renewed freshness of youth upon him. Thus, 
 wherever you look, to the North or South, to the East or 
 West, you find the interests of the Colleges dominant ; 
 they extend their roots all over the country, and can 
 scarcely be overturned, without a revolution." l 
 
 The picture may be too highly coloured for the 
 present day, but considerations such as the above no 
 doubt prompted Goldwin Smith to write at a later date 
 (1868) of Oxford 2 : "I will briefly touch on the chief 
 points; first, however, stating my belief that as this is 
 a University of Colleges, a University of Colleges it will 
 remain ; that though, for the sake of the Colleges them- 
 selves, all monopolies ought to be abolished, no attempt 
 to restore the old uncollegiate University can be successful 
 on the ground occupied by these great foundations, with 
 their wealth, their name, their social advantages ; and 
 that the rational objects whereat to aim are the extension 
 of the Colleges, in number or accommodation, and their 
 consolidation, without loss of their individuality, or of 
 the emulation of which it is the spring, into a University, 
 employing their combined resources for the common 
 good. To treat their ascendancy as an encroachment, 
 and to propagate expectations of the revival of a Univer- 
 sity in which they will again be mere private foundations 
 is, I apprehend, futile ; and such language is calculated 
 only to drive them back more than ever into their 
 noxious isolation." 
 
 ipp. 233-235. 2 Reorganisation of the University of Oxford, p. 13. 
 
 H 
 
98 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Mark Pattison, himself the Head of a House, thus 
 sums up the matter from his own particular point of 
 view ' : — 
 
 "At the time of the last Commission, in 1850, our 
 disposition was to urge the distinction between the 
 University and the Colleges upon the Legislature and 
 the public. Out of a just jealousy of their legal rights, 
 the Colleges resented the inclination which was shown 
 to treat their property as equitably convertible for the 
 uses of a distinct Corporation. This was done notwith- 
 standing ; but, paralysed by our clamours and our 
 undeniable right, the omnipotence of Parliament was 
 only exerted to an extent which did not materially 
 benefit the University, while it enabled the Colleges 
 to complain of confiscation. Since our rights are no 
 longer invaded, we have had time for reflection. We 
 have learned that there is no conflict of objects or interests 
 between the Colleges and the University — that they are, 
 in fact, the same men under a different denomination. 
 There was no point on which University reformers before 
 1850 had been more unanimous and decided than in the 
 assertion that the usurpation of the Colleges had been 
 the destruction of Oxford. The same complaint neces- 
 sarily held a prominent place in the Blue-Book of the 
 Commission. Even as late as 1856 2 we find Dr. Donaldson 
 reflecting that 'the subjection of the University to the 
 Colleges is the cause of all that is wrong in the practical 
 working of the Cambridge system ' (Classical Learning, 
 p. 46.) Hence the watchword of reform was the 'Pro- 
 fessorial system.' The Professor was the University 
 officer, who had been supplanted by the Tutor, a College 
 officer. Parliament was invoked to restore the teaching 
 to the University officer. The Commission to which was 
 entrusted the execution of the Act of 17 and 18 Victoria, 
 c. 81, dared not do this. The teaching still remains in the 
 hands of members of the Colleges. Yet we hear no more 
 of the old complaint of the usurpation of University 
 functions by the Colleges. The explanation of this is 
 
 i Suggestions, pp. 46-48. 
 
 2 Professor Bonamy Price, it will be remembered, wrote his second 
 pamphlet in 1872, four years after the publication of Pattison's 
 suggestions. 
 
UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 99 
 
 that the reformers had seized upon the great evil of the 
 place, but had assigned it to a wrong cause. But this 
 inefficiency did not arise from, the circumstance that the 
 teacher was a Tutor and not a Professor, nor from the 
 circumstance that he was a Fellow of a College, and not 
 an unattached member of the University. I have always 
 regarded the relation of Tutor and pupil as being a 
 relation more efficacious for instruction than the relation 
 of Professor and student. And I believe the soundest 
 opinion among us inclines to the same side. The cause 
 of the inefficiency of the teaching of Oxford in the old 
 days was, as I have indicated elsewhere, to be sought in 
 the low standard of attainment of the place, a standard 
 common to the University and the Colleges. Provided the 
 teacher be competent — i.e. provided he be a master in the 
 science he professes to teach — he will gain in power by 
 being brought into the close and confidential relation of 
 Tutor. And University Professors are not always found 
 to be at the level of existing knowledge in their special 
 profession. . . The University versus the College, then, 
 though it may heretofore have served the purpose of 
 ascertaining our rights, and awakening us to our duties, 
 is no longer a relevant issue." 
 
 Both sides of the question have thus been presented 
 to the reader. An attempt to decide between them will 
 be made later on. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 
 
 The history of University Reform has now been traced 
 through a period of fifty years— the first half of the 
 nineteenth century. How much has been accomplished 
 in this time ? There has been interminable discussion, a 
 ceaseless output of articles and pamphlets, abortive 
 attempts in both Houses of Parliament, but exceedingly 
 little practical action. Oxford has instituted a competi- 
 tive examination system, and Cambridge has improved 
 and extended a similar system which was already in 
 existence, but beyond this next to nothing has been done. 
 Yet this little has had important results especially out- 
 side the two Universities. The rise in this country of the 
 modern system of competitive examinations may fairly 
 be dated from the Oxford Examination Statute of 1850. 
 That enactment and the extensions Avhich followed made 
 the Prize Fellowship possible and gradually intensified 
 competition. The increased spirit of emulation produced 
 the private tutor or " coach," the highly-skilled teacher 
 whose function it is to impart the knowledge which the 
 Universities demand in their examinations, but which 
 neither they nor the Colleges supply. In Cambridge 
 University private tuition was in great request, especially 
 in Mathematics, and Hopkins and Routh are still remem- 
 bered as two extraordinarily efficient Senior Wrangler 
 makers. Along with the Prize Fellowships has come an 
 increased number of Open Scholarships and Exhibitions, 
 as the Colleges more and more competed with one another 
 for the future winners of their Fellowships. The force of 
 competition has thus invaded the Public Schools, and the 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 101 
 
 foreseeing parent now-a-days sends the boy of promise to 
 a Preparatory School where he is crammed for the open 
 scholarships of a Public School, thence to the Public School 
 where he continues his specialised studies with a view to 
 a College Scholarship, and so on to the Fellowship. 
 This has not been the end of the matter. The examina- 
 tion system has spread everywhere. It conquered the 
 Civil Service, first in India, then at home. Mr. Robert 
 Lowe, himself an Oxford man, had " procured the inser- 
 tion in the India Bill of 1853 of a provision throwing open 
 the great service of India to competition for all British- 
 born subjects." 1 For the same reform in the Home 
 Service "the inspiration proceeded from Oxford. Two of the 
 foremost champions of the change were Temple (afterwards 
 Archbishop of Canterbury) and Jowett, and in the be- 
 ginning of 1855 Mr. Gladstone proposed to these two 
 reformers that they should take the salaried office of Ex- 
 aminers under the Civil Service scheme." 2 The examination 
 system even got as low down as the elementary schools, and 
 in the hands of Mr. Robert Lowe produced what was known 
 as " payment by results." Our age has thus become empha- 
 tically an age of examinations. The University of Cam- 
 bridge does not disdain to hold a Preliminary Local 
 Examination where the candidates may be as young as 
 they please, the only restriction being that they should 
 not be over fourteen. The Ordinary B.A. Examination at 
 Cambridge can be taken as often as one likes, so that 
 persons so minded may, if they go the right way to work, 
 be examined from early childhood to advanced old age. 
 There are endless examining bodies, all with their sepa- 
 rate and sometimes competing examinations. Signs are 
 not wanting of a reaction, and the cry is being heard 
 among educationists that a halt must be called, that 
 examinations must be simplified and their number 
 reduced. Whatever may be the result of this movement, 
 the fact remains that the Universities, by their record in 
 this matter, have proved that they are not the secluded 
 and remote bodies they are sometimes conceived to be, 
 and that what is done in them quietly and almost secretly, 
 
 iMorley, Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 510. 
 2 lb. Vol. I., p. 512. 
 
102 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 may have a profound effect on national practice and 
 national life. 1 
 
 The little that the Universities effected in the way of 
 internal improvement from 1800 to 1850 is sufficient com- 
 ment on the wisdom of those who are always advising 
 that these bodies should be left alone and allowed to 
 reform themselves from within. But by 1850 public 
 opinion was too strong to be any longer resisted. Atten- 
 tion has been called in Chapter III. to the action taken in 
 Parliament in 1837 and the demand then made for a 
 Royal Commission. The story may be taken up from the 
 point where it was there left. In May, 1844, Mr. W. D. 
 Christie, M.P., moved in the House of Commons an 
 Address to the Queen to issue a Commission to inquire 
 into all matters relating to the statutes, revenues, trusts, 
 privileges, and general condition as regards learning and 
 religion, of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, 
 and the Colleges and Halls therein. While the hon. 
 Member was speaking, the House was counted out. In 
 April of the next year, 1845, Mr. Christie again raised the 
 
 i The upholders of the modern examination system might not be so 
 enamoured of it, if they knew where it originally came from. " The 
 introduction of the system of emulation and prizes into the higher studies 
 is historically traceable to the Jesuits. The adoption of the principle of 
 perpetual supervision, of repeated examinations, of weekly exercises, 
 produced marvellous results in the Jesuit Colleges. For a century and 
 a half these establishments carried all before them, and earned the 
 praises of all, even Protestant, observers, who contrasted their energy 
 and zeal with the lifeless routine of the old Universities. It was not till 
 the first half of the 18th century that opinion began to turn. It required 
 time for the experiment of external stimulus applied to intellectual 
 development to be fairly tried and judged. It was then found, that, 
 beneath this brilliant show of College exercises and prizes, was concealed 
 a starved and shrivelled understanding. The work done in class was 
 pattern work ; but the pupil whom the institution turned out was a 
 washed-out, frivolous, superficial being. Without any hold either on the 
 verities of science, or on the recorded experience of history, he was at the 
 mercy of the opinions and the superstitions of the day. All the learning 
 and knowledge, which was in the possession of the civilised communities 
 of Europe, existed outside the Jesuit seminaries, as well as outside the 
 old Universities of France and England. The rising tide of progressive 
 opinion engulfed the Jesuit establishments, . . but one thing was 
 adopted unchanged from the Jesuit method. This was the system of 
 constant examination." Thus writes Mark Pattison in the Essays on the 
 Endowment of Research , pp. 18-20. Sir William Hamilton, at p. 769-770 of 
 his Discussions gives the ordinary arguments in favour of examinations as 
 laid down by Melancthon in his be Studiis Adolescentnm, and adds the 
 testimony of other distinguished writers. Professor Sayce, in his contri- 
 bution to the Essays on the Endowment of Research, puts the arguments on 
 the other side in a convenient form. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 103 
 
 question and moved the same resolution. It was 
 seconded by Mr. Ewart, and supported by Mr. Wyse, 
 Mr. Hume and Lord Palmerston. It was opposed by 
 Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Beresford Hope and Mr. Goulburn, 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, and on a division was re- 
 jected by 143 votes to 82, a majority of 61. 1 
 
 The day of success did not come till five years later. 
 On April 23rd, 1850, Mr. James Heywood, M.P. for North 
 Lancashire, moved the following resolution in the House 
 of Commons : — 
 
 " That all systems of academical education require 
 from time to time some modification, from the change of 
 external circumstances, the progress of opinion, and the 
 intellectual improvement of the people. 
 
 " That in the ancient English and Irish Universities, 
 and in the Colleges connected with them, the interests of 
 religious and useful learning have not advanced to an 
 extent commensurate with the great resources and high 
 position of these bodies : that Collegiate Statutes of the 
 15th century occasionally prohibit the local authorities 
 from introducing any alterations into voluminous codes, 
 of which a large portion are now obsolete ; that better 
 laws are needed to regulate the ceremony of matriculation 
 and the granting of Degrees, to diminish the exclusive- 
 ness of the University Libraries, to provide for a fairer 
 distribution of the rewards of scientific and literary 
 merit, to extend the permission of marriage to Tutors of 
 Colleges, and to facilitate the registration of electors for 
 the Universities ; that additional checks might be con- 
 sidered with reference to the continued extravagance of 
 individual students : and that the mode of tenure of 
 College property ought to be ameliorated, particularly in 
 Ireland : 
 
 " That, as it is Her Majesty's right and prerogative to 
 name Visitors and Commissioners to inquire into the 
 ancient Universities and Colleges of England and Ireland, 
 an humble address be presented to Her Majesty, praying 
 that Her Majesty would be graciously pleased to issue 
 her Royal Commission of Enquiry into the state of the 
 Universities and Colleges of Oxford, Cambridge, and 
 
 l Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., pp. 668, 676. 
 
104 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 Dublin, with a view to assist in the adaptation of those 
 important institutions to the requirements of modern 
 times." 
 
 " Mr. Heywood," says Molesworth, 1 " had himself been 
 educated at Trinity College, Cambridge ; but being a 
 Unitarian he had been prevented from taking his degree 
 by a regulation of the University requiring all persons 
 who wished to graduate to sign a declaration that 
 they were hona-fide members of the Church of England. 
 In this respect Cambridge was more liberal or more 
 fortunate than the sister University ; for while she 
 only required a declaration of Church membership 
 before taking the degree, the other University made 
 it a condition of matriculation. Thus the Noncon- 
 formists, repelled at Oxford at the very entrance, 
 found an asylum at Cambridge, received there the 
 best education the University could afford, might 
 attain to the highest honours she conferred on her 
 successful students, and were only stopped at the point 
 of taking the degree which should crown and complete 
 a University career. Mr. Heywood was well known to 
 be enthusiastically attached to his alma mater ; he had 
 devoted much time and labour to the examination of 
 its statutes and the study of its constitution ; he had 
 thoroughly mastered the question in all its bearings ; 
 he had ascertained how much the resources of the 
 Universities were wasted ; and how much need there was 
 of some means of reforming the abuses that had grown 
 up in the course of ages, and of adapting the curriculum 
 of University teaching to the circumstances of the times. 
 He was also anxious to redress the grievances of which 
 the Dissenters complained." 
 
 To the surprise of the House, the Prime Minister, 
 Lord John Russell, announced that, though he could not 
 accept the motion, the Government would advise Her 
 Majesty to issue a Royal Commission of Enquiry for the 
 Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. Mr. Roundell 
 Palmer (afterwards the first Lord Selborne) objected 
 that the proposed Commission would be illegal, and 
 moved the adjournment of the debate. The Attorney- 
 
 i History of England, Vol. II., p. 338. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 105 
 
 General (Sir John Jervis) explained that the Commission 
 the Government proposed to issue was merely to receive 
 evidence voluntarily given. The motion for the adjourn- 
 ment of the debate was then carried by 273 to 81. 
 
 On May 8th Lord John Russell, without waiting for 
 the resumption of the debate, sent a letter to Prince 
 Albert, the Chancellor of Cambridge University, and 
 to the Duke of Wellington, the Chancellor of Oxford 
 University, 1 explaining the voluntary nature of the 
 Commission, and finally stating that " the utmost care 
 will be taken in selecting Commissioners, who maynot 
 only be well qualified for their important task, but who 
 may inspire confidence and respect by their character 
 and position." 
 
 The same month a number of resident members of 
 the Senate of Cambridge University addressed a long 
 remonstrance to Prince Albert, their Chancellor, opposing 
 the Commission on the familiar grounds that the 
 University was reforming itself already, and that time was 
 necessary to see the effect of the improvements made. In 
 particular they objected to the Government's suggestion 
 that " one object of such inquiry was to be to ascertain 
 means by which the instruction given in the Colleges 
 should be rendered serviceable in preparing Students for 
 the Examinations in new subjects of study, lately in- 
 stituted by the University " — (the Moral Sciences Tripos, 
 and the Natural Sciences Tripos). 
 
 "We have no wish to deny," the memorialists 
 continued, "that such a harmony of connexion between 
 the subjects of College study and of University examin- 
 ations should exist. . . But we cannot help looking 
 with the greatest alarm at the prospect of having attempts 
 made to establish such a connexion of College and 
 University subjects, by the action of any power 
 extraneous to the University and the Colleges. We 
 
 i There had been method in the choice of these distinguished person- 
 ages. "Nor had the Universities neglected the more obvious means of 
 resisting the attacks of their assailants. Oxford had secured as her 
 Chancellor the Great Duke, who was said to command majorities in the 
 House of Lords ; while Cambridge, wiser, as she fancied, in her gener- 
 ation than her sister, had wooed and won the protection of Royalty itself, 
 and felt safe under the shadow of the Throne." Campion in Cambridge 
 Essays, 1858, p. 165. 
 
106 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 conceive that any attempt to compel the Colleges to 
 appoint teachers or to reward proficients, by external 
 agency, would be an interference with their internal 
 freedom of a kind utterly unheard of except in the worst 
 times, and altogether destructive of their just and ancient 
 corporate rights." ' They hinted also that there might be 
 a refusal to give evidence. The Vice-Chancellor, the Rev. 
 Dr. Cartmell, Master of Christ's College, also addressed a 
 remonstrance to the Chancellor, in which he said that the 
 issuing of a Commission would be taken to imply that in 
 the opinion of Her Majesty's Ministers the governing body 
 of the University were unfit for their position ; thus 
 regarded it would be an affront and an indignity, and as 
 such would be resented. This last word in italics. 
 
 Prince Albert replied on May 27th that he had hoped 
 the Universities would have been allowed to go on without 
 extraneous interference, but as the Government was 
 irrevocably pledged to a Commission, he recommended 
 that it should be received in a friendly spirit. 2 
 
 On July 18th the House of Commons resumed the 
 debate, when Mr. John Stuart proposed the following 
 amendment: "That any advice given to Her Majesty to 
 issue a Royal Commission for inquiry into the state of 
 the revenues and management of any Colleges or Halls of 
 the two Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, not being 
 of Royal foundation, tends to a violation of the laws and 
 constitution of her kingdom, and of the rights and 
 liberties of Her Majesty's subjects." This amendment 
 was supported by Mr. Gladstone. He was at that time 
 one of the members for Oxford University, for which seat 
 he had been returned in 1847, and had not yet shaken off 
 his reactionary views. Mr. John Morley 3 describes the 
 speech as " the last manifesto, on a high theme and on a 
 broad scale, of that Toryism from which this wonderful 
 pilgrim had started on his shining progress." The debate 
 was again adjourned by 160 to 138. On August 31st, before 
 any further discussion had taken place, the Royal Com- 
 mission was issued. 
 
 Such was the way in which the first step was taken 
 in "a long journey towards the nationalisation of the 
 
 i Cooper, Annals, Vol. V., p. 13. 
 2 lb. pp. 17-18. 3 Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 498. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 107 
 
 Universities." The Commission produced an effect even 
 before it reported. On May 1st, 1851, by a unanimous 
 vote, the Undergraduate Fellows of King's College, 
 Cambridge, resolved to relinquish their "ancient and 
 undoubted privilege to claim and receive the degree of 
 Bachelor in Arts in the Senate House of the said 
 University without having passed any of the previous 
 examinations required from the undergraduates of other 
 Colleges." 1 The Oxford Commissioners were able to 
 report that New College had taken similar action. 
 Certain peculiar privileges, however, still appertain to 
 King's College. The Provost has absolute authority 
 within the precincts, and, by special composition between 
 this Society and the University, its Undergraduates are 
 exempt from the power of the Proctors and other 
 University Officers within the limits of the College. 
 
 The Oxford Commissioners were the Bishop of Nor- 
 wich, Dr. A. C. Tait (then Dean of Carlisle), Dr. Jeune 
 (Master of Pembroke College), Dr. Liddell, Head Master 
 of Westminster School, J. L. Dampier, Professor Baden 
 Powell, and the Rev. G. H. S. Johnson. The Rev. A. P. 
 Stanley was appointed Secretary and Mr. Goldwin Smith 
 Assistant Secretary. They began their sittings on 
 October 19th, 1850," and reported on April 27th, 1852. 
 Their duty was to "enquire into the State, Discipline, 
 Studies, and Revenues " of the University, and they 
 carried out their task mainly by means of printed ques- 
 tions, though many witnesses were examined orally. 
 
 Their reception was creditable neither to the Univer- 
 sity nor to the Colleges. " The Governing Body," the 
 Commissioners were compelled to say, " has withheld 
 from us the information which we sought from the 
 University through the Vice-Chancellor as its chief resi- 
 dent officer; and this, as has since been intimated to 
 us, with the purpose of disputing the legality of Your 
 Majesty's Commission. . . From the majority of the 
 Colleges, as Societies, we have received no assistance. . . 
 On the subject of the Revenues of the University, and of 
 many of the Colleges, we have little authentic informa- 
 tion to communicate. To state the amount and nature 
 
 1 Cooper, Annals, Vol. V., p. 31. 
 
108 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 of these Revenues with precision, we required the zealous 
 assistance of the University and College authorities. In 
 most instances such assistance has been withheld. For 
 the sake of the University itself, we regret that a different 
 course was not pursued." 
 
 Such are the words which meet the reader in the first 
 two pages of the Oxford Report. Nevertheless the Com- 
 missioners gathered from individuals both inside and 
 outside the University a vast amount of information. 
 They specially instance Mr. Hey wood, " who has liberally 
 furnished the Commission, not only with copies of the 
 translations of the various Statutes published by him, 
 but with several manuscripts which he had caused to be 
 transcribed at his own cost." 
 
 The Report itself is much more compact and better 
 arranged than the subsequently-issued Cambridge Report, 
 and has the great advantage of a summary of recom- 
 mendations at the end. Mr. Gladstone thought it one of 
 the ablest productions submitted to Parliament in his 
 recollection. 
 
 It will be of interest to go at once to the central 
 question of how the Commissioners viewed the Univer- 
 sity as a teaching body, involving the further question 
 of the proper relations between itself and the con- 
 stituent Colleges. The answer will be found on p. 45 : 
 " The absorption of the University by the Colleges has 
 been often brought before us in the Evidence. Great as 
 are the advantages which the Colleges have conferred on 
 the University, we cannot doubt that both the one and 
 the other have suffered from the extent to which the 
 amalgamation has been carried ; and that the restoration 
 of the University to its proper superiority would, inde- 
 pendently of all other considerations, be a great benefit. 
 The monopoly of teaching by the Colleges has gone far to 
 extinguish the Professorial system in Oxford, and, conse- 
 quently, to impair, if not to destroy, the character of the 
 University as a seat of learning. The absence of competi- 
 tion has encouraged the apathy which has rendered some 
 of the most powerful and wealthy of the Colleges the least 
 useful. The strong College feeling engendered by the 
 present system has superinduced a neglect, we might 
 almost say an unconsciousness, of the claims of the 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 10!) 
 
 University on the affections and the exertions of its 
 Members, such as could hardly have existed had there 
 been a body of men attached to the University, but 
 unconnected with the Colleges. For these and other 
 reasons we feel it to be a matter of great importance to 
 raise up by the side of the Colleges an independent body, 
 which will bear witness to the distinct existence of the 
 University, and excite the Colleges to greater exertion." 
 
 Later on (beginning at p. 92), the Commissioners 
 trace the " operation of the system of University Instruc- 
 tion, or rather its failure. . . During the Middle Ages, 
 whilst the whole governing body of the University con- 
 sisted of Teachers only, the flourishing state of the 
 University indicated of itself a flourishing state of 
 University teaching. These ancient Teachers generally 
 gave place to the Praelectorships established by the 
 University, or founded in certain Colleges ; and these 
 Praelectors were (in part at least) superseded by the 
 endowed Professors, who, in the Laudian Code, were form- 
 ally acknowledged as the Instructors of the University. 
 It may be, however, doubted whether the Professorial 
 system ever attained a full development. . . The 
 general fact is unquestionable that the Professors are not 
 now the Teachers of the University ; and that of all the 
 functions of the Academic body, that which was once, 
 and which in the Statutes is still presumed to be, the 
 most important, might cease to exist altogether, with 
 hardly any perceptible shock to the general system of the 
 place." 
 
 The Commissioners then give reasons for restoring 
 the Professorial system, and the old quarrel between 
 Professors and Tutors rages over many passages of their 
 Report. Mark Pattison is the foremost critic of the 
 Professorial system, while Professor Halford Vaughan 
 is the chief witness in its favour. The Commissioners 
 proposed to establish Assistant-Professors, or Lecturers, 
 a grade of Instructors subordinate to the Professors, but 
 yet lecturing on the same subjects, and, if need be, acting 
 as their deputies or substitutes. 1 They also came to the 
 conclusion that the combination of Professorial and 
 Tutorial teaching was "not only possible, but desirable," 2 
 
 1 Report, p. 98. 2 lb. p. 99. 
 
110 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 and quote in their support the authority of Jowett. They 
 sum up in these words : " Our conclusion therefore is, 
 that for any healthy and complete scheme of University 
 Reform, it will be necessary to reconstruct the Profes- 
 sorial system, to procure for the Professors ample 
 endowments, to raise them to an important position in 
 the University, and to call to their aid a body of younger 
 men, under the name of Lecturers, in order that the 
 supremacy of Learning and Science may be duly 
 recognised, that the permanent services of able men may 
 be secured for Academical purposes, and that the Educa- 
 tion of the people may be conducted on general principles 
 acknowledged and authorised by the University." 1 
 
 The Commissioners next proceed to consider means for 
 restoring the Professorial system. They suggest a new 
 arrangement of the Staff, better methods of appoint- 
 ment, the removal of restrictions, guarantees for activity, 
 increase of income, and power for the University to meet 
 an advance, or an altered distribution in the several 
 departments of knowledge, by making necessary changes 
 with the consent of the Crown. Their other main pro- 
 posals, the abolition of " close " Fellowships and Scholar- 
 ships, and the creation of Non-Collegiate Students, both 
 aimed at increasing the power of the University. By the 
 abolition of the restrictions on endowments, they hoped 
 for " a considerable accession of persons capable of doing 
 honour to their respective Societies and serving the 
 University." 2 They also expected that the Colleges would 
 take advantage of their liberty to supplement the revenues 
 of the University from their own resources. 
 
 The Commissioners, it will be seen, were cautious in 
 the removal of restrictions on Fellowships. They were 
 in favour of confirming the practices of non-residence and 
 of celibacy, but of doing away with the obligations to 
 take Orders, to resign a Fellowship on coming into 
 property, and to proceed to the superior Degrees. 
 Generally on the question of endowments they say : 
 " These are the recommendations we have to offer for 
 re-distributing the College revenues so as to meet the 
 wants of the times. In this way the Scholarships 
 
 i lb. p. 102. 2 lb. p. 153. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. Ill 
 
 would become stimulants to all the Schools in the 
 country ; the Fellowships would act as rewards to those 
 who are advancing in their studies ; the Professorships 
 and Lectureships would be an object for Fellows, and 
 would raise the University to its proper position as a 
 seat of learning." ' Here is a career marked clearly out 
 in its successive grades. 
 
 As to University Government the Commissioners 
 proposed : — 
 
 1. " That the University should henceforth have full 
 authority to make, abrogate or alter Statutes, with the 
 exception of a few Fundamental Articles not to be altered 
 without the consent of the Crown or some other superior 
 authority." 
 
 2. " That the right of initiating measures should be 
 confined to a body comprising Professors and other 
 Academical Teachers as well as the Members of the 
 Hebdomadal Board. For this purpose it may be 
 expedient that the body called Congregation should be 
 remodelled, so as to consist of all Heads of Houses, 
 the Proctors, all Professors, and Public Lecturers, 
 together with the Senior Tutors of all Colleges and 
 Halls ; that the members of this body should possess 
 the right of originating measures ; that it should be 
 convened by the Vice-Chancellor to discuss measures, 
 only on the written request of a fixed number of its 
 Members ; that it should be empowered to appoint 
 Delegacies for discharging the functions usually belong- 
 ing to the Committees of Deliberative bodies ; that its 
 members should be allowed to address the House in 
 English ; that measures, after being passed by this 
 House of Congregation, should be proposed to the House 
 of Convocation simply for acceptance or rejection, in 
 the same manner that measures emanating from the 
 Hebdomadal Board are now proposed ; that, these 
 changes being made, the Hebdomadal Board should 
 continue to discharge its executive and administrative 
 functions, and should also retain its present right of 
 originating measures." 2 
 
 It is also noteworthy that Recommendation 11 runs : 
 
 1 lb. p. 181. 2 16. p. 256. 
 
112 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " That there should be a public Examination for all 
 young men before Matriculation." 
 
 The Cambridge Commissioners were the Bishop of 
 Chester, Dr. Peacock (Dean of Ely), Sir John Herschell, 
 Sir John Romilly (Attorney-General), and Professor 
 Adam Sedgwick. They appointed as their Secretary the 
 Rev. W. H. Bateson, B.D., Public Orator of the University, 
 and President and Senior Bursar of St. John's College. 
 Their Report strikes one as by no means so able a docu- 
 ment as that submitted by their colleagues at Oxford. 
 It moves along in slow and ponderous style, dropping no 
 doubt many pearls of wisdom by the way, but these have 
 a knack of running into dark and unsuspected corners, 
 and may easily be overlooked. It contains no summary 
 of recommendations to aid the tired reader. Nevertheless 
 it will be well to deal with it in some detail. 
 
 The chief abuses of which University reformers had 
 made complaint were: (1) the obsolete character of the 
 governing bodies ; (2) the inadequacy and the inefficiency 
 of the teaching ; (3) the system of " close " Fellowships 
 and Scholarships ; (4) the expensiveness of a University 
 course ; and (5) Religious Tests. These five points will 
 now be considered in order. 
 
 The question of organisation is but lightly handled. 
 The Commissioners point out that on March 7, 1849, the 
 University had appointed a Syndicate to revise the 
 Statutes. 1 This Syndicate had prepared a Draft of an 
 amended Code, which included proposals to alter the 
 constitution of the Caput Senatus, to limit its powers, and 
 to institute a Council of Legislation. The then existing 
 Constitution of the University of Cambridge is thus 
 described in terms which amplify the slight sketch pre- 
 viously given of it : — 
 
 " The Senate, or Legislative Body of the University, is 
 divided into two Houses, corresponding to the Academical 
 distinction of Regents and Non-Regents. The Regent 
 House consists of the Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, 
 the Proctors, the Taxors, 2 the Moderators, the Esquire 
 
 1 Report, p. 3. 
 
 2 Officials who fixed the rents of lodging-houses and hostels to save 
 the undergraduates from extortionate charges. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 113 
 
 Bedells, ' provided they be Masters of Arts, all Masters of 
 less than five, and Doctors of Divinity, Civil Law, and 
 Physic, of less than two years standing ; five years in the 
 former case and two in the latter being the period during 
 which the rules of the University impose a liability to 
 perform the duties of Regency, that is of presiding at the 
 public Disputations or Exercises in the Schools. The 
 Non-Regent House is composed of Masters of Arts of more 
 than five years standing, of Bachelors of Divinity who 
 have previously been Masters of Arts, and Doctors of 
 Divinity, Civil Law and Physic, of more than two years 
 standing. 
 
 " From the Members of the two Houses there is formed 
 a Council, called the Caput Senatus, or Head of the 
 Senate ; consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, a Doctor in 
 each of the Faculties of Divinity, Civil Law, and Physic ; 
 one Non-Regent Master of Arts ; and one Regent Master 
 of Arts. The appointment of the five persons who are 
 associated with the Vice-Chancellor in this Council is 
 made annually in the following manner: The Vice- 
 Chancellor proposes the names of five persons, who are 
 qualified to serve in the several capacities. Each of the 
 two Proctors also proposes the names of five other persons 
 so qualified. Out of the fifteen thus proposed, the Vice- 
 Chancellor, the Heads of Colleges, the Doctors of the three 
 Faculties and the two Scrutators 2 elect, by a majority of 
 votes, five ; who, with the Vice-Chancellor constitute the 
 Caput for the ensuing year. The ordinary subjects 
 requiring the votes of the Senate are called Graces, under 
 which name are now comprehended all Grants, Orders, 
 and Rules made by the authority of the Senate for the 
 administration of University affairs. The Graces are, in 
 the first instance, submitted to the Caput ; each member 
 of which has, by the Statutes of Elizabeth, the power of 
 rejection by his sole negative voice. 3 A Grace, after 
 
 1 Ornamental officials who are in personal attendance on the Chan- 
 cellor and Vice-Chancellor. 
 
 2 Officials who counted the votes in the Non-Regent House. 
 3 This power of veto was not so absurd as it looks on the face of it, 
 as any member of the Senate had the right to propose a Grace and have 
 it voted on within twenty-four hours. Thus on Dec. 4, 1834, Prof. Pryme 
 offered to the Senate two Graces for appointing Syndicates to consider the 
 propriety of abolishing or modifying subscription on graduation. Both 
 were rejected in the Caput. (Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., p. 579.) 
 
114 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 passing the Caput, is publicly recited, first by the Scruta- 
 tors in the Non-Regent House, and next by the Proctors 
 in the Regent House. The Congregation is then sus- 
 pended for a customary interval of time; and, on its 
 reassembling, the Grace is again recited in the Non-Regent 
 House, where, in the case of any opposition to it, the 
 Scrutators collect the votes. If it be passed there by a 
 majority of votes, it is then forwarded to the Regent 
 House, where the Proctors observe a like form in taking 
 the opinion of that House. The Grace, if passed by them, 
 thereby becomes valid, and is registered in the Records of 
 the University." ' 
 
 The Syndicate had shown decided conservatism in 
 the way in which they dealt with the form of government 
 here described. The Commissioners say: "We cannot 
 hesitate to express our pleasure to find such a proposal 
 emanating from the University itself. It has evidently 
 been framed with careful deliberation, and with an 
 especial view as well to preserve the balance of power 
 among the several Colleges, as also to prevent the excite- 
 ment and rivalries of a more popular and unlimited mode 
 of appointment. The suggested scheme has received the 
 unanimous approval of the Syndicate, and we hope it may 
 receive the sanction of the Senate." 2 Parliament, however, 
 went beyond the Syndicate Report, and it is therefore 
 unnecessary to say more about a form of government 
 which never fully attained even a paper existence. 
 
 The second complaint of the reformers as to the 
 inadequacy and inefficiency of the teaching at the Univer- 
 sities is the main charge, and there is abundant evidence 
 that the Cambridge Commissioners so regarded it. Their 
 chief criticism of the Professorial system as then existing 
 occurs incidentally under the heading " Lecture Rooms," 
 and is as follows 8 : — " The Professors, in fact, are never 
 called together, or co-operate as a body, and are subject to 
 no authority or control beyond the special provisions of 
 their several foundations ; and if these are neglected, or 
 have become inapplicable, there is no readily available 
 means to enforce them in one case, or modify them in the 
 other. As a natural consequence of this want of organisa- 
 
 l Report, p. 13. 2 Report, p. 15. 3 Report, p. 115. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 115 
 
 tion, there exists no arrangement by which the order of 
 succession of the lectures is regulated and adjusted to the 
 wants of the students, or by which a continuous system 
 of public instruction, in any considerable department of 
 study, can be properly carried out ; and though the Vice- 
 Chancellor, since the institution of the new Triposes in 
 1848, has been accustomed to issue, in the month of Octo- 
 ber, a programme of the lectures to be given by the 
 Professors in the ensuing academical year, it is not 
 formed as the result of a conference among them, but 
 merely records their separate answers to a circular letter 
 addressed to them with a blank column, which they are 
 requested to fill up with the term, place, hour, and subject 
 of their lectures." 
 
 They also report ' : " That there is a very general dis- 
 satisfaction with the present state of tuition in the 
 University " : and add, " It will also have been noticed that 
 one of the chief embarrassments in the way of a satisfac- 
 tory solution of the question consists in the difficulty 
 which would be generally experienced by the smaller 
 Colleges, if they were to attempt to provide a staff of 
 Tutors competent, both in number and variety of attain- 
 ments, to afford the requisite amount of instruction and 
 with the requisite classification of the students, in all the 
 departments of University study. Moreover, the diffi- 
 culties to which we have referred, so far as they may have 
 already been experienced by the smaller Colleges, in pro- 
 viding instruction in a sufficient amount and quality for 
 the present University Examinations, must in a short 
 time be greatly aggravated, now that the University has 
 extended its range of honours and afforded to the student 
 an opportunity to win distinctions in other important 
 departments of human learning." 
 
 On the positive side they report : — " From the 
 observations which we have premised we arrive at the 
 conclusion, that in any plan which may be devised for 
 ameliorating the state of University teaching, the two 
 principal conditions to be satisfied are : (1) that there shall 
 be a definite and permanent career provided for the 
 teachers; and (2) that a reasonable latitude of choice 
 
 1 pp. 74, 79. 
 
116 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 should be allowed to the pupils as to what teachers they 
 will select for their guidance. Two other conditions of a 
 secondary character, and closely connected with each 
 other, are : (1) that there shall be adequate facilities for the 
 classification of pupils ; (2) due economy in the adminis- 
 tration of the system." * 
 
 The Commissioners were of opinion that it was very 
 desirable that a general examination should be passed by 
 all students in the course of their second year. " The 
 requisite provision for preparing students for this 
 preliminary examination, we are disposed to leave in the 
 hands of the several Colleges. . . But for the higher 
 duty of instructing those who had passed the preliminary 
 examination, we are desirous of creating a numerous 
 staff of Public Lecturers. We should prefer the title of 
 Lecturer to that of Professor or Sub-Professor, mainly 
 because we think the teaching of such persons 
 must be for the most part catechetical, and therefore 
 different from that of the Professors. A new title 
 will also be desirable on other accounts, inasmuch 
 as we shall propose that both the mode of appoint- 
 ment, the functions and the remuneration of these 
 Instructors shall be different from any of those 
 now known in the University. For we should propose 
 that the remuneration of these teachers should be partly 
 a fixed stipend dependent on continued residence within 
 the University and on compliance with such regulations 
 as may be framed for their guidance, and partly the fees 
 paid by the particular pupils attending their respective 
 classes. . . In our opinion it would be a satisfactory 
 system if the payment (for College tuition), whatever 
 might be its amount, which we think must be left to be 
 determined by the University from time to time, were 
 divided into two parts, according to such a proportion as 
 might be deemed fitting, one of which should be devoted 
 to the remuneration of the College Tutor acting in the 
 capacity of sponsor or guardian of the student's conduct, 
 and the other should be appropriated to defray the cost of 
 his instruction, being paid to the College up to the time 
 of passing the general preliminary examination, and 
 
 1 pp. 80, 81. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 117 
 
 afterwards to the University for the maintenance of the 
 Staff of Public Lecturers. . . 
 
 " A code of Bye-laws to be carefully framed by the 
 authority of the Senate would be requisite to apportion 
 among the different departments of study the fund which 
 it is proposed to raise as well out of the quarterly 
 payments of the students for tuition as by subsidies from 
 the corporate funds of the several Colleges. 
 
 " It appears also, that another advantage will be 
 derived from the institution of the office referred to. It 
 will be the means of retaining in the immediate service 
 of the University a body of men of high character for 
 learning and science. . > 
 
 " We have recommended, generally, that the staff of 
 Instructors who are to conduct the public teaching of the 
 University should be composed of two classes — Professors 
 and Public Lecturers. The first class would consist of 
 men whose character for learning and ability is fully 
 established, holding permanent appointments, whose 
 income should be mainly at least provided by the endow- 
 ment of their Chairs ; the second would be formed of men 
 of less assured eminence, many of them just entering on 
 public life, and looking for much of their remuneration, 
 from their popularity as teachers, at least in those depart- 
 ments of study where the students are numerous, and 
 where it is desirable or practicable to keep in full activity 
 the principle of competition, without which their func- 
 tions would sooner or later be usurped by other parties. 
 But even as respects this second class, there are many 
 departments of study where the number of students is 
 necessarily small, and where the principle of competition 
 would either cease to operate or involve a needless multi- 
 plication of teachers. In such cases it will rest with those 
 in whom the appointment of such Professors or Lecturers 
 is vested to select those who are known from their pre- 
 vious character and reputation to be fully competent for 
 the duties which they are required to discharge." 
 
 The Commissioners then turn their attention to the 
 Boards of Studies which they have recommended in 
 various parts of the Report and find that there are Pro- 
 fessors enough to form the nucleus of the following 
 Boards:— (1) Board of Theological Studies, (2) Board of 
 
118 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Legal Studies, (3) Board of Medical Studies, (4) Board of 
 Mathematical Studies, (5) Board of Classical Studies, (6) 
 Board of Natural Science Studies, (7) Board of Moral 
 Science Studies. Engineering Studies were to be sub- 
 ordinate to the Board of Mathematical Studies to begin 
 with, and Modern Language Studies to the Board of 
 Moral Science Studies, to which also Modern History 
 Studies were assigned. 1 
 
 Only one of these Boards was at that time in existence 
 —the Board of Mathematical Studies, which consisted of 
 the four Mathematical Professors, together with the 
 Moderators and Examiners for the Mathematical Tripos 
 for the year, as also those of the two years immediately 
 preceding. Mathematics at this time still reigned 
 supreme at Cambridge. " It is this department of study 
 which is pursued in the University with the greatest 
 earnestness, and which occupies the greatest number of 
 teachers, comprehending a very great majority of the 
 College and Private Tutors ; and as long as success in the 
 Mathematical Tripos continues to be the main avenue to 
 Fellowships, its supremacy amongst other branches of 
 academical study is not likely to be disturbed." 2 The 
 Commissioners were well pleased with the way in which 
 this Board had done its work. It had presented two 
 Reports, the first bearing date May 19, 1849, which were 
 " documents of much interest." It was clearly the model 
 on which the new " General Council of Studies " s was to 
 be fashioned, and is thus described : — 
 
 " This Board, according to the constitution which we 
 propose in other parts of our Report to give it, would be 
 called upon to exercise larger regulating powers extending 
 as well to lectures, and the cycle which they should 
 follow, as to examinations. Questions of no small 
 difficulty would present themselves in the distribution 
 and organisation of the lectures. These lectures must be 
 adapted also to the wants of students of various capacities 
 and very different states of preparation ; they must 
 recognise and provide for such an amount of competition 
 as will allow a sufficient freedom of choice to the student 
 and stimulate the exertions of the Lecturer; above all, 
 
 i Report, p. 88. a lb. pp. 96, 97. 3 lb. p. 104. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 119 
 
 such a Board must have the power, subject to due 
 regulation and control, of recruiting the body of Lecturers 
 from time to time by the addition of young men of 
 distinguished power and ability. We do not conceal from 
 ourselves the difficulties which would attend the successful 
 working out of this or any other system for conducting 
 the studies of the University, designed to supersede 
 another which has been so long in operation, connected 
 with so many interests, and supported, as it undoubtedly 
 would be, by all those who are adverse from principle or 
 habit to all considerable changes ; but we have ventured 
 to propose it as being, in our opinion, calculated to remove 
 some evils and anomalies which are of a very serious 
 nature, and also to restore to the public teaching of the 
 University its just influence and authority." ' 
 
 The Commissioners continue to dole out their views 
 all through the Report in this fragmentary fashion, so 
 that when we reach the section dealing with the Board of 
 Classical Studies, to which it was proposed to give the 
 same powers as were to be given to the Mathematical 
 Board, we find the following additional remarks : — 
 
 " It is, however, manifestly essential to the success of 
 such a system of Lectures in this or any other department 
 of learning or science that the attendance of students on 
 the University Lecturers should not be obstructed by an 
 unnecessary concurrence of Lectures on the same subjects 
 in the Colleges ; for it is obvious from the relation which 
 exists between a student and his College, that in a 
 competition for attendance upon University or College 
 Lectures, where it can be enforced in the one case and not 
 in the other, the compulsory lectures will always prevail- 
 It is only by strictly defining the respective provinces of 
 the University and the Colleges in the education of 
 students, and by preventing irregular intrusions on them, 
 either on the one part or the other, that they can be 
 made to work harmoniously together. To secure this 
 end, it appears to us to be necessary that every candidate 
 for a Degree in Arts, or for Honours in any Tripos, should 
 be required to produce a certificate of his having attended, 
 during the last four Terms of his residence, such a Course 
 
 1 lb. p. 97. 
 
120 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 of Public University Lectures as might be thought to be 
 an appropriate and adequate preparation in his particular 
 line of study." x 
 
 As for Boards of Study generally the Commissioners 
 say 2 : — " We have sufficiently enlarged upon the impor- 
 tance of instituting Boards of Study, corresponding to the 
 several courses by which the B.A., or the Professional 
 Degrees may be attainable. The several Boards would be 
 composed of Professors belonging to each particular 
 branch of study, together with such other Members of the 
 Senate as it might be thought expedient to unite with 
 them. To these Boards we would confide the regulation 
 of their several departments ; their proceedings, when not 
 merely administrative, being subject to the approbation 
 of the Senate, and consequently to the revision of the 
 Council of Legislation. We think that it would also be 
 the province of each Board as well to select and nominate 
 the Public Lecturers of their several branches of study, as 
 also to secure in each branch due organisation of the 
 teaching of the Public Lecturers and the Professors, to 
 prescribe the cycle of subjects to be taught, the order in 
 which they are to be taken, and to suggest and propose 
 the arrangements and changes required from time to time 
 to maintain the constant efficiency of the system of 
 instruction. 
 
 " But there are many questions which may arise 
 affecting the relations of these Boards to each other as 
 well as to the whole body of the Professors, which will 
 require from time to time to be considered and determined 
 by some superior authority, such as a General Council of 
 Studies. 
 
 " We recommend that a Council should be instituted, 
 which should possess the power of nominating, for the 
 sanction of the Senate, the candidates to fill vacant Pro- 
 fessorships, when their election is not provided for by 
 special Statutes ; and it might be expedient to constitute 
 the same body as a General Council of Studies, who should 
 be authorised to meet from time to time, and to delibe- 
 rate, and, when necessary, to report to the Senate upon 
 all matters which relate to the public instruction of the 
 
 i lb., pp. 99, 100. 2 lb., pp. 103, 104. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 121 
 
 University, and to give unity of action to the Boards who 
 preside over its several departments. In this Council all 
 Professors would naturally be included. It might, how- 
 ever, be objected that if it were composed of Professors 
 only, its members would be disposed to view the questions 
 submitted to them rather with reference to the interests of 
 the class to which they belonged than to those of the 
 University at large ; that in elections and the distribution 
 of funds entrusted to them, a spirit of exclusion and 
 favouritism might sometimes manifest itself, which would 
 tend to provoke feelings of jealousy and distrust in other 
 members of the University, and thus expose their recom- 
 mendations to much opposition. In order to guard 
 against the formation of such an exclusive spirit and to 
 give to the constitution of the Board a more comprehen- 
 sive and popular character, it would seem to be expedient 
 to add a certain proportion of other members of the 
 Senate. Thus the Vice-Chancellors of the current and 
 past year, the Public Orator, the Registrary, the two 
 Proctors, and the two Moderators of the current year, 
 might be ex officio members of it. And if with them were 
 combined a certain number of other persons, as for 
 instance, two Heads of Colleges, appointed by their body, 
 and eight members of the Senate, appointed by the 
 Colleges according to a specified cycle, a body would be 
 formed which would be little likely to be influenced by 
 the personal interests and feelings of any predominant 
 class of its members to such an extent as seriously to 
 compromise its usefulness and impartiality." 
 
 Ten new Professorships were thought necessary by 
 the Commissioners. These were : — 
 
 Two of Theology. 
 
 One of General Jurisprudence. 
 
 One of the Law of Nations and Diplomacy. 
 
 One of Anatomy. 
 
 One of Chemistry. 
 
 One of Latin. 
 
 One of Zoology. 
 
 One of Practical Engineering. 
 
 One of Descriptive Geometry. 
 As for the additional means of endowment thereby 
 rendered necessary, the Commissioners were of opinion 
 
122 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 that sufficient means might be found for all purposes 
 without imposing upon the Colleges the burden of contri- 
 buting from their corporate revenues a larger annual sum 
 than under all circumstances might reasonably be ex- 
 pected of them, ' but they were further of opinion that 
 both staffs of Instructors, as well the College as the Public 
 Lecturer, should be subsidised by payments out of the 
 corporate funds of the several Colleges. To the same 
 source they also looked for additional stipends in aid of 
 the existing Staff of Professors, and to endow such new 
 Chairs as may appear to be necessary. 2 
 
 With regard to the principles upon which the emolu- 
 ments of Professors should be regulated, the Com- 
 missioners quote with approval Sir William Hamilton's 
 condensation of Lord Bacon's triple appeal to the Crown 
 and to the Nation on the wisdom and necessity of dealing 
 liberally with teachers, 3 and add, " We should be induced 
 not to fix the incomes of the Professors as high as that 
 which other professional employments would generally 
 secure for them, and in mentioning incomes varying from 
 £400 to £800 per annum, attainable at a moderately early 
 period of life, we indicate a scale by which the University 
 would probably be able to command the services of men 
 of the highest order in every department of science and 
 learning. . . In the framing of the Statutes for regu- 
 lating the Professorships or Lectureships to be hereafter 
 founded, or those already in existence, which receive an 
 augmentation of income, there are some conditions which 
 should be rigorously enforced. First, residence in the 
 University for at least six months in the year. Secondly, 
 that the whole or a considerable part of their salary 
 should not be paid unless the required Lectures had been 
 delivered. If, however, the approach of old age or con- 
 tinued illness should render the effective performance of 
 duties no longer possible or no longer profitable to the 
 University, then some part of the stipend in proportion to 
 the length of service should be assigned to the Professor 
 or Lecturer by way of pension with the title of emeritus." * 
 
 As for the method of appointment of Professors, the 
 Commissioners say : — " If we assume that the appointment 
 
 1 Report, p. 102. 2 lb. p. 85. Cf. Pattison, Suggestions, pp. 57, 58. 
 
 3 Discussions, Appendix C, p. 784. 4 Report, p. 115. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 123 
 
 to Professorships which have been created by special 
 Founders should continue to be regulated by the special 
 provisions of their deeds of foundation, it becomes a 
 question of no small difficulty, but of paramount import- 
 ance, to determine the best and safest modes in which 
 elections should be made to the Professorships already 
 founded or to be hereafter founded by the University 
 itself. . . We should be disposed to recommend a middle 
 course, entrusting to a General Board or Council of 
 Studies the selection of one or more candidates to be by 
 them nominated to the whole body of the Senate, for 
 final confirmation or election." ' 
 
 Let us next turn to the recommendations which 
 concern the Colleges, as under this head Complaints num- 
 bered 2 and 3 above are dealt with incidentally. They 
 are : — 
 
 That a revision of the ancient Statutes of the Colleges 
 has become a matter of urgent importance. 2 
 
 That it would be highly beneficial to the several Col- 
 leges if certain limitations on the election to Fellowships 
 (excepting the case of particular Schools) were entirely 
 removed by an enactment of the Legislature; and that 
 such limitations should be prohibited in the case of future 
 accession of endowment/ 
 
 That it would be a great benefit to those Colleges in 
 which Bye-Fellowships exist (i.e. Fellowships not on the 
 Foundation, and giving the holders no share in the govern- 
 ment of the College), if gradually and without prejudice 
 to the interests of the existing Fellows, the different bene- 
 factions were incorporated and the Fellowships made 
 more nearly equal. 4 
 
 That in the three larger Colleges there should be an 
 annual election of Fellows at a fixed time ; and that 
 in the other Colleges it would be convenient if, upon a 
 vacancy occurring in a Fellowship, the space of twelve 
 months were allowed to fill it up, beyond which time it 
 should not be in the power of the Society to keep any of 
 their Fellowships vacant.'' 
 
 That the law of some of the Colleges, requiring tho 
 
 1 Report, p. 103. a pp. 150, 151, 152. 3 pp. 157-168. 
 
 'pp. 167, 168. 5 p. 170. 
 
124 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 Fellows to enter into Holy Orders, might be relaxed so as 
 to allow of a reasonable interval of time before a newly- 
 elected Fellow should be required to take Orders or vacate 
 his Fellowship. 1 
 
 That Fellows of Colleges should not be required to 
 reside, due precaution being taken for the transaction of 
 the ordinary business of the several societies. 2 
 
 That in revising the Statutes of the University and 
 of the Colleges, it would be necessary to make provision 
 for the continuance of the rule by which the condition of 
 celibacy is attached to the tenure of all Fellowships. 3 
 
 That it would be advantageous if it were enacted by 
 the Legislature, that where a beneficial College lease has 
 been allowed to expire, no lease of such property should 
 be valid for which any fine or premium is accepted. 4 
 
 That it would be highly desirable to make provision 
 for periodical visitations of the several Colleges, and that 
 it would be expedient to remove any doubts as to where 
 the Visitorial authority resides in particular Colleges. 5 
 
 The practical means by which the recommendations 
 of the Report were to be carried out are thus stated : — 
 
 " Having now indicated the principles upon which we 
 think that any reform of the University and Colleges 
 should be conducted, it remains to consider the practical 
 means by which such principles could most satisfactorily 
 be applied. There is no doubt much within the power of 
 the several Colleges themselves. We believe, however, 
 that no complete correction of the evils we have pointed 
 out can be effected unless under the authority of the 
 Legislature. How this is to be applied is a matter of 
 grave consideration. The revision of Statutes, the exami- 
 nation of sub-foundations, the incorporation of Bye- 
 Fellows, the adjustment of the claims of Schools, the 
 determination of the relative number of Fellows and 
 Scholars, and many other points which we have noticed, 
 involve a multiplicity of details which demand the 
 greatest care, diligence, and prudence for their correct 
 and satisfactory settlement. If Parliament should enter- 
 tain the question of the reform of the University and its 
 Colleges, it seems to us that it would be convenient to lay 
 
 1 p. 171. 2 pp. 171, 172. 3 p. 172. 4 p. 199. 5 p. 199. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 125 
 
 down, in an Act of the Legislature, the principles on 
 which such reforms should be conducted, and to entrust 
 a Board with temporary powers necessary for carrying 
 them into effect. . . The results of the deliberations of 
 such a Board might properly be referred to Your Majesty 
 in Council for final sanction." l 
 
 As for the fourth grievance — the expensiveness of a 
 University career, the Commissioners' finding is that it 
 was substantially non-existent. They say : " We have 
 great satisfaction in expressing our opinion that the 
 expenses of the great majority of the students are 
 moderate. The fact reflects credit both on themselves, 
 and on the authorities of the University and the several 
 Colleges. By reference to the Evidence it will be seen 
 that the necessary expense of residence is small ; and 
 that the actual average expense does not exceed a 
 reasonable limit." 2 
 
 With a view to the reduction of this necessary 
 expense the system of Unattached Students had been 
 strongly advocated. The Commissioners reported against 
 it in these words : — " It has been contended that it would 
 be desirable to revert to ancient practice as far as to allow 
 of matriculated students of the University, not attached 
 to any College or Hall. The question has received our 
 careful consideration, and we are of opinion that it would 
 not be expedient to adopt any change of that nature in 
 the present system of the University. It appears to us 
 that one of the most striking and valuable characteristics 
 of our English Universities is to be found in the domestic 
 system of their education, by which habits of order and 
 moral control are most satisfactorily obtained. . . The 
 two systems of Collegiate and Unattached Students seem 
 to us to be hardly compatible with one another ; at least 
 we cannot doubt that great difficulties would be experi- 
 enced in blending them harmoniously together, if the 
 class of students not affiliated to some Collegiate body 
 were recognised, and afterwards received any consider- 
 able accession of numbers. We come, therefore, to the 
 conclusion that the extension of the benefits of the 
 University, so as to embrace a larger number of students 
 
 l pp. 199, 200. 2 lb. p. 18. 
 
126 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 than at present exists, and more proportionate to the 
 great increase of our population and national wealth, 
 must be sought in a corresponding growth of our 
 Collegiate system, and in such improvements of the 
 existing foundations as may render them more generally 
 accessible and more generally useful." ' 
 
 They make one practical suggestion. " We think, 
 however, it would be very advantageous if buildings were 
 erected for the reception of students in immediate con- 
 nexion with, and under the direct control of, the Collegiate 
 bodies. For such Affiliated Halls we apprehend that no 
 fresh powers are required. They appear to have existed 
 in ancient times : sometimes under the name of Pension- 
 aries ; in other cases particular Hostels were attached to 
 Colleges, an instance of which is furnished by Physwick 
 Hostel, belonging to Gonville Hall, which was included in 
 the site of Trinity College on its foundation in 1546." 2 
 
 It will thus be seen that the two Commissions 
 came to opposite conclusions as to the admission of Non- 
 Collegiate Students. The Oxford Commissioners were in 
 favour of raising up by the side of the Colleges an inde- 
 pendent body which would bear witness to the distinct 
 existence of the University, and excite the Colleges 
 to greater exertion. 8 The Cambridge Commissioners 
 thought such a step both unnecessary and unwise. 
 
 To take the last of the five points — Religious Tests. 
 The Commissioners say : " Beyond this line there lies 
 another and a larger question on which we do not enter ; 
 namely, the expediency of admitting persons to Degrees 
 in Arts and Law and Physic, who are not members of the 
 Church of England. The subject would present com- 
 paratively few difficulties, if it involved only the confer- 
 ring of a certificate and title of Academical proficiency. 
 But the real difficulty lies in another point : whether the 
 internal system of Collegiate discipline and the course of 
 Academical administration could be so adjusted as to 
 comprehend persons of different religious opinions with- 
 out the neglect of religious ordinances, the compromise 
 of religious consistency, or the disturbance of religious 
 peace. 
 
 i lb. pp. 143, 144. 2 lb. p. 144. * See above, p. 109. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 127 
 
 " Not seeking to disguise our impression of the great- 
 ness of the difficulty, we yet desire to express our sense of 
 the importance of the question itself. 
 
 " The University is a great national institution ; 
 invested with important privileges by the favour of the 
 Crown or the authority of the Legislature. It exercises a 
 most extensive influence on the education of the higher 
 and middle classes of the community, and consequently 
 on the intellectual, moral and social character of the 
 nation. But its capacity of exercising this high preroga- 
 tive fully and completely must depend on its keeping pace 
 with the progress of enlightened opinion and moving in 
 sympathy and unison with the spirit of the age. It is 
 one of the noblest characteristics of our times that the 
 barriers, which long excluded so many of our fellow sub- 
 jects from the equal enjoyment of civil rights on account 
 of differences in religious opinion, have happily been 
 removed by the prevalence of a generous and wise policy. 
 The University will be placed, more or less, in a false 
 position, if it estranges itself from this great movement 
 of liberal progress. There is a manifest and intelligible 
 challenge to it to throw open the advantages of its system 
 of education, under proper securities, as widely as the 
 State has thrown open the avenues to civil rights and 
 honours. Undoubtedly, many of the endowments of its 
 Colleges are connected with the Church by links which it 
 would be an injustice to sever. Its school of Theology is 
 identified with the Church, and incapable of a separate 
 existence. But, as a great school of liberal education for 
 the lay professions, for the pursuits of general literature 
 and science, for the business and offices of active public 
 life, it should seem to be capable of a freer range and a 
 more extended usefulness without any compromise of 
 duty or apostacy of principle. Were it to enter on this 
 more open course in a spirit of generous magnanimity, 
 it might draw to itself a yet larger measure of public 
 sympathy and even find increased safety in thus identify- 
 ing itself with the liberal policy of the age. 
 
 " What securities should accompany such a concession 
 to public opinion ; what guarantees for internal peace 
 can be provided either by regulations of the University 
 or enactments of the Legislature ; how much can be 
 
128 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 made matter of compact, and how much must be left 
 to mutual confidence between the University and any- 
 new classes of students whom it may eventually be 
 induced to admit ; these are questions on which we do 
 not presume to express an opinion. We humbly leave 
 them to the effect of time, to the wisdom of the Legis- 
 lature, and to the gracious consideration of Your 
 Majesty." l From all which it is clear that the Cambridge 
 Commissioners were in favour of the abolition of Tests, 
 though they did not venture openly to recommend it. 
 
 The following were the recommendations as to the 
 University Library : — 
 
 " That the privilege which the Copyright Act gives to 
 the University might be advantageously commuted for a 
 money payment to be expended in the purchase and bind- 
 ing of such works recently purchased as might be deemed 
 to be worth preserving." 2 
 
 " That if additions should hereafter be made to the 
 Library, it seems desirable that a Reading-room should 
 be provided, where not only Undergraduates, but also 
 other persons not members of the University, might be 
 allowed to consult books under proper regulations." • 
 
 The Commissioners, in concluding their Report, 
 remark with approval on the reforms already made both 
 by the University and the Colleges, and continue : — 
 
 " That the University was ready to enlarge its cycle 
 of studies is proved by its instituting new Triposes of the 
 Moral and Natural Sciences ; and thus affording to most 
 of the Professors an extended field of usefulness. A like 
 spirit has been shown by the Colleges, which in several 
 instances have, at a great cost and no small sacrifice of 
 personal interests, enlarged their buildings, and in all 
 cases shown themselves careful guardians of their cor- 
 porate property, by foregoing a part of the income of 
 the existing body with a view to the prospective benefit 
 of the Society. 
 
 "Following rather than originating this opening source 
 of amelioration, we have, in the foregoing Report, recom- 
 mended a series of measures, in perfect harmony, as 
 we conceive, with the spirit which has prompted these 
 
 1 lb. p. 44. 2 I6. p. 129. 8 lb. p. 132. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850 129 
 
 beginning's, though in some respects going far beyond 
 them. We have proposed the restoration in its integrity 
 of the ancient supervision of the University over the 
 studies of its Members, by the enlargement of the Profes- 
 sorial system — by the addition of such supplementary 
 appliances to such system as may obviate the undue 
 encroachments of that of private tuition — by opening 
 avenues for acquiring Academical Honours in many new 
 and distinct branches of knowledge and professional 
 pursuit — by leaving to more aspiring students ample 
 opportunity to devote themselves to those lines of 
 acquirement in which natural bias has given them 
 capacity, or in which the force of circumstances has 
 rendered it urgent upon them to obtain pre-eminence ; 
 while not denying to the less highly gifted the social 
 advantage of an University Degree. Still following the 
 same lead, though here no doubt passing beyond the 
 immediate limits marked out by internal reformations, 
 we have recommended the removal of all restrictions 
 upon elections to Fellowships and Scholarships, and we 
 have pointed out the means by which, without any real 
 injury to the claims of particular Schools, all Fellowships 
 and Scholarships may be placed on such a footing as to 
 be brought universally under the one good rule of un- 
 fettered and open competition. In a like spirit we have 
 regarded the existing distribution of Collegiate emolu- 
 ments. We recognise the prevailing practice by which 
 Fellowships are looked upon as just rewards of eminent 
 merit, and as helps and encouragements to the further 
 prosecution of study or general advancement in life. 
 But, at the same time, bearing in mind that the Fellows 
 of Colleges were by the original constitution of the 
 University in the position of Teachers, and have laborious 
 duties assigned to them arising out of the old scheme of 
 Academical instruction, while in modern times the 
 Fellowships are frequently held by Non-residents, and 
 rarely contribute in any direct way to the course of 
 Academical instruction, though their emoluments far 
 exceed their original value, we have thought, that in 
 consideration of this practical exemption from the per- 
 formance of such educational duties, it is no more than 
 reasonable and equitable in return that an adequate 
 
130 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 contribution should be made from the Corporate Funds 
 of the several Colleges towards rendering the course of 
 Public Teaching, as carried on by the University itself, 
 more efficient and complete." 1 
 
 It will thus be seen that there are some striking 
 differences between the Reports of the two sets of Com- 
 missioners. The Oxford Commissioners boldry face the 
 fundamental question of the relation of the University 
 to the Colleges. They pronounce for the ancient 
 supremacy of the former over the latter, but the practical 
 measures which they recommend proved entirely in- 
 adequate to achieve the end they had in view. The 
 Cambridge Commissioners went on different lines. They 
 do not touch so explicitly on the vexed question of 
 University v. Colleges, nor do they exhibit the literary 
 grace or the lucid arrangement of their colleagues. 
 They make a great number of recommendations on all 
 kinds of subjects both great and small, 2 and these are so 
 mixed up together that the far-reaching nature of certain 
 reforms which they advocate is in danger of being 
 altogether overlooked. 
 
 Special attention may be called to begin with to 
 the recommendation on p. 104 of the Report, already 
 quoted and here repeated: — "That if the General Council 
 of Studies comprised all the Professors, the Vice- 
 Chan cellor of the current and past year, the Public 
 Orator, the Registrary, the two Proctors, the two 
 Moderators, two Heads of Colleges appointed by their 
 body, and eight members of the Senate ajypointed by the 
 Colleges according to a cycle, a body would be formed 
 which would be little likely to be influenced by the 
 personal interests and feelings of any predominant class 
 of its members to such an extent as seriously to com- 
 promise its usefulness and impartiality." In the year 
 1852 there were already twenty-one Professors, and the 
 Commissioners recommended the establishment of ten 
 others. 3 The composition, therefore, of the proposed 
 
 x pp. 202, 203. 
 
 2 Cooper, in his Annals of Cambridge, Vol. V., pp. 75—89, summarises 
 their recommendations under 127 heads. A few of these have to do with 
 the relations between the University and the Town. 
 
 8 Report, p. 102. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 131 
 
 General Council of Studies would have been mainly 
 Professorial, that is to say, it would have looked at 
 matters from the University standpoint. The Public 
 Orator and the Registrary are two University officials, 
 and it may be taken that they would have done the same. 
 The two Heads and the eight members of the Senate 
 appointed by the Colleges would naturally have taken the 
 College point of view, while the Vice-Chancellors, the 
 Proctors, and the Moderators, as discharging University 
 functions, and yet very closely connected with the College 
 system, might be thought likely to adopt an independent 
 attitude. Sir William Hamilton himself would probably 
 have been satisfied with this arrangement, as giving the 
 University a preponderating voice in advising as to the 
 best developments of study at Cambridge. 
 
 There is, too, an echo of the controversies sketched in 
 the preceding pages in the sentence quoted from p. 70 of 
 the Report: " That if the Professors are to continue to form 
 useful and essential members of the University, their 
 duties must be completely assimilated with its system, 
 and be modified therefore from time to time to suit the 
 changes which it undergoes ; and that it is chiefly owing 
 to the want of necessary readjustments to the varying 
 circumstances of the University that some of them have 
 lost their proper influence in its public teaching." The 
 Commissioners here recognise the disrepute into which 
 Professorial or University teaching had fallen, and 
 suggest a method of improving it. 
 
 Most daring of all is the suggestion (p. 82) that the 
 Colleges should only be responsible for the instruction of 
 the Undergraduates up to the time of their passing the 
 Previous Examination, i.e. normally to their fifth term, 
 and that all the instruction for Degrees should be handed 
 over to the Professoriate, the fees for tuition being divided 
 in a proportion to be agreed on. ' This plan would have 
 put all the tuition that ought properly to be done at a 
 University into the hands of the University teachers, 
 leaving only the belated school teaching to the Colleges. 
 The University staff of teachers, which was to be greatly 
 
 1 This recommendation appears to be a modification of the scheme 
 proposed by Mr. Bonamy Price at Oxford in 1850, and set out in Chapter 
 Y. of this book. 
 
132 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 enlarged, was also to be subsidised from College funds. 
 Two principles are here involved : (1) that the University 
 should have the ultimate control of the teaching ; and (2) 
 that they should so far control the College finances as to 
 be able to draw from them the funds necessary to support 
 the increased University staff. These principles have 
 never yet been fully acted on ; they were lost sight of 
 for many years, but they will one day be considered on 
 their merits. 
 
CHAPTEK VII. 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY ACTS OP 1854 and 1856. 
 
 It will be remembered that it was Lord John Russell, 
 who, as the head of Her Majesty's Government, advised the 
 issue of the Royal Commission in 1850. In 1852, when 
 the Commission reported, the Earl of Derby was Prime 
 Minister, and in the Queen's Speech of November in 
 that year there appeared a paragraph stating that the 
 Universities had been asked to consider the recommen- 
 dations of the Reports. Shortly after, the Derby Admin- 
 istration was defeated in the House of Commons, and 
 the Earl of Aberdeen became Prime Minister, with Mr. 
 Gladstone as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord 
 Palmerston as Home Secretary. No definite step was 
 taken till December 12th, 1853, when Lord Palmerston 
 sent a letter to the Chancellors of the two Universities 
 couched in the following terms :— 
 
 " Sir, — Her Majesty's Government have had before 
 
 them the Letter addressed by my predecessor on the 
 
 4th of October, 1852, to the Chancellor of the University 
 
 o Oxford 
 
 Cambridge 
 
 "A statement was made to the House of Commons 
 (subsequent to the Queen's Speech on the 11th of 
 November, 1852, which stated that copies of the Com- 
 missioners' Report had been sent to the two Univer- 
 sities) that the Government thought it desirable that 
 ample time should be allowed for a full examination 
 of these matters, and that it was not intended that 
 any legislation on the subject should be proposed to 
 Parliament during the then current session. 
 
 "At the same time, though it was not deemed expe- 
 dient to discuss details, yet reference was made to 
 some essential points with respect to which Her 
 Majesty's Government conceived that it would be the 
 desire of Parliament that plans of improvement should 
 be entertained. 
 
134 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 " These points were : — 
 
 " 1. An alteration of the constitution of the Uni- 
 versities, with a view to the more general and effective 
 representation of the several main elements which 
 properly enter into their composition. 
 
 " 2. The adoption of measures which might enable the 
 Universities, without weakening the proper securities for 
 discipline, to extend the benefits of training to a greater 
 number of students, whether in connexion or not with 
 Colleges and Halls, and also to diminish the relative 
 disadvantages which now attach within Colleges and Halls 
 to students of comparatively limited pecuniary means. 
 
 "3. The establishment of such rules with regard to 
 Fellowships, and to the enjoyment of other College 
 endowments, as might wholly abolish or greatly modify 
 the restrictions which now, in many cases, attach to 
 those Fellowships and endowments, and might subject 
 the acquisition of such Fellowships and endowments 
 generally to the effective influence of competition. 
 
 "4. The establishment of such regulations with regard 
 to Fellowships thus to be acquired by merit as should 
 prevent them from degenerating into sinecures, and 
 especially the enactment of a provision, that after Fellow- 
 ships should have been held for such a time as might be 
 thought reasonable as rewards for early exertion and 
 distinction, they should either be relinquished, or should 
 only continue to be held on condition of residence, 
 coupled with a discharge of active duty in discipline or 
 tuition, or with the earnest prosecution of private study. 
 
 " 5. And, lastly, the establishment of provisions under 
 which Colleges possessed of means either particularly 
 ample, or now only partially applied to the purposes of 
 education or learning, might, in conformity with the 
 views which founders have often indicated, render some 
 portion of their property available for the general pur- 
 poses of the University beyond as well as within the 
 College walls, and might thus facilitate the energetic 
 prosecution of some branches of study, the importance 
 of which the Universities have of late distinctly and 
 specially acknowledged." 
 
 Lord Palmerston therefore requested the Chancellor 
 " to take an early opportunity of informing him what 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 135 
 
 measures of improvement the University or any of the 
 Colleges therein may be about to undertake, and what aid 
 they may desire from Parliament in the form either of 
 prohibitions, of enabling powers, or of new enactments." 
 
 On January 13th, 1854, the Syndicate appointed by 
 the University of Cambridge to consider Lord Palmer- 
 ston's letter reported, and their report was unanimously 
 accepted four days later. The main points in it were as 
 follows : — 
 
 1. It called attention to the labours of the Syndicate 
 appointed to revise the Statutes of the University on 
 March 7th, 1849 (or more than twelve months before the 
 announcement of the Royal Commission), and its scheme 
 for the reform of the Senate which was accepted by the 
 Commissioners. 
 
 2. It rejected the proposal to create Non-Collegiate 
 students but agreed with the erection of hostels in con- 
 nexion with or in dependence on the Colleges, adding 
 that " where Colleges do not possess the means of build- 
 ing, the purpose of providing accommodation for a greater 
 number of their Students might be effected, if occasion 
 required, by hiring houses in the town." 
 
 3. As regards Professorial and other University 
 foundations the Syndicate submitted "that the object in 
 view might be accomplished if enabling powers, to be 
 exercised for a limited time, were given by an Act of the 
 Legislature to a Board of persons who should deserve the 
 confidence of the University and the country." 
 
 The other points raised in Lord Palmerston's letter 
 were not dealt with because they concerned the Colleges 
 and not the University. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone had by this time shaken off the Toryism 
 which had impelled him in 1850 to oppose the appoint- 
 ment of the Royal Commission, and the duty fell on him 
 as Member for Oxford University to frame the Oxford 
 Bill on behalf of the Government. The Crimean War 
 was then imminent and broke out in February, 1854. 
 Mr. Gladstone, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, had 
 to provide the money wherewith to carry it on, 
 a sufficiently arduous task one would have imagined, 
 but his heart was not in the war, but in the cause of 
 educational reform. 
 
136 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Lord Morley thus writes of him 1 : "In none of the 
 enterprises of his life was he more industrious or ener- 
 getic. Before December he forwarded to Lord John 
 Russell what he called a rude draft, but the rude draft 
 contained the kernel of the plan that was ultimately 
 carried, with a suggestion even of the names of the Com- 
 missioners to whom operations were to be confided. . . 
 As he began, so he advanced, listening to everybody, 
 arguing with everybody, flexible, persistent, clear, practi- 
 cal, fervid, unconquerable. . . ' My whole heart is in 
 the Oxford Bill,' he writes (March 29), ' it is my consolation 
 under the pain with which I view the character my office 
 is assuming under the circumstances of war.' ' Gladstone 
 has been surprising everybody here,' writes a conspicuous 
 High Churchman from Oxford, ' by the ubiquity of his 
 correspondence. Three-fourths of the Colleges have been 
 in communication with him, on various parts of the Bill 
 more or less affecting themselves. He answers everybody 
 by return of post, fully and at length, quite entering into 
 their case and showing the greatest acquaintance with it.' 
 . . . What he saw was that if this Bill was thrown 
 out, no other half so favourable would ever again be 
 brought in. 
 
 " The scheme accepted by the Cabinet was in essentials 
 Mr. Gladstone's own. Jowett at the earliest stage sent 
 him a comprehensive plan, and soon after, saw Lord John 
 (Jan. 6). ' I must own,' writes the latter to Mr. Gladstone, 
 ' I was much struck by the clearness and completeness of 
 his views.' The difference between Jowett's plan and 
 Mr. Gladstone's was on the highly important point of 
 machinery. Jowett, who all his life had a weakness for 
 getting and keeping authority into his own hands, or the 
 hands of those he could influence, contended that after 
 Parliament had settled principles, Oxford itself could be 
 trusted to settle details far better than a little body of 
 great personages from outside, unacquainted with special 
 wants and special interests. Mr. Gladstone, on the other 
 hand, invented the idea of an Executive Commission with 
 statutory powers. The two plans were printed and circu- 
 lated, and the balance of opinion in the Cabinet went 
 
 1 Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 500. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 137 
 
 decisively for Mr. Gladstone's scheme. . . In drawing 
 the clauses Mr. Gladstone received the help of Bethell, the 
 Solicitor-General, at whose suggestion Phillimore and 
 Thring were called in for further aid in what was un- 
 doubtedly a task of exceptional difficulty. The process 
 brought into clearer light the truth discerned by Mr. 
 Gladstone from the first, that the enormous number of 
 diverse institutions that had grown up at Oxford made 
 resort to what he called sub-legislation inevitable ; that 
 is to say, they were too complex for Parliament, and could 
 only be dealt with by delegation to executive act. . . 
 
 " Oxford, scene of so many agitations for a score of 
 years past, was once more seized with consternation, 
 stupefaction, enthusiasm. A few private copies of the 
 draft were sent down from London for criticism. On the 
 Vice-Chancellor it left 'an impression of sorrow and sad 
 anticipations ' ; it opened deplorable prospects for the 
 University, the Church, for religion, for righteousness. 
 The Dean of Christ Church thought it not merely inexpe- 
 dient, but unjust and tyrannical. Jowett, on the other 
 hand, was convinced that it must satisfy all reasonable 
 reformers, and added emphatically in writing to Mr. 
 Gladstone, 'It is to yourself and Lord John that the Uni- 
 versity will be indebted for the greatest boon that it has 
 ever received.' After the introduction of the Bill the 
 obscurantists made a final effort to call down one of their 
 old pelting hailstorms. A petition against the Bill was 
 submitted to Convocation ; happily it passed by a majority 
 of no more than two." 
 
 There is only one point in the above account which 
 seems to call for criticism — the invention by Mr. Gladstone 
 of the idea of an Executive Commission with statutory 
 powers. As has already been pointed out in Chapter VI., 
 the Cambridge Commissioners had written : " If Parlia- 
 ment should entertain the question of the reform of the 
 University and its Colleges, it seems to us that it would 
 be convenient to lay down, in an Act of the Legislature, 
 the principles upon which such reforms should be con- 
 ducted, and to entrust a Board with temporary powers 
 necessary for carrying them into effect. . . The result 
 of the deliberations of such a Board as we have ventured 
 to suggest, might properly be referred to Your Majesty in 
 
138 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Council for final sanction." 1 The Report of the Cam- 
 bridge Syndicate, already quoted in this chapter, 
 endorses this suggestion of the Commissioners, and it 
 was the plan followed in 1854, 1856 and 1877. Mr. 
 Gladstone's reputation will not be injured by so small 
 a subtraction from the sum total of his achievements. 
 
 Though Mr. Gladstone had framed the Bill lie 
 was not put in charge of it. It was Lord John Russell 
 who on March 17th, 1854, rose in the House of Commons 
 to move for leave to bring in a Bill to make further 
 provision for the good government of the University 
 of Oxford and of the Colleges therein. 2 He asked for 
 indulgence on the ground that not having had the honour 
 of studying there, he had not any personal acquaintance 
 with the institutions of the University of Oxford, but he 
 showed in his speech a complete grasp of the situation. 
 The plan of the Bill was to take in order the points raised 
 in Lord Palmerston's letter to the two Chancellors. In 
 the first place came the necessary alterations in the 
 constitution of the University, but the Government pro- 
 posals were reserved till later on in his remarks. The 
 next question was the extension of the University, and 
 here Lord John Russell dropped into history. " We find," 
 he said, " in ancient times that the University, and not 
 the Colleges, was the principal ruling body — that the 
 Congregation of the leading resident Tutors, and Profes- 
 sors, summoned by bell, formed the ruling body of the 
 University — that at one time there were no less than 300 
 Halls, to which scholars resorted to obtain the benefit of 
 the education of the University. But in progress of time 
 the whole of this system was subverted, and the Commis- 
 sioners state that for 150 years — it appears, however, for a 
 considerably longer period — the Halls have entirely dis- 
 appeared, and no instruction has been given except under 
 the modern system, through the medium of the Tutors 
 of the different Colleges. There is, then, quite a different 
 system from that which was originally established ; and 
 the consequence of that different system is, that the 
 education has become far more confined — that young 
 
 i Report, pp. 199, 200. 
 2 For this and the subsequent debates see Hansard, Parliamentary 
 Reports, Vol. CXXXL, p. 892 and onwards. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 139 
 
 men are obliged to enter themselves of a College, they are 
 obliged to receive the education given in that College, 
 and they look only to that education as the means 
 of obtaining whether degrees or honours, or whether 
 Fellowships and the more substantial rewards of the 
 University." 
 
 Here the speaker, naturally enough, glided off into 
 a discussion of the then burning topic, — education in 
 Colleges by Tutors, and education in the University by 
 Professors. After reviewing the advantages and dis- 
 advantages of both methods, he states his own con- 
 clusion : " I own it appears to me, Sir, that we have an 
 opportunity, and an opportunity which we ought not to 
 lose, to combine the advantage of Tutorial College tuition 
 with that of Professorial teaching." He then read to the 
 House a statement of the number of pupils who had 
 attended the lectures of the several University Professors 
 during the last two years, and continued: "Thus it will 
 be perceived, in regard to all these Professorships, that 
 they do not form, in fact, a part of the education of the 
 University ; and therefore, when it is stated, as it is, in 
 some of the works that have been issued against the 
 Report of the Commissioners, that there are at present 
 Professors, the obvious answer is, that no doubt there 
 are at present professors, but that attendance on their 
 lectures does not form any part of the road to honours or 
 emoluments in the University, and that the consequence 
 is, as might naturally be expected, that the studies of 
 the Colleges are preferred. . . It is clear, therefore, that 
 the time has come when there ought to be a junction 
 between the system of teaching in the Colleges and the 
 duties of the University Professors." 
 
 Lord John Russell next turned to the question of the 
 cost of a University course, reminding the House that 
 " the only means of obtaining education is by becoming 
 an inmate of one of the Colleges. . . The consequence, 
 then, of the Colleges having this monopoly, and of the 
 restrictions established in consequence of the Laudian 
 Statutes, has been that those cheaper modes of living 
 which were in use in former times, and by which great 
 numbers of persons, otherwise poor, could obtain 
 entrance into the University, all these avenues are 
 
140 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 shut up, and the numbers at the University have been 
 very much reduced. This, therefore, is one of the 
 defects for which we wish to provide a remedy — that 
 there is no means of obtaining education at Oxford 
 except by belonging to one of the Colleges. 
 
 " The next point to which I wish to refer," continued 
 the speaker, "is the restrictions which are placed upon 
 the various emoluments, which are the rewards of learn- 
 ing in the University. It is part of the same subject that 
 many of these Fellowships are held by those who for 
 many years have had no connection with Oxford, nor 
 contributed in any way to the studies of the place, and 
 thereby the means of this great University are restricted 
 and frittered away. . . 
 
 "It appears to me that some part at least of the 
 revenues of the richer Colleges — that some part of those 
 revenues which are not now applied to the purposes of 
 learning and the purposes of teaching in the Universities, 
 ought to be so applied ; and that we could not do better 
 than lay down certain rules by which Professors and 
 Lecturers, and others engaged in teaching in the Univer- 
 sity, might receive a sufficient income and be made 
 available for the future purposes of University education." 
 
 Lord John Russell then turned from this enunciation 
 of general principles to the actual text of the proposed 
 measure. "What we propose in the first place is that 
 instead of the Hebdomadal Board consisting of the Vice- 
 Chancellor, the Proctors and twenty-three Heads of 
 Houses, there shall be a body composed of twenty-four 
 or twenty-five members, to be called the Hebdomadal 
 Council, and to be composed in the following manner. 
 We propose that the Vice-Chancellor and the two Proctors 
 shall always form part of this Council, and that when the 
 Vice-Chancellor for the preceding year shall not be an 
 elected member he shall also form part of the Council. 
 That will give three or four persons who will be members 
 ex-officio. With respect to the others, we begin by form- 
 ing a body, to be called, according to the ancient name, a 
 ' Congregation,' and which will, in fact, consist of all the 
 resident teaching staff of the University. There will 
 belong to that body, called a Congregation, all the Heads 
 of Houses, the Tutors of Colleges, the Professors, persons 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 141 
 
 bearing certain offices in the University, and others who 
 are resident, upon certain conditions, and fulfilling certain 
 rules which will be laid down. This body will therefore 
 be numerous, and we propose that of the remaining 
 twenty-one members of the Hebdomadal Council, seven 
 shall be Heads of Houses, of whom six shall be chosen by 
 the Congregation and one nominated by the Chancellor of 
 the University. To these seven there will be added eight 
 Professors, of whom the Congregation will choose six, the 
 Chancellor will nominate one, and the eighth will be one 
 of the Divinity Professors of the University. There will 
 then remain six, who will be chosen out of the resident 
 members of Congregation by the Congregation. This we 
 propose as the governing body of the University. 
 
 "The next subject is one of which I have already stated 
 to you the effect — I mean the exclusive character of Col- 
 lege education. 1 I propose that there should be a power 
 to open private halls, which may be opened by any Master 
 of Arts obtaining a licence from the Vice-Chancellor for 
 that purpose. The Commissioners proposed that under- 
 graduates should be permitted to live in lodgings under 
 certain restrictions ; but, upon considering the matter, 
 we think it a safer plan that those who are not in Colleges 
 shall be in private halls, where they will be subject to 
 some discipline, but where at the same time they will 
 have a more economical mode of living than is to be 
 obtained at present. 
 
 " I now come to the question of preferences granted to 
 those who come under one of these different denomina- 
 tions — that they are related to the founder; that they 
 come from a particular place or county ; or, lastly, that 
 they have belonged to a particular school. . . We pro- 
 pose to do away with the restrictions with respect to 
 founders' kindred and to particular localities — except with 
 respect to those which have been founded within 100 
 years, and with respect to the lineal descendants of the 
 founder. With respect to schools, we only provide in the 
 cases of their claims to Fellowships that there must in 
 
 1 As Mr. Walpole pointed out in the debate, whereas at Oxford 
 undergraduates had for the most part to reside in the Colleges, in 
 Cambridge very great numbers resided in lodgings. Hansard, Vol. 
 CXXXL, p. 917. 
 
142 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 every instance be at least two scholars from whom to 
 choose. . . 
 
 " I come now to state the powers which we propose to 
 give of applying part of the revenues of the Colleges for 
 the purpose of increasing the funds for education in the 
 University ; and in order that each College may have time 
 to consider its Statutes very carefully, we propose that 
 there should be for a certain limited time a Commission 
 of five persons, who shall have the powers I now propose 
 to state. In the first place, we propose that they should 
 have the power of approving Statutes in conformity 
 with the proposals of this Bill, and that after Michaelmas 
 Term, 1855, if the University and the Colleges are held not 
 to have performed that which is expected of them — that 
 then the Commissioners shall have power to enact by 
 Statute, rules in accordance with this Act, which rules 
 when they have been laid before the Privy Council, have 
 been approved by Her Majesty, and have for a certain 
 period been placed upon the table of this House, shall 
 have the force of law and be binding, as Statutes, on the 
 University and the Colleges. Such being the constitution 
 of the Commission, it is proposed that each of the Colleges 
 shall have the power of contributing from its annual 
 revenue one-fifth part towards the foundation or better 
 endowment of Professorships or Lectureships ; to provide 
 for the discharge of the duties thereof; to diminish the 
 number of Fellowships belonging to such College, or 
 suspend payment of the emoluments of any such Fellow- 
 ships, with a view to the foundation of such Professorships 
 or Lectureships ; or to the supply of pensions on the 
 retirement therefrom of the Professors or Lecturers ; or 
 to the foundation of Scholarships in the College ; or to the 
 raising the income of the remaining Fellowships to any 
 sum not exceeding £250 a year ; or to the erection of new 
 buildings; or to the establishment of Halls, to be affiliated to 
 such College, and the acquisition of grounds and buildings 
 for the same ; and that they may appropriate any number, 
 not exceeding one-fourth, of the Fellowships belonging to 
 any College to the encouragement of the special studies 
 of the schools of Mathematics, Natural Science, or Modern 
 History, or of any other studies recognised or to be 
 recognised by the University." 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 143 
 
 Lord John Russell finished his speech with the 
 following reference to University tests : — 
 
 " Sir, there remains one question on which there is no 
 provision in this Bill, hut on which I shall at any time be 
 prepared to give my vote in conformity with the opinion I 
 have always held. I cannot think that the whole purposes 
 of the University are fulfilled while there is a test at the 
 entrance of the University which hinders so many persons 
 from entering it at all. But I do expect certainly that 
 by the addition of those new Halls there will be facilities 
 which may induce Parliament not much longer to 
 interpose the obstructions which hitherto have been 
 interposed, to the enjoyment of the benefits of those great 
 schools by a far larger portion of Her Majesty's subjects 
 than at present enjoy them. But though this is my 
 opinion, I do not think it would have been wise in Her 
 Majesty's Government to have decided on placing any 
 proposition of the kind in the present Bill. It is a 
 subject which I think should be reserved for a separate 
 measure and a separate consideration." 
 
 Mr. Miall, the Nonconformist leader, could not con- 
 ceal his disappointment with this announcement. He said: 
 " According to the late Census as to religious worship in 
 England, it would appear that this country, religiously 
 speaking, might be divided into three parts. There were 
 above 5,000,000 absenters, about 5,000,000 Dissenters, and 
 above 5,000,000 members of the Establishment ; three 
 tolerably equal divisions. The national institutions of 
 Oxford and Cambridge were to be improved and continued 
 for the special and exclusive advantage of the one-third 
 part of the people of these realms." Mr. Heywood 
 followed in the same sense, and gave notice of his 
 intention to move in Committee a clause opening the 
 Universities to Dissenters. The Opposition fastened 
 mainly on the proposal that the Colleges should contribute 
 out of their revenues to University purposes. Leave was 
 then given, and the Bill was brought in and read a first 
 time. 
 
 On April 7th the Bill was read a second time without 
 a division. Lord Morley thus describes the scene : " At 
 length the blessed day of the second reading came. The 
 ever-zealous Arthur Stanley was present. ' A superb 
 
144 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 speech from Gladstone,' he records, 'in which, for the 
 first time, all the arguments from our Report were 
 worked up in the most effective manner. He vainly 
 endeavoured to reconcile his present with his former 
 position. But with this exception, I listened to his 
 speech with the greatest delight. To hehold one's old 
 enemies slaughtered before one's face with the most 
 irresistible weapons was quite intoxicating. One great 
 charm of his speaking is its exceeding good-humour. 
 There is great vehemence, but no bitterness.' " l 
 
 On April 27th, the motion having been made, " That 
 Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," Mr. Heywood moved 
 as an amendment that the Bill be referred to a Select 
 Committee. He pointed out that in connexion with 
 Fellowships two things were left untouched— compulsory 
 ordination, and enforced celibacy. Mr. Disraeli sup- 
 ported him (not without a desire, it may be imagined, 
 of getting rid of the Bill altogether), and so did Mr. John 
 Bright, on the ground of the exclusion of the Dissenters. 
 The amendment was rejected by 172 to 90. 
 
 The temper of the House was clearly shown as soon 
 as it got into Committee. The clauses appointing the 
 Commissioners and defining their powers were passed 
 with but little difficulty. 2 But trouble began on Clause 6, 
 which related to the composition of the Hebdomadal 
 Council. Mr. Walpole was in favour of what was called 
 sectional election, i.e. that the Heads of Colleges should 
 elect the Heads to serve on the Council, and that the 
 Professors should elect the Professors, and proposed 
 amendments to that effect. The amendment as to the 
 Heads was carried against the Government by 162 to 
 149, and the Government did not resist a similar motion 
 about the Professors. 
 
 The next serious amendment was on Clause 18, which 
 dealt with the way in which the new body, Congregation, 
 was to be made up. The Bill proposed that it should 
 consist of the following persons, among others : — 
 
 " The Tutors of Colleges and Halls and other officers 
 
 i Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 503. 
 2 The Commissioners first proposed by the Government were the 
 Earl of Ellesmere, the Bishop of Ripon, Sir J. T. Coleridge, the Dean of 
 Wells, and Sir J. W. Awdry. Two were subsequently added— the Earl of 
 Harrowby and Mr. George Cornewall Lewis. Mr. Goldwin Smith and the 
 Rev. Mr. Wayte were appointed Secretaries. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 145 
 
 engaged in the discipline of Colleges; all Masters of 
 Private Halls ; all Residents who, though not actually 
 holding any of the aforesaid qualifications, may have 
 held one or more of them at any previous time for three 
 years and upwards ; and Residents qualified in respect 
 of study under this Act." 
 
 This was a mild attempt to confine Congregation 
 to the real workers and students at the University. Sir 
 William Heathcote moved as an amendment that all 
 these words be left out and the words " all residents " 
 be substituted for them. He argued that if Congregation 
 was to be useful at all, " it ought to be an epitome and 
 a representation of Convocation (i.e. the whole body of 
 graduates, resident and non-resident), and ought to have 
 in it as many elements of Convocation as possible. His 
 amendment would include the parochial clergy in Oxford, 
 who would form a most desirable body of representatives 
 for the clergy throughout the kingdom, and it would also 
 admit the private Tutors, who, as matters stood at pre- 
 sent, had no place in Congregation." The Government 
 view, as expressed by Mr. Gladstone, was that " Congre- 
 gation should represent the intellect and aristocracy of 
 the University, and include within it the whole studying 
 and the whole teaching body of the University." On a 
 division Sir William Heathcote's amendment was carried 
 against the Government by 135 to 104. 
 
 Lord Morley remarks on these proceedings : " In 
 Parliament the craft laboured heavily in cross-seas. - 1 
 have never known,' says its pilot, ' a measure so foolishly 
 discussed in Committee.' Nor was oil cast upon the 
 waters by its friends. By the end of May Mr. Gladstone 
 and Lord John saw that they must take in canvas. 
 Accordingly on June 1st, Lord John Russell announced 
 that the Government proposed to introduce clauses 
 giving the Commissioners power to make Statutes for 
 the Colleges under certain conditions, and to omit six- 
 teen clauses of very great detail. What could not be 
 got through Parliament in the way of reform was thus 
 relegated to an outside but statutory body to deal with. 1 
 
 i The most interesting thing omitted was the sub-section giving 
 power to the Colleges to contribute from their annual revenues any sum 
 not exceeding one-fifth part to the foundation or better endowment of 
 Professorships and Lectureships in the University. 
 
146 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Bill was then discussed de novo in Committee, 
 beginning on June 15th. Mr. Heywood, on the Report 
 stage, moved a new clause providing that from the first 
 day of Michaelmas Term, 1854, it should not be necessary 
 for any person, upon matriculation at the University 
 of Oxford, to make or subscribe any declaration or take 
 any oath except the oath of allegiance or an equivalent 
 declaration, the object of the clause being to place 
 Oxford on the same footing in this respect as Cambridge. 
 At Oxford, students at matriculation had to sign the 
 Thirty-nine Articles and take the Oath of Supremacy. 
 Dissenters were thus effectually excluded. The clause 
 was read a second time by 252 to 161. Mr. Heywood 
 then moved a second clause abolishing the religious test 
 on taking any of the degrees in Arts, Law, or Medicine, 
 but this clause was negatived by 205 to 196. He moved 
 it again on the third reading, when it was carried by 
 223 to 79. 
 
 The second reading of the Bill came on in the House 
 of Lords on July 6th, and was moved by Viscount 
 Canning. It was agreed to without a division. In 
 Committee things did not go quite so smoothly. There 
 was a notable outburst by the Earl of Winchelsea, who 
 on Clauses 31 and 34, which dealt with close Fellowships 
 and Scholarships, said that "the present Bill proposed 
 to effect the most dreadful confiscation of property thati \ 
 ever took place in an enlightened country, and was the 
 grossest violation of justice that ever characterised the 
 Legislature of England. There never was a measure 
 so fraught with evil, so unjust in principle, so iniquitous 
 in its details, as this accursed Bill." But the noble Earl ' 
 was only a private member. There was no official 
 opposition, and after the two Houses had agreed on 
 certain amendments, the Bill received the Royal Assent 
 on August 7th. 
 
 The following are the principal provisions of the Act 
 as actually passed, and they will enable the reader to 
 follow the final results of amendments and counter- 
 amendments in the two Chambers : — 
 
 The Preamble runs : — " Whereas it is expedient for 
 the Advancement of Religion and Learning, to enlarge the 
 Powers of making and altering Statutes and Regulations 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 147 
 
 now possessed by the University of Oxford and the 
 Colleges thereof, and to make and enable to be made 
 further Provision for the Government, and for the Ex- 
 tension of the said University, and for the Abrogation of 
 Oaths now taken therein, and otherwise for maintaining 
 and improving the Discipline and Studies and the good 
 government of the said University of Oxford and the 
 Colleges thereof; Be it enacted," etc. 
 
 It will be observed that nothing is said here about the 
 power given to the Colleges to contribute out of their 
 funds to University purposes. This is tucked away in the 
 Preamble to Clause 27. 
 
 After appointing Commissioners and denning their 
 powers, the Act sets up a Hebdomadal Council in lieu of 
 the old Hebdomadal Board and frames its composition 
 thus :— " The Hebdomadal Council shall consist of the 
 Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, the Proctors, Six Heads 
 of Colleges or Halls, Six Professors of the University, and 
 Six Members of Convocation of not less than Five Years 
 Standing, such Heads of Colleges or Halls, Professors, and 
 Members of Convocation to be elected by the Congregation 
 hereinafter mentioned of the said University, and the Chan- 
 cellor, or in his absence the Vice-Chancellor, or his Deputy, 
 being a Member of the Hebdomadal Council, shall be the 
 President of such Hebdomadal Council." Twenty-four 
 weeks residence during Term time was made necessary 
 for continuing to hold a seat on the Council. The Vice- 
 Chancellor was instructed to make a Register of Congrega- 
 tion, and regulations respecting the Hebdomadal Council. 
 •' Sectional election " had been in the end defeated. 
 
 Clause 16 defines the composition of Congregation : 
 " The Congregation of the University shall be composed 
 of the following persons only, the said Persons being 
 Members of Convocation : — 
 
 1. The Chancellor. 
 
 2. The High Steward. 
 
 3. The Heads of Colleges and Halls. 
 
 4. The Canons of Christ Church. 
 
 5. The Proctors. 
 
 6. The Members of the Hebdomadal Council. 
 
 7. The Officers named in Schedule A to this Act 
 annexed. 
 
148 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 8. The Professors. 
 
 9. Assistant or Deputy Professors. 
 
 10. The Public Examiners. 
 
 11. All Residents. 
 
 12. All such Persons as shall be provided to be 
 
 added by Election or otherwise to the said 
 Congregation by any Statute of the Uni- 
 versity approved by the Commissioners, or 
 (after the Expiry of the Commission) passed 
 by Licence of the Crown." 
 Schedule A included : — 
 " Deputy Steward. 
 
 Public Orator. 
 
 Keeper of the Archives. 
 
 Assessor of the Vice-Chancellor's Court. 
 
 Registrar of the University. 
 
 Counsel to the University. 
 
 Bodley's Librarian. 
 
 Radcliffe Librarian. 
 
 Radcliffe Observer. 
 
 Librarians and Sub-Librarians of 
 University Libraries. 
 
 Keepers of University j If authorised for the 
 
 Museums and Re- ( Purposes of the Sche- 
 
 positories of Arts f dule by Statute of the 
 
 or Science. ) University." 
 
 The inclusion of " All Residents," according to the 
 amendment moved by Sir William Heathcote, was the 
 most serious alteration made in the Committee stage. 
 Mark Pattison thus writes of it : — " Congregation was 
 called into being by the Act of 1854, and was calculated 
 to have been one of the most useful of its enactments. 
 That it has not been so is owing to an alteration, 
 seemingly trifling, which was made in the Bill in 
 Committee. Congregation was designed by Mr. Glad- 
 stone to be an assembly of the persons engaged in 
 teaching— a Senatus Academicus. In Committee this was 
 enlarged to include all residents. This alteration added 
 to the assembly about 100 members, not connected with 
 the studies of the place, and waterlogged Congregation at 
 one stroke. Had Mr. Gladstone's first draft been adopted, 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 149 
 
 Congregation would have been a revival of the old 
 distinction between Regent and Non-regent Masters. It 
 would have been a notable example of what I believe will 
 be found to be true, that, as the University revives, we 
 shall find ourselves reviving old arrangements, not because 
 they are old, but because they are the results of much 
 experience." ' 
 
 Every Statute framed by the Council was to be 
 proposed first to Congregation and then, after a fixed 
 interval, submitted to Convocation for final adoption or 
 rejection. (Clause 17.) 
 
 Members of Congregation were given the power of 
 proposing amendments in writing to any Statute pro- 
 mulgated by the Council, " which the said Council shall 
 consider, and thereupon may adopt, alter, or reject. They 
 were also given the power of speaking thereon in the 
 English Tongue, but without the Power of moving any 
 Amendment." (Clauses 18 and 20.) It is curious that an 
 Act of Parliament was necessary to restore to Oxford 
 graduates the right of using their own mother tongue, but 
 Oxford is still strangely mediaeval in the way in which it 
 sticks to Latin. 
 
 The question of reducing the cost of a University 
 course was one of the subjects most discussed in the 
 debates of both Houses, and it resulted in Clauses 25- 
 27 of the Act. Clause 25 provides that " It shall 
 be lawful for any Member of Convocation, of such 
 Standing and Qualifications as may be provided by any 
 Statute hereafter to be made, to obtain a Licence from 
 the Vice-Chancellor to open his Residence, if situate 
 within one mile and a half of Carfax, for the Reception of 
 Students, who shall be matriculated and admitted to all 
 the Privileges of the University without being of necessity 
 entered as Members of any Colleges or existing Hall." 
 These persons were to be called Licensed Masters and their 
 residences Private Halls. The University was further 
 authorised to make Statutes for the regulation of these 
 Private Halls, including their aggregation into one or 
 more Great Halls of the University. 
 
 These clauses are a memorable example of how even 
 the wisest men may be deceived in their expectations of 
 
 i Suggestions on Academical Organisation, p. 29. 
 
150 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the good results which are to follow from a particular 
 reform. Sir William Hamilton had been a strong advo- 
 cate of these Halls ; the Cambridge Commissioners made 
 them a special feature in their Report ; Mr. Gladstone 
 was eager for the proposed right to establish private 
 halls, as a change calculated to extend the numbers and 
 strength of the University, and as settling the much-dis- 
 puted question, whether the scale of living could not be 
 reduced, and University education brought within reach 
 of classes of moderate means. The plan in question has 
 proved a failure. 
 
 Clause 28 gives the Colleges power to alter their 
 Statutes with respect to eligibility to Headships, Fellow- 
 ships, and other College emoluments, and for that purpose 
 to modify or abolish any Preference, and in the case of 
 some of the Colleges for rendering portions of their Pro- 
 perty available to purposes for the benefit of the Univer- 
 sity, and for the conversion of Fellowships attached to 
 Schools into Scholarships or Exhibitions so attached, 
 subject to the approval of the Commissioners ; the said 
 Commissioners being empowered to take action them- 
 selves provided the Colleges failed to do so. The Univer- 
 sity was also empowered to alter Trusts which had been 
 in existence more than fifty years (Clause 30). 
 
 The duty of the Colleges to help the University 
 was further emphasised by Clause 38 : — " In giving 
 effect to their Powers with respect to the Colleges and 
 Halls, the Commissioners shall have regard, among other 
 things, to making due Provision, firstly, for the Wants 
 and Improvements of the College or Hall, and the 
 Advancement of Religion and Learning among its own 
 members; and secondly, for aid towards the Establish- 
 ment of the Professoriate of the said University on an 
 enlarged basis in the several main Branches of Science 
 and Letters, and with adequate Duties and Emoluments, 
 by appropriating Portions of the divisible Revenues of 
 any College for that Purpose, in Cases where the Founder 
 of the College hath directed Lectures to be delivered for 
 the Benefit of the University, or where it shall appear to 
 the Commissioners that the College is well able to make 
 such Provision." 
 
 Lord John Russell, in his speech on moving for leave 
 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 151 
 
 to bring in the Bill, had mentioned one-fifth part or 20 
 per cent, of the corporate revenue as the limit up to which 
 a College might be allowed to contribute voluntarily to 
 University purposes. There is no such percentage in the 
 Act, the question of contribution being one of those 
 things which were left to the Commissioners. Here again 
 the Act failed. The Colleges did not provide for the needs 
 of the Universities, and the matter was not even partially 
 settled till the supplementary legislation of 1877. 
 
 Clauses 43 and 44 abolished religious tests for 
 Matriculation and the Bachelor's Degree, but not for 
 the Master's or its equivalent Degree, or the higher 
 Degrees. The indirect effect of their retention in these 
 latter cases was that no Nonconformist could be a member 
 of the Hebdomadal Council, or of Congregation, or of 
 Convocation. He remained entirely shut out from all 
 participation in the government of the University. 
 
 The Cambridge University Bill had a far less stormy 
 passage through Parliament than the corresponding 
 measure for the University of Oxford, doubtless because 
 it followed the lines which had already been agreed on. 
 It was introduced into the House of Lords in 1855 and 
 subsequently went down to the House of Commons, but 
 at so late a period of the Session that it could not be 
 proceeded with. It was reintroduced in the House of 
 Commons in 1856 and passed its first and second readings 
 without discussion. The general discussion took place 
 on May 30th, on the motion that the Speaker do now 
 leave the Chair. The altered importance of the occasion 
 was shown by the fact that it was not the Prime 
 Minister, but a subordinate member of the Government, 
 Mr. Bouverie, who stated the official case. He criticised 
 the University of Cambridge in strong terms. "The 
 proposition he would lay down to justify the interference 
 of Parliament was this— that the University of Cam- 
 bridge and the Colleges were institutions having a vast 
 revenue, and enormous means for the education of the 
 people, and that those resources were not turned to the 
 best account; but that on the contrary the result pro- 
 duced was comparatively very small." 1 The Cornmis- 
 
 i Hansard, Parliamentary Reports, Vol. CXLII., p. 809. 
 
152 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 sioners of 1852 estimated the income of the 17 Colleges 
 at not less than £185,000 a year. The income of the 
 University was £24,500, making a total of £209,500. Yet 
 it appeared from the Commission Report that in the 
 eleven years from 1840 to 1850 inclusive the average 
 number of persons taking the B.A. degree was only 336. 
 Taking the thirteen years beginning in 1620 and ending 
 in 1632, before the civil troubles began, the average 
 number of B.A. degrees was 293. Practically the educa- 
 tional result had not increased, though the population 
 had meanwhile increased from 300 to 400 per cent. It 
 followed that the cost of each B.A. degree was between 
 £600 and £700, or about £200 a year, independently of 
 what each student paid out of his own pocket. Mr. 
 Bouverie poured the greatest scorn on the Pass degree 
 and detailed to the House the subjects required in the 
 Previous and General Examinations, declaring that any 
 intelligent boy of sixteen could prepare himself for them 
 in six weeks time. Cambridge University education was 
 equally defective as regards the three professions of 
 Theology, Law and Medicine. He did not blame the 
 University, because it had small power of self-improve- 
 ment. It was troubled with an antiquated and confined 
 constitution. The Bill proposed that a body to be elected 
 by the resident members of the University should have 
 the power of initiating measures. To that body he 
 proposed to intrust, not only these legislative functions, 
 but also the power of framing Statutes for amending or 
 repealing the University Statutes, the code of Whitgift, 
 or any other Royal Statutes in existence, together with a 
 general power of imposing and altering bye-laws. The 
 oaths of the University also demanded great alteration. 
 " The Universities were formerly national institutions, 
 practically open to all the nation, but now, by the system 
 of oaths and tests which had sprung up, half the public, 
 the Dissenters, were excluded from University degrees, 
 and this not by any Act of Parliament, but in conse- 
 quence of a letter of James I., never formally recognised, 
 although acted on by the University, in which he required 
 all who took degrees to subscribe to the Articles of 
 the Church of England as well as to take the Oath of 
 Supremacy." It was proposed by the present Bill that 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 153 
 
 none of these oaths or declarations should be required 
 upon taking degrees. 
 
 In Committee, Mr. Heywood moved the following 
 clause : — " From and after the first day of Michaelmas 
 Term 1856, it shall not be necessary for any person on 
 obtaining any Exhibition, Scholarship, or other College 
 Emolument available for the assistance of an Under- 
 graduate Student in his Academical Education, to make 
 or subscribe any Declaration of his Religious Opinion 
 or Belief, or to take any oath, any Law or Statute to 
 the contrary notwithstanding." 
 
 This was added to the Bill. 
 
 He was also successful in amending Clause 44 so 
 that Dissenters besides being admitted to take degrees 
 could also become members of the Senate. The vote 
 was 85 in favour to 60 against. 
 
 In the House of Lords the Bill was also read a first 
 and second time without discussion. In Committee 
 Lord Lyndhurst carried an amendment negativing Mr. 
 Heywood's amendment to Clause 44 on the ground 
 that " it was a most important thing to take care that 
 those who governed the University should be members 
 of the Church of England." The voting was Content 
 73; Not Content 26; Majority 47. The two Houses soon 
 came to an agreement on the points of difference between 
 them, and the Royal Assent was given to the Act on 
 July 29th. 
 
 The Commissioners appointed for the purposes of 
 the Act were the Bishop of Lichfield (Dr. John Lonsdale, 
 formerly Fellow of King's College), the Bishop of Chester 
 (Dr. John Graham, sometime Master of Christ's College). 
 Lord Stanley, the Right Hon. M. T. Baines, Vice- 
 Chancellor Sir William Page Wood, the Right Hon. Sir 
 Lawrence Peel, the Dean of Ely (Dr. George Peacock), 
 and the Rev. Dr. C. J. Vaughan. The powers conferred 
 on them were to remain in force till January 1st, 1859, 
 with power of extension till January 1st, 1860, but no 
 longer. 
 
 The chief operative Clauses of the Act may here 
 be set out. 
 
 Clauses 5 and 6 abolished the old Caput Senatus 
 and established the present Council in its stead. The 
 
154 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Caput accordingly came to an end on November 6th, 1856, 
 and on November 7th there was elected a Council con- 
 sisting of the Chancellor, the Vice - Chancellor, four 
 Masters of Colleges, four Professors, and eight other 
 members of the Senate, with not more than two members 
 of the same College among the eight. 
 
 Clause 7 sets up the Electoral Roll, the body 
 corresponding to Congregation at Oxford. It consists 
 of the members of the Senate (the equivalent of Oxford 
 Convocation) who have resided for fourteen weeks at 
 least of the academical year within a mile and a half 
 of Great St. Mary's Church, together with all officers 
 of the University, being members of the Senate, the 
 Heads of Houses, the Professors, and the Public Ex- 
 aminers. The Electoral Roll thus includes "all residents," 
 as did Congregation at Oxford. 
 
 The office of Vice-Chancellor was continued to the 
 Heads of Colleges exclusively, two Heads having always 
 to be nominated by the Council of the Senate, of whom 
 the Senate elects one (Clause 21). 
 
 By Clause 22 the oaths which had so troubled the 
 mind of Sir William Hamilton were finally got rid of. It 
 enacted that every oath directly or indirectly binding the 
 Juror — 
 
 Not to disclose any matter or thing relating to his 
 College, although required so to do by lawful 
 authority ; 
 
 To resist or not to concur in any change in the 
 Statutes of the University or Colleges ; 
 
 To do or forbear from doing anything the doing or 
 
 the not doing of which would tend to any such 
 
 concealment, resistance, or non-concurrence, 
 
 shall from the time of the passing of this Act be an illegal 
 
 oath in the said University and the Colleges thereof, and 
 
 no such oath shall hereafter be administered or taken. 
 
 Objection was taken to many proposals in the Oxford 
 and Cambridge Bills, but no objection was taken to this 
 clause or the corresponding clause in the Act of 1854. Sir 
 William Hamilton's oft-repeated accusations of perjury 
 had done their work, and all parties agreed to bury the 
 offending promises out of sight as speedily and quietly as 
 possible. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 155 
 
 By Clause 23 any member of the University of 
 such standing and qualifications as were to be hereafter 
 provided by statute, may obtain a licence from the Vice- 
 Chancellor to open his residence, if situate within one 
 mile and a half from Great St. Mary's Church, for the 
 reception of students who shall be matriculated and 
 admitted to all the privileges of the University without 
 being of necessity admitted as members of any College. 
 
 By Clause 27 the Colleges were given power to 
 frame new Statutes any time before January 1st, 1858, 
 specially with reference to 
 
 (i.) the Headship, Fellowships and emoluments " so as to 
 insure such Fellowships and emoluments being conferred 
 according to personal merits and fitness, and being re- 
 tained for such periods as are likely to conduce to the better 
 advancement of the interests of religion and learning " : 
 
 (ii.) the altering and abolition of oaths : 
 
 (iii.) redistributing or apportioning the divisible 
 revenues of the College : 
 
 (iv.) rendering portions of the College property or 
 income available for University purposes : 
 
 (v.) the opening of Fellowships and Scholarships, and 
 the conversion of Fellowships into Scholarships and 
 Exhibitions : 
 
 (vi.) the creation of Open Scholarships : 
 
 (vii.) the incorporation of Bye-Fellowships with the 
 original foundation : 
 
 (viii.) transferring to the College any trusts vested in 
 any one or more of the Masters and Fellows : 
 
 (ix.) and generally for making further provision for 
 maintaining and improving the discipline, studies, and 
 good government of such College, and for amending the 
 Statutes from time to time. 
 
 By Clause 26, if the University did not frame new 
 Statutes to the satisfaction of the Commissioners by 
 January 1, 1858, the Commissioners had power to frame 
 Statutes themselves ; and by Clause 29, if a College did 
 not frame Statutes or framed insufficient Statutes by 
 the same date, the Commissioners had power to frame 
 Statutes for it. This method of procedure proved effec- 
 tive at both Universities, and in no case were the Com- 
 missioners called upon to exercise their special powers. 
 
156 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 Clause 45 enacts that "From and after the first day 
 of Michaelmas term, 1856, no person shall be required 
 upon matriculating, or upon taking, or to enable him to 
 take, any Degree in Arts, Law, Medicine, or Music, in the 
 said University, to take any oath or to make any declara- 
 tion or Subscription whatever; but such Degree shall not, 
 until the person obtaining the same shall, in such man- 
 ner as the University may from Time to Time prescribe, 
 have subscribed a Declaration, stating that he is bona-fide 
 a Member of the Church of England, entitle him to be or 
 to become a Member of the Senate, or constitute a Qualifi- 
 cation for the holding of any Office, either in the Univer- 
 sity or elsewhere, which was heretofore always held by 
 a Member of the United Church of England and Ireland, 
 and for which such Degree has heretofore constituted 
 one of the Qualifications." 
 
 The aged Lord Lyndhurst (he was now in his eighty- 
 ninth year) had thus triumphed over Mr. Heywood and 
 secured the exclusion of Nonconformists from membership 
 of the Senate to which their degrees would otherwise 
 have entitled them, and also from any share in the 
 government of the University. So slowly did the idea die, 
 that the University belonged to the Church of England 
 and not to the nation. 
 
 The positive results of the Acts were seen in the 
 increased number of matriculations and the general 
 advance of the Universities. " The work of the Royal 
 Commission appointed in 1850," writes Mr. J. A. Venn, 1 
 " bore fruit some years later, in the shape of a neAV and 
 surprising increase in the number of students, and in the 
 altered conditions of academic life and study which were 
 brought to pass. . . There can be little doubt but that 
 the Commission was the direct cause of the extraordinary 
 rise in numbers which followed. . . During the thirty 
 years 1850-1880 the numbers of the Freshmen at Cambridge 
 were exactly doubled, rising from 400 to 800 per annum." 
 Part of this increase, however, must be put down to the 
 Act of 1871 which went so far towards abolishing religious 
 tests. But when all allowances have been made, the fact 
 remains that the Acts of 1854 and 1856 started the Uni- 
 versities on a new period of prosperity. 
 i Matriculations, pp. 16-17. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 157 
 
 Yet they by no means fulfilled all the hopes of the 
 reformers. Mark Pattison writes of Oxford : ' " The inter- 
 vention of the Legislature in 1854 was made by it, and 
 submitted to by us, in an unhappy spirit, which, in a 
 great degree falsified the relation between the parties. 
 After two centuries of neglect, the House of Commons 
 had been brought to the point of considering the state of 
 the Universities. The movement was by no means a 
 spontaneous one on the part of the House or the Govern- 
 ment. They were brought to it, reluctantly enough, by 
 the patient persevering efforts of a minority of University 
 men. Their reluctance to touch the case was intelligible, 
 for it had all the characteristics which make a business 
 distasteful to members of Parliament. It was wrapt up 
 in new, intricate, esoteric details, requiring much study 
 to master; it related to the transcendental parts of 
 education ; it involved religious party and the Established 
 Church. Ill understood, the question was ill cared for. 
 So much of it as could be brought upon the platform was 
 made into a party topic, and debated with excited temper 
 and party exaggeration. The usual result followed. The 
 House passed the Government Bill, maiming it in vital 
 points in its passage through Committee. 
 
 " Our mode of receiving the measure was still less 
 worthy of our character. The University of Oxford, 
 remembering that its last appearance on the stage of 
 history had been in resistance to the encroachment of the 
 Crown, took legal advice as to whether it could not resist 
 even the preliminary inquiry. Besides withholding all 
 information from the Commission, a great deal of foolish 
 bluster was talked about interference with private pro- 
 perty and the illegality of the Commission. So great is 
 the territorial influence of our great educational endow- 
 ments that this unconstitutional language made an 
 impression. The House of Commons only touched the 
 ark of our property with half a heart. The Act nowhere 
 asserts the rights of the nation over the national domain. 
 The Preamble can scarcely be acquitted of dishonesty 
 when in professing to recite what it was expedient to do, 
 it omits to mention that the Act took powers to deal with 
 
 l Suggestions, pp. 6, 7. 
 
158 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 College property. In the same temper the executive 
 Commission, when it came to divert College funds to new 
 uses, only diverted an insignificant fraction." 
 
 And again, " The Act of 1854 was by no means the 
 discharge in full of the Government's duty. It could not 
 and did not pretend to be a reform of the Universities. 
 The public and patent grievances which had long been 
 urged were: — 
 
 "1. The incompetence of the Governing Body— the 
 old Hebdomadal Board of Heads of Houses and Proctors. 
 
 " 2. The close Fellowships and Scholarships. 
 
 " 3. Inadequate teaching — the Tutors being incompe- 
 tent and the Professors silent. 
 
 " 4. The enforcement of religious tests. 
 
 " The Act of 1854 dealt with all four points. It treated 
 1 and 2 fully and confidently. 1. It abolished the Board 
 of Heads of Houses and Proctors. 2. It abolished local 
 claims for Fellowships, and partially for Scholarships. 
 3. It did little for No. 3 — partly from its timidity in 
 dealing with College property, partly also because it was 
 hoped that the abolition of close Fellowships would of 
 itself raise the teaching capacities of the Tutors. 4. What 
 it did under this head was the result of a compromise 
 between parties in the House. The subscription was 
 retained for the M.A. degree. How little of principle 
 there was in the retention was shown by the Cambridge 
 Act of the following year, which abolished all sub- 
 scription for degrees. 
 
 " It would be ungrateful to its framers and promoters 
 not to recognise heartily the great benefits which have 
 been derived from the Act of 7th August, 1854. Its 
 indirect effects in stimulating the spirit of improvement 
 among us have been no less important than the specific 
 reforms enacted by it. The last twenty years have seen 
 more improvement in the temper and the teaching of 
 Oxford than the three centuries since the Reformation. 
 This improvement has undoubtedly been vastly promoted 
 by the Reform Bill of 1854, or at least by one of its enact- 
 ments. The abolition of close Fellowships has not only 
 done more for us than all the other enactments of the 
 measure together, but it is the only one which has com- 
 pletely answered the expectations then formed from it. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 159 
 
 But the Act of 1854 could never claim to be a settle- 
 ment of the University. It was merely an enabling Act, 
 removing two evils of long standing, and giving very 
 inadequate relief from two others. It cannot be pre- 
 mature to apply again to the Legislature to complete 
 the work begun, and only begun in 1854." ' 
 
 What is here said of Oxford applies in almost equal 
 degree to Cambridge. The fact is that the two bodies 
 of Commissioners went to the furthest point in their 
 recommendations, the Bill as introduced by Lord John 
 Russell fell short of the recommendations, the Act which 
 was passed fell short of the Bill, and the subsequently 
 appointed Commissioners were unable to make the best 
 of the Act. 
 
 Two proofs may be adduced in confirmation of this 
 last statement. They are drawn from the fate which 
 overtook the recommendations of the Cambridge Com- 
 missioners with regard to (1) University teaching, and 
 (2) College contributions to University purposes. " The 
 Commissioners discovered, as they imagined, a panacea 
 for all existing evils in the revivication (? revivification) 
 of a teaching Professoriate. This teaching Professoriate 
 formed the great feature of their Report ; it was to be 
 the nucleus about which the elements of the reformed 
 University were to crystallize. . . Accordingly a 
 Syndicate was appointed for the purpose of considering 
 such of the recommendations as more directly affected 
 the University. . . The chief points of the Report 
 were fully discussed. The glaring defects of the Profes- 
 sorial system were balanced against its apparent merits 
 and were found far to outweigh them. The grand scheme 
 of public Lecturers by which the system was to be 
 propped was seen to be a costly and hazardous experi- 
 ment. . . The result was, that the Syndicate did not 
 think it expedient to recommend the adoption of any 
 measures for augmenting the existing means of teaching 
 the students of the University by public Professors and 
 public Lecturers." 2 The Executive Commission had to 
 acquiesce in the decision of the Syndicate. 
 
 i lb. p. 23-24. 
 2 Campion, Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 167-169. 
 
160 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 As for College contributions to the University, the 
 Executive Commission recommended " that there be paid 
 into the University Chest, to be applied to University 
 purposes, an annual sum equal to (say) five per cent, upon 
 the distributable income of the Colleges." 1 The Univer- 
 sity never got its five per cent. 
 
 It was unfortunate that the readjustment of the rela- 
 tions between the University and the Colleges was made 
 to turn on the extension of the Professoriate. The 
 problem could not be solved on those lines then, any more 
 than it can now. The division of the teaching proposed 
 by the Cambridge Commission was impracticable. The 
 Colleges had simply to sit still and things went on as 
 before. The long-looked for contributions from the 
 Colleges disappeared with the teaching scheme. They 
 had been demanded for an impossible purpose, and this 
 was sufficient reason for not giving them at all. 
 
 The general effect of these Acts on public opinion 
 and the agitation for University Reform deserves a 
 word of notice. Students of practical politics are well 
 aware of the way in which even the partial remedying 
 of a grievance affects the movement for its abolition. 
 For the time being it can stop the movement altogether, 
 or put off its complete success for many years. The 
 larger part of the grievance may still remain, but some- 
 thing has been done ; the British public is satisfied, 
 and it is impossible to rouse it to further activity. 
 
 Then, again, one chief result of the two Acts was to 
 leave the Nonconformists smarting as keenly as ever 
 under a sense of injustice. When the grossest of the 
 educational abuses had been swept away at Oxford and 
 Cambridge, and public opinion was satisfied, the Noncon- 
 formists with their religious grievance were left in 
 possession of the field. Educational reform, pure and 
 simple, sank into the back-ground, and tests became the 
 one object of agitation till the Act of 1871 partially 
 removed them. These various causes produced a com- 
 plete change in the character of the demand for reform. 
 The question of University v. Colleges died away 
 altogether; the great majority of the present generation 
 
 i lb. p. '221. 
 
THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 161 
 
 probably do not know that it was ever raised, certainly 
 they are unaware of the intensity of the conflict which 
 once raged round it. From 1856 then the agitation enters 
 on a new phase. It becomes political; later on sub- 
 sidiary educational reforms engross attention, and so the 
 old contention, with its far-reaching issues, dies down and 
 its memory fades away. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 1856—1871. 
 
 As the Reform agitation which culminated in the Act 
 of 1832 stirred up a movement' in favour of University 
 Reform, so did the agitation which culminated in the Act 
 of 1867. " In May 1866," says Mark Pattison, who was 
 then Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, " a few Members 
 of Convocation met in the chambers of Mr. Osborne 
 Morgan, Lincoln's Inn, to consider some University 
 matters. A wish was expressed by the meeting for fuller 
 information and suggestions. As no one else could be 
 readily found to undertake the task, I have ventured to 
 offer the following notes and hints. They are but a very 
 imperfect contribution towards a scheme for making 
 Oxford a University fully adequate to the wants of the 
 nation." These " notes and hints " make up the volume 
 entitled " Suggestions on Academical Organisation with 
 especial reference to Oxford." Though now obsolete in 
 many respects, as are all these old writings on University 
 Reform, it yet contains so much acute criticism and so 
 many wise suggestions that no one can afford to neglect 
 it. Along with Sir William Hamilton's Discussions, it 
 must be accounted among the chief contributions made to 
 the subject. Under 
 
 Sec. 1. Of Legislative Interference, 
 Pattison thus defines his object: "My endeavour will be 
 to show that the Colleges are not now performing the 
 function designed by their founders, and to urge that 
 they should be enabled by legislative interposition to 
 resume that function." ' He next discusses the principles 
 on which this legislative interposition should proceed. 
 " The Legislature of this country is now fairly in presence 
 of the question, What it shall do with its seminaries of 
 the higher education ? That the Legislature should have 
 
 1 Suggestions, p. 18. 
 
1856—1871. 163 
 
 clearly realised the extent of its rights is the best guaran- 
 tee we can have that it will recognise their limitation. 
 That there is a limit to the power of the State in its 
 treatment of its one great scientific corporation will not 
 be questioned. It is only by perfect freedom in its inter- 
 nal administration that such a corporation can discharge 
 its trust." Here then is the negative limit. On the other 
 side there are the positive principles of Government action. 
 " Protection is not enough. It must be among the duties 
 of Government, under its responsibilities to the nation, to 
 watch unintermittingly over the University, and to see 
 that it does in practice efficiently discharge the functions 
 assigned to it. If the Legislature only steps in when 
 crying abuses have accumulated, it is hardly possible that 
 justice will be done by a popular assembly, heated with 
 previous struggles between those who exaggerate in de- 
 nouncing, and those who exaggerate in defending, the 
 abuse. The University submits with discontent as to a 
 tyrannical intruder, and the Legislature, unacquainted 
 from disuse with the matter on which it has to legislate, 
 gladly escapes from an unwelcome task by an Act, which 
 passed, it dismisses the subject for an indefinite period. 
 This is the point at which the University question is 
 found to be involved in that more general question which 
 constitutes the governmental problem of the time, both in 
 this country and in Europe at large, how to hold the 
 balance, namely, between centralisation and self-govern- 
 ment. . . A closer connection with the central power 
 would quicken our zeal and concentrate our energies." 1 
 
 Pattison thus saw the necessity of keeping the Univer- 
 sities in touch with the national life, and especially in 
 touch with national education. But the method whereby 
 he proposed to effect this end may not strike everybody 
 as the most effective which could be found. " Why," he 
 asks, " should the Crown not exercise such a function ? 
 Our relations with the State might be re-established, in 
 a mode as little revolutionary as may be, by giving the 
 Crown the nomination of the Chancellor. He should be a 
 lay person nominated for life, be unpaid, but have a paid 
 secretary and an office through which all communications 
 
 i lb. pp. 20, 21. 
 
164 UNIVERSITY REFOEM. 
 
 should pass. An annual report should be laid before him 
 by each University officer. It should be his duty to 
 examine these reports, and to bring before the University 
 Council any matters arising upon such reports. He 
 should be ex-ojfficio a member of the Hebdomadal Council, 
 and his motions, to be made aut per se ant per alium, 
 should take precedence of those of any other member. . . 
 In compensation for surrendering its right of electing its 
 own Chancellor, the University should acquire an official 
 recognition in place of the unofficial and somewhat ex- 
 parte championship expected of her Chancellor in his 
 place as a Peer in Parliament. Official recognition in the 
 Government would supersede for the future spasmodic 
 and occasional efforts of Parliamentary legislation. Such 
 intermittent government is to be deprecated. . . But 
 the Colleges once started on a new career, powers of 
 internal legislation should be entrusted to the University, 
 which would enable it, under proper safeguards, to avoid 
 for the future a repetition of the deadlock which now 
 necessitates an appeal to Parliament." 1 Whatever may 
 be thought of the suggestion of a Crown-appointed Chan- 
 cellor who would play the part of King Stork, rather than 
 that of King Log, all will agree that a never-ending series 
 of Royal Commissions, each resulting in fresh legislation, 
 is a thing greatly to be deprecated. The next Royal Com- 
 mission and the resulting Act of Parliament should be 
 the last, and should leave the Universities free to develop 
 on right lines without fear of further interference. 
 Pattison next passes to 
 
 Sec. 2. — The Constitution of the University. 
 Much of what he suggests has been carried out, but some 
 of his points still remain to be dealt with. As for the 
 Hebdomadal Council, he suggested that the threefold 
 division into Heads, Professors, and Masters should be 
 replaced by a division according to the Faculties, while it 
 should be relieved of all matters relating to Studies and 
 Examinations, these being assigned to a separate body. 
 With regard to Congregation, he writes : — 
 " All that is now asked is that effect should be given 
 to the original scheme of Congregation — a scheme of 
 
 i lb. pp. 21, 22. 
 
1856—1871. 165 
 
 which nothing but the name has ever been in operation. 
 As if its usefulness was not sufficiently crushed by 
 making it 'an Epitome of Convocation,' jealousy of its 
 power went the length of — (1) dividing the vote from 
 the debate; and (2) denying it the power of amending. 
 Both these disabilities should be abrogated. . . When 
 reconstituted as proposed, it would be a body not equal 
 to the Council for the detailed conduct of business and 
 shaping of measures, but likely to take broader views 
 of principle and policy." 1 
 
 On the subject of Convocation, Pattison says: "If 
 Congregation were reinstated in its destined rights, it 
 seems to follow that it would be necessary to put an 
 end to the legislative functions of Convocation. . . It 
 appears to me that this single measure, could it possibly 
 be carried, would be a greater revolution in the Uni- 
 versity than all the reforms of 1854, or than any other 
 reforms that are thought of now. Is it not clear on the 
 face of it that it would be to transfer at one stroke 
 the foundation of the University from property to 
 intelligence ? " 2 In spite of this strong reason for action 
 Pattison hesitates. "Congregation, as we propose to 
 reform it, would be a purely educational body, entirely 
 divested of (professional or territorial) interests. Are we 
 prepared to sever the ties which at present bind our 
 national Universities to the country and its interests, 
 and hand them over to intelligence ? Is our country 
 ripe for such a measure ? I wish I could think so." f If 
 the country was not ripe in 1868, it certainly ought to 
 be ripe in 1913. This essential change and a more 
 scientific method of keeping Oxford and Cambridge in 
 touch with the national life will be discussed later on. 
 
 After legislation comes administration. The chief 
 executive officer of the University is the Vice-Chancellor. 
 With reference to him Pattison writes: "The Vice- 
 Chancellorship has been choked by an over-growth of 
 merely formal duties. . . He should be set free from 
 the drudgery of the desk, and from the transaction of 
 purely formal business. The ceremonies attending 
 degrees and presiding in Convocation might be delegated 
 
 i lb. pp. 30-31. 2 J6. pp. 31, 32. 3 lb. p. 33. 
 
166 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 to deputies (pro-Vice-Chancellors). Instead of being an 
 ex-officio member of every delegacy, and so obliged to 
 attend every sitting of every Board or Committee, it 
 would be better that he should not be on any, but 
 have reports made to him of the results arrived at 
 when the work of detail had been accomplished. His 
 higher energies would thus be set free for deliberation 
 in Council, and his nominal presidency changed into 
 a real one. His time would be more at liberty to 
 cultivate the University relations with the world out- 
 side. For the purpose of entertaining strangers and 
 foreigners, an official residence should be assigned him 
 with adequate appointments. This lofty station could 
 excite no jealousy, as the existing usage might be con- 
 firmed by statute— viz. that the holder of the office 
 should go out at the end of four years. 1 . . I would 
 leave the nomination with the Chancellor, but would 
 extend his range of selection as widely as could safely 
 be done. If proper security can be taken that the 
 Chancellor shall no longer be a party man, and make 
 party appointments, all limitations on his choice could 
 be removed." 2 
 
 After advocating the formation of a Financial Board 
 to deal with University property and revenues, Pattison 
 asks this revolutionary question : — 
 
 " Why should not the Colleges be relieved of the 
 burden of management of their property, and throw their 
 accounts into the same office, with proper provisions for 
 superintendence, in which the University business is to 
 be conducted ?" 3 
 
 Sec. 3.— Of the Endowments. 
 
 Under this head, Pattison defines the problem thus : 
 " For a great national purpose which we have in view, 
 how can we make the endowments go as far as possible 
 in promoting it?" 4 and he continues : " The distribution 
 of the nett residue of University and College revenues 
 taken together may be considered as taking place in three 
 channels : — 
 
 " 1. One portion, being the great bulk of our 
 
 i Now reduced at Oxford to three. At Cambridge the term is two. 
 2 lb. pp. 3S-40. 3 lb. p. 44. 4 lb. p. 51. 
 
1856—1871. 167 
 
 income, is laid out in subsidising education, in the shape 
 of Scholarships, Exhibitions to Students, and Fellowships 
 to graduates. 
 
 " 2. Another portion, of smaller amount, is expended 
 in the payment of Teachers, i.e. Professors, Lecturers, 
 Chaplains, Deans, or Officers of Discipline. 
 
 " 3. Lastly, a third, but inconsiderable, fraction of 
 our income is appropriated to the maintenance and 
 encouragement of science and learning, canonries, head- 
 ships, libraries, museums, etc." 
 
 Sec. 4.— -Actual Distribution of the Endowment Fund. 
 
 Pattison then considers these three in order, 
 beginning with 
 
 Subsidies to Education. 
 
 " This outlay upon students' pensions may be made, 
 according to the mode of its distribution, to answer three 
 quite distinct purposes :— (1) It may be given as prizes 
 to merit, and so serve to stimulate industry. (2) It may 
 be given to poverty, and so serve to give the means of 
 education to those who would be otherwise unable to pay 
 for it. (3) It may operate as a bounty on a particular 
 kind of education — i.e. it may be a mode of creating an 
 artificial demand for classics, or mathematics, while the 
 natural course of supply and demand would lead to the 
 establishment of other kinds of education." 1 
 
 "The complaint of the costliness of a University 
 education is one of the oldest and most urgent com- 
 plaints which has been standing against us. The 
 reduction of College expenses was, at the time of the 
 Commission of 1850, a first object with the public," and 
 the Commission recommended a large augmentation of 
 Open Scholarships. "The result of twelve years' experi- 
 ence is that the intentions of the Commission have been 
 carried out, and the expectations of the public have not 
 been realised. Open Scholarships have been multiplied 
 on all sides with eager rivalry. The market is glutted. 
 . . . Yet University education is not cheapened. For 
 what Colleges have done in the way of reduction of their 
 fees and charges with one hand, they have undone with 
 the other, by lavish allowances to their scholars. We 
 
 i I&. p. 57. 
 
168 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 have secretly supplied fuel to the fire we were engaged 
 in extinguishing. Well-to-do parents continue to make 
 their sons the usual allowance, and the Scholar treats 
 his £80 a year as so much pocket-money to be spent 
 in procuring himself extra luxuries. . . It is said that 
 the increase of the matriculations proves that a poorer 
 class have reaped some of the benefit of the creation of 
 Scholarships. . . But even if our increased numbers 
 be to a slight extent due to the increased number of the 
 Open Scholarships, this does not show that Scholarships 
 aid poor men. The question is not, Has multiplication 
 of Scholarships drawn more men to Oxford ? but, Has 
 it brought the University within the reach of a class 
 socially below the class which frequented it before? I 
 think the answer must be that it has not. . . The Open 
 Scholarship Fund, then, does not act as an instrument of 
 University extension. It acts as prize-money. . . The 
 national outlay under the head ' Scholarships and 
 Exhibitions ' is so much prize-money distributed among 
 the grammar-schools, the University being merely the 
 competent and impartial examiner. . . There can be 
 no doubt that a most powerful impulse has been given to 
 the grammar-schools by the opening of the Scholarships. 
 The same social class as before frequents the schools, but 
 a direction and a motive have been supplied to their 
 industry which were before wanting. On the University 
 itself the effect has been no less beneficial. Even if it 
 has not increased the numbers, or the amount of talent, it 
 has brought that talent forward in a way in which it was 
 not before. . . The Scholars constitute an order bound 
 to study as much by the opinion of their fellows as by the 
 tenure of their gowns. The existence of such an order is 
 beneficial beyond its own pale by influence and example. 
 Study, from being the peculiarity of an exceptional 
 minority, is becoming, let us say with thankfulness, 
 more and more the tone of a large proportion of the 
 students in many Colleges, though in too many others 
 the traditions of Eton still give the law to undergraduate 
 opinion." 1 
 
 " No one then," continues the writer, " is proposing 
 
 i lb. pp. 56-60. 
 
1856—1871. 169 
 
 to alter the present Scholarship system. But there are 
 two opinions prevalent as to additions which may be 
 made to the fund. 
 
 " 1. There are many University reformers who wish 
 to see a further and large creation of Prize Scholarships. 
 
 " 2. There is an influential section of opinion which 
 is in favour of a large creation of Exhibitions, which 
 should not be awarded as prizes, but given to ' poor 
 men.'" 1 
 
 As for (1), the fund from which more Scholarships 
 are demanded is the Fellowships. " I am ready to 
 admit," says Pattison, " that the Fellowships as now 
 bestowed do not answer any proper purpose, and that 
 the time has come when the destination of that fund 
 should be reconsidered. . . But it is not wanted for 
 Scholarships. . . The scholar's gown is too often to be 
 found on youths who have no vocation for science or 
 literature, and whom it was no kindness to have drawn 
 away from their proper destination to active life. They 
 have come here as a commercial speculation. High 
 wages are given for learning Latin and Greek, and they 
 are sent to enlist to earn the pay. In other words, we 
 fear that the Scholarships have been multiplied beyond 
 the limit within which they act as an incentive to 
 industry, and that they are become a bounty upon a 
 privileged species of education. . . When we consider, 
 out of our 1700 students, how many are here chiefly 
 because they are paid to come here, the reflection will 
 arise, Can an education which requires so heavy a 
 pecuniary premium to get itself accepted be really the 
 excellent thing we profess it to be?" 2 
 
 A further pungent criticism follows. " Even as a 
 Prize system, we are in danger of leaning too much upon 
 it. These competitive examinations, even while they 
 urge to work, have a fatal tendency to falsify education. 
 Open Scholarships have not been an unmixed good. 
 They have stirred up the schools, but they have also 
 stirred up an unwholesome system of training the com- 
 petitors for the race. The youth comes up with a 
 varnish of accomplishment beyond his real powers. He 
 
 i lb. p. 61. 2 lb. pp. 61-63. 
 
170 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 has caught the spirit of his professional trainers. He has 
 learned to regard his classics, not as the portals of a real 
 knowledge, but as the verbal material of an athletic 
 conflict. It is useless for real genius to enter the lists 
 of competition without this training. It is easy for 
 mediocrity, by putting itself under training, to reach one 
 of the prizes. Thus a life has been quickened among 
 us, but it is not a thoroughly sound and healthy life." 1 
 Pattison makes the following suggestions : — 
 
 1. The number of Prize Scholarships might be 
 diminished with advantage. 
 
 2. The value of each Scholarship is too large. " This 
 value has reached its present dimensions by the 
 accidental division of the University into independent, 
 and, for this purpose, rival houses. 2 Every College is 
 desirous to have its rooms full, and every College is 
 desirous of showing as many University honours as it 
 can. Consequently the Colleges outbid each other in the 
 general market for talent." 
 
 Under 3, Pattison then makes a suggestion of great 
 importance. " Fewer Scholarships, and of less money- 
 value, would, I think, have fully as great an effect as at 
 present, if, instead of being given away for the convenience 
 of each College, they were organised on a footing common 
 to the whole University. A fixed number should be 
 vacant every year, assignable among the Colleges in the 
 proportions of their respective contributions to the Prize 
 Fund. An examination might be held twice in the year. 
 It should be conducted by Boards of Examiners, one for 
 each of the subjects to which prizes were assigned — one 
 half of these Examiners to be appointed by the Vice- 
 Chancellor, the other half by the Professors (in turns) of 
 the several faculties to which the Boards would belong." 8 
 
 Pattison then passes to consider the demand for 
 more Exhibitions, or sums granted in aid of poverty. 
 He is not enthusiastic about them. In the first place there 
 would be the difficulty of raising a sufficiently large fund. 
 In the second place a better use might be made of the 
 
 i lb. p. 65. 
 
 2 Pattison here shows himself aware of the defects of the College 
 system, in spite of his defence of it on other occasions. 
 
 3 lb. p. 66. 
 
1856—1871. 171 
 
 money. Then the Exhibitions would probably fall to 
 those who came nearest to the successful candidates in 
 the Scholarship Examinations; in which case "we shall 
 but have increased the number of the existing prizes, 
 already too numerous, and failed in bringing up a single 
 representative of a new and poorer class to Oxford." l In 
 the fourth place there is "the impracticability of any 
 equitable gauge of poverty, either by testimonial or 
 inquiry." His own suggestion is that "it would be very 
 desirable that there should be in each College a small 
 reserve fund, out of which subsidies could be granted 
 to meet cases (of poverty) when they occur." 2 " The 
 endowment of Exhibitions," he goes on to say, "is a mode 
 of meeting cost, which, even when most lavishly employed, 
 can only add to our numbers by tens. It can never 
 1 extend ' the University to a newer and lower class of 
 English society. If this is to be done, the expensiveness 
 must be attacked in its causes. Instead of subsidising 
 the poor student up to the level of our expenses, we 
 ought to bring down the expenses to the level of 
 the poor. It is idle to say we cannot. We have never 
 tried." 3 
 
 When will these plain and true words have their due 
 effect ? It is forty-five years since Pattison wrote them, 
 and they describe the facts as correctly now as they did 
 then. 
 
 Pattison's first remedy for the high cost of a 
 University career was the system of Unattached Students, 
 i.e. of students who are members of the University 
 without being members of any of the Colleges. They are 
 in fact a return to the old state of things when all the 
 students were of necessity non-collegiate because the 
 Colleges had not yet come into existence. 
 
 He further admits that the price of education at 
 Oxford is artificially enhanced. "That this enhancement 
 is due mainly to the College and Tutorial system no 
 one will deny. . . Compulsory residence within College 
 walls must cease to be the law of the University." 4 
 
 i lb. p. 71. 2 lb. p. 74. 3 lb. p. 76. 
 
 * lb. pp. 76-79. Here we have yet another criticism of the College 
 system which should be read in conjunction with Pattison's defence of it 
 quoted at pp. 98-99. 
 
172 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Pattison's second remedy was the improvement of 
 the instruction given. " To cheapen the cost of a 
 University education is only one half of University 
 extension. The education given must be better adapted 
 to the wants of the class intended to benefit by it. Let 
 Oxford become, as nothing but artificial legislation 
 prevents it from becoming, the first school of science 
 and learning in the world, and at the same time let it 
 be accessible at the cost only of board and lodging, and 
 it will attract pupils enough. If what we have to teach 
 requires to be bolstered up by bounties to the taught, 
 that is evidence that what we have to teach is not 
 recognised as of intrinsic utility. If what the public 
 is calling for under the name of University extension 
 means certain social advantages, at the University and 
 afterwards, for their sons, let them understand that 
 these advantages cannot be had cheap, and if had, ought 
 to be paid for by those who get them. Exhibitions 
 are a means of extending to a small additional number 
 — a favoured few — this privilege. But aristocratic society 
 must always remain a privilege, and always be costly. 
 Social combinations apart, the necessaries of life cost 
 no more in Oxford than in other towns in the South 
 of England. The inducement to spend three years here 
 can only be found in improving the instruction. The 
 true solution of the problem of University extension 
 is to be found at last not in expedients for recruit- 
 ing more students, but in raising the character and 
 reputation of the body of teachers." l This last is our 
 author's sovereign remedy for University ills. It would 
 have been interesting if he had explained in detail how 
 the University was to "be accessible at the cost only 
 of board and lodging." How was free tuition to have 
 been provided? 
 
 Fellowships. 
 
 As for Fellowships, Pattison, after showing that the 
 old system imposed upon the Fellow, as a condition of 
 his tenure, a course of study of from twenty to twenty- 
 five years, goes on to discuss the effect of the Act of 
 1854 on them. He says: "The (College) ordinances in every 
 
 1 lb. p. 81. 
 
1856—1871. 173 
 
 instance abolish the statutable regulations of studies 
 and exercises, as well as the obligation to proceed to 
 the superior degrees. In no instance do they attempt 
 to substitute an equivalent. But though no duties are 
 provided for him to perform, the Fellow is maintained 
 in the enjoyment of his stipend and emoluments. In 
 other words, the ordinances of the Commission of 1854 
 converted the Fellowships into sinecures. The Com- 
 missioners found an enormous abuse existing illegally, 
 and they legalised it." ! And again : " Fellowships are 
 pensions conferred in recompense or acknowledgment 
 of meritorious exertions in the past. . . The Com- 
 missioners transferred them from the category of 
 benefices entailing duties, to that of sinecure benefices 
 obtainable by qualification. 2 . . They are educational 
 prizes. The Fellowships, as now administered, are to 
 the academical course what the Scholarships are to the 
 grammar-school, so much prize-money offered for com- 
 petition among the scholars." 3 
 
 Pattison's own view is thus expressed : — " Ability 
 based on force of character, on tenacity, and industry, is 
 what educational endowments seek to find and bring out. 
 We must keep the Fellowships as well as the Scholarships 
 free from the taint of a system which invites men to come 
 to the Universities, simply because they are poor, and 
 because they see in them a way to a good pension on easy 
 terms. To do this the prize-Fellowships must be restricted 
 in numbers, and rigidly bestowed so as to bring out the 
 greatest amount of exertion. . . The next stage to a 
 Scholarship should be a post in the public service, with 
 prospect of promotion by merit." 4 
 
 The writer's sketch of the educational position as he 
 saw it in his day can still be read with profit : — 
 
 "Next to a regular connection between the public 
 service and the University course, a re-establishment of 
 the local grammar-schools would be necessary if we are 
 to keep open the highway. The decay of the local 
 grammar-schools had cut off the supply of men to the 
 Universities at its source. But that decay itself was 
 only one of the minor symptoms of the social revolution 
 
 i lb. pp. 89, 90. 2 lb. p. 94. 3 lb. p. 98. * lb. pp. 100, 104. 
 
174 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 in progress. The youth of the lower middle class left 
 the grammar-school because it no longer taught them 
 what it was their interest to learn. The commercial 
 schools grew up, which taught nothing well, but which 
 professed to teach the things they wished to learn. The 
 public, which judges by profession, and not by perform- 
 ance, adopted the commercial academy. The local gram- 
 mar-school decayed, or turned itself, in order to live, into 
 a commercial school. Our middle-class youth passed into 
 life without approaching the Universities, without the 
 faintest trace of the culture which still remained the 
 traditional culture of the nation. The whole commercial 
 and moneyed class — from the great capitalists down to 
 the point where it merges in the small retailer — became 
 separated by an impassable gulf of education from the 
 professional classes. 
 
 " But mark well the reversal of social importance 
 which had accompanied the growth of this separation. 
 Down to the end of the wars of the French Revolution 
 (1815), the aristocratical, political, professional, and 
 clerical sections of society had been everything in social 
 consideration. These classes had clung to the traditions 
 of liberal education. But the enormous development of 
 commerce and manufactures since 1815 has opened a new 
 world to energy. The career opened by commercial enter- 
 prise to the middle class is a far more tempting career 
 than those opened by the old road of the professional and 
 public life. The thousands who tread this path go with- 
 out any education properly so called. Yet these classes 
 are in possession of great political power and social con- 
 sideration, which throws that of the professions into the 
 shade, and almost balances the power of the territorial 
 aristocracy. What is the consequence? It is that these 
 moneyed classes, containing the better half of the nation's 
 wealth and life, lie outside the pale of our educational 
 system. What they have not got they despise. Liberal 
 education confined to one half — and the least energetic 
 half— of the wealthy classes, is depreciated. The great 
 highway of successful life no longer lies through the 
 Universities. We wish to restore the road, and maintain 
 one broad-gauge line of refining education, along which 
 all our youth, the aspiring and the enterprising, as well 
 
1856—1871. 175 
 
 v 
 
 as the fanieant aristocrat and the apathetic dullard, shall 
 be willing to travel. It is impossible seriously to propose 
 that this shall be done by pensions. What would i'100,000 
 a year distributed in pensions do, if tried as a set-off 
 against the prizes which await skill and energy in busi- 
 ness ? Our endowment fund is considerable, but I believe 
 it is not equal to this task — that of buying up, the best 
 talent of the country. If we can succeed in making the 
 education given meet the demands of all classes, all 
 classes will desire to have it. If we want the old road to 
 be travelled, we must repair it, not pay pilgrims so much 
 a head, like a starving Swiss inn-keeper, for going our 
 route." ! 
 
 Of Endowments of Science and Learning. 
 
 Under this head Pattison gives a first hint of his own 
 particular scheme of University reorganisation. " The 
 present scheme proposes to convert the whole of the 
 Fellowship endowments from educational prizes into en- 
 dowments for science and literature, and I would propose 
 to include the endowments of the Headships in the same 
 category."' 2 And again: "In our arrangement the Colleges 
 are divided into those which, ceasing to receive boarders, 
 will be appropriated to one of the incorporated Faculties, 
 and into those which will remain boarding-houses." 8 
 
 This scheme of University reform is elaborated under 
 Sec. 5-6. The Re-distribution of the Endowment Fund. 
 It involves the fundamental question of What is a 
 University? 4 "The great bulk of our endowments — so 
 large a part that we may almost say the whole — is ex- 
 pended on youths under the age of twenty-four — i.e. it has 
 an educational effect. What is expended on promoting 
 science and learning is, by comparison, trifling, and, from 
 the peculiar mode of its bestowal, almost unproductive of 
 any fruits. This is the actual direction taken by the 
 National Endowment Fund. And it stands in direct con- 
 trast with the original destination of that fund. The 
 endowments, in the design of the founders, were endow- 
 ments for men and not for youth, and were not directed 
 to education as a preparation for life, but to knowledge 
 as a peculiar profession which withdrew men from the 
 
 i 16. pp. 101-103. 2 16. p. 112. 3 16. p, 114. 4 j&. p . 120. 
 
176 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 ordinary professions, and all those careers which are self- 
 paying, and which could therefore only be supported by 
 way of endowment." 
 
 But Pattison is careful not to rest his case on histo- 
 rical grounds alone : " I niake no claim for the restoration 
 of what once was, and has ceased to be, merely because it 
 once was. I only seek to have the real issue clearly 
 brought out before debate on University Reform is the 
 order of the day. No questions of detail can be entered 
 on, or particular applications of funds determined, till we 
 have settled the relative claims of Education v. Science." 
 The origin of the Oxford Colleges is then gone into to 
 show " the difference between an endowment for science 
 and an endowment for education." * 
 
 Having shown how Oxford became a school, instead 
 of a place of learning, he continues : — " When we adopt, 
 and acquiesce in, this view of ourselves, we cannot 
 complain if the public take us at our own valuation. If 
 you are a school, the public not unnaturally argues that 
 you are a very costly school. All those extensive build- 
 ings, those magnificent endowments, all those Canons, 
 Heads, Professors, Fellows, Tutors, to educate some 1700 
 pupils ! . . Certainly the Oxford B.A. ought to be the 
 most finished specimen of education in the world, if cost 
 of production is the measure of value. £120,000 a year 
 applied as prize-money or bonus distributable among 
 Scholars, and another £50,000 a year spent on Teachers 
 and Masters out of endowments, besides nearly another 
 £50,000 levied in fees by Tutors, private and public. . . 
 It has been determined that we are a school, and that 
 we shall be nothing else. Tried by this standard, the 
 public will discover two facts — 1st, That we are not the 
 right sort of school for its purposes ; 2nd, That such a 
 school as it wants could be conducted for probably a 
 fourth of the cost, and that the other three-fourths of the 
 endowment are superfluous." 2 
 
 A forecast is then made of the direction which reform, 
 under these circumstances, is likely to take. " It is not 
 desired to destroy us but to make us useful. If the 
 public were to take us in hand now, it would no doubt 
 
 l lb. p. 121. 2 lb. pp. 135, 136. 
 
1856—1871. 177 
 
 try to set up a school of liberal education for its youth, 
 in which the measure of attainment would be what will 
 get him on in life. And the measure of life would be an 
 empirical one, — not life as it might be, but life as it is. 
 Thus the type of our middle-class, such as it now is, 
 would be perpetuated. Education, instead of an elevating 
 influence, would become, as in China, the stamp of a 
 uniform pattern. At the same time, it is probable that 
 the first result of such a principle of reform would be an 
 increased efficiency of Oxford as a school. We should 
 have a varied staff of masters, under whom every sort 
 of accomplishment might be acquired in little time, or 
 at little cost, and youth prepared to pass unnumbered 
 competitive examinations in any subject. The hive 
 would be purified; the drones would be driven out. The 
 danger on which the Times dwells, that we are getting 
 to know too much, and to do too little, would be abated. 
 Every one would be doing a day's work, and receiving a 
 salary in proportion." ■ 
 
 This is certainly the direction in which things have 
 moved at Cambridge, though we have not reached 
 the happy state described in the last sentence. But 
 Pattison held such seeming progress to be a " catas- 
 trophe," and asks eagerly, Can we do anything towards 
 averting it? His reply is : " There remains only one thing 
 to be tried : — we must engage in a grapple with public 
 opinion, and endeavour to graft upon it, by discussion 
 and by the reason of the thing, an idea of the purposes 
 and the possibilities of a University, which is at present 
 wanting alike to its conception, and to our practice. We 
 must do nothing less than ask that the College endow- 
 ments be restored to their original purpose — that of the 
 promotion of science and learning." 2 
 
 Next comes a series of reasons to show that this is 
 not a Quixotic and hopeless proposal. 
 
 1. It is not a question of a new tax to be levied. The 
 money is already there. 
 
 2. The mode of its present expenditure is not 
 merely useless, but actually hurtful. " The endowments 
 of schools and Colleges diminish the necessity of 
 
 i lb. p. 138. 2 lb. p. 139. 
 
178 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 application in the teachers, their subsistence being 
 secured by a fund, independent of their success and 
 reputation in their profession." 1 
 
 3. The clear ground ought to be taken " that the 
 highest form of education is culture for culture's sake. It 
 must stand not in opposition to professional life, but 
 above it. The energy of a secular success is one only of 
 the conditions of moral life, and not the whole of it. 
 Refinement, if not actually a subtraction from public 
 energy, is not a basis for it. Education is to be a 
 preparation for life. Be it so. But then life is not all 
 fighting. When we shall dare to say these things, and 
 can show an education which, while it fits for the struggle, 
 yet leads up to a view of life which is above the struggle, 
 our position will not be confused by a cross issue, we 
 shall not be coming before the world on false pretences." 2 
 
 4. " It is ignorance, and not ill-will, that directs the 
 popular discussions on the subject of the highest 
 education. Men in general cannot imagine what they 
 have seen no example of. To expect that the public should 
 at once admit the idea, of the Universities becoming the 
 intellectual and educational metropolis of the country, 
 would be quite unreasonable." 
 
 Supposing, then, this principle of University Reform to 
 be granted, "the question arises, What form must the 
 institution assume to give it a scope and influence proper 
 to its time ? Three conditions of the success of such a 
 body may be laid down : — (1) It must be organised ; (2) The 
 persons composing it must be appointed for eminent 
 merit, and not for other considerations ; (3) There must 
 be security taken that when appointed they devote 
 themselves to the promotion of knowledge, and not 
 engage in other pursuits or subside into indifference." 3 
 
 1. It must be an organisation of science. College 
 funds might be spent in giving pensions to men of 
 science known to be engaged in independent researches. 
 But isolated life-pensions are not to be compared with au 
 institution organised for perpetual succession. All the 
 advantages of the spirit of association may probably be 
 secured without a common domestic life. " The collegium, 
 
 l lb. p. 142. 2 lb. pp. 145, 146. 3 lb. p. 155. 
 
1856—1871. 179 
 
 the incorporated society, having a common purse and 
 purpose, is still required ; but the College, in the modern 
 sense of the building, is not always fitted to be the home 
 of the individual members of the corporation, who must 
 be free to marry. In some instances the existing College 
 buildings might be appropriated for the residence of the 
 future married Fellows. This would especially be desirable 
 in the case of those foundations which were affected to 
 the cultivation of particular studies. If it were proposed, 
 e.g. to amalgamate Merton with Corpus Christi College, 
 and to dedicate the united College to the study of Biology, 
 Chemistry, and the allied branches, the buildings might 
 in this case be wholly appropriated to the use of the 
 families of the Fellows. In other cases, where no such 
 special dedication took place, a College might remain 
 fitted up in separate chambers as at present, and be let as 
 lodging to junior students." ' 
 
 2. " A place in a reformed College will be much more 
 worth having than a Fellowship is now, and it will be of 
 greater public concern that it should be properly filled. 
 The question of appointment resolves itself into two : — 
 (1) Who is to appoint? (2-) What test of merit is the 
 appointing officer to employ? The present method of 
 co-optation will no longer be applicable. An examination 
 test is not to be thought of. . . There remains but one 
 possible pattern on which a University, as an establish- 
 ment for science, can be constructed, and that is the 
 graduated Professoriate. This is sometimes called the 
 German type. . . The German University is an associa- 
 tion of men of learning and science under the title of 
 Professors. The position created for them is such as to 
 place them under the most powerful inducements to 
 devote their whole mind and energies to the cultivation of 
 some special branch of knowledge. . . In proposing the 
 German University as the model to which we must look 
 in making any alterations in our own, I wish to confine 
 Jiyself entirely to this single point of view — viz. of a 
 central association of men of science. . . What I wish 
 to contend is, that the Professor of a modern University 
 ought to regard himself primarily as a learner, and a 
 
 i lb. pp. 156, 157. 
 
180 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 teacher only secondarily. His first obligation is to the 
 Faculty he represents; he must consider that he is there 
 on his own account, and not for the sake of his pupils. 
 The pupils, indeed, are useful to him, as urging him to 
 activity of mind, to clearness of expression, to definiteness 
 of conception, to be perpetually turning over and verifying 
 the thoughts and truths which occupy him. 
 
 " But we must go further than this : Even merely to 
 be efficient as teacher, the University teacher must hold 
 up to himself a higher standard of attainment than the 
 possession of so much as has to be communicated to the 
 pupil. . . No teacher who is a teacher only, and not 
 himself a daily student, who does not speak from the love 
 and faith of a habitual intuition, can be competent to 
 treat any of the higher parts of any moral or speculative 
 science. . . . Our weakness of late years has been that 
 we have not felt this ; — we have known no higher level of 
 knowledge than so much as sufficed for teaching. Hence 
 education among us has sunk into a trade, and, like 
 trading sophists, we have not cared to keep on hand a 
 larger stock than we could dispose of in the season. Our 
 Faculties have dried up r have become dissociated from 
 professional practice at one end, and from scientific 
 investigation at the other, and degrees in them have lost 
 all value but a social one. . . It is because our life here 
 is wanting in scientific dignity, in intellectual purpose, in 
 the ennobling influence of the pursuit of knowledge, that 
 our action upon the young is so feeble. The trading 
 teacher, whatever disguise he may assume — whether he 
 call himself Professor or Tutor— is the mere servant of 
 his young master. But true education is the moulding 
 of the mind ancf character of the rising generation by 
 the generation that now is. We cannot communicate 
 ^hat which we have not got. To make others anything 
 we must first be it ourselves." ' 
 
 Pattison urges these considerations again and again. 
 "It cannot be repeated too often that the drift of these 
 ' Suggestions' is the conversion, or restoration of College 
 endowments to the maintenance of a professional class 
 of learned and scientific men." And again : " In order to 
 
 i lb. pp. 157-167. 
 
1856—1871. 181 
 
 make Oxford a seat of education, it must first be made 
 a seat of science and learning. All attempts to stimu- 
 late its teaching activity, without adding to its solid 
 possession of the field of science, will only feed the 
 unwholesome system of examination which is now under- 
 mining the educational value of the work we do. . . 
 The Professor-Fellow is to teach, but his business is 
 to learn, not to teach. 1 . . Not to enlarge the 
 sciences, or to heap up libraries, is our object, but to 
 maintain through successive generations an order of 
 minds, in each of the great departments of human 
 inquiry, cultivated to the utmost point which their 
 powers admit of." 2 
 
 He adds : " It may be necessary to guard the sug- 
 gestion of this principle against misconception on 
 another side. The University is to be an association of 
 men of science. But it is not for the sake of science 
 that they are associated. Whether or no the State 
 should patronise science, or promote discovery, is another 
 question. Even if it should, a University is not the 
 organ for this purpose. A Professoriate has for its duty 
 to maintain, cultivate, and diffuse extant knowledge. 
 This is an every-day function which should not be con- 
 founded with the very exceptional pursuit of prosecuting 
 researches or conducting experiments with a view to 
 new discoveries. The Professoriate is ' to know what 
 is known and definitely acquired for humanity on the 
 most important human concerns.' " 3 
 
 Outline of a Scheme. 
 Pattison now proceeds to outline his scheme more 
 definitely. 4 His University is one where no branch of 
 human knowledge is excluded, but where every subject 
 which it is for the interest of the community to have 
 preserved and diffused, is professed. The corrective to 
 the seeming infinity of this cadre is supplied by the old 
 classification of Faculties. These are : — 
 
 Theology. 
 
 Law. 
 
 Medicine. 
 
 Classics. 
 
 l lb. p. 198. 2 lb. p. 227. 3 pp. 171, 172. 4 lb. p. 173. 
 
182 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Philology and Language. 
 
 Historical and Moral Sciences. 
 
 Mathematical and Physical Sciences. 
 " Each of these faculties will be organised as a deliberative 
 body on its own arrangements, and will recommend 
 from time to time such modifications in the material 
 and number of its Professorships as occasion may require." 
 The collective Professors of each Faculty, whether asso- 
 ciated in one or more Colleges, would form a General 
 Board or Collegium, competent to make, subject to the 
 organic statute, 1 from time to time, regulations for the 
 conduct of the studies, lectures, and examinations in 
 their Faculty. The senior Professor, as Dean of the 
 Faculty, would be chairman of the Board. ' 2 
 
 Pattison then examines the above Faculties in suc- 
 cession; but as his book is confined to University objects, 
 he makes no suggestion about Theology, because he is 
 here on ground which is not purely academical. 
 
 The Faculty of Law also presents difficulties. " Legal 
 education has been wholly withdrawn from the English 
 Universities. . . Whatever the University may be able 
 to do in the way of direct preparation of the legal 
 practitioners must necessarily be concerted with the 
 Inns of Court. . . Ten or twelve Professor-Fellows of 
 recognised eminence in various departments, incorporated 
 in a Law-College, would give a very different aspect to 
 the question of a University law-degree as a qualification 
 for a call to the Bar. A good beginning has already been 
 made at All Souls." 3 
 
 "For an endowment which is to sustain and encourage 
 Historical Studies we must contemplate a much larger 
 application of our Fellowship fund. . . Nor can a 
 nation, which at this moment conducts and reaps the 
 profit of the commerce of the world, think that one Pro- 
 fessor of Political Economy is a sufficient representation 
 of those vast and important subjects. The phenomena of 
 capital and labour, of currency and exchange, not only 
 
 i The reference is to p. 28, where it is recommended that the whole 
 of the department " Studies and Examinations " should be placed under a 
 special Delegacy, or Board, and an organic statute passed, denning the 
 competency of this Board. 
 
 2 pp. 173-175. 3 lb. pp. 178-184. 
 
 
1856—1871. 183 
 
 involve practical questions of the highest moment, but 
 questions which even the public see cannot be elucidated 
 without science and theory. It is impossible, without an 
 apprehension of the laws of these phenomena, to form any 
 adequate conception of the world we live in. We can no 
 more understand the body politic and its history without 
 political economy than we can understand the natural 
 body without physiology." 1 Oriel and Queen's are sug- 
 gested as the History Colleges, and as a home for Moral 
 and Mental Science ; Corpus and Merton, as already sug- 
 gested, might furnish a home for the Biological Sciences; 
 and the splendid endowments of Magdalen might go to 
 the Mathematical and Experimental Sciences. 
 
 " As for the Faculty of Arts, in the special University 
 sense, there must be at least three Colleges, or incor- 
 porated, endowed, bodies of Professors in it : — 
 
 1. A College of Classical Studies. 
 
 2. A College of Comparative Philology and the 
 
 Science of Language. 
 
 3. A College of the Theory and History of Art. 2 
 "An endowed Art-College might provide for (say) four 
 
 Professors: Two, historical, dealing with — (1) Classical 
 Archaeology, Asiatic, Egyptian, &c, Art; (2) The period 
 from the revival of Art to modern times. Two, of the 
 Science and ^Esthetic, dealing with — (1) Painting and 
 Sculpture, Theory of Composition, Chiaroscuro, Style, &c. ; 
 (2) Architecture, Mechanics, Proportion, Balance, &c." 8 
 
 The proper income of the Professor-Fellow, and the 
 best methods of appointing him, are then discussed, but 
 these need not be further gone into. As a guarantee 
 against the besetting danger of endowments — mental 
 stagnation and apathy — a graduated system of promotion 
 is recommended, or a four-fold scale rising in value : — 
 
 1. Tutors. 
 
 2. Lecturers. 
 
 3. Professors. 
 
 4. Senior Fellows (or Heads). 4 
 Pattison then passes to 
 
 Sec. 6. — Of the Studies Preliminary to the Degree. 
 Here he necessarily touches on the principles of 
 education, a vast subject which lies outside University 
 
 i lb. pp. 185, 186. 2 lb. p. 193. 3 p. 196. 4 lb. p. 210. 
 
184 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Reform proper. Omitting reference to this topic, it may 
 be noted that the writer advocates a Special Delegacy or 
 Board of Examinations, on the system of representing 
 all the branches of study admitted in the University. 1 
 The Pass Examinations. 
 
 As to the distinction between " Pass " and " Class," 
 i.e. the distinction between an Ordinary Degree and an 
 Honours Degree, Pattison declares the " Pass " to be " a 
 nullity " ; and adds : " the Honour-students are the only 
 students who are undergoing any educational process, 
 which it can be considered as a function of a University 
 either to impart or to exact ; the only students who are 
 at all within the scope of the scientific apparatus and 
 arrangements of an academical body." 2 In those days the 
 " Pass " men were 70 per cent, of the whole number of the 
 students at Oxford and the " Class " men only 30 per cent. 
 Pattison would have made short and speedy work of the 
 " Pass " men. He writes : " Let Oxford once resume its 
 higher functions, let it become the home of science and the 
 representative of the best learning of the time, and what 
 is now called a pass-degree will be seen at once to be an 
 incongruity. . . Let us once realise our lofty calling, 
 and we shall find that we have quite enough to do in 
 maintaining and adorning the vast structure of human 
 knowledge to have time to occupy ourselves in the incul- 
 cation of the rudiments. . . The arrangement, then, at 
 which we should aim is, that the University should cease 
 the pass-business altogether." 3 
 
 The Examinations for Honours. 
 
 " The compulsory examination and the Pass Degree 
 being supposed abolished, and a voluntary examination 
 outside the University for youths under eighteen substi- 
 tuted for it, the next step follows as of course. The 
 present standard of honours must become the qualifica- 
 tion for the degree. The B.A. is superfluous and may be 
 dropped. The M.A. degree may be taken at the end of 
 three years residence by all whose names appear in any of 
 the four classes in any of the schools. Residence must be 
 at all costs preserved as a qualification." 4 
 
 1 lb. p. 229, 2 lb. p. 230. 3 lb. pp. 236-238. 
 
 4 lb. p. 243. 
 
1856- 1871. 185 
 
 "Examination must be restored to its proper place, 
 and that is one of subordination to the curriculum of 
 study, whatever that curriculum may be. Instead of, as 
 now, the examination regulating the student's preparation, 
 and the examiner being supreme over the teacher, the 
 position should be reversed. The examination should 
 follow the course of study, arranged from time to time 
 among the Professors of each faculty organised into a 
 College of studies for that purpose." 1 
 
 " Experience and reason seem to be both united in 
 favour of the ' voluntary principle ' as an indispensable 
 condition of the higher education. But all liberty must 
 be realised through law. We offer the degree, but on 
 conditions. We exact residence ; we test proficiency by 
 examination. May we not go further, and prescribe a 
 curriculum of lectures ? I think we may, if such a condi- 
 tion is not arbitrary, but is founded in the nature of the 
 case. . . A degree will be offered as a prize to the 
 student on two conditions : — (1) That he has gone through 
 a defined curriculum of study ; (2) That he has done so 
 with attention and profit. The courses of lectures delivered 
 by the public teachers will henceforth be the centre of the 
 system. When the teacherships are filled by men of real 
 knowledge, and who are imbued with the idea of science, 
 the teacher will no longer condescend to be guided in what 
 he shall say by an Examination in prospect. The trade 
 of the sophist will be gone when examination in fixed 
 text-books is abolished." 2 
 
 Inter-Collegiate instruction (not then existing, but 
 since established at both Universities), was the necessary 
 corollary of such a scheme. " Let the scholar be free to 
 select his teachers, and we need not anticipate any 
 difficulty in getting the candidates for Honours to submit 
 to a prescribed order of the subjects taught. . . It is a 
 chief business of the University to lay down correct lines 
 of study ; from the vast mass of all that may be learned 
 and may be taught, to select what should be taught and 
 learned." 8 
 
 i lb. pp. 248-249. a lb. pp. 253, 254. 
 
 3 lb. pp. 255, 258. 
 
186 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Conflict of Studies. 
 " The existing system of Oxford education is an 
 attempt at an adjustment between two conflicting 
 claims. The conflict of claims is between the general 
 and the special. Every man has to earn his 
 bread, and is also a member of civil society, a 
 participant in common humanity, is a soul capable 
 of a development or perfection of its own, and so may 
 be the subject of a general or humane training and 
 accomplishment. The problem is to combine specialty 
 of function with generality of culture. In the last 
 generation— i.e. thirty years ago, the Oxford curriculum 
 was wholly liberal, or general. . . After a long struggle 
 with opinion we had to give way. In 1850 two new 
 Schools — that of Law and History and that of Physical 
 Science — succeeded in establishing themselves, but in a 
 subordinate position to the School of Classics. Fifteen 
 years more (1865), and the new Schools had thrust aside 
 the once supreme Classics, and become alone a qualifi- 
 cation for a degree. Classics may now be dropped 
 entirely at Moderations. This is the adjustment between 
 the general and the special. . . But I am sure we 
 shall not long rest content with the clumsy adjustment 
 of the problem which we patched up two years ago. . . 
 The steps which we have already taken are in a right 
 direction, but to make them safe we must go on. . . 
 What is meant by saying that the steps have been in 
 a right direction is, that the recognition of special 
 studies as qualification for a degree is in conformity 
 with the true principle of University education. . 
 No one will dispute that, in the development of the 
 mind, there comes an epoch where a discursive ranging 
 from province to province of information must give 
 way to the inverse process of concentrating the energies 
 of the intellect in undivided intensity upon some one 
 object. The necessity for so doing is forced upon most 
 men by the external pressure of a profession. . . The 
 division of labour is the law of mental, no less than of 
 manufacturing, production. . . The only point that 
 can be questioned is, Ought this change to be post- 
 poned till after education is finished'? Can the higher 
 education be completed by general processes? Can 
 
1856—1871. 187 
 
 intellect be fully formed by formal discipline without 
 special knowledge? The old University system answered 
 the question in the negative. The practice of Oxford, 
 for the last three centuries, since the introduction 
 of the Classics as the instrument of education, has 
 been founded on the opposite theory. It is essential 
 to the revival of the University that it should recur to 
 the older system. The principle of the old University 
 system was a combination of the general and the 
 special. . . The proposal made in the first part of 
 these ' Suggestions,' for the application of the College 
 endowments, was a proposal for the revival of faculty, 
 or special studies. . . The principle I am now con- 
 tending for goes further still in the direction of special- 
 ising study. I am contending for the introduction 
 of definite, or faculty, studies at an earlier period of 
 the curriculum and for all students. . . The neces- 
 sity for founding the higher education on faculty studies 
 lies in the reason of the thing, and not in the weight of 
 authority or the force of precedent. The higher educa- 
 tion must take hold of the highest mental faculty and 
 form and develop it. This faculty is the scientific reason 
 in its perfect form. . . The imagination and the taste ; 
 the employment and discernment of language ; the percep- 
 tion of beauty by the eye ; to speak, to write, to argue, to 
 reason ; — all these are capacities or accomplishments to 
 be improved, or formed by education at some period. 
 But all these form only a superficial mental character, if 
 the great work of education, the establishment of an 
 exact habit of judgment, of the philosophical intellect 
 has not been achieved. . . The scientific habit can only 
 be educed by setting the understanding to investigate for 
 itself the laws of some one chief department, or division 
 of objects. It is not the matters known that make science, 
 but the mode of knowing." At the same time there 
 is a qualification. " The higher education, as the portal 
 through which the boy is to enter upon the duties of the 
 man, must conform in its arrangements to those of the 
 social system to which he belongs; . . it must adapt 
 itself to the requirements of daily existence. . . There 
 is no reason why every class of vocation in which intelli- 
 gence and refinement are applicable, and in which a 
 
188 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 career of prosperity is opened to the practitioner, should 
 not have a corresponding " Faculty " arranged for it 
 in the University, where an appropriate training — not 
 practical and professional, but theoretical and scientific — 
 might be had. Why should commerce and industry 
 choose to remain under the stigma which the feudal 
 system branded upon them, as base employments, which 
 necessarily excluded from the education which was 
 reserved for the territorial seigneur and the cleric ? . . 
 What the re-arrangement of the faculties should be, and 
 of the schools and courses leading up to their respective 
 degrees, is matter which will require profound delibera- 
 tion by special committees. Nor can it well be arranged 
 by ourselves without the advice and co-operation of the 
 Inns of Court, the Medical Council, the Heads of the 
 Government Offices, and other chief interests and occupa- 
 tions, which will in future come in for their share of 
 liberal training." 1 
 
 Pattison discussing the question of the division of 
 time at Oxford between general and special studies, 
 says : " Let school exercises — i.e. general education — 
 terminate at Moderations. Let this examination be 
 placed at the end of the first year from Matriculation. 
 That passed, let the student declare his Faculty, and 
 commence his special, or scientific, studies. These are 
 to be according to a prescribed curriculum, for each 
 Faculty separately, to be spread over two years and 
 terminated by the Degree. . . As I would remove Logic 
 and Philology from Moderations, and make that examina- 
 tion an examination purely in scholarship, I would make 
 the final examination for a degree in the Arts Faculty 
 wholly scientific." 2 There follows a detailed criticism on 
 " Greats " as they then were. 
 
 Incidentally Pattison makes a strong plea for the 
 training of teachers by the University. 3 He is also in 
 favour of lengthening the terms. " Instead of three terms 
 of residence in the year, I would have only two. The first 
 should begin 10th October and end 23rd December. The 
 second should begin 14th January and end 1st June. 
 
 i lb. pp. 258-268. 2 lb. p. 311. 
 
 3 lb. p. 287. 
 
1856—1871. 189 
 
 The examinations should be held once a year, in the 
 month of May." 1 Finally we come to the 
 
 Summary of Arrangement of Studies. 
 
 " A student would come up at once, without previous 
 notice, and matriculate. All Matriculations are in Octor 
 ber. He would inscribe his name on the register of the 
 University, and not on the books of any College. All that 
 would be necessary for this purpose would be that he 
 should be presented at the Registry Office by an M.A. 
 whose own name was on the roll of 'Tutors' — i.e. the 
 lowest or junior grade of University teachers. There is 
 no Matriculation examination, no Responsions, and no 
 1 Pass ' examinations or lectures. The Tutor would give 
 what instruction he thought fit, and require his pupils' 
 attendance at any courses of Professors' Lectures he 
 judged expedient. 
 
 " The student would lodge where he liked. If he chose 
 to rent a set of rooms in any College, or if he obtained a 
 Scholarship attached to any College, he would have, of 
 course, to comply with such regulations as to hours, etc., 
 as the College thought good to make. Outside College 
 walls he would be amenable to the disciplinal regulations 
 of the University and the directions of his Tutor. 
 
 " If he be a candidate for a degree, and for honours — 
 which are the same thing — he must attend public lectures 
 in such sequence as shall be from time to time directed 
 by each of the Faculty Boards. The first University test 
 he will encounter will be Moderations. There will be 
 no limit of age or standing imposed on candidates for 
 Moderations. But it would be usual to pass the Modera- 
 tion-school at the end of the first year of residence — i.e. in 
 the May following the October in which he matriculated. 
 But there would be nothing to prevent any young man 
 from offering himself for this examination before Matricu- 
 lation. If he passed it, he would not thereby reduce the 
 three years of his attendance on lectures to two, but he 
 would gain the advantage of having got a mere 'pre- 
 liminary ' examination out of the way, and of getting 
 three years' scientific instruction instead of only two. In 
 Moderations there would be (at least) two schools : (1) 
 
 l 16. p. 315. 
 
190 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Classical ; (2) Mathematical and Physical. Candidates to 
 make their option between the Classical and the Mathe- 
 matical School. . . 
 
 "Having, after Moderations, chosen his Faculty, he 
 must attend the courses of lectures in that faculty in the 
 order prescribed by its Boards of Studies. Any other 
 lectures besides these he is free to attend if he likes. If 
 he intends to become a professional teacher, in or out of 
 the University, his Tutor will recommend him to inscribe 
 his name in the ' Philological Seminary.' These courses 
 last two years. At the end of two years from Modera- 
 tions he presents himself in the school of his Faculty for 
 examination for the first degree. The faculties are : — 
 Theology. 
 Law, with two sub-faculties : 
 
 1. History. 
 
 2. Moral and Social Science. 
 Medicine. 
 
 Mathematics and Physics, in two sub-divisions : 
 
 1. Chemical and Biological Sciences. 
 
 2. Natural Philosophy. 
 
 Language and Literature, in three sub-divisions : 
 
 1. Comparative Philology and Science of 
 
 Language. 
 
 2. Classics. 
 
 3. Theory and Archaeology of Art. 
 Civil Engineering, Architecture, etc. 
 
 " The students who pass the examination which is 
 instituted upon the courses will be entitled to the first 
 degree. This degree confers the title of ' Master ' and all 
 the privileges and franchises attaching at present to a 
 ' Member of Convocation.' 
 
 " The second degree confers the title of Doctor of the 
 Faculty to which the graduate belongs, but is only for those 
 who design the practice of one of the professions. It is 
 conferred by the University, but requires, besides the 
 previous attainment of the degree of ' Master ' in the 
 Faculty, the performance of such exercises or conditions 
 as the authorities of the profession may impose. . . The 
 Master's degree is, alone, to qualify for the rank of Tutor. 
 But before the ' Tutor ' can be promoted to be ' Lecturer ' 
 in his Faculty, a further test might perhaps be applied. 
 
1856—1871. 191 
 
 At all events, attendance in the Philological Seminary 
 would be required. . . As soon as the University 
 teachers shall be in a position to give instruction which 
 is in itself valuable, we shall not grudge to admit all who 
 will, freely to it, without exacting from them that they 
 shall be candidates for a degree." 1 
 
 Such were Pattison's chief ideas on University Reform. 
 In part they relate to machinery, and to the problem of 
 organisation, but in the main, as he himself put it in his 
 " Conclusion,*' they amount to nothing less than " a 
 change in the aims and objects of Oxford." In other words, 
 the author of them does not set before us a scheme 
 capable of being carried out then and there, but sketches 
 an ideal plan, embodying, as he put it, "a conception, 
 which cannot be imported into Oxford from without, 
 either by public opinion or the Legislature, because 
 neither the public nor the Legislature can give an idea 
 or a sentiment which they do not themselves possess. 
 The idea, however, exists in germ in the University itself. 
 It is sure to grow and develop itself under favourable 
 influences. All that the Legislature can do is to create 
 the conditions, or to remove the obstructions." 2 
 
 Another book of importance to the University 
 reformer was published in this same year, 1868, — Professor 
 Goldwin Smith's " Reorganisation of the University of 
 Oxford." It is comparatively brief, but it contains much 
 that is suggestive and informing. Goldwin Smith 
 assumes, to start with, that the direct function of a 
 University in the present day is education, and that 
 educational duties ought to be attached to all emoluments. 
 He will have nothing to do with Mark Pattison's ideal. 
 " It appears to me that the expenditure of public money 
 in sinecures for the benefit of persons professedly 
 devoted to learning and science has been decisively 
 condemned by experience. . . Experience seems to 
 show that the best way in which the University can 
 promote learning and advance science is by allowing its 
 teachers, and especially the holders of its great Pro- 
 fessorial chairs, a liberal margin for private study ; by 
 this, by keeping its libraries and scientific apparatus in 
 
 1 lb. pp. 317-322. 2 lb. p. 227. 
 
192 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 full efficiency and 'opening them as liberally as possible, 
 by assisting through its Press in the publication of 
 learned works which an ordinary publisher would not 
 undertake, and by making the best use of its power of 
 conferring literary and scientific honours." 1 And again, 
 " in the same way the question whether particular Colleges 
 shall devote themselves, wholly or principally, to par- 
 ticular studies, must be settled by the course of events ; 
 to canton the Colleges out at present among the different 
 studies would be chemerical." 2 
 
 In his suggestions Goldwin Smith takes first the 
 questions affecting the Colleges internally. 
 
 He is against the existing Fellowship System, and 
 would divide the Fellowships into two classes—" Teacher 
 Fellowships and Prize Fellowships ; the former class, 
 with the present or increased incomes, bound to strict 
 residence and the performance of educational duties; the 
 latter class, with reduced incomes, but without obligation 
 to reside or other compulsory duty." College government 
 would be vested entirely in the Teaching Fellows. The 
 Prize Fellows would be chosen by examination ; but the 
 Teacher Fellows by educational qualifications without 
 limit in respect of age ; so that the Colleges and the 
 University would no longer be confined in their choice of 
 teachers to those who had won a Fellowship immediately 
 after taking the B.A. degree, to the exclusion of all whose 
 educational powers may have been later developed. 
 
 As to the Prize Fellows, they should be elected only 
 for a term of years. 
 
 " I would maintain students only during the educa- 
 tional course, including in that term the full period of 
 professional as well as of liberal study, whether completed 
 at Oxford, or, with the sanction of the University, else- 
 where." 3 
 
 As for the Fellows forming the College staff, " pro- 
 vision ought to be made for its residence under the 
 conditions of modern and domestic life in houses within 
 or adjoining the College." i 
 
 " The Headships ought now to have work assigned 
 them suitable to the present circumstances and functions 
 
 l Reorganisation, pp. 1, 4. 2 lb. pp. 23, 24. 3 lb. p. 16. ** lb. p. 17. 
 
1856—1871. 193 
 
 of the Colleges, i.e. the superintendence of moral dis- 
 cipline, and a share in the work of education. 
 
 " The time of persons devoted to education ought not 
 to be spent in the management of estates. , . It would, 
 in truth, be a good thing for the Colleges if their property 
 were in the funds. . . It is in the direction, not so 
 much of the lowering of charges as of improved economic 
 machinery, that the economic reform of the Colleges may 
 be hopefully pursued." ' 
 
 "It seems to be generally acknowledged that the 
 system under which each College attempts to be a 
 University in itself must be abandoned, and that the 
 Colleges must combine among themselves, and with the 
 University Professoriate, for the purposes of instruction. 
 . . The functions of the Tutor proper, that is, the 
 personal superintendence of students, should be separated 
 from those of the Lecturers ; and the Lecturers should 
 lecture, not to the College, but to the University, giving 
 public notice of their courses like the Professors. The 
 present Tutorial Fund should at the same time be divided; 
 a portion paid to the Tutors, and the rest, through the 
 College, to such Lecturers as the student may attend. 
 The College may thus retain all desirable control over the 
 instruction of its undergraduates. The position and 
 prospects of College Lecturers themselves would obviously 
 be greatly improved by the change." 2 
 
 The exact relations between the Professors and the 
 College Lecturers cannot be determined beforehand : they 
 will be settled among the Professors and Lecturers 
 themselves, as experience may dictate. If instruction is 
 reorganised on a University basis, the University Pro- 
 fessor ought, in all cases, to have the first claim on the 
 attendance of pupils; but otherwise the arrangements 
 will probably vary in the different departments. Classics 
 or Mathematics can be taught in a College Lecture-room, 
 but Natural Science can only be taught in the Labora- 
 tories and Anatomy Schools of the University. In the 
 same way the question whether particular Colleges shall 
 devote themselves, wholly or principally, to particular 
 studies, must be settled by the course of events : to canton 
 
 i lb. pp. 19, 20. 2 lb. p. 21. 
 
194 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the Colleges out at present among the different studies is 
 chimerical ; it would imply a knowledge of the future of 
 learning and science to which nobody, especially at a 
 moment of critical transition, can pretend." ' 
 
 " Shall we make the University again a place of 
 professional study, or of study preliminary to professions, 
 as well as a place of liberal education ? In other words, 
 shall we revive the Faculties ? The analogy of all the 
 Universities of other countries points to an answer in the 
 affirmative. . . The more practical parts of Law would 
 still have to be learnt in London Chambers ; the more 
 practical parts of Medicine in London Hospitals. The 
 University must for this purpose enter into alliance 
 with the Inns of Courts and the Hospitals, and recognise 
 their certificates as part qualifications for the legal 
 and medical degrees. . . With the Faculties, their old 
 system of self-government should be revived, and they 
 should be allowed, subject to the general legislation of 
 the University, to regulate their own studies." 2 
 
 " I must concur in the opinion that the ' Pass ' 
 Examinations ought to cease ; and that men who are 
 unable, with reasonable industry, to reach the standard 
 required for the lowest class in the Honour lists, ought not 
 to be brought to the University." 3 
 
 " The Entrance Examination ought to be in the 
 hands of the University, not only to secure the exclusion 
 of men unprepared for Academical studies, . . but also 
 to put the requisite pressure on the public schools." 4 
 
 " That the Legislative Assembly of the University 
 should be rightly constituted is a matter of the most 
 vital importance. Upon this depends the fusion of the 
 Colleges into a University, and their power of acting 
 together for the common good. . . The most indis- 
 pensable, though perhaps the most difficult reform, is to 
 set the intelligent and responsible government of the 
 University free from the unintelligent and irresponsible 
 interference of the non-Academical Convocation. The 
 power of the non-residents is a usurpation ; and it is not 
 only a great anomaly, but a great evil. . . The non- 
 Academical element ought to be removed from Congre- 
 
 l lb. pp. 23, 24. 2 J6. pp. 28, 29, 30. 3 lb. p 35. * lb. p. 36. 
 
1856—1871. 195 
 
 gation, and the legislature of the University made, as it 
 was intended to be, purely Academical. . . If ballast, 
 and a guarantee that Oxford shall not too much outrun 
 public opinion, is really needed, a certain number of non- 
 residents specially qualified, by having held important 
 educational offices in the University or the Colleges, and 
 possibly Head Masters of great Schools, might be added 
 to Congregation." 1 
 
 " The initiative Council . . . has not been success- 
 ful. It has proved unable to act as a Cabinet, to shape 
 any intelligible or consistent policy. . . The other 
 peculiarities of our system, the preposterous rule of 
 discussing a measure on one day and voting on another, 
 the absence of any power of moving amendments or of 
 going into Committee on the details of a measure, are 
 fatal to rational legislation. . . The want of initiative 
 vigour in the Council is evinced by their lazy retention of 
 the fashion of legislating in bad Latin." 2 
 
 " In an active University, the Vice-Chancellor must 
 always be a functionary of the highest importance, not 
 only as regards executive government, but as regards 
 general initiative. . . The method of mere rotation 
 among the Heads of Houses is clearly the offspring of the 
 age of torpor, quite unsatisfactory at the present time." 3 
 
 " No Delegacy or Committee can be organic without 
 a proper Secretary and a Chairman of its own. . . The 
 rule which makes the Vice-Chancellor ex officio Chairman 
 of all Delegacies and Committees, and paralyses their 
 action when he is absent (and perhaps still more when he 
 is present) is too absurd, and too contrary to what 
 common sense dictates elsewhere to require discussion." 4 
 
 " That English education will for some time to come 
 need the organising and guiding control of a central 
 authority, can hardly be doubted ; and it seems equally 
 clear that in a country governed by party, the Univer- 
 sities, if made thoroughly national, would be better and 
 more trustworthy depositories of such authority than the 
 political government. As there are two co-equal Univer- 
 sities, there would be little reason to apprehend a Procrus- 
 tean despotism of education." 5 The day, however, seems 
 
 l lb. pp. 38-40. 2 lb. pp. 40-42. 3 lb. p. 42. 
 
 4 lb. pp. 43, 44. 5 lb. pp. 54, 56. 
 
196 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 still far off when Oxford and Cambridge will supersede 
 the Board of Education. 
 
 " The relations of the University and its component 
 Colleges to the State also requires revision. At present 
 the law is not quite certain, but it appears that though 
 the University may be called to account for any technical 
 breach of legality, there is no visitatorial authority to 
 control the general exercise of its powers, or the general 
 expenditure of its funds, in the interest of the nation. 
 The Colleges have as Visitors mostly ecclesiastics. . . 
 The Visitor, however, never visits in the proper sense of 
 the term, nor does he in any way interfere to obviate the 
 evils incident to perpetual endowments. He only hears 
 appeals and interprets the Statutes. . . Everything 
 seems to point to the creation of a responsible department 
 of government with adequate powers for the visitation 
 of endowed institutions. . . To this department of 
 Government all powers now vested in the Privy Council 
 or in Visitors, with regard to the amendment of Statutes 
 or the appropriation of revenues, would naturally be 
 transferred. . . Under an efficient system of Visitation, 
 the expenditure of Academical funds for other than Aca- 
 demical purposes would of course be controlled." ' 
 
 " The action of the State should, however, be limited 
 to securing the right appropriation of public property, 
 and the right use of public powers. There should be no 
 interference with the intellectual liberty of the University. 
 On the other hand, it is obviously necessary that 
 the Universities should stand perfectly clear of political 
 party. Their representation in Parliament, the well- 
 meant but silly gift of James I., is not only an anomaly, 
 but it is, under the guise of a privilege, a real curse. In 
 the case of Oxford the representation has constantly 
 placed the University in a position of subserviency to a 
 political faction, and of antagonism to the nation. . . 
 A University which does its duty and attaches the youth 
 of the upper class to it by the bond of gratitude will 
 always be sufficiently, perhaps more than sufficiently,, 
 represented in the House of Commons." 2 
 
 Such were the two chief Oxford contributions during 
 
 i lb. pp. 61-64. 2 lb. pp. 64-66. 
 
1856—1871. 197 
 
 these years to the question of University Reform. The 
 writers differ profoundly, yet they have much in common. 
 Both desired a unified and self-governing University in 
 touch with national education. Pattison had for his 
 ideal an institution of the German pattern, which he 
 would have secured by an amalgamation of the Colleges, 
 a wholesale redistribution of their endowments, a gradu- 
 ated Professoriate, and a single-chambered government. 
 It is not a little amusing to find him assuring us that the 
 old quarrel of University v. Colleges is a dead issue, and 
 then merging these institutions so completely the one 
 in the other, that promotion for the teachers lies 
 through the Colleges to the University and then back 
 from the University to the Colleges. Pattison's Univer- 
 sity would also have claimed the student as its own 
 from the outset, and have made the Colleges com- 
 pletely subservient to his interests. Goldwin Smith 
 keeps in closer touch with the actual, and recognises 
 that the function of the University is education. He 
 would consolidate the Colleges but "without loss of their 
 individuality, or of the emulation of which it is the 
 spring, into a University," but he leaves their exact rela- 
 tions undefined ; they must be settled by the light of 
 further experience. He too would make Congregation 
 the sole governing body, regarding this reform as of vital 
 importance, because on it "depends the fusion of the 
 Colleges into a University, and their power of acting 
 together for the common good." The views held in 
 common by two such diverse minds ought not lightly to 
 be set on one side. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 
 
 The abolition of University Tests is a striking 
 example of a long-delayed reform. The great Parliament 
 of 1832, in the fulness of its zeal and energy made the first 
 attempt to deal with the matter. On the 17th of April, 
 1834, Colonel Williams moved the House of Commons to 
 present an address to the King praying that subscription 
 in the Universities might be abrogated except in the case 
 of those persons who were proceeding to Degrees in 
 Divinity. Thereupon Mr. George Wood proposed as an 
 amendment that leave be given to bring in a Bill to grant 
 to His Majesty's subjects generally the right of admission 
 to the English Universities, and the right of equal 
 eligibility to Degrees therein, notwithstanding their 
 diversities of religious opinion, Degrees in Divinity alone 
 excepted. On a division the amendment was carried by 
 185 votes to 44, and leave was given to bring in the Bilh 
 which was read a second time on the 20th of June by 321 
 against 147. The third reading was carried on the 28th 
 of July. Among the names of those who supported the 
 measure may be found those of Mr. Secretary Spring Rice 
 and Prof. Pryme, members for the Borough of Cambridge ; 
 Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston and Mr. Daniel 
 O'Connell ; while Mr. W. E. Gladstone, who had entered 
 Parliament in 1832, spoke in opposition on the third read- 
 ing. In the House of Lords the Earl of Radnor moved 
 the second reading on the 1st of August. Viscount Mel- 
 bourne and Lord Brougham, then Lord Chancellor, sup- 
 ported it, but the vote was Non-Contents, 187 ; Contents, 
 85, and there being no Parliament Act in those days, the 
 Bill was lost. Lord Holland entered a protest against 
 this decision of the Peers in the following vigorous 
 language : — " Excellence in the learned and liberal pro- 
 fessions of Law and Medicine in no degree depends on 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 199 
 
 religious belief; and Providence not having annexed the 
 avowal of any peculiar tenets in religious matters as the 
 condition of attaining human knowledge, I can discover 
 no motive of prudence or duty which should induce 
 human authority to impose any." 1 
 
 The question of Tests came up again in the Parlia- 
 ment of 1835. On the 11th of June of that year the Earl 
 of Radnor introduced a Bill into the House of Lords 
 abolishing subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles on 
 Matriculation. This modest proposal was defeated by 163 
 to 57 votes. 
 
 On the 25th of May, 1843, Mr. W. D. Christie, M.P. for 
 Weymouth, moved the House of Commons for leave to 
 bring in a Bill to abolish certain oaths and subscriptions 
 in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and to 
 extend education in the Universities to persons who were 
 not members of the Church of England ; but reaction had 
 now set in, and on a division the motion was rejected by 
 175 to 105. 
 
 On the 19th of June, 1851, Mr. Heywood moved that 
 the House of Commons should resolve itself into a Com- 
 mittee to consider the religious tests imposed by the 
 authority of the Crown or by Act of Parliament as a 
 qualification for any civil corporate privilege in the 
 Universities and Colleges of Oxford, Cambridge and 
 Dublin. Whilst Mr. Milner Gibson was speaking in favour 
 of the motion, the House was counted out. 
 
 The modifications in tests effected by the University 
 Acts of 1854 and 1856 have already been pointed out, and 
 in this connexion the following extract will be read with 
 interest. It is from the speech of the Earl of Derby, 
 Chancellor of Oxford University, on the second reading of 
 the Bill of 1854 in the House of Lords:— "If I thought 
 that the effect of this (Bill) was in the slightest degree to 
 dissociate the University and the Colleges from their close 
 and intimate connexion with the Church of England — 
 if I thought that it could in the slightest degree counten- 
 ance any pretext on the part of the Dissenters, that for 
 the purpose of accommodating their views the principles 
 and the practices of the University were to be altered, I 
 
 i Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., pp. 584, 595. 
 
200 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 then should look upon this question in a very different 
 light ; and as I am desirous of removing the bar to their 
 admission, so I am equally sincerely, cordially and de- 
 terminedly opposed to the severance of the intimate and 
 close connexion between the University and the Estab- 
 lished Church. . . I never will sacrifice the inestimable 
 advantage of having the two Universities of Oxford and 
 Cambridge as nurseries for the Church of England. . . 
 I call upon Her Majesty's Ministers to declare that the 
 Bill will not give to the Dissenter any control, power, or 
 authority, over the discipline, teaching, or government of 
 the University. I wish to learn from them how the 
 degree of Bachelor of Arts is guarded in this respect, and 
 I want to know further from them whether in sanction- 
 ing the granting of degrees of Bachelors to Dissenters, 
 they do not give them a claim to be appointed to the 
 masterships of many endowed schools in this country, 
 where the object of the founder in requiring the masters 
 to be Bachelors of Arts was practically for the purpose 
 of securing that they should be members of the Church 
 of England. As for the establishment of private Halls, 
 although I am ready to admit that the intermixture of 
 a small and unimportant portion of Dissenters among 
 the Colleges, to whose rules they were subject, might be 
 unobjectionable, I am not prepared to establish in these 
 private Halls congregations of Dissenting young men in 
 the centre of the University, or to encourage the propa- 
 gation in Oxford, either of Protestant Dissent on the one 
 hand, or the inculcation of Roman Catholic opinions on 
 the other." The state of public opinion which such an 
 utterance denotes, amply accounts for the apathy which 
 the Whig Ministers displayed towards the Nonconformist 
 grievance, and the despair of such men as Mr. Bright, Mr. 
 Miall and Mr. Heywood, as to the possibility of securing 
 redress. 
 
 The further efforts made after 1856 must be passed 
 over very briefly. Suffice it to say that from 1864 
 onwards a University Tests Bill was a " hardy annual " 
 in the House of Commons. The Bill of 1867 was rejected 
 by the House of Lords, as was the Bill of 1869. The 
 real debate on the subject took place in 1870. On May 
 23rd of that year, the Solicitor-General, Sir John Duke 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 201 
 
 Coleridge, moved the second reading of the University 
 Tests Bill. 1 The Government had now advanced to the 
 j)Osition previously occupied by the more Radical members 
 of the party, and had incorporated in their proposals the 
 amendment moved by Mr. Fawcett to the Bill of the 
 previous year, the effect of which was, that instead 
 of the abolition of the tests being left to the various 
 Colleges, to be adopted by them or not at their pleasure, 
 those tests were abolished for them once for all by the 
 power of Parliament. Mr. Spencer Walpole, one of the 
 members for the University of Cambridge, moved the 
 rejection of the Bill. Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, in 
 supporting it, thus summarised the facts: "Only 
 after the Reformation did the fatal idea creep in of 
 fastening the Universities in the strait waistcoat of 
 orthodoxy. King Edward VI weeded out the Catholics, 
 Queen Mary weeded them in again. Queen Elizabeth 
 weeded them out a second time ; and after much vacil- 
 lation, owing to the various interests which alternately 
 influenced her mind, she inflicted on Oxford the Thirty- 
 nine Articles and the three Articles of the 36th Canon. 
 This was done at the advice of Leicester, an incompetent 
 general, a more than incompetent statesman, and the 
 murderer of his wife. King James inflicted the three 
 Articles of the 36th Canon on Cambridge. But it was not 
 till the Restoration that the Universities experienced 
 their full degradation. By the Act of Uniformity of 
 Charles II. it was ordered that Heads and Fellows of 
 Colleges, Professors, Lecturers and Tutors should be 
 required to declare their unfeigned assent and consent to 
 all and everything contained and prescribed in the Book 
 of Common Prayer. The century and a-half after the 
 Act of Uniformity was the darkest and dreariest period in 
 the history of the Universities. They became a by-word, 
 not only in England but on the Continent. They were 
 the home of Jacobite Toryism ; they published declara- 
 tions against civil and religious liberty — on one occasion 
 in such language that the declaration was ordered to be 
 burnt by the hands of the common hangman, and that 
 order came from the House of Lords. Of educational 
 
 i Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. CCL, p. 1192, and following 
 volumes. 
 
202 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 work there was little or none, and religion showed its 
 presence chiefly by those libations of port wine of which 
 Gibbon preserved so keen a recollection." Mr. Gladstone 
 followed on the same side, agreeing with Sir Robert Peel 
 that " it was impossible to admit Dissenters to education 
 at the Universities without admitting them to degrees, 
 that it was impossible to admit them to degrees without 
 admitting them to government, and impossible to admit 
 them to government without admitting them to emolu- 
 ments." The first two points had been conceded ; the 
 second two followed of necessity. The second reading 
 was carried by 191 to 66, a majority of 125, and the third 
 reading by a still larger majority. 
 
 In the House of Lords the second reading was moved 
 on July 14 by Earl de Grey and Ripon, afterwards known 
 as the Marquis of Ripon. The Marquis of Salisbury met 
 the proposal by a hostile amendment which was carried 
 by a majority of 14, and a Select Committee was appointed 
 for the purpose of inquiring into the best mode of giving 
 effect thereto. This action killed the Bill for that session, 
 but the discussions which had taken place materially 
 shortened the proceedings in 1871. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, when once he had reached a position, 
 never went back from it ; and though as late as 1865 he 
 had opposed Mr. Goschen's Bill for the abolition of tests 
 at Oxford, he was now determined that the oft-repeated 
 demands of the Nonconformists should in great measure 
 be granted, and he went forward without wavering. On 
 February 10th, 1871, he re-introduced the Bill of the year 
 before, refusing to enlarge it so as to include clerical 
 Fellowships and Headships, on the ground that it was the 
 duty of the Government to make one more appeal to the 
 House of Lords to pass the measure which it had rejected 
 the year before. Six days later the Bill was read a second 
 time without a division. On February 20th it passed 
 through Committee without amendment, and was read a 
 third time without a division on February 23rd. This 
 rapid progress showed that all parties in the Commons 
 were ready for a settlement. 
 
 The House of Lords gave the Bill a first reading on 
 the same day as it passed the House of Commons. The 
 real struggle was in Committee. The Marquis of Salis- 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 203 
 
 bury, in accordance with the advice of the Select Com- 
 mittee appointed the year before, proposed the following 
 addition to Clause 2 : " No person shall be appointed to the 
 office of Tutor, Assistant Tutor, Dean, Censor, or Lecturer 
 in Divinity, in any College now subsisting in the said 
 Universities, until he shall have made and subscribed the 
 following Declaration in the presence of the Vice-Chan- 
 cellor, that is to say : ' I A. B. do solemnly declare that 
 
 while holding the office of I will not teach anything 
 
 contrary to the teaching or divine authority of the Holy 
 Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.' " The noble 
 Marquis declared that " the question raised by this Bill is 
 not a question between Church and Dissent, but between 
 Christianity and infidelity." ' Personally he and his 
 friends desired that all honours and emoluments, all 
 Fellowships and Scholarships should be thrown open 
 without distinction to all subjects of the Queen. They 
 held, however, that the office of teaching rested upon a 
 very different footing to the enjoyment of emoluments, 
 the rights of the pupils had to be considered, education 
 must be religious, and the amendments to be proposed 
 were directed mainly to the maintenance of religious 
 education. The amendment was carried by 71 to 66, a 
 majority of only 5, aud other amendments on the same 
 lines were carried by equally narrow majorities. Mr. 
 Gladstone, on the return of the Bill to the Commons, 
 would have none of Lord Salisbury's " negative test," and 
 declared that it was impossible to have such a test more 
 unfortunately framed than that introduced by the Lords. 
 The amendment was disagreed with without a division, 
 as were similar amendments. The Lords did not carry 
 the contest further. The motion to insist on the Salis- 
 bury clause was lost by a majority of 40. After this 
 vote it was useless to persevere, and the Royal Assent was 
 given to the Bill on June 16th, thirty-seven years after 
 Mr. Ward had made the first attempt. 
 
 i Most political struggles generate catch-words. The catch-word 
 about the abolition of University Tests was that "it was opening the 
 flood-gates of infidelity." The present defenders of the last shred of 
 religious tests now remaining at Oxford,— those for the Divinity Degrees, 
 do not seem to have advanced very far from the position occupied by 
 Lord Salisbury more than forty years ago. 
 
204 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 We may now turn to the text of the Act itself. The 
 first paragraph of the Preamble runs as follows : — 
 
 " Whereas it is expedient that the benefits of the 
 Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Durham, and of 1 
 the Colleges and Halls now subsisting therein, as places 
 of religion and learning, should be rendered freely acces- 
 sible to the nation :" It is here laid down that not only 
 the Universities, but the Colleges as well are henceforth i 
 to be regarded as national institutions. 
 
 The operative clause is Clause 3. It runs : " No ] 
 person shall be required, upon taking, or to enable him i 
 to take, any degree (other than a degree in Divinity) | 
 within the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and I 
 Durham, or any of them, or upon exercising or to enable 
 him to exercise, any of the rights and privileges which i 
 may heretofore have been, or may hereafter be, exercised I 
 by graduates in the said Universities, or any of them, , 
 or in any College subsisting at the time of the passing 
 of this Act in any of the said Universities, or upon 
 taking, or holding, or to enable him to take or hold, any 
 office in any of the said Universities or any such College 
 as aforesaid, or upon teaching, or to enable him to teach, , 
 or upon opening, or to enable him to open, a private 
 Hall or Hostel for the reception of students, to subscribe 
 any article or formulary of faith, or to make any declara- 
 tion, or to take any oath respecting his religious belief I 
 or profession, or to attend, or abstain from attending, 
 any form of public worship, or to belong to any specified I 
 church, sect, or denomination ; nor shall any person be : 
 compelled to attend the public worship of any church, 
 sect, or denomination to which he does not belong." 
 
 The word "office" is previously defined in Clause 2. 
 as including " every Professorship other than Professor- 
 ships of Divinity, every Assistant or Deputy Professor- 
 ship, Praelectorship, Lectureship, Headship of a College t 
 or Hall, Fellowship, Studentship, Tutorship, Scholarship! 
 or Exhibition." 
 
 The throwing open of all rights and privileges enabled j 
 Nonconformists to vote as members of the Senate, and 
 consequently to take their full share in the government 
 of the University. Clause 3, combined with Clause 2, 
 threw open all Headships, Professorships, Lectureships, 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 205 
 
 Fellowships and Scholarships, save where a clerical 
 
 qualification was expressly attached to them. This 
 
 exception was effected by the saving sections of Clause 3. 
 
 Compulsory attendance at College Chapel was also done 
 ; away with for those who were not members of the 
 
 Church of England. 
 
 This same year was rendered notable by another step 
 i in advance. On October 24th, 1871, Mr. Gladstone 
 
 addressed a letter to the Vice-Chancellors of Oxford and 
 : Cambridge which began as follows : — 
 
 " Rev. Sir, — I have the honour to acquaint you that 
 I during the discussions of the current year upon the 
 i University Tests Act, the advisers of the Crown made 
 'known to Parliament their opinion that a complete 
 i enquiry ought to be instituted, by a Commission for the 
 i purpose, into the revenues and property of the two 
 . Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and their intention 
 : to take steps with a view to the early appointment of such 
 ; a Commission. 
 
 " On the one hand it appeared to be undeniable that 
 
 the information to be sought through such a Commission 
 : would be of great interest and value to the public and to 
 
 Parliament, as well as to the members of the two 
 distinguished bodies themselves. On the other hand, the 
 
 Government bore in mind that it had not been in the 
 power of a Royal Commission of inquiry, appointed more 
 than twenty years ago, to present such information in a 
 complete form even at the period of their investigation ; 
 while the time which has intervened must have greatly 
 altered the facts of the case in a variety of material 
 particulars. 
 
 " What thus remained wanting could only be supplied 
 either under the authority of a Statutory Commission, or 
 through a Royal Commission, if such Royal Commission 
 should enjoy the full and free assistance of the Uni- 
 versities and Colleges themselves." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone then remarked that from inquiries 
 which had been made, it was thought a Royal Commission 
 Avould meet the needs of the case. He continued : — 
 
 " With regard to the scope of the inquiry which has 
 been mentioned in Parliament, it ought, in our view, to 
 embrace the fullest information respecting all matters of 
 
206 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 fact connected with the property and income either of the 
 Universities themselves, or of the Colleges and Halls 
 therein. In these would be included the prospects of 
 increase or decrease in such property and income, and the 
 statement of the uses to which they are applied. But it 
 would be no part of the duty of the Commission to pass 
 judgment on the present appropriation of these resources, 
 or to recommend alterations in it. For a task thus 
 denned, in the opinion of the Government, a single 
 Commission, composed of a small number of members, 
 would suffice ; and it is to be hoped that the inquiry need 
 not occupy more than a moderate space of time. 
 
 " What is requisite, however, is that the Government 
 should have reasonable ground to expect such voluntary 
 and general assistance from the numerous societies con- 
 cerned as would warrant their relying on a process thus 
 conducted for the attainment of complete results." 
 Finally Mr. Gladstone asked the Vice-Chancellor to 
 ascertain how such a Commission would be regarded by 
 the University and the Colleges. The reply in both cases 
 was that every facility and assistance would be afforded 
 in order to render the inquiry effectual. 1 
 
 On January 5, 1872, a Royal Commission was issued, 
 the Commissioners being the Duke of Cleveland, Lord 
 Frederick Cavendish, Lord Clinton, J. W. Strutt (after- 
 wards Lord Rayleigh), W. H. Bateson, Bartholomew Price, 
 and K. D. Hodgson. Mr. C. S. Roundell was appointed 
 Secretary. The Commissioners presented their Report 
 on July 31st, 1874. Details from it and comment on it 
 are reserved for Chapter XI., which treats of the Financial 
 Resources of the two Universities. 
 
 In the Appendix to the Report will be found various 
 matters of wider scope. There are here the memorials 
 and other documents which show the origin of the 
 University Extension Movement (pp. i.-xi.). 
 
 There is also a memorandum addressed to Mr. 
 Gladstone which runs as follows : — 
 
 " We, the undersigned, being resident Fellows of 
 Colleges and other Resident members of the University 
 of Cambridge, engaged in educational work or holding 
 
 i Report, p. 23. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 207 
 
 offices in the University or the Colleges, thinking it of 
 the greatest importance that the Universities should 
 retain the position which they occupy as the centres of 
 the highest education, are of opinion that the following 
 reforms would increase the educational efficiency of the 
 University, and at the same time promote the advance- 
 ment of science and learning. 
 
 " I. No Fellowship should be tenable for life, except 
 only when the original tenure is extended in consider- 
 ation of services rendered to education, learning, or 
 science, actively and directly, in connection with the 
 University or the Colleges. 
 
 " II. A permanent professional career should be as far 
 as possible secured to resident educators and students, 
 whether married or no(t). 
 
 " III. Provision should be made for the association of 
 the Colleges, or of some of them, for educational purposes, 
 so as to secure more efficient teaching and to allow to the 
 teachers more leisure for private study. 
 
 "IV. The pecuniary and other relations subsisting 
 between the University and the Colleges should be 
 revised, and, if necessary, a representative Board of 
 University finance should be organised. 
 
 "We are of opinion that a scheme may be framed 
 which shall deal with these questions in such a manner 
 as to promote simultaneously the interests of education 
 and of learning, and that any scheme by which those 
 interests should be dissociated would be injurious to 
 both." 
 
 In the covering letter sent with the memorial there 
 occurs the following sentence : — 
 
 "It is universally admitted that the present regula- 
 tions connected with the tenure of Fellowships are highly 
 unsatisfactory. They seriously diminish the number of 
 learned residents in Cambridge. They are detrimental to 
 the efficiency of teaching in the University, and calcu- 
 lated to deprive her of the educational services of many of 
 her ablest members." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone replied in a letter dated April 28th, 
 1873, in which he says : " It gives me great pleasure to 
 find supported by this authoritative judgment a proposal 
 with respect to the tenure of Fellowships, the principle of 
 
208 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 which was included in the Oxford University Bill of 1854, 
 but from which the state of Parliamentary and academic 
 opinion at the time compelled the Government of Lord 
 Aberdeen to withdraw." Mr. Gladstone adds that the 
 time is hardly ripe for action, but assures the memorial- 
 ists that the subject is one which will always command 
 his warm and friendly interest. 
 
 In January, 1874, Mr. Gladstone appealed to the 
 country. At the ensuing General Election he was 
 defeated, and on February 17th he resigned office. When 
 therefore the Royal Commission reported on the last 
 day of July, 1874, the Conservatives had for some months 
 been installed in office, and by one of the ironies of 
 politics it fell to them to carry out their predecessors' 
 policy in the matter of University Reform. Mark 
 Pattison has left us the following lively explanation of a 
 unique situation as it appeared to him in 1876, the year 
 before legislation actually took place. "In 1854," he 
 writes, 1 " the House of Commons, after many threats and 
 long hesitation, made its onslaught on the Universities, 
 or rather on the Colleges. It was a fair stand-up fight 
 between these wealthy and powerful societies and the 
 representatives of the nation. The issue may be said to 
 have been a drawn battle. The Colleges were not 
 re-modelled, nor did they lose a shilling of their property. 
 On the other hand, the assailant made good his claim to 
 overhaul and to legislate. Everyone felt that this first 
 baffled attempt was but a prelude. We are now (1876) in 
 the middle of the second Punic War, and no one can fail 
 to see the importance of the advantage gained by the 
 attacking party in the first. In 1854 we disputed the 
 right of interference, and invoked our charters and the 
 sacredness of private property. This ground is no longer 
 taken. The cry of ' spoliation ' is no longer raised. We 
 take as a matter of course the taking away of the 
 property of the Colleges and giving it to the University, 
 and no one is shocked or so much as hints at ' confisca- 
 tion.' . . All parties are agreed that the Colleges 
 shall be wholly re-modelled. There is no fight about this. 
 The struggle will be what model shall be adopted. . . 
 
 1 Essays on the Endowment of Research, pp. 2-3, 11-15. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 209 
 
 What then are the causes of dissatisfaction? What 
 is it that has led to the call for a new Reform Bill ? 
 From what side does the present movement, which Lord 
 Salisbury's Bill is intended to satisfy, come ? 
 
 " The question is not so easy to answer as might be 
 thought. I have asked over and over again, Why should 
 a Conservative Government have meddled with the 
 University at all ? It is not part of the Tory programme 
 to promote science, to foster intelligence, to raise the level 
 of education. Property, character, respectability, Church 
 principle, obedience to superiors, these have been the basis 
 on which Toryism has rested, these are the valuable 
 qualities it has fostered, and to the production of which it 
 would fain direct its education. In its adhesion to this 
 programme lay the strength of Conservatism. How is it 
 that it should have deserted its traditional ground, and 
 taken up the policy of the Liberal party ? Twenty years 
 ago the very title of ' Professor ' was odious to the Con- 
 servatives, who used all their strength, and successfully* 
 to prevent the employment of College funds for the 
 endowment of Professorial chairs. Now in 1876, when 
 the Universities were working better than they had ever 
 done, when there was no public dissatisfaction, no call 
 whatever for interposition, a Conservative Government 
 comes down upon us with a Bill, the object of which, so 
 far as we can discover its object, is to promote that very 
 kind of reform which twenty years ago it employed all its 
 strength to defeat — the confiscation, viz., of College pro- 
 perty for the benefit of the University. . . It cannot be 
 alleged that there was any pressure of opinion from 
 without which called for a further University reform. 
 The Bill of the present Ministry is a legacy from the 
 ' harassing ' legislation of their predecessors. . . Accord- 
 ing to the opinion of the middle classes of England, 
 Oxford is a place of education. We ourselves, i.e. the Col- 
 leges, have no other conception of our vocation. Mean- 
 while a vague notion was being spread that these societies, 
 which existed only for education, were possessed of large 
 landed or other property. The central Government 
 wished to know how much ? It asked us to tell in 1851, 
 but we yelled and screamed, and threw dust in the 
 air, and got off telling for the moment. The question was 
 
210 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 repeated in 1874, and in sterner and more determined 
 tones. The howling this time was confined to the Bursars 
 of the Colleges. These gentlemen were certainly hardly 
 used, in being required to make laborious returns upon 
 schedules quite unnecessarily complicated. But it will 
 be observed that the Colleges this time showed no reluct- 
 ance to produce their rent-rolls. The public, as usual, in 
 the absence of information, had indulged in exaggeration. 
 We paid the just penalty of having refused in 1851 to 
 make any return, in being now credited with extravagant 
 riches. In 1874 we were rather anxious to disabuse general 
 opinion by letting it be known how moderate our incomes 
 really were. 
 
 " The return was made. It was ascertained that the 
 nett income of the University and Colleges of Oxford was 
 i,'400,000 a year. To combine this fact, or figure, with the 
 other fact or figure that Oxford is a place for the education 
 of 2,000 students, required no great powers of logic. It 
 was a sum in division. Divide the pounds sterling by the 
 students, and it is obvious that each undergraduate costs 
 £200 a year to educate. To educate, observe ; simply 
 teachers' fees; for the pupil pays himself for his board, 
 lodging, all his necessaries and amusements. The 
 teaching power, for 2,000 undergraduates, staff, apparatus, 
 chapels, libraries, Deans, Tutors, Heads, Prize-Fellowships, 
 who all exist for the sake of the undergraduate, cost 
 £400,000 a year. This is a striking, not to say staggering 
 result. If the lower and uneducated classes should ever 
 come to an apprehension of these figures, how must they 
 reason upon them ? ' This annual sum arises out of 
 national property. National property belongs to us. We 
 are even told by some that it was given by the founders 
 to the poor students. It is all spent upon educating the 
 sons of the rich.' It is certain that as information slowly 
 finds its way downwards, this simple reasoning must come 
 into vogue. Meanwhile, so far as the figures have been 
 reflected on by the classes at present interested in the 
 Universities, the conviction has arisen that there is some- 
 thing wrong here. The expenses of this educational 
 establishment are out of all proportion to the work done. 
 We have not so much fault to find with the teaching, but 
 it is too expensive. £400,000 a year for 'tuition, prizes 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 211 
 
 and the use of the globes ' is too much. It can be done 
 cheaper. 
 
 " If this is a true description, first of the actual 
 reasoning of the middle classes, and secondly of the pros- 
 pective reasoning of the lower classes, it becomes intelli- 
 gible why a Conservative Government should have found 
 it necessary to take the initiative and endeavour to 
 obviate the economic objection to Oxford. The objection 
 of its extravagant cost is not the only objection that can 
 be brought, but it is the only one which is urged with any 
 effect, or which can be adequately apprehended by the 
 middle class of an industrial community with little 
 education and no culture. The sum in arithmetic — 
 divide the pounds by the pupils— that is an argument by 
 which 'the constituencies' are capable of being moved. 
 It is an act of statesmanship to anticipate this movement, 
 and to deal with ' surplus funds ' of the Colleges before 
 they are seized by ignorant hands. I offer this as a con- 
 jectural history of Lord Salisbury's Bill." 
 
 When Parliament assembled on February 8th, 1876, it 
 was announced in the Queen's Speech that legislation 
 would be proposed relating to the Universities. Accord- 
 ingly on February 24th the Marquis of Salisbury, who 
 was then Secretary of State for India, rose to present 
 the University of Oxford Bill. After premising that 
 there were not many in the House who could remember 
 the last University Bill, he continued : " It may be worth 
 while, therefore, before entering on the consideration of 
 another University Bill to remind your Lordships of the 
 principles embodied in the Act of 1854. And what were 
 they ? . . . The principal portion of the Act was 
 directed to the entire reconstruction of the Government 
 and legislative machinery of the University. With 
 respect to that portion of the Act, I have no proposition 
 to make. Another point which at the time was con- 
 sidered to be of great importance was . . . that pro- 
 vision in the Act which gave leave to Masters of Arts 
 to set up Halls. . . The result has been that one 
 Master set up a Hall, and that there are four under- 
 graduates in it. That is the end of all those hopes and 
 all those fears. Some twelve years afterwards the Uni- 
 versity devised a plan of its own to admit the less wealthy 
 
212 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 classes to the training of the University. It devised 
 what is known as the system of Unattached Students. 
 The result which seven years' experience of that system 
 enables the University to present is very remarkable. 
 In 1868-9, when it commenced, the entries of under- 
 graduates as Unattached Students was 53 ; and from 
 that time they have gone on increasing year by year, 
 so that in 1875 they were 185, which is, I think, a 
 very respectable number. . . A third point in the 
 Act of 1854 was the application of the revenues of the 
 Colleges. In respect of that, undoubtedly, there has 
 not been the same satisfaction as has been derived 
 from the other points with which the Act dealt. There 
 are constant complaints that the revenues of the Univer- 
 sity are not spent in as useful a manner as they might 
 be, and that things remain undone which might be done 
 if there were a more judicious outlay of some portion of 
 those revenues. This it was which led to the appoint- 
 ment of the Commission presided over by the Duke of 
 Cleveland, whose inquiry was to be as to the revenues 
 of the Colleges as they at present exist, and as they 
 might be expected to exist at a definite time. That 
 Commission reported towards the close of 1874. In one 
 sense it was a most satisfactory Report. It showed that 
 the idea — if the idea ever existed — that the Colleges 
 mismanaged their property was wholly without founda- 
 tion. . . But, on the other hand, the Commissioners 
 go on to notice, as one remarkable thing arising out of 
 their inquiry, a point to which it would have been 
 impossible not to direct the attention of Parliament. 
 One point brought prominently out in the result of the 
 inquiry is the great disparity between the property and 
 income of the several Colleges and the number of the 
 members. When that number is small the expense of 
 the staff and establishment is large in proportion. And 
 now let me explain why we undertook to legislate on the 
 University at all. It is a work I undertook with great 
 reluctance, and I do not think Her Majesty's Government 
 would have entered upon it at all, if they had not felt 
 that there was an absolute necessity for their so doing. 
 It is not desirable, if it can be avoided, that the inter- 
 ference of Parliament should be invoked, because 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 213 
 
 such interference is calculated to disturb the studies 
 of the University and to excite hopes that cannot be 
 realised. But when we come to look at certain figures 
 and the deductions that lay in those figures, we felt that 
 it would be idle to think that Parliament could abstain 
 from interfering, or that we could conscientiously 
 recommend Parliament to do so. I will venture to put 
 before your Lordships what I know are hostile figures. 
 . . . In the first place, it is calculated that within the 
 next 15 years an addition of no less than £123,000 a year 
 will be made to the Collegiate revenues. . . Again, it 
 is not only the prospective income of the Colleges which 
 is to be regarded — we have an actual income to examine. 
 Taking together the whole corporate income and tuition 
 fees, but deducting money borrowed and money received 
 on behalf of the University, and other necessary deduc- 
 tions, it appears that the average income per under- 
 graduate in all the Colleges is £203. But when we come 
 from the Colleges as a whole to particular Colleges we 
 have very different results. The income per undergraduate 
 in all the Colleges is £203 ; but in Exeter it is only £97> 
 in Trinity £96, and in Balliol £75. If University education 
 were provided in all the Colleges as cheaply as at Exeter, 
 there would be at present a saving annually of £165,578 ; 
 as cheaply as at Trinity, there would be a saving 
 annually of £167,129 ; or as cheaply as at Balliol, a saving 
 annually of £197,700. With such figures before us, on the 
 surface of the Report, I hold that it would be impossible 
 to avoid dealing with the question. . . It may be urged 
 that the Colleges individually may come and ask to 
 have the necessary legislative changes. But another 
 and great complaint is that, while the Colleges are 
 rich, the University is poor, and you cannot expect 
 that the result of an application by each College 
 would be a scheme which would work economically for 
 the whole. You might as well expect economy and 
 good order to result from the proceedings of twenty 
 different architects building a club-house, each of whom 
 came forward with a plan of one room in the club-house 
 to suit his own views. But where does the money go? 
 The £200,000 is not thrown into the sea. AVith a great 
 number of different bodies, some large and some small, of 
 
214 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 course the expense of the small bodies will be out of pro- 
 portion to that of the large ones. The real gist of the 
 whole question lies in the Fellowships, and in the giving 
 nien £250 to £300 a year without any duties attached to 
 the Fellowships in right of which they receive that 
 amount. I do not believe that any one starting fresh in 
 the matter would ever think of establishing rewards of 
 that kind. . . Only in this case of Fellowships to which 
 no duties are attached do you reward merit by absolute 
 idleness. It is against the whole law of public life. In 
 public life, if a man succeeds, you give him more import- 
 ant work, but not idleness. In the Bill of 1854 the 
 authors of that Bill saw the evil and endeavoured to pro- 
 vide against it. They suggested that there should be 
 work attached to those Fellowships. But there was great 
 opposition. In the end Commissioners were appointed ; 
 and the Commissioners, though they wished to make a 
 fundamental alteration, did not care to make an effectual 
 alteration. I am afraid they adopted a compromise main- 
 taining the appearance of one system while adopting 
 another. At all events it is a comfort to know that the 
 University has become thoroughly alive to the evil of this 
 state of things, and from it we shall meet with no 
 opposition in applying such remedy as may be thought 
 necessary. It seems that if all these ' idle Fellowships ' 
 were to be done away with, we should save a sum 
 of from £50,000 to £()0,000 or £80,000. That, under an 
 improved system, could be applied to University purposes. 
 There are now from 220 to 230 of these Fellowships not 
 filled by any person occupying an educational office. At 
 £250 per Fellow that would give a disposable sum of 
 £55,000 a year. These are the monies we have got in hand. 
 First I would ask what are the objects to which it is 
 desirable that these revenues should be applied ? . . I 
 should suggest that the recommendations of the Com- 
 mittee of the Hebdomadal Council would afford a good 
 indication of present requirements. The Committee 
 speaks of a new library, new museums, and new schools. 
 . . I think I may estimate that a capital sum amount- 
 ing, on the whole, to £210,000 would be required for these 
 objects. Besides this the Committee press strongly the 
 necessity of increased remuneration for those who are 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 215 
 
 engaged in academical education. There are Professors 
 at £800, £600, £300, £200, and even at £100. Compare these 
 annual stipends with what is paid in other departments. 
 . . I do not believe that less than £1000 a-year, with a 
 fair pension beside, will secure the highest talent for 
 those Professorships. . . My Lords, these being the 
 objects we have in view, it may be well to state what 
 money we hold to be available. In the Report of the Com- 
 missioners a distinction is drawn between the general 
 income of the Colleges and the money held by them in 
 trust. We propose to interfere very little with trusts. 
 . . But beside the trust funds there would still remain a 
 vast residue of revenue over which the Commissioners 
 would be able to exercise control and to apply to such pur- 
 poses as they thought best. . . We propose now to begin 
 at the point where the Act of 1854 ended. We propose to 
 provide by means of the present Bill that each College 
 shall have the opportunity during some eighteen or 
 twenty months after the passing of the Act of drawing 
 up and of laying statutes before the Commissioners to 
 be appointed under the Bill, and on such statutes receiv- 
 ing the approval of the Commissioners they shall become 
 law. . . All I have to do now is to show what duties 
 the Commissioners will have to perform. We propose 
 that in dealing with the University the Commissioners 
 may make provision from time to time for affording 
 further or better instruction in Art or Science; for pro- 
 viding endowments for Professorships or Lectureships ; 
 for erecting and endowing Professorships or Lecture- 
 ships on arts or sciences not already taught in the 
 University ; for providing new or improving existing 
 buildings, libraries and museums, and collections and 
 apparatus. The proposal with regard to the Colleges 
 is somewhat similar, and also provides that College 
 revenues may be applied to the maintenance and benefit 
 of persons of known ability and learning, who may be 
 engaged in study or research in the realms of Art and 
 Science in the University." Lord Salisbury then went 
 on to speak of the duty and necessity of encouraging 
 research, and concluded the most radical speech he ever 
 made in these words: "We feel in the present chaos 
 of opinion, at a time when beliefs of all kinds and on 
 
216 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 all subjects appear to be loosening their hold, it is of 
 especial value to give every facility to, and to take every 
 opportunity of maintaining in their fullest efficiency, 
 institutions which combine those dispositions of mind 
 on which alone any sound and progressive culture can 
 rest." 
 
 An interesting feature of the brief discussion which 
 followed was a speech by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 who, as Dr. Tait, had been one of the leading spirits of 
 the Oxford Commission of 1850. He remarked that 
 " looking to the past, he could not conceal from himself 
 that it was desirable that a little external pressure should 
 be brought to bear upon the Universities, and that it 
 would not do to trust either the Universities or the 
 Colleges with the entire management of the reforms, for 
 he believed that they were not an exception to the rule 
 which had been found to exist everywhere, that hardly 
 any corporation was capable of entirely reforming itself 
 without external pressure." 1 
 
 The second reading of the Bill was carried on March 
 9th. Speaking for the Government, the Earl of Carnarvon 
 remarked : " It must never be forgotten that originally at 
 Oxford the University was the chief and central figure, 
 but changes had occurred, and at Oxford the supremacy 
 had passed into the hands of the Colleges, and in restoring 
 a little of the power which originally belonged to the 
 University, they were but reverting to an old idea, but 
 a sound one in theory and practice." 2 The Marquis of 
 Salisbury, on the other hand, on March 31st, on the 
 motion to go into Committee, said plainly : " The interests 
 of the Colleges would be attended to first, and those of 
 the University afterwards." 
 
 In Committee the Earl of Morley carried the following 
 amendment : " The Commissioners may also, on the 
 application of any two or more Colleges, make provision 
 for their complete or partial union ; such application 
 shall be made by at least two-thirds of the Governing 
 Bodies of the said Colleges, with the consent of the 
 
 Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. CCXXVII., pp. 791-806. 
 2 lb. p. 1683. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 217 
 
 Visitors thereof." The Marquis of Salisbury afterwards 
 embodied this amendment in a new clause, which appears 
 as Clause 22 in the Act. 
 
 Lord Carlingford was unsuccessful with the following 
 clause, intended to give Oxford the same constitution as 
 Mr. Gladstone intended by the Bill of 1854 : — " On and 
 after the 15th day of Michaelmas Term, 1876, the 
 Congregation of the University of Oxford shall be 
 composed of the following persons only, the said persons 
 being members of Convocation : The Chancellor, the 
 High Steward, the Heads of Colleges and Halls, the 
 Proctors, the Members of the Hebdomadal Council, the 
 officers named in the schedule to this list annexed, the 
 Professors, Lecturers and Readers of the University, the 
 Public Examiners, Resident Fellows of Colleges, and all 
 persons who shall be certified by the Head of any College 
 or Hall to be engaged in the tuition, discipline, or 
 administration of such College or Hall." 
 
 The Bill was passed and sent to the Commons on May 
 5th, and was read a second time on June 12th. 
 
 The University of Cambridge Bill was introduced 
 into the House of Commons by Mr. Spencer Walpole on 
 May 16th, and was read a second time on July 6th, after 
 an amendment moved by Sir Charles Dilke : " That in 
 view of the large legislative powers entrusted to the 
 University of Cambridge Commissioners, this House is of 
 opinion that the Bill does not sufficiently declare or define 
 the principles and scope of the changes which such Com- 
 missioners are empowered to make in that University and 
 the Colleges therein." This amendment was identical in 
 terms with that which Mr. Osborne Morgan had pre- 
 viously moved on the Oxford Bill. The idea which was 
 in the mind of the Opposition may be expressed in one 
 sentence from Sir Charles Dilke's speech : " Their com- 
 plaint was, that as far as any limitations went, the Bill 
 enabled the Commissioners to strip the Colleges in order 
 to make a couple of bad copies of a German University." 
 It is noteworthy that Sir Charles Dilke, a Cambridge man 
 and a Radical, was for the Colleges against the Univer- 
 sity, and that the Radical section of the Liberal Party 
 agreed with him. Both Bills were withdrawn on July 31st. 
 
 The Queen's Speech for 1877 again contained a promise 
 
218 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 of University legislation. This time the two Bills were 
 made into one, and on February 9th Mr. Gathorne Hardy 
 brought in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge 
 Bill. On February 19th the Bill was read a second time 
 without a division. In Committee Sir Charles Dilke 
 again raised the question of University government. He 
 proposed to give powers to the Commissioners " for alter- 
 ing the qualifications required for membership of Congre- 
 gation at Oxford, and for admission to the Electoral Roll 
 of the University of Cambridge, and for limiting or 
 abrogating the power of the Convocation of the University 
 of Oxford and of the Senate of the University of Cam- 
 bridge respectively to regulate matters relating to the 
 studies of the University, and to the education given in 
 it." The amendment was lost by a majority of 28. A 
 long debate took place on the question of Clerical Fellow- 
 ships, Mr. Goschen moving : " The Commissioners, in 
 Statutes made by them for a College, shall provide that 
 the entering into or being in Holy Orders shall not be the 
 condition of the holding of any Headship or Fellowships." 
 The Government view was that the question should be 
 left to the Commissioners. The discussion drew Mr. 
 Gladstone from the retirement in which he had lived 
 since his defeat in 1874, and he supported Mr. Goschen, 
 who was defeated by a majority of only nine. The Bill 
 was read a third time on June 18th. The Lords made 
 certain amendments, but an agreement between the two 
 Houses was speedily reached, and the Royal Assent was 
 given on August 10th. 
 
 The Preamble of the Act runs as follows : — 
 " Whereas the revenues of the Universities of Oxford 
 and Cambridge are not adequate to the full discharge 
 of the duties incumbent on them respectively, and it 
 is therefore expedient that provision be made for enabling 
 or requiring the Colleges in each University to contribute 
 more largely out of their revenues to the University 
 purposes, especially with a view to further and better 
 instruction in Art, Science, and other branches of learn- 
 ing, where the same are not taught, or not adequately 
 taught in the University : 
 
 "And whereas it may be requisite for the purposes 
 aforesaid, as regards each University, to attach Fellow- 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 219 
 
 ships and other emoluments held in the Colleges to 
 offices in the University : 
 
 " And whereas it is also expedient to make provision 
 for regulating the tenure and advantages of Fellowships 
 not so attached, and for altering the conditions on which 
 the same are held, and to amend in divers other particu- 
 lars the law relating to the Universities and Colleges : " 
 
 By Clauses 3 and 4 two bodies of Commissioners 
 were appointed, styled respectively the University of 
 Oxford Commissioners and the University of Cam- 
 bridge Commissioners. 
 
 The following were the Oxford Commissioners:— 
 Lord Selborne, the Earl of Redesdale, Dr. Montagu 
 Bernard, Sir William Grove, Dr. James Bellamy, Pro- 
 fessor H. J. S. Smith, and Matthew White Ridley. 
 
 The Cambridge Commissioners were Lord Chief 
 Justice Cock burn, The Bishop ot Worcester, Lord 
 Rayleigh, the Right Hon. E. P. Bouverie, Professor 
 Lightfoot, Professor Stokes, and G. W. Hemming. 
 
 The powers of the Commissioners were continued till 
 the end of 1880, with power to the Queen in Council to 
 extend the time till the end of 1881. The Commissioners 
 from and after the end of 1878 had the power of making 
 Statutes for the Universities and Colleges, and the 
 Universities and Colleges had the like power, subject to 
 the approval of the Commissioners. The effect of this 
 proviso was that if a University or College did not frame 
 statutes to the Commissioners' liking, the Commissioners 
 could frame Statutes for it, but they could not alter a 
 trust less than fifty years old (Clause 13), and were 
 required to have regard to the main design of founders. 
 
 The objects of Statutes for the University are thus 
 set out (Clause 16) : — 
 
 " AVith a view to the advancement of Art, Science, and 
 other branches of learning, the Commissioners, in Statutes 
 made by them for the University, may from time to time 
 make provision for the following purposes or any of them: 
 
 " (1) For enabling and requiring the several Colleges, 
 or any of them, to make contribution out of their 
 revenues for University purposes, regard being first had 
 to the wants of the several Colleges in themselves for 
 educational and other Collegiate purposes : 
 
220 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " (2) For the creation, by means of contributions 
 from the Colleges or otherwise of a common University 
 Fund, to be administered under the supervision of the 
 University : 
 
 " (3) For making payments under the supervision of 
 the University, out of the said common fund, for the 
 giving of instruction, the doing of work, or the con- 
 ducting of investigations within the University or 
 inquiry connected with the studies of the University : 
 
 " (4) For consolidating any two or more Professor- 
 ships or Lectureships : 
 
 " (5) For erecting and endowing Professorships or 
 Lectureships : 
 
 " (6) For abolishing Professorships or Lecture- 
 ships : 
 
 " (7) For altering the endowment of any Professor- 
 ship or Lectureship : 
 
 " (8) For altering the conditions of eligibility or 
 appointment and mode of election or appointment to 
 any Professorship or Lectureship, and for limiting the 
 tenure thereof : 
 
 " (9) For providing retiring pensions for Professors 
 and Lecturers : 
 
 " (10) For providing new or improving existing 
 buildings, libraries, collections, or apparatus for any 
 purpose connected with the instruction of any members 
 of the University, or with research in any art or science 
 or other branch of learning, and for maintaining the 
 same : 
 
 " (11) For diminishing the expense of University 
 education by founding Scholarships tenable by students 
 either at any College or Hall within the University or as 
 unattached students not members of any College or Hall, 
 or by paying salaries to the teachers of such unattached 
 students, or by otherwise encouraging such unattached 
 students 1 : 
 
 " (12) For founding and endowing Scholarships, 
 Exhibitions, and Prizes for encouragement of proficiency 
 in any art or science or other branch of learning : 
 
 i This sub-section embodies an amendment proposed by Dr. Tait, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 221 
 
 " (13) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
 tions of or affecting any University endowment, founda- 
 tion, or gift, or of or affecting any Professorship, Lecture- 
 ship, Scholarship, office, or institution, in or connected 
 with the University, or of or affecting any property belong- 
 ing to or held in trust for the University or held by the 
 University in trust for a Hall, as far as the Commissioners 
 think the modification thereof necessary or expedient for 
 giving effect to Statutes made by them for any purpose in 
 this Act mentioned : 
 
 " (14) For regulating presentations to benefices in 
 the gift of the University : 
 
 " (15) For regulating the application of the purchase 
 money for any advowson sold by the University : 
 
 " (16) For founding any office not paid out of 
 University or College funds in connexion with any special 
 educational work done out of the University under the 
 control of the University, and for remunerating any 
 secretary or officer resident in the University and em- 
 ployed there in the management of any such special 
 educational work : 
 
 " (17) For altering or repealing any Statute, Ordinance 
 or regulation of the University and substituting or add- 
 ing any Statute for or to the same." 
 
 Clause 17 reads : " The Commissioners in Statutes 
 made by them for a College, may from time to time make 
 provision for the following purposes relative to the Col- 
 lege, or any of them : 
 
 " (1) For altering and regulating the conditions of 
 eligibility or appointment including where it seems fit 
 those relating to age, to any emolument or office held in 
 or connected with the College, the mode of election and 
 appointment thereto, and the value, length, and condi- 
 tions of tenure thereof, and for providing a retiring 
 pension for a holder thereof : 
 
 " (2) For consolidating any two or more emoluments 
 held in or connected with the College: 
 
 " (3) For dividing, suspending, suppressing, con- 
 verting or otherwise dealing with any emolument held in 
 or connected with the College : 
 
 " (4) For attaching any emolument held in or con- 
 nected with the College to any office in the College, on 
 
222 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 such tenure as to the Commissioners seems fit, and for 
 attaching to the emolument, in connexion with the 
 office, conditions of residence, study, and duty, or any of 
 them : 
 
 " (5) For affording further or better instruction in 
 any art or science or other branch of learning : 
 
 " (6) For providing new or improving existing 
 buildings, libraries, collections, or apparatus, for any 
 purpose connected with instruction or research in any 
 art or science or other branch of learning, and for main- 
 taining the same : 
 
 " (7) For diminishing the expense of education in the 
 College : 
 
 " (8) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
 tions affecting any College endowment, foundation, or 
 gift, or any property belonging to the College, or the Head 
 or any member thereof, as such, or held in trust for the 
 College, or for the Head or any member thereof, as such, 
 as far as the Commissioners think the modification 
 thereof necessary or expedient for giving effect to 
 Statutes made by them for the College : 
 
 " (9) For regulating presentations to benefices in the 
 gift of the College : 
 
 " (10) For regulating the application of the purchase 
 money for any advowson sold by the College : 
 
 " (11) For altering or repealing any Statute, ordin- 
 ance, regulation or bye-law of the College, and substitut- 
 ing or adding any Statute for or to the same." 
 
 Clause 18 reads : " The Commissioners, in Statutes 
 made by them for a College, may from time to time make 
 provision for the following purposes relative to the Uni- 
 versity, or any Of them : 
 
 " (1) For authorising the College to commute any 
 annual payment agreed or required to be made by it 
 for University purposes into a capital sum to be provided 
 by the College out of money belonging to it, and not 
 produced by the sale of any lands or hereditaments made 
 after the passing of this Act : 
 
 " (2) For annexing any emolument held in or con- 
 nected with the College to any office in the University, or 
 in a Hall, on such tenure as to the Commissioners seems 
 fit, and for attaching to the emolument, in connexion 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 223 
 
 with the office, conditions of residence, study, and duty, 
 or any of them. 
 
 " (3) For assigning a portion of the revenues or 
 property of the College, as a contribution to the common 
 fund or otherwise, for encouragement of instruction in 
 the University in any art or science or other branch 
 of learning, or for the maintenance and benefit of persons 
 of known ability and learning, studying, or making 
 researches in any art or science or other branch of 
 learning in the University : 
 
 " (4) For empowering the College by Statute made 
 and passed at a general meeting of the Governing Body of 
 the College specially summoned for this purpose, by the 
 votes of not less than two-thirds of the number of persons 
 present and voting, to transfer the library of the College, 
 or any portion thereof, to any University library : 
 
 " (5) For providing out of the revenues of the College 
 for payments to be made, under the supervision of the 
 University, for work done or investigations conducted in 
 any branch of learning or inquiry connected with the 
 studies of the University within the University : 
 
 " (6) For giving effect to Statutes made by the 
 Commissioners for the University : 
 
 " (7) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
 tions of or affecting any College endowment, foundation, 
 or gift, concerning or relating to the University, as far as 
 the Commissioners think the modification thereof neces- 
 sary or expedient for giving effect to Statutes made by 
 them for the University." 
 
 Clause 21: "The Commissioners, in Statutes made by 
 them, shall from time to time make provision — 
 
 " (1) For the form of accounts of the University, and 
 of a College relating to funds administered either for 
 general purposes, or in trust, or otherwise, and for the 
 audit and publication thereof : 
 
 " (2) For the publication of accounts of receipts and 
 expenditure of money raised under the borrowing powers 
 of the University or of a College : 
 
 " And the Commissioners, in Statutes made by them, 
 may from time to time, if they think fit, make provision — 
 
 " (3) For regulating the exercise of the borrowing 
 powers of the University or of a College : 
 
224 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 
 
 " (4) For regulating the conditions under which 
 beneficial leases niay be renewed by the University or a 
 College." 
 
 Clause 22 : " The Commissioners, in Statutes made by 
 them, may from time to time make provision for the 
 complete or partial union of two or more Colleges, or of a 
 College or Colleges and a Hall or Halls, or of two or more 
 Halls, or of a College or Hall, with any institution in the 
 University, or for the organization of a combined 
 educational system in and for two or more Colleges or 
 Halls, provided application in that behalf is made to the 
 Commissioners on the part of each College and Hall and 
 institution as follows : 
 
 " In the case of a College in the University of Oxford, 
 by a resolution passed at a general meeting of the 
 Governing Body of the College specially summoned for 
 this purpose, by the votes of not less than two-thirds of 
 the number of persons present and voting, and, in case of 
 an application for complete union, with the consent in 
 writing of the Visitor of the College. 
 
 The regulations for Cambridge are the same, except 
 that in the case of complete union, the two-thirds 
 majority is sufficient, without the consent of the Visitor. 
 Clause 44 : " There shall be a Committee of Her 
 Majesty's Privy Council styled The Universities' Com- 
 mittee of the Privy Council. 
 
 " The Universities' Committee shall consist of the 
 President for the time being of the Privy Council, the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being, the Lord 
 Chancellor of Great Britain for the time being, the 
 Chancellor of the University of Oxford for the time being, 
 if a member of the Privy Council, the Chancellor of the 
 University of Cambridge for the time being, if a member 
 of the Privy Council, and such other member or two 
 members of the Privy Council as Her Majesty from time 
 to time thinks fit to appoint in that behalf, that other 
 member, or one at least of those two other members, 
 being a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy 
 Council." 
 
 Clause 52 : " If after the cesser of the powers of the 
 Commissioners any doubt arises with respect to the true 
 meaning of any Statute made by the Commissioners for 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 225 
 
 the University of Cambridge, the Council of the Senate 
 may apply to the Chancellor of the University for the 
 time being, and he may declare in writing the meaning of 
 the Statute on the matter submitted to him, and his 
 declaration shall be registered by the Registrary of the 
 University, and the meaning of the Statute as therein 
 declared shall be deemed to be the true meaning thereof." 
 
 Clauses 53 and 54 give power to make alterations in 
 the University and College Statutes, and Clause 55 gives 
 the method of procedure. 
 
 The effects of the Act of 1877 may be judged of by the 
 following extract, 1 what is said of one College being sub- 
 stantially true of all the rest. 
 
 " The changes introduced by the Statutes of 1882, 
 which were the outcome of the Commissioners' labours, 
 constituted a veritable revolution in the history of 
 Jesus College. Some of these changes — such as the 
 limitation of the emoluments of Fellowships, the 
 abolition of celibacy as the condition of their tenure, 
 the limitation of the period during which unofficial 
 Fellowships were tenable, and the obligation imposed 
 on the College of contributing to the common funds 
 of the University — were features introduced into the 
 Statutes of all Colleges alike. A few of those which 
 concerned Jesus individually may be mentioned. To the 
 Master and Fellows was given the right to elect to the 
 Mastership and all Fellowships, unfettered by any refer- 
 ence to the Bishop of Ely. Religious tests were no 
 longer required of a Fellow on his admission, and Clerical 
 restrictions were abolished. The proportion of the College 
 revenue allotted to the Open Scholarship Fund was aug- 
 mented from a twentieth to a tenth part." 
 
 Clerical Fellowships thus quietly ceased to be, and the 
 principle of religious equality was everywhere recognised 
 except in the case of the Divinity Degrees. The tests in 
 connexion with these degrees have since been abolished at 
 Cambridge ; Oxford has voted for their retention by a 
 large majority; when she comes into line with Cambridge, 
 the victory will be complete. 
 
 The Commissioners continued in power till 1881, when 
 
 i Gray, Jesus College, pp. 230-231. 
 
226 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the new Statutes were issued. These came into force in 
 1882, and constitute the Code of Laws by which the 
 University and the Colleges are still governed. The most 
 important provisions of the University Statutes are here 
 
 summarised. 
 
 Terms. 
 
 There are to be three Terms in the year, including two 
 hundred and twenty-seven days at least. A Term may be 
 kept by residence during not less than three-quarters of 
 it. 1 Three-quarters of two hundred and twenty-seven is 
 just one hundred and seventy, so that a student need reside, 
 and in fact does reside, only eight weeks in each Term to 
 comply with the Statute. Terms are thus very short and 
 crowded, and the time for teaching is much less than 
 is required for the Tripos Examinations. Surely it is not 
 too much to ask that there should be thirty clear weeks 
 or two hundred and ten days instruction in the academic 
 year. This is a very old demand on the part of reformers. 
 
 Contributions of Colleges for University Purposes.' 1 
 1. "Each of the Colleges shall pay to the University 
 in every year for University purposes the sum determined 
 by the subsequent provisions of this Statute, according to 
 a percentage on its income. 
 
 "The income of a College shall be taken to be the gross 
 income, external and internal, including the profits, if 
 any, derived from the hall, kitchen, buttery, sale of 
 commodities, and supply of service, including also such 
 parts of the income arising from the investment of sums 
 received from members of the College as compositions for 
 dues payable to the University or to the Colleges, or both, 
 as may be applied, either yearly or otherwise, to the 
 general revenue of the College or to any purpose within 
 the College ; not including, however, the rents paid for 
 rooms, but including instead thereof the amount at 
 which the College buildings are from time to time 
 assessed for municipal rates, after deducting from such 
 gross income any sums paid thereout under the several 
 heads next following : — 
 
 (a) Rates, taxes, and insurance on the College build- 
 ings. 
 
 l Statutes of the University of Cambridge, p. 11. ~ lb. pp. 37-39. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 227 
 
 (b) Rates, taxes, insurances, tithe or other rent-charge, 
 fee farm rents, quit rents, fines on copyhold estates, fines 
 on renewals of leases, if and when paid by the College. 
 
 (c) The University dues paid to the University in 
 each year by the College for such of its members as have 
 not made compositions for dues payable to the University 
 or the College. 
 
 (d) The cost of maintenance and repairs of the College 
 buildings. 
 
 (e) The cost of maintenance, repairs, and improve- 
 ments on the College estates incurred by the College. 
 
 (/') Necessary repairs of chancels in all cases where 
 the same are chargeable upon the College and paid by it. 
 
 (g) Compulsory charges on the College estates or 
 general revenue for the augmentation of benefices, and 
 stipends of perpetual curates in parishes where the Col- 
 lege possesses tithe rent-charge or land given in lieu of 
 tithe. 
 
 (//) The cost of management of the College estates, 
 including the stipends paid to College officers for the 
 purpose. 
 
 (i) The interest on debts and loans and the repay- 
 ment of principal money by instalments in all cases in 
 which the debt has been incurred or the loan contracted 
 for the extension of the College buildings or for the 
 improvement of the College estates and such instalments 
 are spread over a period of not less than twenty years. 
 
 (A) Such receipts from minerals or other sources as 
 the College is by law required to treat as capital. 
 
 (I) Such portions of the income of trust funds as are 
 applicable exclusively to purposes without the College. 
 
 (m) One half of the income derived from the tuition 
 fees paid by the students. 
 
 2. "The aggregate sum to be contributed by the 
 Colleges in every year from January 1st, 1883, to the 
 [end of the year 1884 shall be not less than £5000 nor 
 1 more than £6000 ; in each of the years 1885, 1886, 1887, not 
 less than £10,000 nor more than £12,000; in each of the 
 years 1888, 1889, 1890, not less than £15,000 nor more than 
 £18,000 ; in each of the years 1891, 1892, 1893, not less than 
 £20,000 nor more than £24,000 ; in each of the years 1894, 
 1895, 1896, not less than £25,000 nor more than £30,000 ; 
 
228 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 and in every subsequent year £30,000, or such larger 
 sum being not greater than £30,500 as may be found 
 more convenient for the purpose of calculating the rate 
 per centum in any year. Provided that in case it appears 
 at any time hereafter to the Financial Board hereinafter 
 constituted that the aggregate income of the Colleges has 
 fallen so low that the contribution required under this 
 Chapter would be an excessive burden on the Colleges, the 
 Chancellor may, upon the application of the Financial 
 Board, inquire into the matter, and if he be satisfied that 
 the fact is so, he may at his discretion direct that the 
 amount to be levied be diminished for any period not ex- 
 ceeding five years by any sum not exceeding one-fifth part 
 of the minimum amount named for each year of such 
 period." 
 
 Section 3 directs that in 1894 and each succeeding 
 year each College shall be entitled to deduct from its 
 contribution £200 for each Professorial Fellowship held 
 by a Professor of the University. 
 
 Such is the legislation which has finally carried out 
 the intention of the Royal Commissioners of 1850 that the 
 Colleges should contribute from their funds to University 
 purposes. The weak spot in it lies on the surface. The 
 cost of maintenance and repairs of both College buildings 
 and College estates, the cost of improvements on the 
 estates, interest on loans and instalments of principal 
 money, are all allowed to be deducted from gross income. 
 The Colleges have interpreted this permission generously 
 in certain cases, and can plead in their favour that there 
 is no definition of, or authority to, define " improvements." 
 Moreover, if a College makes an extension and pays for 
 it out of current income it can deduct the whole amount. 
 These points will be recurred to in Chapters XI. and XII. 
 
 In 1877 there was an established belief that the 
 financial resources of the Colleges would speedily show a 
 substantial increase. The agricultural depression which 
 followed falsified this hope, and in 1903, 1904 and 1905 the 
 Chancellor of Cambridge University reduced the statu- 
 tory contribution according to the provision quoted 
 above. 
 
 The Common University Fund. 
 
 The College contributions are paid into the Common 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 229 
 
 University Fund, the accounts of which are kept distinct 
 from those of the Chest or University accounts proper. 
 
 Payments out of this Fund may be made for the 
 following purposes only : — 
 
 The stipends of Professors, Readers, and University 
 Lecturers ; 
 
 Retiring pensions for emeriti Professors and Readers ; 
 
 The salaries of Demonstrators, Superintendents, and 
 Curators ; 
 
 The erection of Museums, Laboratories, Libraries, 
 Lecture-rooms, and other rooms for University business ; 
 
 Grants for research. 
 
 The sum paid in any year for the provision of sites 
 and the erection of buildings and for the maintenance 
 and furniture of buildings, including interest and sinking- 
 fund payments, must not exceed one-third of the income 
 of the Fund for that year. 
 
 Lord John Russell, as we have seen, was of opinion 
 that the Colleges might fairly be called on to contribute 
 one-fifth of their income, or 20 per cent., to University 
 purposes. Such a levy would nearly double the present 
 contribution at Cambridge of £30,000. 
 
 The property and income of the University, i.e. both 
 the Chest and the Common University Fund, were placed 
 by the same legislation under 
 
 The Financial Board. 
 
 Statute B, Chapter IV., reads : 1 — 
 
 " 1. A Financial Board shall be appointed for the 
 care and management of the property and income of the 
 University, consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, two mem- 
 bers of the General Board of Studies elected by that 
 Board, four members of the Senate elected by the 
 Colleges in common, and four members of the Senate 
 elected by Grace on the nomination of the Council of the 
 Senate. 
 
 " 2. For the purpose of the election of members of 
 the Board by the Colleges in common, each College shall 
 elect one representative. The Vice-Chancellor shall 
 summon a meeting of the representatives of the Colleges 
 for the election of members of the Senate to serve on the 
 
 i lb. pp. 44, 45. 
 
230 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Board. Each representative shall have one vote, to- 
 gether with one additional vote for each complete £100 
 for which the College is assessed in the preceding year 
 for University purposes. 
 
 " 3. Of the members of the Board elected by the 
 Colleges in common, not more than one shall belong to 
 any one College." 
 
 The Board every year prepares a statement of the 
 sum which in its judgment ought to be levied on the 
 Colleges, declares the respective incomes of the several 
 Colleges which are subject to percentage, assesses the 
 Colleges for their proportional payments, and collects 
 the money. It has also power to require from any 
 College explanations of the published College accounts, 
 subject to an appeal to the Chancellor. If any question 
 arises between the Financial Board respecting the amount 
 of income subject to percentage, the matter is referred to 
 the Chancellor, whose decision is final. 
 
 Special Boards of Studies. 1 
 
 The Statutes of 1882 repealed the Statute for the 
 appointment of Boards of Studies made in 1860 and intro- 
 duced the amended regulations set out below. 
 
 2. "The University shall appoint Special Boards of 
 Studies for all important departments of study recog- 
 nised in the University, to consist of the Professors 
 hereinafter assigned to such Boards severally, together 
 with such Readers, University Lecturers, Examiners and 
 other persons as may be appointed from time to time by 
 or under the authority of a Grace of the Senate. 
 
 3. "The number of such Special Boards to be ap- 
 pointed as soon as may be after the approval of this 
 Statute by the Queen in Council shall be twelve, viz., for 
 
 Divinity. Mathematics. 
 
 Law. Physics and Chemistry. 
 
 Medicine. Biology and Geology. 
 
 Classics. History and Archaeology. 
 
 Oriental Studies. Moral Science. 
 Mediaeval and Modern Music." 
 Languages. 
 
 i lb. pp. 48, 49. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 231 
 
 To these have since been added — 
 
 Indian Civil Service Military Studies. 
 
 Studies. Anthropological Studies. 
 
 Economics and Politics. Architectural Studies. 
 Agricultural Studies Foreign Service Students 
 
 and Forestry. Committee. 
 
 Geographical Studies. 
 
 4. By this Clause, five Professors are assigned to 
 Divinity, three to Law, four to Medicine, two to Classics, 
 and so on. 
 
 The duties of the Boards are thus denned : l — 
 
 " (6) It shall be the duty of every Special Board to 
 consult together from time to time on all matters relating 
 to the studies and examinations of the University in its 
 department, and to prepare, whenever it appears to them 
 desirable, and present to the Vice-Chancellor, a report to 
 be published by him to the University. 
 
 " The Board shall also, after consultation with the 
 Professors, Readers, and University Lecturers connected 
 with its department, frame a scheme of lectures in every 
 year: taking care to provide that the subjects of the said 
 lectures be determined with regard to the general objects 
 of every particular Professorship, and so as to distribute 
 the several branches of learning in the department among 
 the said Professors, Readers and University Lecturers ; 
 having regard also to the regulations and instructions 
 which the General Board of Studies may have issued. 
 
 " (7) Every scheme so settled by any Special Board 
 shall be submitted to the General Board of Studies ; and 
 no scheme shall be taken to be final until it has received 
 the approval of the said General Board." 
 
 Let us next turn to the 
 
 General Board of Studies* 
 
 " 9. The University shall appoint a General Board of 
 Studies, consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, one member of 
 each Special Board of Studies elected by that Special 
 Board, and eight members of the Senate elected by Grace. 
 
 " 12. It shall be the duty of the General Board to 
 consult together from time to time on all matters relating 
 to the studies and examinations of the University, in- 
 
 l lb. pp. 50, 51. 2 lb. pp. 51, 52. 
 
232 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 eluding the maintenance and improvement of existing 
 institutions, and the establishment and maintenance of 
 new institutions. They shall prepare, whenever it appears 
 to them desirable, and present to the Vice-Chancellor, a 
 report to be published by him to the University. 
 
 " 13. The General Board shall issue from time to 
 time as they think fit, regulations and instructions in 
 respect to the subjects and character of the lectures to be 
 delivered, the superintendence of laboratory work, the 
 subordination when necessary of the Readers and Uni- 
 versity Lecturers to the Professors, the extent to which 
 in any cases discourses shall be supplemented by oral 
 or written examinations, the times and places of lecturing, 
 the arrangements to be made for the distribution of 
 students among the different teachers, so as to secure 
 classes of suitable size, and to group separately the more 
 and less advanced students, and any other matters 
 affecting the method of instruction to be pursued, with 
 the view of providing suitable and efficient education in 
 all subjects of University study for all students whether 
 more or less advanced who may require it. 
 
 " 14. The General Board shall also consider the 
 schemes for lectures in every year submitted to it by 
 the several Special Boards, and shall approve the said 
 schemes or remit them for further consideration with 
 alterations and amendments, or, if necessary, frame 
 schemes ; provided that, in case the General Board of 
 Studies and any of the Special Boards shall be unable to 
 agree to any scheme, the question shall be referred to a 
 meeting of the Members of the General Board and of the 
 Special Board deliberating together, whose decision shall 
 be final. When such schemes have been finally deter- 
 mined, the General Board shall present them to the Vice- 
 Chancellor for publication." 
 
 The composition and powers of the Financial Board, 
 the General Board of Studies, and the Special Boards of 
 Studies should be carefully considered, as it is through 
 these bodies that the unification of the University, if 
 thought desirable, must be effected. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS FROM OXFORD 
 AND CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 The latest suggestions from Oxford are contained in 
 Lord Curzon's book entitled " Principles and Methods of 
 University Reform," published in 1909. Lord Curzon is 
 Chancellor of the University of Oxford, and the book is 
 I a letter addressed in his official capacity to the University. 
 In a preliminary letter to the Vice-Chancellor he explains 
 that the immediate cause of his taking action was the 
 debate in the House of Lords in July, 1907, initiated by 
 the Bishop of Birmingham, 1 " in which he asked for the 
 appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the 
 endowment, government, administration, and teaching of 
 the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and their 
 i constituent Colleges, in order to secure the best use of 
 their resources for the benefit of all classes of the com- 
 munity." Lord Curzon was strongly opposed to the 
 appointment of any such Commission, and his Memor- 
 andum is an attempt to show how Oxford can reform 
 I itself and so escape further legislation by Parliament. 
 He tries in fact himself to discharge the functions of a 
 Royal Commission. 
 
 Chapter I. Introduction. 
 Lord Curzon recognises that there was no finality in 
 the work of previous Commissions and the legislation 
 which followed on their labours. " We find the Reformers 
 of 1850 engaged in the attempt to reanimate and re- 
 inthrone the University as against the alleged encroach- 
 ments of the Collegiate system, and we recognise the 
 same note in the utterances of the present day. We find 
 the Commissioners of that date devoting pages of print 
 to an examination of the conditions and a suggestion of 
 the methods by which Oxford might reopen its gates to 
 
 1 Dr. Gore, now Bishop of Oxford. 
 
234 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the poor ; and such is again the cry which we hear in 
 Parliament and in the Press. One of the principal 
 objects of the first Commissioners was the creation of a 
 Governing Body (in the shape of a reformed Congrega- 
 tion) which should represent the teaching element of the 
 University ; and such is still the aspiration of those who 
 are dissatisfied with the present composition of that 
 body. The second Commission created the very Boards 
 of Faculties whose organisation and work are now 
 impugned. They definitely formulated and enforced the 
 principle of College responsibility for a portion at any 
 rate of the expenditure of the University, and they called 
 into being the Common University Fund. But no finality 
 has been reached in respect of these matters, and they 
 are still the subject of acute, though friendly controversy. 
 The same Commission required the auditing and publica- 
 tion of accounts — reforms which are admittedly suscep- 
 tible of further improvement and extension. They carried 
 the principle of open competition in respect both of 
 Fellowships and Scholarships to an extreme pitch, with 
 the consequence that a reaction has set in, and the 
 administration of both forms of endowment is again in 
 dispute. They made tentative provision for the Endow- 
 ment of Research. But the strides made in advanced 
 study have been so enormous in the last quarter of a 
 century that what was thought liberal in 1882 is now 
 generally regarded as halting and inadequate." * But Lord 
 Curzon still urges the old plea that Oxford is able to 
 reform itself from within. 
 
 He classifies his suggestions under the following 
 heads : — 
 
 "I. The Constitution of the University, as consisting 
 of Council, Congregation, and Convocation. 
 
 II. The admission of poor men, both of the pro- 
 fessional and working classes, which will open up the 
 allied questions of the Collegiate and Non-Collegiate 
 systems, the University Extension movement, and that 
 for Working-men's Colleges, the cost of living, and the 
 incidence of Fees and Dues. 
 
 III. The administration of Endowments — Scholar- 
 ships, Exhibitions, and Fellowships. 
 
 l Principles and Methods, pp. 16, 17. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 235 
 
 IV. The requirement of Greek in Responsions, and 
 the question of a University Entrance Examination, and 
 other examinations. 
 
 V. The relations of the University and the Colleges 
 (a) in their educational, and (b) in their financial aspect. 
 The former branch of the subject includes the difficult 
 questions of the Boards of Faculties and the better 
 organisation of University teaching. The second branch 
 will lead to the discussion of the principle and practice of 
 College contributions to the funds of the University, 
 and the desirability of a further extension. 
 
 VI. The Financial administration (a) of the Uni- 
 versity, and (b) of the Colleges. 
 
 VII. The executive machinery of University admin- 
 istration. 
 
 VIII. Facilities for advanced study and Research. 
 
 IX. Independent subjects that do not fall directly 
 under any of the foregoing heads." 1 
 
 Chapter II. The Constitution of the University. 
 
 The Council. 
 
 Three criticisms are noticed which have been made 
 upon the Hebdomadal Council as now constituted : (1) the 
 Heads of Houses are over-represented ; (2) the Heads of 
 Houses ought to be chosen, not because they are Heads, 
 but because of their personal qualifications ; (3) the 
 Council does not sufficiently represent the teaching of 
 the University. It is suggested " that the class system 
 should be abolished altogether, and that the entire 
 eighteen places should be thrown open to M.A.'s of five 
 years' standing." a 
 
 Congregation. 
 
 Congregation, as at present constituted, consists of 
 the ex-ojficio members as set out in the Act of 1854, 
 and of a much larger number of members qualified \>y 
 residence for twenty weeks of the year within a mile 
 and a half of Carfax — the total being somewhat over 
 500 persons. 
 
 i lb. pp. 19, 20. 
 
 2 lb. p. 25. On May 5th, 1913, a series of resolutions was passed 
 in Congregation dealing with the composition of the Hebdomadal Council. 
 At Oxford such l-esolutions form the foundation of future legislation. 
 
236 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Lord Curzon gives an interesting history of this body. 
 It was once a guild composed of all the Masters and 
 Teachers of the University, but long before 1850 it had 
 lost practically all its powers. " One of the main objects 
 of the Commissioners of that date was the resuscitation 
 of this body and the restoration of governing powers to 
 the teaching element in Oxford. Accordingly they pro- 
 posed a House of somewhat over a 100 members, to be 
 composed of the Heads of Houses, the Proctors, the Pro- 
 fessors and Public Lecturers, and the Senior Tutor of 
 each College. . . But by a strange oversight Lord John 
 Russell's Government in 1854, in creating the new Con- 
 gregation, forgot to disestablish the old, and accordingly 
 there still exists by the side of the present House another 
 body known as ' The Ancient House of Congregation ' 
 consisting of Heads of Houses, Doctors and Masters of 
 two years' standing, Resident Doctors, Professors and 
 Examiners. The functions of this body are limited to the 
 granting of ordinary degrees, and the confirmation of the 
 appointment of Examiners." J 
 
 The writer's further discussion of the reform of 
 Congregation may be omitted because on March 4th of 
 the present year (1913), " the Statute respecting the 
 constitution of Congregation, which provides that resi- 
 dence shall no longer be a qualification for membership 
 thereof, but that in future Congregation shall consist of 
 the teaching and administrative elements in the Uni- 
 versity and Colleges, was submitted to the House of 
 Convocation for final approval, and was approved by a 
 majority of 28. (Placets, 77 ; Non-Placets, 49.)" 2 Provision 
 is made in the neAV Statute for safeguarding existing 
 rights; but Oxford has this year done "what the Royal 
 Commissioners of 1850 desired, what Lord John Russell 
 desired, and what Mr. Gladstone desired to do just 60 
 years ago." 3 
 
 i lb. pp. 27, 28. 2 Times' report of March 5. 
 
 3 Principles, p. 31. The text of the Statute is set out in the Oxford 
 University Gazette of March 5th, 1913, pp. 551, 552 and runs as follows : — 
 
 "1. As from the first day of September next following the date of the 
 approval of this Statute by His Majesty in Council, the Congregation of 
 the University shall, subject to the provisions of cl. 2 below, consist of 
 the following persons only, the said persons being members of Convo- 
 cation : 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 237 
 
 Convocation. 
 Convocation is a more serious problem. " The present 
 number of Convocation (which in 1852 was 3,300, and in 
 1868, 4,000) is over 6,700 : and it consists of all M.A.'s and 
 
 (1) The Chancellor. 
 
 (2) The High Steward. 
 
 (3) The Vice-Chancellor. 
 (4; The Proctors. 
 
 (5) Members of the Hebdomadal Council. 
 
 (6) The Officers named in the Schedule annexed. 
 
 (7) The Professors, as defined in Section 48 of the Oxford Univer- 
 
 sity Act, 1854. 
 
 (8) Assistant or Deputy Professors, University Lecturers, and 
 
 University Demonstrators. 
 
 (9) The Masters of the Schools, Moderators, Public Examiners, 
 
 and Examiners for the degrees in Civil Law, Medicine, and 
 Music. 
 
 (10) The Members of the Faculties, and the Members of the Boards 
 
 of Faculties as respectively defined in Title V of the Statutes 
 of the University, and such members of Convocation, belong- 
 ing to the teaching or administrative element in the Univer- 
 sity and Colleges, as shall be designated by any Board of a 
 Faculty as fit and proper persons to be members of Congre- 
 gation on account of work done by them in the subjects with 
 which that Faculty is conversant ; a list of such persons to 
 be drawn up by each Board at its last meeting in Trinity 
 Term. 
 
 (11) Members of, and Secretaries to, Delegacies, Boards, Com- 
 
 mittees, and bodies of Curators and Visitors, established by 
 any Statute of the University. 
 
 (12) Assistants, Librarians, and any other members of the perma- 
 
 nent staff of any University Institution which is controlled 
 by a Delegacy, Board, Committee, or body of Curators or 
 Visitors, established by any Statute of the University. 
 
 (13) Heads of Colleges, Public Halls and New Foundations, the 
 
 Censor of Non-Collegiate Students, and Heads of Private 
 Halls. 
 
 (14) Members of the Governing Bodies of Colleges, and the prin- 
 
 cipal Bursar or Treasurer of each College, if he be not a 
 member of its Governing Body. 
 
 (15) All persons who, on the day of the approval of this Statute by 
 
 His Majesty in Council, are, and have been continuously for 
 the ten years immediately before that day, members of any 
 one or more of the above fourteen classes. 
 
 (16) All such persons as shall be provided to be added by election 
 
 or otherwise by any Statute of the University made with the 
 approval of His Majesty in Council. 
 The Chancellor, or in his absence the Vice-Chancellor or his deputy, 
 shall preside in the said Congregation : and the Congregation so con- 
 stituted as aforesaid shall have power to frame regulations for the order 
 of its own proceedings, but subject to any Statute which the University 
 may make in respect thereof. 
 
 2. Every person who under the provisions of Section 16 of the 
 Oxford University Act, 1854, would on the first day of September next 
 
238 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Doctors of Oxford, whether resident or non-resident, 
 who have kept their names on the books both of the 
 University and of any College or Hall. 
 
 " Its functions are the following : — It elects the 
 Chancellor of the University. It elects the University 
 representatives in Parliament. It confers Honorary and 
 Diploma Degrees. It transacts much of the ordinary 
 business of the University by means of Decrees. Above 
 all it has the final voice in all University legislation, con- 
 firming or rejecting (without the right to amend) the 
 Statutes passed by Congregation." * 
 
 This last fact is all important. The reform of Con- 
 gregation which has just been mentioned is distinctly a 
 step in advance, but the decisions of the new body as of 
 
 following the date of the approval of this Statute by His Majesty in 
 Council have been entitled to be a member of the Congregation of the 
 University by reason of residence, and who shall on or before the thirty- 
 tirst day of August next following the said first day of September have 
 given notice in writing to the Vice-Chancellor that he desires to continue 
 to be a member of the said Congregation, shall continue to be a member 
 of the said Congregation so long as he continues to be a resident within 
 the meaning of Section 48 of the Oxford University Act, 1854, without 
 interruption. 
 
 3. The Vice-Chancellor shall, before the 25th day of September in 
 each year, make and promulgate a register of the persons qualified to the 
 best of his knowledge to be members of the Congregation of the Univer- 
 sity of Oxford. He shall also from time to time make and promulgate all 
 such regulations as to the said register and otherwise as may be necessary 
 for the assembling together of the Congregation, and shall appoint the 
 time and the place at which it shall so assemble together ; and no person 
 shall be admitted to vote in or act as a member of the Congregation 
 unless he is included in such register and is one of the persons qualified 
 under clause 1 or clause 2 above. 
 
 Schedule. 
 Deputy Steward. 
 Public Orator. 
 Keeper of the Archives. 
 Assessor of the Chancellor's Court. 
 Registrar of the University. 
 Counsel to the University. 
 Bodley's Librarian. 
 
 Sub-Librarians of the Bodleian Library. 
 Radcliffe Librarian. 
 Radcliffe Observer. 
 Assistant Registrar. 
 
 Keeper of the Antiquarium in the Ashmolean Museum. 
 Keeper of the Art Galleries in the Ashmolean Museum. 
 Keeper of the Hope Collection of Engraved Portraits. 
 Curator of the Pitt-Rivers Museum." 
 
 i lb. pp. 33, 34. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 239 
 
 the old will be subject to the approval of Convocation, 
 and may be upset by it as before. The only advantage 
 which the advocates of the reformed Congregation have 
 been able to claim for it, is that it will be representative of 
 the views of the real University — the body which actually 
 teaches and administers, and that the outsiders will in 
 consequence have more scruple about overriding its 
 wishes. 
 
 Lord Curzon's criticism of Convocation cannot help 
 being severe. " In theory the constitution of this body, 
 which is supposed to be coextensive with the graduates of 
 [the University, is unimpeachable and democratic. But 
 [the practice differs widely from the theory. For in the 
 first place it represents not all graduates, but 011I3- such 
 graduates (B.A.'s) as have thought it worth while or have 
 possessed the means to pay £12 to the University to 
 obtain the M.A. degree, in addition to such fee as their 
 College may require for the same step, and who further 
 have compounded or have continued to pay to the Univer- 
 sity and the College such additional annual fee as either 
 may exact. Out of the total number of B.A.'s it is calcu- 
 lated that only one-third proceed to the M.A. degree and 
 become members of Convocation. In other words, the 
 franchise is not primarily educational but pecuniary: 1 and 
 the Pass-man who can afford the cost becomes a member 
 of the Governing Body of the University, while the 
 Honours man who cannot afford it does not. And 
 secondly, it is a matter of common knowledge that while 
 it contains representatives of many and diverse classes, 
 the two classes who are most strongly represented in the 
 ranks of Convocation are the members of the clerical and 
 scholastic professions who find it of value to retain their 
 connexion with the University. However this may be, 
 it is indisputable that Convocation contains only a 
 minority of those who have proceeded to a University 
 degree, and that its representative aspect is sectional 
 rather than catholic." 2 
 
 1 The reader will remember Mark Pattison's remark that the founda- 
 tion of the University is property and not intelligence. See above, 
 p. 165. 
 
 2 lb. pp. 34, 35. 
 
240 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Various proposals have been made for the reform of 
 Convocation. Of these the first to be noticed by Lord 
 Curzon is that advocated by Jowett and his followers — 
 the restriction of its powers so that it could not 
 interfere in the internal government of the University, , 
 or in educational matters. To this Lord Curzon objects i 
 that " it would be handing over the University to an i 
 oligarchy of resident teachers, to some extent detached 1 
 from the outside world and independent of its criticism. . 
 . . Further, is it not of supreme importance to main- 
 tain the connexion of Oxford with its old members, and, , 
 through them, with the nation at large ? " Lord Curzon i 
 concludes : " For reasons such as these it appears to me i 
 that any attempt to sweep away Convocation as the final ! 
 court in University matters would be doomed to probable 
 failure." 1 
 
 The second proposal is to confine the degree of M.A. 
 to those who have either taken an Honour School or I 
 something more than the mere Pass course. This 
 " would be a reversion to the original theory on which 
 Convocation was based, viz. that the M.A. degree which 
 gave entry to Convocation and a share in the government 
 of the University, was a certificate of proficiency as a 
 teacher." 2 But there are objections to this course. Would 
 it be wise to depreciate the lower degree and to deter the 
 average Oxford man from taking it ? Again, in the event 
 of Convocation falling off in numbers, with a consequent 
 loss to the revenues of the University, would there not 
 be a temptation to recoup that loss by lowering the 
 standard of the Honour Schools ? Thirdly, there is no 
 fundamental difference in quality or merit between the 
 low-class Honours man and the better Pass-man. 3 
 
 The third proposal is to expand Convocation by 
 reducing the fees to a relatively nominal amount so that 
 practically all who take the B.A. might proceed to the 
 M.A. degree. But the pecuniary sacrifice might be very 
 great, and Convocation might become of a too great size. 
 
 The fourth proposal is to leave Convocation as it is, 
 and to introduce some form of suspensory veto. " Many 
 variations of this form of limited prerogative will suggest 
 
 116. p. 37. 2 16. p. 38. 'sib. p. 39. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 241 
 
 themselves. This idea of reform seems to follow the line 
 of least resistance." ' 
 
 Chapter III. The Admission of Poor Men. 
 " Of all the criticisms," writes Lord Curzon, " passed 
 upon modern Oxford, none can compare in the earnest- 
 ness, amounting often to vehemence, with which it is 
 urged, or in the interest which it excites, with the com- 
 plaint that neither the education, the endowments, nor 
 the social advantages of the University are sufficiently 
 open to the man of humble means. We are told that 
 Oxford is a place where the standard of living is high, and 
 , that of learning low ; that it is the resort of idlers and 
 loafers ; that its endowments, intended for the poor, are 
 , wasted upon those who do not require them ; that it is 
 out of touch with the main system of national education, 
 of which it ought to be the apex and crown ; and that it 
 is, in fact, the University of the leisured classes instead 
 of the nation. Even Bishop Gore did not shrink from 
 ': describing it in the House of Lords as ' a playground for 
 [the sons of the wealthier classes,' and as ' not in any 
 serious sense a place of study at all."" 2 
 
 The Commissioners of 1850 had the same problem 
 -before them, " but they deliberately declined to cater for 
 tthe poor as such. . . They were more concerned in 
 helping real ability than they were in compensating real 
 poverty. 3 The remedial measures proposed by them — 
 inotably the argument for Open Scholarships — bore the 
 'impress of this idea. . . Their other remedial measures 
 either failed of their object or were not attended with the 
 desired results, in some cases because academic opinion 
 was half-hearted or divided upon them, in others because 
 no action was taken on those sections of the Report." 4 
 Pattison advocated the Non-Collegiate system ; and 
 Jowett, University Extension. Lord Curzon thinks the 
 first thing necessary is "to distinguish between the various 
 classes to whom the term ' poor ' has been generically 
 applied." 3 But before opening the University to the poor, 
 he is anxious it should not be closed to the rich. 
 
 i lb. p. 40. 2 76. p. 42. 
 
 3 The Commissioners' view was that " what the State and the Church 
 require is not poor men, but good and able men whether rich or poor." 
 4 lb. pp. 43, 44. 5 lb. p. 45. 
 
 R 
 
242 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 "Spurn not the nobly born," he says in the familiar 
 words of Gilbert. Indeed, in a sense, the rich man is 
 indispensable to the poor man, " for without his pecuniary 
 contribution to the University there would not be that 
 surplus, without which the University and Colleges in 
 combination could not pay their way." 1 Besides which, 
 Oxford in educating the so-called upper classes is fulfilling 
 a duty every whit as national and as imperial as in 
 stretching her resources to the uttermost for the, 
 assistance of the poor. 
 
 Lord Curzon makes a second reservation under this 
 head. It is "that the standard of living at Oxford is], 
 primarily created by the majority of the students who 
 frequent it," and that " no curtailment of expenditure, no 
 redistribution of wealth that might take place, can 
 permanently bring down the Collegiate system of living 
 at Oxford, differing as it does toto caelo from the practice 
 of Scotch or German Universities, to the level of economy 
 that is possible in those places." 2 He then divides the 
 poor into two classes, the industrial or wage-earning or 
 artisan class, and the professional class in its many 
 ramifications. The University must provide for both, 
 but it will require to provide for them by different means. 
 
 Needs of the Working-Classes. 
 
 These are set out in the Report (issued in December 
 1908) of the Joint Committee of representatives of the: 
 University and of working-class organisations. The best 
 of the working-classes are seeking " that training in 
 citizenship which the study of political and economic 
 science and of social and industrial history will give, 
 and which Oxford, with its traditions of a wide outlook 
 on public affairs, is more likely than any other Uni- 
 versity to bestow." 8 
 
 As for the opportunities already provided by Oxford 
 for working-class education, there may be mentioned, first, 
 
 The Non-Collegiate System. 
 
 Lord Curzon begins with a noteworthy admission. 
 
 " The Non-Collegiate system, though intended for the 
 
 relief of the poor, was not designed for, and has not 
 
 been utilised by, the working-classes as such." But "it 
 
 l lb. p. 46. 2 lb. p. 48. 3 lb. p. 51. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 243 
 
 endeavours to give every privilege which the University 
 has it in its power to bestow, except that of life inside 
 a College. — Further, its education is most moderate 
 in cost. The entrance fees and dues amount to £10; 
 the annual cost of board and lodging (in the lodgings 
 licensed for the purpose), education, and examination 
 is about 4'52 : the total annual expenses at Oxford of 
 such a student are about £70." ' But there are certain 
 drawbacks to the system. The name is against it, and 
 Lord Curzon suggests that the Non-Collegiate students 
 should henceforth be called University students. Then 
 the instruction provided still leaves much to be desired. 
 But the chief impediment is the superior attractiveness 
 of the Colleges and College life. The number of students 
 in 1908 and 1909 showed a decline as compared with 
 the average of the four years 1878-1881, being 166 and 
 172 against 202. 2 
 
 The University Extension System. 
 
 This section relates to work outside the University, 
 and as these pages deal with internal University Reform, 
 it is here omitted, as are also the sections on 
 
 Proposals of the Working -Class Education Committee 
 and Raskin College. 
 
 " Other suggestions that have been made are that 
 Colleges should build 
 
 Hostels 
 
 attached to themselves for the special accommodation of 
 poorer men, including working-men ; or that such Hostels 
 should be created independently of the Colleges, whether 
 of the academical type or under private supervision. . . 
 In both cases, and particularly in that of the independent 
 Hostel, the difficulties of discipline and control would be 
 considerable; and there would remain the danger, which 
 led the Commission of 1850 to regard all these proposals 
 with suspicion, that a distinct line of social cleavage 
 might be created between the well-to-do man and the poor 
 ■ man." 8 Public Halls seem to be tending towards extinc- 
 tion, and there are at Oxford only three Private Halls 
 with an undergraduate membership of not much over 
 
 1 lb. pp. 52, 53. 2 lb: p. 54. 3 16. pp. 61, 62. 
 
244 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 fifty. Lord Curzon's own idea is to found at Oxford a 
 University 
 
 Working -men's College 
 
 not confined to artisans alone, but embracing the members 
 of all those classes who are too poor, even with financial 
 assistance, to enter the ordinary Colleges, or to spend 
 half the year in vacations. Such a College should have a 
 fixed scale of cost, if possible, not more than i'60 per 
 annum. The Principal would be appointed by the Uni- 
 versity. The members of the College would be matricu- 
 lated and subject to academic discipline, but would not as 
 a rule proceed to a degree. The normal course would be 
 one of two years, leading to a Diploma, the subjects of 
 study being Sociology and Economics, with an admixture 
 of History, Geography, English Literature, and Natural 
 Science. If any student, after receiving his Diploma, 
 wished to stay on and take a degree, he should be at 
 liberty to do so. The College would remain in session 
 throughout the vacation, special arrangements being 
 made for lectures and tuition. 1 
 
 The Poor of other Classes. 
 
 From the artisan poor Lord Curzon passes to the poor 
 of other classes, the sons of tradesmen, farmers, teachers 
 in Primary and Secondary Schools, poor clergymen, 
 small professional men, solicitors, land agents, doctors, 
 etc. These classes may also be distinguished by the 
 schools from which they come, the richer classes coming 
 from the Public Schools, and the poorer classes, after 
 passing through the Elementary School, coming from 
 schools of the Municipal and County Council type. Of 
 this latter class the number that comes to Oxford is 
 small, but in respect of special endowments it is well 
 provided for. " The provision made, firstly by Scholar- 
 ships from Elementary or Secondary Schools, and later 
 on by Town or County Council Scholarships, by College 
 or City Company Exhibitions, and by private generosity, 
 is very considerable." 2 
 
 Teachers in Elementary and Secondary Schools are a 
 class for whom a special effort ought to be made. " The 
 
 1 lb. pp. 62-66. 2 lb. p. 67. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 245 
 
 University can undertake no niore honourable duty than 
 the education of those who will mould the thought of 
 the future. More encouragement might be given to 
 both grades by Scholarships or Exhibitions, but the 
 real obstacle in the path of teacher-students who are 
 proceeding to a degree is compulsory Greek in Respon- 
 sions." 1 
 
 But it may be that in spite of subsidies there are 
 features in the Oxford system which act as a deterrent to 
 the entry of poor students, and which it might be possible 
 to alleviate or remove. They may relate to (a) the cost of 
 living in Colleges, (b) the incidence of University and 
 College Fees and Dues, (c) the distribution of Endowments, 
 or (d) the nature and subjects of Examinations. All these 
 Lord Curzon now proceeds to consider. 
 
 Cost of Living in Colleges. 
 
 " This is one of the oldest of complaints." Since 1850 
 the outlay has been in many ways reduced by the better 
 arrangements now made by the Colleges. Keble (where 
 all meals are in common) makes a fixed annual charge 
 of £85. The minimum cost at which a careful under- 
 graduate can reside in the majority of Colleges is £100 per 
 annum. To this, from £8 to £11 a year should be added 
 for clubs, fees and dues, and tips to servants. These esti- 
 mates exclude the cost of living in vacations, travelling, 
 clothes, books, pocket-money, wine and tobacco. " Many 
 proposals have been made for curtailing the expenditure 
 thrown upon poor men by living in College. It has been 
 suggested that two or three Colleges might be thrown 
 into one, with the result of a considerable saving in 
 respect of College officers and servants ; or that existing 
 Colleges should be remodelled so as to provide single 
 rooms, instead of sets of rooms, for the average under- 
 graduate, or that the less wealthy Colleges should shut 
 their doors against well-to-do students. . . More fruit- 
 ful appears to me to be the suggestion that there should 
 be a conference of College Domestic Bursars to discuss 
 the management of College kitchens, maintenance charges 
 in general, and the purchase of supx^lies." 2 
 
 i 16. pp. 68, 69. 2 lb. pp. 70, 71. 
 
246 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 a. 
 
 3 10 
 
 
 
 ... ±'8 to 9 
 
 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 Fees and Dues. 
 
 For an undergraduate taking the B.A. followed by 
 the M.A. degree, these are as follows : — 
 
 (a) University Fees. 
 Admission Fee, paid at Matriculation 
 Average Fees for all Examinations 
 Admission to B.A. Degree 
 Admission to M.A. Degree 
 
 £31 or £32 
 (b) University Dues (paid through Colleges)- 
 12s. 6d. per quarter or £2 10s. Od. per annum 
 for a four years' course (though less for a 
 shorter course) 10 
 
 (c) College Fees. 
 
 Admission Fee, usually 5 00 
 
 Admission to B.A. Degree, average 3 14 6 
 
 Admission to M.A. Degree, average 4 9 6 
 
 (d) Life Membership. 
 
 (i.) University Dues : per annum 10 
 
 or Composition Charge, according to age, 
 
 from 15 15 
 
 Recovery of right of voting in Convoca- 
 tion, after removal of name from College 
 books 10 
 
 (ii.) College Dues : per annum ... 14s. to 10 
 
 Composition Charge, according to age, 
 
 from about 15 15 
 
 In these items Caution-money is not included, usually 
 about £30, nor Tuition charges, as a rule from £22 to £25 
 per annum. Fees and Dues are one of the main sources 
 of University income, the University receiving from them 
 in 1906, £37,892; in 1907, £38,954; and in 1908, £40,678. 
 From Admission and Degree Fees the nineteen Colleges, 
 whose accounts are published annually, received in 
 1907 an income of £6,900. Lord Curzon thinks there is 
 room for reduction in these amounts. 1 
 
 l 16. p. 73. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 247 
 
 Chapter IV. Scholarships and Exhibitions, Fellowships. 
 
 Scholarships and Exhibitions given by Colleges may 
 be distinguished according to the subject in which they 
 are awarded : — 
 
 Classics 
 
 Scholarships. 
 
 Exhibitions. 
 
 No. given 
 yearly. 
 
 Total No. 
 
 No. given 
 Yearly. 
 
 Total No. 
 
 75 
 
 300 
 
 30 
 
 120 
 
 Mathematics ... 
 
 151 
 
 62 
 
 5i 
 
 22 
 
 Science... 
 
 14 
 
 56 
 
 13 
 
 52 
 
 History 
 
 Uh 
 
 58 
 
 6* 
 
 26 
 
 Other Subjects 
 
 7 
 
 23 
 
 2i 
 
 10 
 
 Total 
 
 126 
 
 504 
 
 57 i 
 
 230 
 
 " The most noteworthy features of the above table 
 are (a) the predominance of the Classics, (6) the meagre 
 place conceded to ' other subjects.' . . The contents of 
 this category are Music, Divinity, the Indian Civil 
 Service and Research. It will thus be seen how small 
 a portion of the outer field of learning is at present 
 touched by the Oxford Scholarship System." ' 
 
 It appears that many restrictions to particular 
 districts or institutions still exist at Oxford. The 
 number of Scholarships and Exhibitions with a local 
 restriction is 
 
 Scholarships. 
 
 Exhibitions. 
 
 No. given 
 yearly. 
 
 Total No. 
 
 No. given 
 yearly. 
 
 Total No. 
 
 S0h 
 
 122 
 
 161 
 
 66 
 
 The total sums paid out by Colleges in Scholarships 
 and Exhibitions in 1907 was £52,890 15s. 10*d. 
 
 1 16. p. 73. 
 
248 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Scholars at all the Oxford Colleges wear the Scholar's 
 gown, and in some Colleges dine at a separate or Scholars' 
 table in Hall. The Scholar's gown " is regarded, and in 
 some Colleges envied, as a mark of intellectual distinction. 
 This is a significant and most healthy symptom." ' 
 
 The total sum given in Scholarships and Exhibitions 
 that is explicitly limited by Statute either to poor schools 
 or poor men as ascertained by a Tutors' Committee was : 
 
 
 Annual Amount. 
 
 No. of Men. 
 
 Poor schools 
 
 £4,400 
 
 60 
 
 Poor men 
 
 £8,800 
 
 120 
 
 " The provision of Scholarships is not meagre, and it 
 is supplemented by grants from private funds and the 
 Exhibition Fund — known to few but the recipient and the 
 College authorities— which amount collectively to a very 
 substantial additional endowment of poverty. 
 
 " Nevertheless the system is the subject of much criti- 
 cism, which it behoves us to consider." 2 The chief com- 
 plaints are four : — 
 
 (1) A large proportion of the Scholarships are held 
 by men who do not need them. 
 
 (2) The competitive examinations for Scholarships 
 promote an unhealthy rivalry between the Schools and 
 lead to an undignified scramble between the Colleges for 
 the best men. 
 
 (3) There is no University policy. as to the subjects 
 for Scholarship examinations, or as to the standard of 
 attainment required. 
 
 (4) The great predominance of Classical Scholarships 
 gives an undue advantage to the large Public Schools, and 
 penalizes the newer Secondary Schools. 
 
 As for (1), Lord Curzon adduces figures to show that 
 Bishop Gore was above the mark when he said that two 
 out of five of the Scholars of Oxford do not need their 
 emoluments for their education. From 10 to 6 per cent, 
 would be a more accurate estimate. " This is not 
 tantamount to saying that the great majority of Oxford 
 Scholarships are held by the positively poor. . . The 
 majority of Oxford Scholars are the sons of professional 
 men, with incomes of varying amounts. A Scholarship 
 
 1 lb. p. 80. 2 lb. p. 82. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 249 
 
 or an Exhibition is often the means of enabling the 
 father of such a man to give a better education to his 
 other children, and the man himself to enjoy that margin 
 of amenity at the University which permits him to 
 associate with his fellows without any sense of humili- 
 ation, and to reap from Oxford society some of its most 
 valuable benefits. Such a man is not of course a pauper; 
 but his presence at Oxford, and the influence exerted upon 
 him, are probably not less beneficial to the community 
 than w r Ould have been the case w 7 ith the working-man or 
 the artisan Avhom he is popularly supposed to have kept 
 out." l 
 
 Lord Curzon thinks the real answer to the question 
 is to be found in the much larger issue, w T hether Scholar- 
 ships ought to be regarded as subsidies to poverty or 
 prizes for intellectual achievement. He examines various 
 suggestions which have been made. The first — to do away 
 with Prize Scholarships — would lead to the rapid deterio- 
 ration of the intellectual standard. Another set of 
 reformers would revive the " close " Scholarship system. 
 But this is obviously impracticable. A third set would 
 divide Scholarships into (1) Honorary, to be competed for 
 by the well-to-do, and (2) eleemosynary, to be competed 
 for or enjoyed by the poor. Lord Curzon rejects all 
 these plans. His conclusion is that " in any serious 
 attempt to vary the emoluments of Oxford Scholarships, 
 obstacles of law as well as moral scruples have to be 
 encountered, co-operation between a large number of 
 Colleges is almost essential to ensure success, and with- 
 out an agreement betw r een Oxford and Cambridge no very 
 considerable or far-reaching change can be hoped for." 2 
 
 The second and third charges "contain much. truth, 
 although they are only part of the wider arraignment 
 that may be directed against the system of competitive 
 examinations at large." A definite suggestion, however, 
 has been made for obviating the least desirable features 
 of the annual competition. " It is that the whole of the 
 Scholarships should be pooled, and should be awarded by 
 examinations held two or three times a year by the 
 School Examination Delegacy, or by a specially appointed 
 
 l lb. pp. 83, 84. 2 lb. p. 87. 
 
250 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 University Board. The scholars would be distributed 
 among the various Colleges, both Colleges and candidates 
 being allowed some liberty of choice — an extension, in 
 fact, of the system already adopted in the combined 
 College Examinations." ' Lord Curzon rejects this 
 solution also. In his view " the weak point in the 
 present system is the fact that owing to the great number 
 of Scholarships that are given for Classics (a system that 
 has its roots in the close connexion between the older 
 Universities and the chief Public Schools) the prizes are 
 in excess of the candidates worthy to win them. . . 
 When we see that places in the Third and even the 
 Fourth Class in Honour Moderations are taken by 
 wearers of the Scholar's gown, the mischief must lie 
 deeper than in the manner or method of examination 
 alone. My own solution of the Scholarship difficulty is 
 . . . a redistribution of our Scholarships and Exhi- 
 bitions on a broad and systematic scale." 2 
 
 Lord Curzon's redistribution scheme is as follows : — 
 " A list will perhaps best indicate the subjects in 
 which Scholarships and Exhibitions would be eagerly 
 welcomed, if they were forthcoming. 
 
 A. For the encouragement of the Poor. 
 
 (i.) The Non-Collegiate system. 
 
 (ii.) Buskin College, 
 (iii.) A new Working-men's College, 
 (iv.) At ordinary Colleges. 
 
 (v.) Elementary and Secondary School Teachers. 
 
 B. For English Literature, 
 
 C. For Modern Languages. 
 
 D. For Post-Graduate Study or Besearch. 
 
 E. For subjects (other than Classics) included in any 
 of the University courses, 
 
 F. For University Scholarships, should the pre- 
 viously discussed experiment be thought desirable and 
 a certain number of College Scholarships be placed at the 
 disposal of the University for distribution between the 
 Colleges after a University Examination." 3 
 
 Possible methods of carrying out this scheme are 
 then examined. 
 
 
 l lb. pp. 88, 89. 2 lb. pp. 90, 91. 3 lb. pp. 91, 92. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 251 
 
 Felloivsliips. 
 Lord Curzon gives a brief history of Fellowships, 
 noting that " Prize Fellowships were earnestly advocated 
 by Jowett and others, on the grounds that they would 
 provide (a) a reward of ability, (b) an opportunity for 
 independent study, (c) a stepping-stone to professional 
 careers, and (d) a link between the residents of Oxford 
 and the outside world." ' The Commissioners of 1877-1882 
 created three classes of Fellows at Oxford, viz. : — 
 
 I. Professorial Fellows, i.e. Fellowships attached to 
 University Professorships ; 
 
 II. Official or Tutorial Fellows, i.e. Fellowships held 
 by the Educational Staff of the College ; 
 
 III. Ordinary, often popularly called Prize Fellows. 
 The Prize Fellow was not to have more than a certain 
 
 income (generally £500 a year) ; he was (after a year of 
 probation) under no obligation to reside, or to serve his 
 College in any capacity ; he received £200 a year for seven 
 years. These Fellowships are awarded after a special 
 ' Fellowship examination. 
 
 Financial difficulties have prevented the scheme of 
 the Commissioners from being carried into full execution. 
 At the present time there are 315 Fellows of Oxford 
 Colleges (including the Professor-Fellows and the Canons 
 of Christ Church) of whom a little more than 220, or 70 
 per cent., are on the Collegiate Staff, or are engaged in 
 University or College work. A certain number of Fellows 
 on the Old Foundation (i.e. before 1877, and even before 
 1850) still survive. The total amount that appeared in 
 the College Accounts for 1907 as having been paid to 
 Fellows was £'61,550 19s. lOd. This did not include the 
 Fellowships of the Professor-Fellows or a considerable 
 portion of the £20,352 13s. 2d. paid to the Professors, nor 
 the sums paid under independent trusts to the Fellows of 
 Hertford, Balliol, and Oriel. The modern tendency of 
 feeling is against Prize Fellowships. There is " an 
 increasing desire that the endowments of Oxford shall 
 be devoted to the direct and immediate service of the 
 University whether inside or outside it ; that neither 
 intellectual merit nor political distinction shall create 
 
 i lb. p. 94. 
 
252 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 any claim to participation in them unless it accepts 
 this obligation." ' Lord Curzon believes in Prize Fellow- 
 ships so far as they form a link between Oxford and the 
 outside world. " For myself," he adds, " I would like to 
 see, as in the case of Scholarships, an examination of the 
 entire system of Fellowships and their allocation on more 
 scientific and harmonious lines. At present a College 
 may assign one of its Ordinary Fellowships to any pur- 
 pose agreeable to itself, provided that it is in conformity 
 with the Statutes; and it is naturally guided, in doing so, 
 firstly by the interests or requirements of the College, and 
 only secondarily by those of the University. Without 
 infringing this principle, good might result from more 
 consultation and from an attempt, renewed from time to 
 time, to map out the entire area of University and College 
 requirements, and to distribute this imposing income in 
 the manner best calculated to promote the advancement 
 of learning. One College might promise a Fellowship for 
 one subject, another for another; there would be method 
 instead of accident, and co-operation in place of caprice. 
 In this way large gaps in University teaching might by 
 degrees be filled. Fellowships might be provided for 
 University Extension, or for Tutorial work among Non- 
 Collegiate students and in Working-Men's Colleges and 
 Halls ; and a definite scheme might be constructed of 
 Research Fellowships, spread over the whole field of 
 advanced studies." 2 
 
 Lord Curzon then passes on to 
 
 Chapter V. University Examinations. 
 
 He would do away with compulsory Greek in Respon- 
 sions, the Oxford Previous Examination, or Little-go. 
 As for Responsions, it is " half an Entrance Examination 
 and half not, and is as unsuitable, in its methods and 
 subjects, for the former object as it is ill-adapted for a 
 University Preliminary Examination." 3 There is no 
 University Entrance Examination. " A test for admis- 
 sion to its privileges is a matter from which the Univer- 
 sity deliberately dissociates itself. . . It is the Colleges 
 who have been conceded or have acquired the power of 
 deciding who shall or shall not be members of the 
 
 i lb. p. 97. 2 lb. pp. 99, 100. 3 lb. p. 107. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 253 
 
 University. . . Oxford and Cambridge are, I believe, 
 the only Universities in the world in which this system 
 prevails. It has grown up because of the circumstances 
 in which the Colleges themselves grew up, and because 
 throughout their joint history there has never been any 
 clear division between the functions of the University 
 and those of the Colleges, the latter being corporate 
 bodies with their own laws and regulations, separate 
 from, and in most respects independent of the University. 
 It is much as though Eton and Harrow were to admit 
 boys to membership, not upon an Entrance Examination 
 conducted by themselves, but upon whatever exam, each 
 of the house-masters might choose to enforce for his in- 
 dividual house. The result is, firstly, that the University 
 has no voice in determining the conditions of its own 
 membership ; secondly, that there is a wide variety of 
 standard created by the Colleges. A man who is rejected 
 at one College may even pass on and obtain admission at 
 another, the scale of requirement descending in proportion 
 to the character and reputation of the College. So startling 
 an anomaly could not escape the notice of the first Com- 
 mission, and one of the many wise recommendations 
 made by them, but unhappily disregarded, was the 
 institution of a University Matriculation Examination." 1 
 The machinery for holding this examination now exists 
 (at any rate in outline) whereas fifty years ago it would 
 have had to be created. " I allude of course to the 
 system of examinations and certificates as conducted by 
 the Local Examination Delegacy, and the Delegacy for 
 the Inspection and Examination of Schools, which is the 
 Oxford half of the Oxford and Cambridge Joint Exam- 
 ination Board." 2 Lord Curzon favours "a universal and 
 elastic system of School-leaving examinations, conducted 
 by the Universities in consultation with the Government 
 and the masters of Secondary Schools." 3 
 
 The Pass-Man and Pass-Schools. 
 
 As for the much-abused Pass-man, Lord Curzon holds 
 
 that "it is part of the function of Oxford to educate him; 
 
 and that, if it is to continue to deserve the name of a 
 
 University, it has few more important duties to perform 
 
 i lb. pp. 108, 109. 2 lb. p. 111. 3 lb. p. 112. 
 
254 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 than to give a good general education to the man of birth 
 and means (' Spurn not the nobly born,' we are told once 
 more). . . It is not necessary, accordingly, to take up 
 the position — though it is true — that without the Pass- 
 man, Oxford would not be able to pay its way. . . It is 
 worthy of consideration whether a wider range of alterna- 
 tives, guiding the Pass-man into practical courses and 
 offering a greater stimulus to his intelligence, might not 
 be discovered." 1 
 
 A Business Education. 
 "There is one subject in which I should like to see 
 the University interest itself, namely, the creation of 
 special facilities for the education of business men. . . 
 I should like to see a substantial two years' course with 
 instruction in Modern History, Commercial Geography, 
 Political Economy, the methods of Accounting, and the 
 principles of Exchange, culminating in a Diploma, 
 specially constructed for the requirements of a business 
 career." 2 
 
 Chapter VI. Relations of the Colleges and the University — 
 Organisation of Teaching. 
 
 In Chapter VI., which deals with the above topics, 
 Lord Curzon comes to the heart of his subject. The chief 
 work done at Oxford and Cambridge is that of teaching. 
 It is divided between the University and the Colleges, 
 and that not according to a carefully considered system, 
 but haphazard, as things have chanced to shape themselves. 
 Again, teaching cannot be given without being paid for. 
 Thus a double set of problems is raised of (1) the educa- 
 tional relations, and (2) the financial relations between 
 the Universities and the Colleges. Lord Curzon there- 
 fore is entirely in the right when he describes the 
 subject of this chapter as " the most difficult of aca- 
 demic problems, viz. the reconcilement of the Colleges 
 with the University, and of the Tutorial with the Pro- 
 fessorial system." " First called attention to by the 
 writings of Sir William Hamilton in 1831. it loomed large 
 before the Commissioners of 1850. Page after page of 
 their report testifies to their anxiety concerning the 
 
 i lb. pp. 117, 118. 2 lb. p. 118. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 255 
 
 readjustment of these relations. Such phrases as 'the 
 Colleges have absorbed the University and drawn to 
 themselves its functions,' 'the Tutors have become the 
 sole authorised teachers of the University,' 'the monopoly 
 of the Colleges,' and ' the University must be restored to 
 its proper superiority,' occur with impressive frequency, 
 and were employed by the Commission to justify the 
 majority of their reforms — for instance, the reorganiza- 
 tion and re-endowment of the Professoriate, the liberation 
 of Fellowships and Scholarships, and the creation of the 
 Unattached Students. The duty of the Colleges to the 
 University was carried a step further in the financial 
 measures ordered by the Commission of 1877, and in the 
 creation of the Common University Fund ; while the 
 better organisation of studies and control of examinations 
 under the eye of the Professors was believed to be pro- 
 vided for by the Boards of Faculties and Boards of Studies 
 that were simultaneously called into being. 
 
 " Since the reforms of 1882 there has on the whole 
 been a steady, though often unrecognised, progress in the 
 direction of strengthening the University. The increase 
 in the number of Professors and other University Teachers 
 has been especially striking ; their number, as given in 
 the Calendar for 1908, being 110. Of these, 9 represent 
 Theology, 7 Law, 31 Medicine, Natural Science, and 
 Mathematics, and 63 Arts and Letters. Their stipends, 
 paid by the University and the Colleges (apart from fees) 
 amount to £10,000 per annum. They divide the instruc- 
 tion of the University with the College Tutors and 
 Lecturers, of whom there are about 150, and who are 
 remunerated partly by College Fellowships, partly by 
 contributions from the College Tuition Funds. The 
 presence of so many Professors on the Governing Bodies 
 of the Colleges also gives the University a direct voice, 
 which formerly did not exist, in Collegiate administration 
 and instruction. 
 
 "Nevertheless the complaint that the Colleges still 
 dominate the Universities has been actively revived, and 
 is in the forefront of every call for University reform. 
 This is due partly to the great improvements that have 
 taken place in the Tutorial system, enhancing its utility 
 and influence and practically extinguishing the once 
 
256 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 flourishing* system of private Tutors and Coaches ; partly 
 to the Inter-Collegiate system of Lectures that has enabled 
 the Colleges to concentrate their instruction and sweep 
 large numbers of men into their Lecture-rooms ; and 
 partly to the rapid development of knowledge and sub- 
 division of its branches, for dealing with which the 
 Colleges possess an unrivalled organisation ready to 
 hand. Accordingly it is once again represented that 
 the University is not master in its own house, and 
 does not adequately control its own teaching. The 
 commonest form in which the complaint arises is as 
 follows. A College appoints A or B to be a Lecturer 
 because he is a Fellow, or appoints him a Lecturer 
 and then gives him a Fellowship. Straightway he 
 becomes a University Lecturer, without being required 
 to furnish any proof of his qualifications ; and he con- 
 tinues to be one, the Boards of Faculties, who are 
 supposed to control the Lecture-list when submitted to 
 them, failing to exercise any real supervision. This, it 
 is pointed out, is unsatisfactory to all parties ; to the 
 University because its staff has been increased without 
 its knowledge or consent ; to the College because it is 
 furnishing from its own staff an officer, who, though 
 paid exclusively by itself, is doing outside work ; to the 
 Tutor because he receives no return for his service to the 
 University; and to the system of instruction at large 
 because too many lecturers are apt to be appointed, 
 too many of them lecture on the same subject, and (it 
 is said) too many lecture who cannot lecture at all." 1 
 Lord Curzon also points out that " In all classes there 
 is manifest the same ungrudging admission of the right 
 of the University as a great Teaching Society to control 
 the instruction which it offers " ; and adds : "It is not in 
 the smaller and newer Faculties, but in the older 
 branches of study, and notably in Literae Humaniores; 
 that the want of co-ordination and the lack of control 
 are most urgently felt." 2 
 
 Boards of Faculties. 
 By the Statutes of 1882, Tit. V., a Faculty was 
 thus defined : " In and for the purpose of this Statute, 
 
 i lb. pp. 121, 122. 2 lb. pp. 123, 124. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 257 
 
 the word ' Faculty ' shall denote any branch or aggregate 
 of branches of the studies pursued in the University, 
 which for the time being shall be represented by a 
 separate Board." There are at Oxford seven Faculties 
 and seven Boards of Faculties, and these Boards control 
 the studies they represent so far as they are controlled. 
 "By the same Statute, six Boards of Studies were 
 constituted for the supervision of certain stated examin- 
 ations, these being composed of representatives drawn 
 from the Boards of Faculties. These bodies in com- 
 bination are thus invested by law with the control of all 
 the examinations of the University, and with the 
 supervision of its entire scheme of lectures, University 
 and College." 1 
 
 The criticisms passed on these Boards are (1) that 
 they are not representative of University teaching; (2) 
 that they pay excessive regard to examinations, and are 
 in reality Examination Boards rather than Faculties 
 representing subjects ; (3) that they exercise no real 
 control over the lectures, merely registering where they 
 ought to revise ; (4) they are impotent because the 
 Professors are liable to be outvoted by the College 
 Tutors, and thus the latter really control the University 
 curriculum. 
 
 Proposed Reforms. 
 Lord Curzon here distinguishes three schools of 
 reformers. " First are those who are quite willing that 
 the Boards should be reconstituted, and if necessary 
 increased, but who hold that they are already empowered 
 to establish the requisite control over University 
 teaching." a " Next are those who hold that there should 
 be created a clear distinction between the two classes of 
 teachers : (1) University lecturers, and (2) College 
 teachers ; that the former should be a recognised status 
 conferred by the University alone, freely, but on a definite 
 system ; and that the Colleges, in filling up their 
 Fellowships and Tutorships, should enter into consul- 
 tation with the University as to the manner of man to be 
 appointed, if he is to merit admission to the University 
 list. . . This would be, in fact, to give the University 
 
 i lb. p. 126. 2 16. p. 129. 
 
258 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 a veto on College appointments. . , The third and last 
 scheme proposes that a Central Board or Council of 
 Faculties should absorb the Common University Fund, 
 and that it should further be charged with the appoint- 
 ment and payment of all University Lecturers, and of all 
 Professors and Readers where not otherwise provided for, 
 the regulation of all matters relating to the studies and 
 examinations of the University ; and the admission of new 
 or the subdivision of old Faculties." 1 
 
 Lord Curzon concludes: "It should not be out of the 
 power of Council by a careful comparison of the good 
 points of the many plans in existence, to evolve some 
 method of placing the relations of the University and the 
 Colleges on a more stable footing. Perhaps the Common 
 University Fund might be rendered more representative 
 of the Faculties if its operations and powers were safe- 
 guarded in the manner which will be hereafter proposed. 
 There would still remain the question of the reorganisa- 
 tion of the University studies as a whole, and of the 
 examinations by which they are tested." 2 But this last is 
 a subject raising such large and complicated issues that 
 Lord Curzon excuses himself from entering on it. 
 
 College Statutes. 
 
 The University of Oxford has appointed a Standing 
 Committee of the Council to examine all College Statutes 
 which are brought before the Privy Council with a 
 view to protecting the interests of the University. 
 "This is a step in advance, but it remains to be seen 
 whether the University has adopted sufficient guarantees 
 to ensure that its own interests are in no way impaired." 3 
 
 Chapter VII., on the Revenue, Expenditure and 
 Financial Administration of the University, is dealt with 
 later on in Chapter XI. of this book. 
 
 Chapter VIII.— Executive Machinery of University 
 Government. 
 
 " The organisation of the University suffers from 
 many defects which impair its efficiency, and breed con- 
 fusion and delay. Perhaps the most conspicuous instance 
 of this lack of system is presented by the Executive 
 
 l lb. pp. 129-136. - lb. pp. 138, 139. 3 lb. p. 134. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 259 
 
 Machinery of the University.. It might be expected that 
 it would at least possess, in the staff of officials who 
 manage its business, and in the office where their records 
 are kept and their business is done, an adequate and 
 efficient machinery. Such is very far from being the 
 case." ' 
 
 The Vice -Chancellor. 
 
 "In olden days the M.A.'s elected their own Vice- 
 Chancellor; but in 1636 this power was transferred to the 
 Chancellor, Avho now annually nominates the Vice- 
 Chancellor as his deputy from among the Heads of Houses 
 in the order of their election as Head, usually for four 
 successive years. . . 
 
 " The duties of this officer are overwhelming in their 
 number and complexity. He presides over Council, the 
 two Congregations, and Convocation. . . He is a mem- 
 ber of every Board, Delegacy and Committee in the 
 University. . . These facts have prompted two sugges- 
 tions. One is that the Chancellor should be empowered 
 to appoint as his deputy some independent and leisured 
 person, who should devote his entire time and abilities to 
 University work. . . The other suggestion is that the 
 Chancellor should choose from a list submitted to him by 
 the Hebdomadal Council. . . There does not appear to 
 be sufficient reason for discussing any revolutionary 
 change. The real reform lies not in altering the choice of 
 the man so much as in reducing and systematising his 
 work." 2 
 
 The University Staff. 
 
 This consists of a Registrar, an Assistant Registrar, 
 and a Secretary to the Curators of the Chest. Lord 
 Curzon advises the institution of a University Office with 
 a University Secretariat or Staff. " Whether such a pro- 
 vision should be made by a development of the existing 
 Registrar's Office, or by entirely new arrangements, is a 
 matter which the Council will be well qualified to decide." 
 A University Architect and a Clerk of the Works would 
 also be required. 3 
 
 Finally Lord Curzon says : " I may be permitted to 
 remark that in the multiplicity of Boards and Delegacies, 
 
 i lb. p. 172. 2 lb. pp. 172-175. 3 lb. pp. 175-177. 
 
260 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 by which the University endeavours to cope with its 
 tremendous task, lies an inevitable source of much delay 
 and dissipation of energy, which a more centralised and 
 scientific organisation might prevent; . . even if the 
 University cannot reduce the number of these agencies, 
 at least it should insist that its executive committee, 
 the Hebdomadal Council, shall bring these bodies into 
 closer relation with itself, and shall exercise a more 
 harmonising, and therefore a more effective, control over 
 their operations." ' 
 
 Chapter IX. Encouragement of Research. 
 
 The encouragement of Research finds no place in the 
 recommendations of the Commission of 1850. Matthew 
 Arnold was the pioneer of the movement in its favour. 
 He was followed by Mark Pattison and Jowett, and the 
 Common University Fund of the 1877-82 Commission 
 was the result, being designed to encourage teaching and 
 study outside the ordinary curriculum, and having its 
 objects specifically defined as Instruction and Research. 
 
 Lord Curzon argues that the main function of Oxford 
 must be to teach, and that it is impossible for it to 
 emulate either a University like the Johns Hopkins at 
 Baltimore, which exists for post-graduate study only ; 
 or like Harvard, which has more than 350 post-graduate 
 students in Arts. Still it is a duty to provide for it. 
 
 Facilities for Advanced Study. 
 The facilities for Advanced Study are then enumer- 
 ated — the Fellowships and Scholarships, the Prizes, the 
 Diplomas, the B.C.L., the new Degrees of B.Litt. and 
 B.Sc, the Libraries and Seminars, the Laboratories, and 
 the publications of the Clarendon Press. All these things 
 point to a great advance. " At the same time it is only 
 too true that the amount of original work as yet turned 
 out from Oxford is inconsiderable. . . 
 
 A University Policy of Research. 
 In the first place I am not aware that the question 
 of its attitude toward Research has ever been considered 
 by the University as a whole, i.e. by the University 
 and Colleges in combination. Might it not be a 
 
 1 lb. p. 178. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 261 
 
 good thing if the resources of the two partners 
 that may be available for the purpose were compared 
 and co-ordinated, and if a plan were to be worked out 
 by which each member of the federation should contri- 
 bute, according to its means and inclination, to the 
 common end'? It might be a function of the Central 
 Board of Finance to take early counsel with the Uni- 
 versity and Colleges in this matter; or Council itself 
 might undertake the labour or delegate it to one of its 
 Committees." ' 
 
 Chapter X. Independent Subjects. 
 Lord Curzon here turns to a number of independent 
 subjects — Election to Professorships, where he suggests 
 various improvements ; a Pension Fund for the Profes- 
 soriate ; Degrees for Women ; the Conferment of Honor- 
 ary Degrees ; a three-years' Honour Course ; a longer 
 Academical year ; and the Indian Institute. 
 
 Chapter XI. Summary. 
 
 Finally, the writer summarises his suggestions, point- 
 ing out that " a fourfold duty lies on the University : (1) 
 to provide the best teaching over the entire field of know- 
 ledge of which its own resources and the progress of 
 science may admit ; (2) to offer this teaching to the widest 
 range of students ; (3) to mould and shape them not 
 merely by the training of intellect but by the discipline 
 of spirit ; and (4) to extend by original inquiry the 
 frontiers of learning." 2 
 
 Lord Curzon has laid his finger on the weak spots 
 in the Oxford system, but he indicates rather the direc- 
 tion which reforms must take, than the ultimate reforms 
 themselves. At the same time he is to be congratulated 
 on the success which certain of his suggestions have 
 already met with. 
 
 We now come to the latest suggestions from Cam- 
 bridge. Early in the Easter Term of 1909, a memorial 
 was received by the Council of the Senate from certain 
 resident members of the University requesting that 
 various questions, connected with the constitution and the 
 government of the University, and with the relations of 
 the Colleges to the University and to one another, should 
 
 i lb. p. 186. 2 lb. p. 210. 
 
262 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 be taken into consideration. 1 Reports were annexed to 
 the memorial. These Reports were the outcome of a 
 series of unofficial meetings of members of the Senate ; 
 the first of which was held on February 10th, 1908, and 
 the last on March 10th, 1900. The above Committee on 
 the Constitution and Government of the University 
 limited their suggestions in the first instance to two 
 questions only : (1) the reconstitution of the Electoral 
 Roll ; and (2) the functions of the Senate and the Electoral 
 Roll as reconstituted. 
 
 "The object which they have had in view has been 
 to suggest a scheme which would give to the body of 
 residents engaged in teaching, research, and administra- 
 tion, a larger share than it at present possesses in the 
 legislative action of the University. The effect of the 
 scheme suggested would be to establish two Houses, one 
 a body of residents, and the other the Senate as at present 
 constituted." 2 In other words, the design was to put 
 more power into the hands of those who do the actual 
 work of the University and to leave less power in the 
 hands of the absentees, a course which has now been 
 followed at Oxford. The documents submitted to the 
 Council were : (1) a suggested reconstitution of the Elec- 
 toral Roll ; (2) suggested alterations in the functions of 
 the Senate and of the Electoral Roll as reconstituted, 
 with two Appendices ; (3) a report on the constitution 
 of the Senate, with a view of effecting the following 
 changes : — (a) to diminish as far as practicable the 
 charge (£12) at present made for the M.A. or equivalent 
 degree, (b) to increase the proportion of graduates who 
 are members of the Senate, and (c) to avoid financial 
 loss to the University ; (4) a memorandum by Mr. H. 
 McLeod Innes on the financial aspect of the degree 
 question ; (5) a Report on the relation of the Colleges 
 to the University and to one another, divided under 
 the following heads : (A) teaching for Honours-Examina- 
 tions, (B) contributions of the Colleges to the University, 
 and (C) the cost of living at Cambridge. 
 
 The Council decided not to nominate a special 
 Syndicate or Syndicates to deal with the matters in 
 
 i University Reporter, 1910, p. 675. 2 Report, p. 2. 
 
THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 263 
 
 question, but in the first instance to undertake the duty 
 themselves, and to deal with the constitution and 
 government of the University to begin with, leaving the 
 second question over till a later date. The Council's 
 report was published on February 28, 1910; it was dis- 
 cussed in April and May, and an amended report was 
 published on June 6, 1910. Its recommendations were 
 voted on in the October term and were rejected. In 
 consequence of this adverse decision the question of the 
 relations of the Colleges to the University and to one 
 another has never been officially considered. There was 
 a subsequent recommendation to alter the B.A. and M.A. 
 degree fees, but this also was rejected, so that this attempt 
 to reform Cambridge from within failed completely. No 
 change of any kind was made. The various sugges- 
 tions of the unofficial Committee are dealt with more 
 fully in the last chapter, so that this brief notice must 
 not be taken as indicating their real importance. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF OXFORD 
 AND CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 It seems most convenient to deal with the question 
 of University finance in a separate chapter. The Com- 
 missioners of 1850 nominally dealt with it, hut the 
 information they were able to obtain was fragmentary 
 and incomplete, especially as regards Oxford. Mark 
 Pattison writes l : " The Report of the Commission of 
 1852 was defective on the point of finance. Their 
 statement (Report, pp. 125-127) of the University income 
 and expenditure is not accurate, and on the property and 
 revenue of the Colleges they have few data. . . When, 
 in 1854, Parliament undertook to transfer a portion of the 
 College revenues, it was not only robbing, but robbing in 
 the dark." 
 
 The Royal Commission of 1872 was appointed, as has 
 been seen, to inquire into the revenues and property of 
 the two Universities. It was thus strictly supplementary 
 to the inquiry of 1850. Mr. Gladstone, in Pattisonian 
 phrase, was determined, if he robbed at all, to rob in the 
 daylight. The Report presented in 1874 still remains the 
 chief source of information on the matters of which it 
 treats. 
 
 The following is the account therein given of the 
 origin of University and College property 2 : — 
 
 " The properties of the Universities have for the most 
 part arisen from gifts entrusted to them for specific 
 purposes. 
 
 " The Colleges which were first established in the 13th 
 century received from their founders an endowment of 
 
 i Suggestions, pp. 51, 52. 2 Report, pp. 25, 26. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 265 
 
 manors, lands, and houses, generally to an extent that 
 was barely adequate to provide the payments and expenses 
 of maintenance which were directed to be allowed by the 
 Statutes. Subsequently were added impropriations of 
 rectories, with their tithe property, in some cases for a 
 period of years to meet the first expenses of the College 
 fabric, in others as a permanent annexation to the 
 foundation. The larger Colleges in both Universities 
 were not established until the 14th and 15th centuries, 
 when the suppression of the alien Priories offered the 
 means of devoting much ecclesiastical property to 
 academical purposes. It was not an uncommon method 
 of founding a College that a founder should, with the 
 sanction of the Crown and the authority of the Church, 
 acquire both the site and the estates of some religious 
 house in Oxford or Cambridge which had perhaps fallen 
 into disrepute or decay, obtain its formal dissolution, and 
 establish his own College in its stead. The dissolution of 
 the monasteries in the reign of Henry VIII. became the 
 occasion for diverting a still larger amount of ecclesi- 
 astical and other property, more particularly of 
 impropriate tithes, to Collegiate uses. In the times 
 subsequent to the Reformation considerable accretions of 
 endowment have been made to Colleges which were 
 already founded with the view of promoting the 
 education of future ministers of the Church, of furnish- 
 ing educational encouragement for particular schools, 
 districts, or families, of providing a more liberal 
 maintenance for the members of the society, or generally 
 of expressing the goodwill and affectionate regard of the 
 benefactor for the particular House of which, perhaps, he 
 had himself been a member, it may be a recipient of its 
 bounty. 
 
 " There are not wanting examples of additions to the 
 several foundations having been occasioned in the earliest 
 times by a desire to encourage special studies and pro- 
 fessional pursuits; but when it was the object of the 
 founder to introduce or to promote some new branch 
 of learning or science, it was the more usual practice 
 for him to confide his gift to the care of the University 
 at large, rather than of an individual College." 
 
 The Commissioners continue : — 
 
266 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " From these various sources there has grown up 
 a large mass of property which for the purposes of our 
 inquiry we have arranged under six heads, viz. : — (1) 
 Lands; (2) House Property; (3) Tithe Rent Charges; 
 (4) Other Rent Charges, such as fee farm rents and fixed 1 
 charges ; (5) Stocks, Shares and other Securities of aa 
 similar kind; and (6) Other Properties, such as fines & 
 and other profits from copyholds of inheritance, minerals,- 
 timber, etc." 
 
 The Commissioners considered that it would be bestf 
 to conduct their inquiry by means of written rather than 
 of oral evidence. Forms were therefore sent out arranged 
 under sixteen heads. In the Returns and Abstracts- 
 prepared from them, properties and income held andi 
 enjoyed for corporate use were distinguished by thei 
 letter A, and those held subject to special trusts by\ 
 the letter B. The Universities, the Colleges, and all 
 their officers, with a few exceptions, supplied the infor- 
 mation asked for. But, add the Commissioners: — "We 
 regret to say that Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, 
 failed to give the required information. The Fellows 
 of the College indeed expressed their willingness that i 
 the information should be given, but as the Master i 
 discharges the duties of Bursar, and has the College' 
 account-books in his custody, the Fellows had not the 1 
 means which would enable them to make the necessary 
 returns." 1 
 
 As for Trusts, the Commissioners report : — " Our I 
 attention has been specially called to the properties heldi 
 in trust by the University and the Colleges. There are* 
 only a very few cases in which the beneficial interest of 
 the trust property is wholly external to the University or 
 College which holds the trust. In almost all cases the 
 trustee-corporation has a beneficial interest either: 
 contingent or partial in the trust estate. The objects of> 
 the trusts are almost universally one or other of the: 
 following: — The maintenance of or aid towards a 
 Professorship, Teachership, or Lectureship, or some 
 institution for the encouragement of Literature, Science, 
 or Art ; Scholarships or Exhibitions in the Universities 
 or some College, those attached to Colleges being 
 
 i lb. p. 24. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 207 
 
 frequently accompanied with a condition of preference 
 i for some candidates from some school or district, with a 
 power to the College to elect by open competition in case 
 no properly qualified candidate presents himself ; prizes ; 
 the purchase of ecclesiastical benefices, and the improve- 
 ment of the benefices which are in the gift of the College. 
 ; Many benefactions have been made in times past for the 
 ; common benefit of all or some members of the foundation 
 of a College. Many special foundations for Fellowships 
 i and Scholarships have also been established in all 
 respects similar to the Fellows and Scholars on the 
 original foundation, with this important exception, viz., 
 that the Fellows were not members of the Corporation, 
 and generally had no voice in the management of the 
 College. To remedy this disability, and to give to all 
 , common interests, the Commissioners appointed under 
 the University Reform Acts of 1854 and 1856, in the 
 exercise of the powers given to them, consolidated these 
 I bye-foundations with the original foundations of the 
 College, and fused the property and income. The result 
 |of this consolidation was a very large reduction in the 
 number of the Trust Funds of the Colleges. In some 
 i instances, however, Trust Funds of a mixed character 
 [could not be treated in this manner; and they still 
 remain subject to separate and distinct administration 
 ; : and account. 
 
 " It may be observed that though these funds are not 
 divisible among the Head and Fellows of a College, yet in 
 ; many cases they indirectly increase the divisible revenue, 
 inasmuch as they bear charges for chapel, library, repairs 
 'and the like, which would otherwise fall on the general 
 .funds of the College." ! 
 
 After these preliminary remarks, the Commissioners 
 proceed to consider, — 
 
 I. The Property of the Universities and Colleges on 
 1st January, 1872. 
 
 II. The Income of the Universities and Colleges in 
 the year 1871. 
 
 III. The Expenditure of the Universities and Colleges 
 in the year 1871. 
 
 i Report, pp. 24, 25. 
 
268 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 I. Property of the Universities and Colleges 
 on 1st January, 1872. 
 
 To take the six heads given above. 
 
 (1) Lands. 
 
 The landed estates comprise 319,718 acres distributed 
 throughout the whole of England and Wales, but situated 
 in larger quantities in the southern than in the northern 
 counties. Of these 
 
 7,683 acres belong to the University of Oxford. 
 2,445 „ „ „ „ „ Cambridge. 
 
 184,764 „ „ „ Colleges and Halls of Oxford. 
 
 124,826 „ „ „ „ of Cambridge. 
 
 Part of these lands is let on what are called beneficial 
 leases, which form of tenure the Commissioners thus 
 explain : — 
 
 " Its distinctive feature is this, that only a small part, 
 in most cases only a nominal part of the annual value of 
 the property leased is represented in the form of yearly 
 rent, the remainder being paid for by the lessee in the 
 way of fine, foregift, or premium, and that at fixed periods 
 in anticipation of the term in respect of which this 
 peculiar payment is made. . - In other words, the 
 leases are at the times indicated restored to the full term 
 of lives or years for which they were originally granted in 
 consideration of a payment (called a fine) which may be 
 regarded as the purchase-money of a term in reversion 
 commencing at the expiration of the 14 or 26 years still 
 remaining in the lease. The result of this system is that 
 the yearly income of the College is uncertain and 
 precarious, and that at all times a large part of 
 the fee-simple value of the estate under beneficial 
 lease is the property of the lessee, and must virtually 
 be bought back before the College can enjoy the 
 full annual value." 1 This form of leasing is strongly 
 condemned both for lands and houses. The Act of 
 1877, section 21 (4) enacts that the Commissioners 
 appointed by the Act may " make provision for regulating 
 the conditions under which beneficial leases may be 
 renewed by the University or a College." But the 
 Commissioners, so far as I can find, never made any 
 Statute to this effect. 
 
 l lb. p. 26. 
 
the financial resources. 269 
 
 (2) House Property. 
 
 Annual Income (less fixed charges) ' : — 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 University of Oxford 1,162 14 2 
 
 University of Cambridge 1-56 10 
 
 Colleges of Oxford 34,152 15 8 
 
 Colleges of Cambridge 54,286 1 1 
 
 (3) Tithe Rent-charges. 
 
 The Universities and Colleges held Tithe Rent-charges 
 to the following amounts 2 : — 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 University of Oxford 1,244 10 10 
 
 University of Cambridge ... 1,741 9 
 
 Colleges and Halls of Oxford 83,238 12 5 
 
 Colleges of Cambridge 63,679 9 5 
 
 (4) Other Rent-charges. 
 These are generally small. 
 
 (5) Stocks and Shares. 
 
 The Universities and Colleges hold Stocks and Shares, 
 the annual income of which is : — 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 University of Oxford 13,068 16 10 
 
 University of Cambridge 7,687 5 8 
 
 Colleges and Halls of Oxford 26,426 11 6 
 
 Colleges of Cambridge 19,314 5 7 
 
 (6) Other Properties. 
 
 The chief item is copyholds of inheritance, but it is 
 not a large one. The number of benefices in the gift of 
 the Universities and Colleges, and the net annual income 
 thereof, is returned or estimated as follows : — 
 
 Annual net 
 
 
 Number. 
 
 Income. 
 £ s. d. 
 
 University of Oxford 
 
 5 
 
 1,036 7 
 
 University of Cambridge 
 
 1 
 
 394 
 
 Colleges and Halls of Oxford .. 
 
 439 
 
 187,659 4 3 
 
 Colleges of Cambridge 
 
 311 
 
 135,016 17 11 
 
 II. Income of the Universities and Colleges in the Year 1871. 
 
 The total income of the Universities and Colleges in 
 
 1871 was £754,405 5s. l^d. Of this sum £665,601 10s. 2|d. 
 
 i See p. 29 (Summary). 2 lb. p. 28. 
 
270 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 was for (A) corporate use, and £88,803 14s. lid. was (B) 
 subject to conditions of trust, being thus divided 1 :— 
 
 University of Oxford 
 University of Cambridge ... 
 Colleges and Halls of Oxford 
 Colleges of Cambridge 
 
 A 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 32,151 1 
 
 23,642 19 5 
 
 330,836 16 1 
 
 278,970 13 8£ 
 
 B 
 
 £ s. cl. 
 15,437 19 3 
 10,407 17 10 
 35,417 2 
 27,540 17 8 
 
 The revenues arise from two different sources : (1) the 
 properties already detailed ; and (2) the room rents, and 
 dues and fees paid by the members of the University or 
 the Colleges. The former the Commissioners call External 
 Income, and the latter Internal Income. 
 
 The following is the conspectus of the whole External 
 Income after deducting fixed payments such as Land Tax 
 and Tithe Rent-charge : — 
 
 
 
 
 Tithe 
 
 
 Other 
 
 
 Lands. 
 
 Houses. 
 
 rent-charg 
 
 es. 
 
 rent-charges. 
 
 University of 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 cl. 
 
 £ s. cl. 
 
 Oxford 
 
 12,083 4 
 
 1,162 14 2 
 
 490 19 
 
 7 
 
 872 6 9 
 
 University of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cambridge 
 
 3,148 19 8 
 
 156 10 
 
 1,784 14 
 
 5 
 
 333 16 6 
 
 Colleges & Halls 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 of Oxford 
 
 170,990 11 7i 
 
 26,833 6 3 
 
 34,152 15 
 
 8 
 
 4,092 14 10 
 
 Colleges of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cambridge 
 
 132,671 6 
 
 25,993 8 2 
 
 54,286 1 
 
 1 
 
 3,943 2 2 
 
 
 £318,893 12 H 
 
 54,145 18 7 
 
 90,714 10 
 
 9 
 
 9,242 3 
 
 Stocks, 
 Shares, &c. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 12,939 6 9 
 
 Other 
 Properties. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 1,494 16 2 
 
 Special endow- 
 ment of Head. 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Loans. 
 
 £ s. cl. 
 
 Total. 
 £ s. d. 
 29,043 3 9 
 
 7,648 9 
 
 844 19 2 
 
 — 
 
 
 13,917 8 9 
 
 24,242 7 lOi 
 
 13,574 14 3 
 
 6,289 6 
 
 27,194 6 2 
 
 307,369 17 2 
 
 16,508 7 5 
 
 20,365 8 8£ 
 
 1,764 9 10 
 
 
 264,256 17 10fc 
 
 £61,338 11 0| 
 
 36,279 18 3| 
 
 8,053 10 4 
 
 27,194 6 2 
 
 614,587 7 &k 
 
 The Internal Income of the Universities arises almost 
 wholly from taxation. 
 
 "At Oxford every member of the University pays Ml 
 annually to the University Chest. Those who have been 
 
 l 76. p. 29. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 271 
 
 admitted to the degree of M.A., B.C.L., or B.M., can com- 
 pound for these dues by a single payment. These sums 
 are invested, and amounted on July 15th, 1871, to £ 14,900 
 Consols. Fees are also charged at Matriculation, at all 
 Examinations, and on Graduation. The Internal Income 
 thus raised in the year ended July 15th, 1878, amounted to 
 £18,066 8s. 6d. 
 
 At Cambridge every member of the University pays 
 annually a capitation charge of 17s. 1 There is no Uni- 
 versity compounding, but the Colleges accept a composi- 
 tion both to themselves and to the University. 
 
 The Internal Income of the Colleges arises from rents 
 of rooms occupied by members of the College ; from fees 
 paid on entrance and graduation; from dues paid by 
 all members whether resident or non-resident ; from 
 profits of the establishment, chiefly in its buttery and 
 kitchen departments ; and from small casual payments. 
 The rate at which fees and dues are levied, and the time 
 over which they are payable, varies in every College, and 
 in some Colleges varies with the different classes of 
 students. 
 
 In the matter of internal economy, and consequently 
 in that of Internal Income, there is no uniformity of 
 practice, and it cannot be said with certainty in all cases 
 whether profit, properly so called, accrues to a College 
 from its reception of students or not. 2 
 
 Tuition fees are sums of money paid terminally or 
 quarterly for tuition and instruction. At Oxford, the 
 payment for tuition varies ; it is generally £21 per annum, 
 but £25 and £27 are also charged. The amount received 
 for these fees was in 1871 £30,761 3s. 4d. To this sum 
 additions were made in that year from the corporate and 
 trust funds of the Colleges of £4,227 4s. 6d. 
 
 In the University of Cambridge the charge is uniform, 
 being £18 a year or £6 a term, for an undergraduate 
 pensioner; £2 a term for a sizar, and £1 10s. Od. a term for 
 every B.A. "In some cases the fund is treated as a 
 private affair of the Tutors, and we have been frequently 
 
 i By a Grace passed June 1st, 1893, this tax has been supplemented 
 by a quarterly payment of 10s. 
 
 2 76. p. 30. 
 
272 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 referred by the College for an account of it. The account 
 has been supplied in all cases but two ; those, viz. of 
 Corpus Christi and of Sidney Sussex College. . . It 
 appears that the amount raised by tuition fees in 13 out 
 of the 17 Colleges was 426,413 15s. Od., and that the Colleges 
 contributed out of their income £1,131 6s. 3d., so that the 
 Tutors and Lecturers are almost wholly paid by means of f 
 fees charged directly on the students for these purposes." [ ' 
 
 III. The Expenditure of the Universities and Colleges in i 
 
 the Year 1871. 
 
 "The Heads of the Colleges in the two Universities- 
 receive annually £50,958 19s. 3d., whereof the Heads of! 
 the 19 Colleges in Oxford receive 4*30,543 12s. 4d., and the 
 Heads of the 17 Colleges at Cambridge 420,415 6s. lid. 
 
 "The whole amount paid to Fellows of Colleges in 1871 
 was 4204,147 15s. 7d., of which 4101,171 4s. 5d. was paid to I 
 Fellows at Oxford, and 4102,976 lis. 2d to Fellows at I 
 Cambridge. These amounts do not in all cases include 
 the cost of allowance of various kinds made by the 
 College." 
 
 Scholars and Exhibitioners were paid out of the 
 corporate income of the Colleges 450,534 5s. 0d., of which 
 426,225 12s. Od. was paid at Oxford, and 424,308 13s. Od. at 
 Cambridge. Large sums were also paid out of the Trust 
 Funds. 
 
 46,694 10s. lOd. was paid to University Professors 
 at Oxford out of College incomes, and 41,011 lis. 8d. 
 at Cambridge. Augmentation of benefices amounted 
 at Oxford to 48,772 2s. 4d., and at Cambridge to 
 45,253 2s. 3d. 
 
 The cost of Management of estates was : Oxford, 
 48,801 18s. 0*d.; Cambridge, 46,906 6s. 6d. ; equal to a 
 percentage of 42 17s. 7d. in the first case, and 42 13s. 8d. 
 in the second. 2 
 
 A deposit is ordinarily made by each student on 
 entrance into a College, which stands to his credit in 
 the College books during the whole time of his under- 
 graduate course, being available to liquidate College bills 
 in case of default. This deposit is called Caution money. 
 
 i lb. pp. 31, 32. 2 lb. p. 34. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 273 
 
 The usual amount at Oxford is £30. The College holds 
 these moneys, which it puts to its own use and has 
 the benefit of any profit derived therefrom. At Cam- 
 bridge the College requires a deposit to be made by each 
 student at the time of his admission, and allows the 
 Tutor to retain this money and employ it to his own 
 profit. The deposit is £15 for a pensioner and £10 for 
 a sizar. " We think that it should be clearly understood 
 that the Tutor receives the money solely as the agent 
 of the College, and that the College is responsible for 
 its repayment." ' 
 
 " There is one point brought prominently out in 
 the result of this inquiry : the great disparity between 
 the property and income of the several Colleges and 
 the number of its members. When that number is 
 small, the expense of the staff and establishment is 
 necessarily large in proportion." The Commissioners, 
 however, did not think that it lay within their province 
 to enter further into this subject. They confined them- 
 selves strictly to finance. 
 
 The new Statutes made both for the University and 
 the Colleges by the Commissioners under the Act of 1877 
 came into force in the year 1882. The following is a com- 
 parison for Cambridge between the University and College 
 receipts for 1883, the first year for which returns were 
 made, and the present year 1913 : — 
 
 University Chest. 
 
 Nov. 3, 1881— 
 Sept. 29, 1882. 1913. 
 
 £ s. d. £ s. d. 
 
 Rents and Dividends ... ... 3,294 1 9 1,873 11 1 
 
 Capitation Tax and Compounders' 
 Fund ... 
 
 Degree Fees 
 
 Matriculation Fees.. 
 Examination Fees' 2 
 University Press ... 
 Miscellaneous 
 
 9,591 5 9 15,909 17 11 
 
 13,693 
 
 19,688 19 6 6,273 18 
 
 12,535 14 
 
 2,500 
 
 211 9 523 4 2 
 
 Totals £32,785 7 9 £53,309 5 2 
 
 i lb. p. 37. 
 
 2 Arranged as Senior and Junior Proctors' Fees, £10,959 15s. Od. 
 Registrary, £8,729 4s. 6d. 
 
274 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Common University Fund. 1 
 
 Assessment of Colleges 
 Deductions 
 
 1883. 
 £ s. d. 
 5,439 13 1 
 829 5 7 
 
 1913. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 30,322 11 7 
 
 7,832 13 3 
 
 £4,610 7 6 £22,489 18 4 
 
 Stocks belonging to University. 
 
 1883. 
 £ s. d. 
 306,648 15 10 
 
 1913. 
 £ s. d. 
 646,165 12 8 
 
 These items represent for the most part endowments 
 ear-marked for particular purposes. Such endowments 
 increase the teaching power of the University, but not its 
 general resources, which it can apply as it thinks fit. 
 
 The incomes of the Colleges assessable for University 
 purposes were : — 
 
 
 1883. 
 
 
 1913. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 6,632 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 
 6,758 14 1 
 
 Clare ... 
 
 11,174 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 12,924 2 2 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 11,556 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 13,542 13 5 
 
 Caius ... 
 
 14,568 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 24,930 14 10 
 
 Trinity Hall ... 
 
 7,724 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 8,138 2 5 
 
 Corpus 
 
 7,343 
 
 11 
 
 4 
 
 10,810 11 4 
 
 King's 
 
 28,549 
 
 19 
 
 1 
 
 25,640 9 
 
 Queens' 
 
 6,827 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 7,843 5 11 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 4,904 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 5,719 9 6 
 
 Jesus... 
 
 11,625 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 12,968 19 7 
 
 Christ's 
 
 10,860 
 
 17 
 
 3 
 
 12,133 17 10 
 
 St. John's 
 
 36,805 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 33,344 2 6 
 
 Magdalene 
 
 4,705 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 6,109 17 
 
 Trinity 
 
 46,367 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 55,393 
 
 Emmanuel 
 
 9,516 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 17,735 3 1 
 
 Sidney 
 
 7,251 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 10,858 10 8 
 
 Downing 
 
 4,850 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 7,132 9 7 
 
 
 £231,265 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 £271,983 14 8 
 
 The gross corporate income shows a like growth, but 
 it must be noted that the returns from the first have been 
 for different years. In the first instance eight Colleges 
 made returns for the year ended Michaelmas, 1882, and 
 
 i In 1883 the rate at which the Colleges were assessed was 2i per 
 cent. ; in 1913 it was 11J per cent. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 
 
 nine for the year ended Michaelmas, 1883. 
 pancy has continued ever since. 
 
 275 
 This discre- 
 
 
 1883. 
 
 
 1913. 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 7,146 18 
 
 7 
 
 8,212 3 11 
 
 Clare ... 
 
 14,623 19 
 
 7 
 
 16,558 13 5 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 11,714 15 
 
 7 
 
 13,896 3 9 
 
 Caius ... 
 
 21,928 1 
 
 9 
 
 29,639 14 9 
 
 Trinity Hall ... 
 
 9,300 14 
 
 10 
 
 8,828 6 
 
 Corpus 
 
 10,038 12 
 
 1 
 
 12,325 5 7 
 
 King's 
 
 38,112 15 
 
 11 
 
 37,654 14 3 
 
 Queens' 
 
 6,871 10 
 
 7 
 
 8,686 3 1 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 5,526 10 
 
 4 
 
 6,063 14 11 
 
 Jesus... 
 
 12,720 8 
 
 8 
 
 13,505 7 9 
 
 Christ's 
 
 14,445 15 
 
 7 
 
 14,943 7 11 
 
 St. John's 
 
 45,511 19 
 
 10 
 
 42,945 7 7 
 
 Magdalene 
 
 5,234 9 
 
 4 
 
 6,931 9 3 
 
 Trinity 
 
 78,903 
 
 
 
 76,492 2 6 
 
 Emmanuel 
 
 13,564 6 
 
 
 
 19,885 5 3 
 
 Sidney 
 
 7,434 18 
 
 3 
 
 14,952 11 10 
 
 Downing 
 
 6,986 16 
 
 2 
 
 9,988 12 7 
 
 
 £310,065 13 
 
 1 
 
 £341,508 18 10 
 
 Let us now compare the income of the Colleges in 
 land, houses, and tithe in the returns for 1883 and 1913. 
 The greatest fluctuations have taken place in these items. 
 
 An exact comparison is here impossible because of 
 the imperfections in the College returns. Caius has 
 never yet made a proper return. It lumps together in 
 one total, lands on beneficial leases, and at rack-rent, 
 houses on beneficial or long leases, and at rack-rent, 
 copyholds, leases and tithes, a union of eight items. 
 Its figures therefore are given separately in the previous 
 table. In 1872, at the time of the Royal Commission, 
 it had 656 acres of land let on beneficial lease, and 
 houses yielding an annual income of £451, also let on 
 beneficial lease. Its gross amount of tithe and other 
 rent-charges was at that date £1,627. 
 
 King's also fails to make its return in the required 
 form. It lumps together three headings into one — lands 
 at rack-rent, houses on long leases, and houses at rack- 
 rent. It also lumps all its Trust funds together. 
 
 Jesus has headings of its own — land rental, Cam- 
 bridge house rental, London house rental, and Cambridge 
 quit-rents. An identical form of return is given in the 
 Statutes of all the Colleges and it ought to be followed. 
 
276 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 a 
 a 
 
 cc 
 OD 
 
 a 
 
 T3 co 
 
 a • <-< 
 
 d t. as 
 
 TO (U rH 
 
 r^ CO 
 .gCGoO 
 CO « 
 
 Hco 
 
 3 -^ • 
 
 5 o co 
 W ^2 
 
 a 
 
 CO CO 
 
 n 
 
 <D i-i 
 
 
 cc as 
 
 
 e8 i-H 
 
 <w 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 OD CO 
 
 o X 
 
 0) 
 
 cc co 
 
 O CJH 
 
 to^2 
 01 
 
 3 a °° 
 
 K O) X 
 
 ■^ -w !Zl 
 
 » o) 
 si 
 
 cS o • 
 
 J gx 
 
 w 00 
 
 o 
 
 <5 as 
 
 
 0> r-l 
 
 
 
 r - . 
 
 
 a 
 ca 
 
 a; £2 
 
 Z GO 
 H CO 
 
 J 
 
 
 .O 
 
 cf of 
 
 H«H10t»ifH 10 05 05 
 Ht««U)t»T(l!00'MO 
 
 rH O O "* CO 
 
 OS C- CO CO 
 5^ i-l CO CO O 
 
 H^tCfitlSSlHOfliO 
 
 toasMw^wosMt-oi 
 
 HHH^OHilOrtW 
 
 X OS CO X CO 
 
 CO rH CO CO O 
 
 Ctf ■"* Iffi OO! rH 
 
 1-TcT 
 
 t- t» » i» O t- l> 
 OS CO X 00 lO CO rH 
 Ol ■>* •* CO CO <N CO 
 
 I t 
 
 di oj t- a o 
 
 OS O) ^* OS CO 
 «rj O CO CQ CO i-H 
 
 of co"i-T 
 
 rH OS CO OS OS X OS 
 
 M00»O>fl»tO 
 
 -^ c- os -** o -* •* 
 
 l-f "* rH N 
 
 t- CO C- O 
 
 >o co o os 
 
 «rt -i h I t> ■* 
 
 of of of 
 
 lO lO O) H O t- ■* }) 1(5 OO 
 
 Q0t»t»H»M(M«iO-f 
 
 t»OHijl«tO(l30ffl 
 
 CO 'X GO iffi 
 
 CO CO X D- 
 
 «rt o C- I CO CO 
 
 OOflOMO^COO 
 OiffiOS-^fOOSOOiffiCO 
 HtOHffllOMfflOi 1 
 
 CO 'fl 
 
 Ctf CO CO 
 
 CO CO CO CI rH 
 
 ^ CO ^ o 
 rH Iffi 00 CO I 
 
 O CI M< iffi 
 
 d -<*< OS CO 
 
 Ctf rH CO I HIO 
 
 MO>Ot» 
 
 x -* © x 
 
 iffi C- CO CO 
 
 etf «n 
 
 I I 
 
 «tf.H I 
 
 °r I 
 
 Iffi Iffi 
 
 i-H CO 
 i-H ffil 
 
 Iffi t~- -H^ Iffi i-H t~ 
 
 ■«* OS ->* GO Tf OS 
 
 Sf? tN © CO 00 -*t< CI 
 
 of ^T ffif of of -*~ 
 
 ■^QOO-^^f'SflffiOSf^OO 
 
 TflcOd-^COOOCOCOOlC- 
 
 >ffic^oxooocicoOi-H 
 
 ■* CO ffil -^ >ffi 
 
 CI <N CO CO 
 
 •f © CO CO i-i 
 
 -* OS C— t— i-H 
 
 CfJ t> ■* 00 00 CI 
 C5 Iffi CO Co" Tf~ 
 
 HHMCfHllJOlOO 
 OOlffiGOGOOOCOOO-H^OCO 
 i"HI>-COGOClCOrHOi-HCO 
 
 O IffiCOOIIffiCOi-HGOi* Iffi Iffi 
 
 e« 
 
 III I I II I I I I I I I 
 
 V, 
 
 5 M I I 
 
 «5 £ 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 rfl 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 0) 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 >s 
 
 m 
 
 3 
 
 
 fl 
 
 ■y 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 ! — i 
 
 
 oj 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 CJJ 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 0) 
 
 c3 
 
 a as 
 
 « flr2 
 
 la J3 ca 
 
 2 co O r3 ■ 
 
 s-gi-s ■oc a 
 
 0) 
 
 a 
 
 la 
 
 o> -a -in tj -h « .a 
 
 >»-a 
 o a 
 
 a fe 
 
 ChOPhHO W > 02r?OccSHrdccQ H 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 
 
 277 
 
 The general features of the situation are, however, 
 clear. Beneficial leases of lands have disappeared, and 
 beneficial leases of houses have diminished by nearly one 
 half. There are still too many, especially at Corpus. In 
 1883, lands at rack-rent were beginning to feel the effects of 
 the depression in agriculture. They have now practically 
 got back to where they were then. Houses on long leases, 
 and houses at rack-rent both show considerable increases, 
 which more than make up for the depreciation in agri- 
 cultural land. Tithe shows marks of the fall in prices. 
 
 The Oxford Colleges have had a like financial history. 
 Their lands have suffered from the depression in agricul- 
 ture, but there have been greatly increased receipts from 
 house property j 1 these having risen from £36,735 in 1883 
 to £127,559 in 1911, a growth of £90,824, the increase being 
 especially from houses and sites of houses let on long 
 leases. The gross external receipts of the University and 
 Colleges were in 1883, £318,000 ; in 1911, £387,000. The net 
 external receipts at the two dates were as follows : — 
 
 Colleges. 
 
 1883. 
 
 1911. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 University 
 
 5,177 
 
 5,991 
 
 Balliol 
 
 4,881 
 
 4,669 
 
 Merton 
 
 13,877 
 
 15,706 
 
 Exeter 
 
 3,752 
 
 3,439 
 
 Oriel... 
 
 5,658 
 
 4,879 
 
 Queen's 
 
 10,222 
 
 18,145 
 
 New ... 
 
 18,307 
 
 17,866 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 4,396 
 
 4,247 
 
 All Souls 
 
 20,446 
 
 18,983 
 
 Magdalen 
 
 23,514 
 
 37,274 
 
 Brasenose 
 
 5,827 
 
 12,595 
 
 Corpus 
 
 11,943 
 
 11,978 
 
 Christ Church 
 
 27,368 
 
 28,213 
 
 Trinity 
 
 5,196 
 
 4,352 
 
 St. John's 
 
 12,165 
 
 14,854 
 
 Jesus... 
 
 8,452 
 
 8,706 
 
 Wadham 
 
 4,200 
 
 2,724 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 3,492 
 
 2,405 
 
 Worcester 
 
 3,245 
 
 1,430 
 
 Total ... 
 
 192,123 
 
 218,456 
 
 The University 
 
 14,313 
 
 8,345 
 
 Total ... 
 
 £206,436 
 
 £226,801 
 
 i See The Times, May 24, 1913, with report of Mr. L. L. Price's paper, 
 read before the Surveyors' Institution, from which the figures are taken. 
 
278 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The external expenditure in the same years was 
 
 Colleges. 
 
 1883. 
 
 1911. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 University 
 
 1,933 
 
 2,764 
 
 Balliol 
 
 1,546 
 
 1,574 
 
 Merton 
 
 5,280 
 
 12,970 
 
 Exeter 
 
 1,326 
 
 868 
 
 Oriel... 
 
 6,230 
 
 5,525 
 
 Queen's 
 
 4,431 
 
 11,065 
 
 New... 
 
 14 146 
 
 13,816 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 1,357 
 
 1,855 
 
 All Souls 
 
 7,424 
 
 11,610 
 
 Magdalen 
 
 15,062 
 
 29,271 
 
 Brasenose 
 
 4,423 
 
 4,804 
 
 Corpus 
 
 7,109 
 
 4,014 
 
 Christ Church 
 
 21,971 
 
 31,415 
 
 Trinity 
 
 1,759 
 
 2,303 
 
 St. John's 
 
 8,489 
 
 11,583 
 
 Jesus 
 
 3,289 
 
 4,182 
 
 Wadharu 
 
 1,162 
 
 2,132 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 342 
 
 778 
 
 Worcester 
 
 1,791 
 
 3,018 
 
 Total ... 
 
 109,070 
 
 155,547 
 
 The University 
 
 2,894 
 
 4,816 
 
 Total ... 
 
 £111,964 
 
 £160,363 
 
 The College contributions to the Common University 
 Fund were £16,742 in 1883, and £35,867 in 1911. 
 
 Oxford and Cambridge have between them a corporate 
 income of about three-quarters of a million. There are 
 besides all the College and University buildings, labora- 
 tories, museums, libraries, observatories, and business 
 premises. The capitalised value of the whole amounts 
 to many millions. 
 
 The question for the public is whether these magnifi- 
 cent and constantly expanding resources are being made 
 the best use of. 
 
 Now that the chief facts have been given, attention 
 may be called to two recent comments on them, the 
 one relating to Cambridge, and the other the financial 
 chapter (Chapter VII.) in Lord Curzon's book. 
 
 The comment on the finances of Cambridge will be 
 found in the April number of the Quarterly Review for 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 279 
 
 1906. 1 The article is entitled A Plea for Cambridge ; it is 
 written in a spirit entirely friendly to the University, and 
 with inside knowledge. The Reviewer calls attention to 
 the fact that Cambridge has twice appealed for outside 
 help, once in 1898 and again in 1904. Oxford, it may be 
 noted by the way, was compelled to do the same thing 
 two years later. The reason in the case of Cambridge 
 was obvious and conclusive. " Science had emptied the 
 University Chest, yet science was still ' hungry and 
 aggressive.' As the result of her straitened finances, Cam- 
 bridge could no longer satisfy the just demands either of 
 Science or of Letters." The writer first deals with " the 
 belief, apparently ineradicable, that the older Universities 
 teach and care for nothing but the ancient languages, 
 Theology and Mathematics"; and contends that "it can- 
 not be too often repeated that since the promulgation of 
 the new Statutes in 1856, the University has advanced 
 without pause to claim as her own the whole field of 
 modern knowledge ; and that it is the rapidity of her 
 advance which has depleted her treasury." He then 
 gives an account of the expansion of University studies 
 since 1851. There could not well be a better summary, 
 and it deserves. the attention of all who are interested 
 in the development of Cambridge. 2 The way is then 
 open for a survey of the financial resources of the 
 University. 
 
 " The corporate income of the seventeen Colleges is, 
 roughly, £310,000 per annum. This, with a sum of about 
 £52,000 (called the Tuition Fund), received annually from 
 the Lecture and Laboratory Fees of the 3,200 students, 
 and £30,000 received annually by the University for 
 degrees and other fees, constitutes the whole available 
 income for College as well as University purposes, 
 if we except certain Trust funds for the endowment 
 of some Professorships, and those funds of the 
 nature of charities, of which the Colleges are merely 
 administrators. 
 
 " The corporate income of the Colleges consists of (1) 
 endowments, usually in the form of estates, which bring 
 in £'220,000 a year ; (2) fees, rent of rooms, profits on 
 
 i p. 499. 2 See pp. 500-510. 
 
280 UNIVEESITY KEFOKM. 
 
 kitchens, and so forth, which bring in .£90,000. But 
 the Colleges are great land-owners, and have the out- 
 goings of land-owners. Though the expenses of the 
 estate management are only about 7 per cent, of the 
 revenues arising from the estates, yet £130,000 a year 
 are spent on management, repairs and improvements, 
 rates and taxes, interest on loans, and the mainten- 
 ance of the costly College buildings in Cambridge. . . 
 When allowance has been made for the inevitable expen- 
 diture under these heads, there is left only £180,000 for 
 all other purposes." 
 
 The significance and importance of these facts are so 
 great that the quotation may be broken in upon to point 
 out that precisely the same state of things exists at 
 Oxford. Mr. L. L. Price, in the paper mentioned above, 
 said that the significant fact that two-fifths of the external 
 receipts of the Colleges were absorbed by the external 
 expenses would not surprise anybody who was acquainted 
 with the circumstances of landed property. Rates, taxes 
 and insurance showed a steady and considerable advance. 
 The figure for 1911 (£32,670) was about twice that for 1883. 
 Repairs and improvements, also, were a very heavy, if a 
 necessary burden, and, like rates and taxes, they seemed 
 to be ever tending upwards, the increase being from 
 £26,000 to £48,000. 
 
 To return to the Quarterly Reviewer. " The Fellow- 
 ships and the stipends of the Heads of Houses absorb 
 £78,000; and the contributions of the Colleges towards 
 Scholarships account for £32,000." 
 
 The Headships and Fellowships, be it noted, are 
 sinecures. Not that the holders of them are on that 
 account to be numbered among the unemployed. On the 
 contrary, the great majority of them are very busy per- 
 sons, but qua Heads of Houses and Fellows, they have, 
 practically, nothing to do. 
 
 "After deduction of Fellowships and Scholarships, 
 there is left of the corporate income a sum of £70,000. 
 Of this sum, £32,000 (including about £10,000 capita- 
 tion tax), or nearly one-half, is paid as a direct contribu- 
 tion to the University. . . Of the £38,000 remaining, 
 £4,000 goes to supplement the Tuition Fund of £52,000, 
 received from the students as fees ; the sum of £56,000 so 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 281 
 
 obtained is applied to the provision of College and Univer- 
 sity Lecturers. A large proportion of these fees is paid 
 to the scientific departments of the University; and of 
 the fees so paid the greater part is assigned as a contribu- 
 tion to the maintenance of the several departments, and 
 not, directly at least, to the payment of Lecturers." 
 
 It will be noticed that the undergraduates pay for 
 their own tuition except so far as they receive Scholar- 
 ships and Exhibitions, and this in spite of the Colleges 
 being so richly endowed. According to the latest returns 1 
 the following sums were paid from corporate income to 
 Tuition Funds : — Clare, £15 ; Caius, £1,115 ; Corpus, £75 ; 
 King's, £1,798 ; Queens', £51 ; St. Catharine's, £31 ; 
 Jesus, £63; Christ's, £96; St. John's, £520; Trinity, £190; 
 Emmanuel, £605; Downing, £120; a total of £4,679, an 
 increase of £679 since 1906. 
 
 " Deducting the sum of £4,000, contributed by the Col- 
 leges to the Tuition Fund, we have left over of the 
 corporate income a sum of £34,000, or about £2,000 per 
 College, available for the payment of College officers and 
 servants, interest on loans, the expenses of College 
 libraries, printing, and other expenses. . . 
 
 "We now turn to the question of the Fellowships. 
 The sum of £78,000 was in 1904 divided among 17 
 Heads of Houses and about 315 ordinary Fellows. Of this 
 sum the Heads of Houses received among them, as far as 
 can be ascertained, £15,000, very unequally divided. The 
 average stipend of a Fellow is thus about £200 per annum. 
 When the last Commission sat, the maximum stipend of 
 a Fellow was fixed at £250, and it was thought that this 
 sum would usually be reached. But, except in the cases 
 of one or two Colleges, the maximum is now never 
 reached, and in certain cases the value of a Fellowship has 
 fallen to less than £100 per annum. Of the 315 Fellows, 
 some 245 were, in 1904, Resident, and some 70 Non-Resi- 
 dent. Of the Residents, about 225 were holding some 
 University or College office, educational or administrative. 
 . . . The analysis shows that the number of ' Prize 
 Fellowships' is small; and it is believed that they are 
 steadily vanishing. 
 
 l Cambridge University Reporter, Feb. 19, 1913. 
 
282 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " The University income, which has to bear almost the 
 whole cost of modern developments, is made up of the 
 following items : Matriculation, Degree, Examination, 
 and other fees, ,£30,000; direct contributions from 
 Colleges, £32,000 ; income from endowments, £2,000— 
 £64,000 in all. 
 
 " In 1904, the University, in the course of its ordinary 
 work, expended £65,300, distributed roughly as follows : — 
 
 £ 
 
 Officers, Secretaries, and Servants 4,100 
 
 Maintenance of Business Offices, Registry, Senate House, 
 
 and Schools 1,300 
 
 Rates and Taxes 3,400 
 
 Obligatory Payments from Income 1,300 
 
 Stipends of Professors ... ... ... ... ... ... 12,100 
 
 Stipends of Readers, University Lecturers, Demonstrators, 
 
 and other Teachers 9,100 
 
 Maintenance and Subordinate Staff of Scientific Depart- 
 ments (including the Botanic Garden and Observatory) 9,600 
 
 University Library, Staff, and Upkeep 6,300 
 
 Examiners' Fees, &c ... 5,900 
 
 Debt on Buildings, Sinking Fund, and Interest on Building 
 
 Loans ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ••■ 8,500 
 
 Printing and Stationery 2,600 
 
 Pension Funds (Professors, £200 ; Servants, £150) ... 350 
 
 Miscellaneous Expenses 450 
 
 £65,300 
 
 " There are 44 Professors ; very few of them receive 
 £800 or more a year (including Fellowships), while the 
 lowest limit of a Professor's stipend, unless he holds a 
 Fellowship, is about £90 a year. The average annual 
 income of a Professor is not more than £550 ; and of the 
 yearly revenue of £24,000 required to produce this average, 
 £7,000 are paid in the shape of Fellowships by the 
 Colleges, and about £4,600 from the income of special 
 Trust Funds and other benefactions, one payment of 
 £800 being for a term of years only. One or two 
 Professors at most receive a proportion of the fees paid 
 for lectures and laboratories in their respective 
 departments. There are 12 University Readers (or 
 Sub-Professors). The new Statutes contemplated for a 
 Reader the salary of £400 a year; but owing to the 
 inadequacy of the University income, none receives 
 more than £300 ; and in several cases only £100 is paid. 
 There are 53 University Lecturers, whose stipends range 
 from £200 a year to £50; and it is melancholy to note 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 283 
 
 how many of them receive the lower sum, without any 
 assistance from endowments such as Fellowships and the 
 like. There are 13 University Teachers, almost all of 
 them appointed by the Board for Indian Civil Service 
 studies, and occupied, in the main, in teaching Eastern 
 dialects ; and there are 44 Demonstrators, Curators, and 
 Superintendents of Museums, whose stipends range from 
 £200 a year to nothing at all. 
 
 " The incomes of some of these gentlemen are supple- 
 mented by Fellowships ; of others by a share of Lecture 
 fees ; a few, too, may hold two such offices as Curator and 
 Lecturer simultaneously. But when the addition from 
 all sources (about £8,000 from fees or special funds, and 
 £13,000 from Fellowships) has been made to the annual 
 sum (£9,100) which the University has to give, we arrive 
 at a total of about £30,000, giving the surprisingly low 
 average income of £250 a year for any University Teacher 
 other than a Professor. . . There are no resources 
 from which these incomes may be increased according to 
 the service of the holder ; and there is practically no 
 provision for pension, except in the case of those teachers 
 (less than one-half of the whole number) who hold 
 Fellowships, and may expect, after many years of service, 
 to earn the right to retain them permanently. In these 
 circumstances it is not surprising that the University 
 finds a difficulty in retaining many of its abler teachers." ' 
 
 Such poverty in the midst of apparent affluence is 
 startling, but there it is. 
 
 Let us turn now to Lord Curzon's Chapter VII., 
 the consideration of which was deferred till this point. 
 
 " The revenue and expenditure of Oxford (i.e. of the 
 University and Colleges in combination) . . . are 
 partially and not very clearly shown in the annually 
 published abstract, drawn up according to a form 
 prescribed by the Statute of 1882. The account is partial, 
 because in the case of the University it only deals with 
 those sums that pass through the University Chest, 
 whereas there are many sources of income that are not so 
 handled ; and in the case of the Colleges, because new 
 sources of income have accrued which are not covered by 
 
 i lb. pp. 510-515. 
 
284 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the Statutes. It is the reverse of clear, because, though 
 the figures are there, very little atterupt is made to 
 collate them or to show what the Colleges alone, or the 
 Colleges and University in combination, are spending 
 upon this or that object or branch of study." 
 
 Balance-sheet of the University. 
 
 The income of Oxford University is derived from 
 (1) Endowments and the University Press, (2) Fees and 
 Dues, (3) Trust Funds for particular purposes or institu- 
 tions, and (4) College contributions. 
 
 In 1907 the gross income from these sources was 
 £76,152 14s. 8d., and net revenue £67,885 10s. 0d., available 
 for the payment of the Officers, Professors, Readers 
 and Examiners, the maintenance of its Institutions, 
 Delegacies, Offices, and Buildings, and allotments for 
 special purposes. 
 
 From special Trust Funds there were received in 1907 
 the sum of £12,026. Over £3,000 of this was expended 
 in University Scholarships. The University is merely 
 charged with the distribution of these endowments, but 
 they are a portion of the resources applied to educa- 
 tional objects. 
 
 Balance-sheet of the Colleges. 
 
 For the same year the gross receipts of the Colleges 
 were £514,927 4s. 9d. Deducting the internal receipts, 
 £139,977 9s. 8d., we arrive at a total gross College Income 
 of £374,949 15s. Id. The gross receipts from Estates 
 were £317,525 18s. 4d. The cost of management, repairs, 
 etc., was £134,241 6s. 7d., leaving a net revenue of 
 £183,284 lis. 9d., and a net revenue from all sources of 
 £240,708 8s. 6d. 
 
 The principal items, as they appear in the pub- 
 lished Abstract, may be thus summarised : — 
 
 £ 
 
 Heads of Houses ... ... ... ... about 21,500 
 
 Fellows ... ... ... ... ... ,, 61,500 
 
 Scholars and Exhibitioners ... ... ,, 52,900 
 
 Contributions to University purposes ... ,, 23,000 
 
 College Officers ... ... ... ... ,, 11,800 
 
 Chapels and Choirs ... ... ... ,, 8,400 
 
 Contributions to Common University Fund... ,, 6,800 "i 
 
 i Principles and Methods, pp. 141-145. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 285 
 
 But neither do the College accounts show the full 
 amounts annually available : i.e. Balliol does not publish 
 the income derived from the recently created Balliol 
 Trust, nor Brasenose that of the Hulme Trust, nor 
 Hertford of the Baring Trust. 
 
 Tlie Published Accounts. 
 
 (i) " It is impossible to ascertain from them the total 
 sums paid partly by the University, partly by the Colleges, 
 and partly from Trust Funds, to Professors, Readers, 
 Lecturers, and Demonstrators. In other words, we do 
 not know the cost of the Teaching Staff of the University. 
 
 (ii) " Neither do we know the cost or method of pay- 
 ment of the Teaching Staff provided by the Colleges, in 
 the persons of its own Fellows and Tutors. 
 
 (iii) " There is no summary of the annual expenditure 
 whether from University or College endowments, upon 
 Scholarships, Exhibitions and Prizes." 
 
 Lord Curzon also criticises the accounts of the Uni- 
 versity Institutions, such as the Bodleian Library, and 
 also that the University Accounts do not include the 
 Common University Fund nor College contributions to 
 extra-Collegiate objects. He concludes : " A system of 
 accounts cannot be held to be perfect which is veiled 
 in so much obscurity, and requires almost an esoteric 
 knowledge to enable the reader to pick his way through 
 the darkness." l 
 
 The above remarks apply, though in a lesser degree, 
 to Cambridge. Cambridge, for one thing, has published 
 separate accounts of the Common University Fund from 
 the beginning. 
 
 College Contributions to the University. 
 
 A charge has been made that, though the University 
 is poor and the Colleges are rich, the latter do not contri- 
 bute to the needs of the former so much as they ought. 
 
 In the case of all the Colleges but three, the present 
 scale of College contributions to the University is " an 
 initial 2 per cent, on the total net revenue, with additional 
 progressive and cumulative percentages on net revenue in 
 excess of £5,000, £10,000, £15,000, and £20,000." 2 
 
 i lb. pp. 145-148. 2 lb. p. 149. 
 
286 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Lord Curzon points out : (1) that of the graduated tax, 
 " by far the greater part is paid by a very small number of 
 Colleges " ; (2) that the Colleges as a whole are far better off 
 than when the Statute of 1882 was passed ; (3) there is a 
 lack of system and co-ordination in the manner in which 
 the payments have been made. 
 
 Three methods of reform have been suggested : 
 
 (1) An increase in the percentages of the College 
 
 contributions. 
 
 (2) The determination of a fixed scale of expendi- 
 
 ture for each College, the surplus being 
 appropriated by the University. 
 
 (3) An increase in the statutory contributions, 
 
 with power to spend some portion of it on 
 objects approved by the University so as to 
 interest each College in particular studies 
 or institutions. 
 
 College Financial Administration. 
 
 "Greater system might with advantage be introduced." 
 Each College dispenses its own revenue in its own way. 
 Five or six Colleges in each year exhibit a loss. The 
 remaining Colleges show credit balances, but are living as 
 a rule very close up to their income. Colleges vary in 
 what they charge to Internal payments. Some spend 
 more on buildings, others on purely educational objects. 
 One College spends from income, another raises loans. 
 Raising a loan benefits the University, spending from 
 income is to its detriment. Hence " it might be desirable 
 to enact by Statute that College expenditure on repairs 
 and improvements, external and internal, should not 
 exceed in any one year a fixed percentage of the net 
 income." 1 In some Colleges, Internal Receipts are used 
 to subsidise insufficient External Receipts ; in others, the 
 kitchen or other internal charges are subsidised out of 
 general income. 
 
 Scales of expenditure vary greatly. Three cases are 
 
 given 2 : — 
 (a) College. 
 Worcester 
 Hertford 
 Merton 
 
 Resident Under graduates. 
 
 90 
 
 108 
 
 118 
 
 
 Cost of Servants. 
 £399 
 £674 
 £1586 
 
 ] 
 
 i 16. p. 155. 
 
 2 16. 
 
 P- 
 
 156. 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 287 
 
 (6) College. Resident Undergraduates. College Entertainments. 
 
 Waclham ... 99 ... ... £43 
 
 Queen's ... 119 ... ... £204 
 
 Trinity ... 146 ... ... £93 
 
 (c) College. Resident Undergraduates. Cost of Chapel. 
 
 University ... 144 ... ... £158 
 
 Exeter ... 162 ... ... £241 
 
 St. John's ... 160 ... ... £522 
 
 These " are the inevitable consequences of a system 
 in which there is no controlling authority beyond the 
 Governing Bodies of the Colleges themselves, and in 
 which the University is powerless to intervene." 1 
 
 Management of College Estates. 
 
 It is the management of College property in houses 
 and land which has been the target of the most sustained 
 criticism. The reformers have made two proposals. The 
 first is that the whole of University and College property 
 should be sold and the Governing Bodies left with the 
 administration solely of the resultant funds. Lord 
 Curzon dismisses this solution as not practicable, even 
 if desirable. But he adds that it is possible that by the 
 sale or exchange of outlying or scattered estates the 
 Colleges might save themselves some trouble and perhaps 
 expense. 
 
 A more plausible suggestion is that the property of 
 the University and Colleges might be transferred to an 
 official body appointed by the Government, like the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who should administer 
 it on their behalf. Lord Curzon dismisses this suggestion 
 also. At the same time he admits the drawbacks of the 
 present system, and sums the position up thus : — 
 
 " Just as in the case of the College contributions to 
 University purposes and of College finances in general, we 
 found that some exterior and controlling authority was 
 required, so does it appear to be a desideratum in the 
 management of those estates from which so large a 
 portion of the College income is derived." 2 
 
 Lord Curzon then gives details of the existing 
 financial machinery at Oxford, the University Chest, and 
 
 i lb. p. 157. 2 lb. pp. 160, 161. 
 
288 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the Common University Fund, and also of the working of 
 the University Press. This leads up to a consideration 
 of the 
 
 Financial Policy of the University. 
 
 " We have previously compared the Hebdomadal 
 Council to the Cabinet of the University, i.e. a Committee 
 appointed by the Congregation to represent the Executive, 
 to shape policy, and to initiate legislation. If the analogy 
 were perfect, we might expect that this body would have 
 supreme control over the University finances, and would 
 possess a Finance Minister of its own, who would provide 
 and co-ordinate the means for carrying out its policy and 
 conducting the general work of the University, and who 
 would frame an annual Budget for that purpose. But 
 the very opposite is the case. The University has no one 
 Treasury (but a number of semi-independent Treasuries), 
 no Chancellor of the Exchequer, and no Budget. Council 
 cannot spend a farthing ; it cannot even order a farthing 
 to be spent. All it can do is to submit proposals for 
 expenditure to Convocation. If an application is made to 
 it by a Department for new expenditure of a permanent 
 kind, or if it has itself decided upon any policy that 
 involves the expenditure of money, its usual course is to 
 send to the Chest, and ask if the means are forthcoming. 
 But the Chest is not itself primarily an instrument for 
 carrying out the policy of the Government ; it does not 
 busy itself with policy at all. . . The Chest therefore 
 may, and often does, return a negative reply. In that 
 case Council may still submit a decree to Convocation, or 
 it may turn for assistance to the Common University 
 Fund. But the Fund is itself a self-contained and inde- 
 pendent body, and may also refuse. . . 
 
 " The public spirit and common sense of all the parties 
 concerned have alone enabled this system to work without 
 any conspicuous breakdown. But it must be obvious 
 that it is strangely lacking in co-ordination, and that the 
 absence of a central financial authority, representing the 
 Government of the University, and invested with a 
 sufficient control over all its funds, is a source of 
 weakness and delay. . . The need of such central 
 control has been rendered still more urgent by the 
 growth of numerous and powerful departments inside 
 
THE FINANCIAL KESOURCES. 289 
 
 the University, constituted for teaching purposes, but 
 invested with financial powers." 1 To meet these diffi- 
 culties Lord Curzon describes his 
 
 Suggested Board of Finance. 
 
 Lord Curzon rejects the amalgamation of the Chest 
 and the Common Fund on the grounds (1) that it would 
 involve the creation of a body inconveniently large, and 
 which would sacrifice efficiency to comprehensiveness ; 
 and (2) that it would be difficult to adjust the relations of 
 such a body to the Council, which might easily find itself 
 overshadowed. At Cambridge, however, there has been 
 this amalgamation from the first under the Financial 
 Board. 
 
 His own suggestion is that " there should be created 
 a new Committee or Board of Finance of moderate 
 dimensions, of independent character, and possessed of 
 adequate powers. . . Some outside authority is required 
 (a) to elucidate and correlate University and College 
 accounts ; (6) to exercise advisory and supervisory powers 
 in connexion with the financial administration of both, 
 but of the Colleges in particular, more especially with 
 relation to the assignment of College contributions to 
 University purposes ; (c) to exercise similar functions 
 with regard to the management both of University and 
 College estates ; (d) above all, to vivify the financial policy 
 of the University." 
 
 A Statute creating a Board of Finance was passed by 
 Convocation on March 5th, 1912, the vote being placets 133, 
 non-placets 26. The text of it appears in the Oxford 2 
 University Gazette of the following day and is given below. 
 From it the reader can gather how far Lord Curzon has 
 been successful in getting what he wanted. 
 
 116. pp. 165-167. 
 
 2 1. There shall be a Board of Finance, which shall consist of nine 
 members of Convocation, of whom three shall be nominated by the 
 Chancellor, three shall be elected by the Hebdomadal Council, and three 
 shall be elected by Convocation. 
 
 2. The members of the Board shall be appointed in Michaelmas 
 Term, and shall enter on office on the first day of January next following 
 the date of their appointment. They shall hold office for six years, one 
 of the three persons in each class vacating office every second year. 
 
 3. If a member of the Board shall die, or shall resign, another 
 member of Convocation shall be appointed in his place in the same 
 manner in which the said member was appointed. He shall enter on 
 
290 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 office at once, but shall hold office for the unexpired residue only of the 
 period of office of the person whom he succeeds. 
 
 4. No member of the Board nominated by the Chancellor shall serve 
 for more than twelve years in all. 
 
 5. No member of the Board elected by the Hebdomadal Council or by 
 Convocation who has served for a full period of six years shall be qualified 
 to enter upon another period of office until after the lapse of a year. 
 
 6. The Vice-Chancellor and the Proctors, if they are not members of 
 the Board, shall nevertheless have the right to attend and speak at all 
 meetings of the Board or its Committees, and shall be summoned thereto, 
 and shall receive copies of all papers submitted to the Board or its 
 Committees. 
 
 7. The Board shall appoint annually one of its members to be 
 Chairman. 
 
 8. The Secretary to the Curators of the University Chest shall be 
 Secretary to the Board. 
 
 9. The Board shall have power to obtain such professional and 
 clerical assistance as it may from time to time require on such terms as 
 shall seem proper to the Board ; and the expenses thus incurred shall be 
 defrayed by the Curators of the University Chest. 
 
 10. The Board shall meet not less than four times a year and all its 
 meetings shall be held in Oxford. Five members shall form a quorum. 
 
 11. The duties of the Board shall be — 
 
 (a) In each academical year, to prepare, on the basis of information 
 received from the Curators of the University Chest and from 
 the Delegates of the University Press and from the Hebdomadal 
 Council, an estimate of income and expenditure of the Univer- 
 sity for the calendar year folloAving, and to forward the same 
 to the Hebdomadal Council before the beginning of Michaelmas 
 Term ; and at the same time, and at any other time when it 
 may think fit, to make recommendations to the Council as to 
 the best means of making further provision, if required, to meet 
 the estimated expenditure of the University, and generally 
 to advise the Hebdomadal Council as to financial administration 
 of the University. 
 
 (b) To review annually the published accounts of the University, 
 
 and of all Institutions, Delegacies, Boards, and Committees of 
 the University, to report to the Hebdomadal Council thereon, 
 and to make recommendations with a view more particularly 
 to the economical administration of the properties or moneys 
 concerned and the suitable disposal of surplus income. 
 
 (c) To prepare annually for submission to the Hebdomadal Council, 
 and for publication by the same, (1) a statement of the whole 
 receipts and expenditure of the University together with those 
 of the Colleges collectively during the preceding year, showing 
 the sources of such receipts and the manner in which the 
 payments have been distributed among various heads of ex- 
 penditure, and also (2) a statement of the total amount of the 
 contributions and other payments made by the Colleges 
 collectively during the year for University purposes and of the 
 objects to which this amount has been applied ; (3) a state- 
 ment of — 
 
 A. The revenue of each College taxable for University 
 purposes after deducting protected revenue, excepted by the 
 Commissioners in University Statutes Tit. XIX. § 16. cl. 2. 
 
 B. The amount which each College is liable to pay on this 
 revenue under the graduated Income-tax established by the 
 
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 291 
 
 Commissioners in Statute Tit. XIX. § 16. el. 4, before deductions 
 are made under Statute Tit. XIX. $ 16. cl. 7, or in case of the 
 Colleges exempted from the graduated tax, the amount to 
 which each would have been liable, if the graduated tax had 
 applied to that College. 
 
 C. The payments (whether made to the Common Fund or 
 otherwise) by which each College discharges the said obligations. 
 
 D. The amount paid by each College for any University 
 purpose beyond the minimum prescribed for it by the graduated 
 Income-tax 
 
 (i) in fulfilment of other obligations imposed on it by the 
 
 Commissioners ; 
 (ii) by way of voluntary contribution. 
 
 (d) To review annually the published accounts of the several 
 Colleges and, after communication with any College concerned, 
 to report to the Hebdomadal Council thereon, with special 
 reference to economy of administration and to any matter in 
 which the interests of the University are directly or indirectly 
 involved. 
 
 (e) To consider from time to time the statutory and other contri- 
 butions made by the Colleges to University purposes, and, if it 
 thinks fit, to advise the Hebdomadal Council as to any action 
 on these matters by the Council that may appear desirable. 
 
 (/) To consider from time to time the forms in which University 
 and College accounts are prepared and published, and to advise 
 the Hebdomadal Council thereon. 
 
 (g) To confer, at the request of the Hebdomadal Council or of the 
 Body concerned, with any University Body or with the 
 Governing Body of any College, for the proper carrying out of 
 the above objects, and to consider any representations that 
 may be made to it by any of these Bodies. 
 
 (h) To take into consideration any question of finance referred to it 
 by the Hebdomadal Council, and to advise the Hebdomadal 
 Council thereon. 
 
 (i) To perform any other duties of advice and supervision connected 
 with the financial administration of the University which may 
 from time to time be assigned to it by any Statute of the 
 University. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 SUGGESTIONS FOR A SCHEME OF REFORM 
 FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 The phrase, " University Reform," is made up of two 
 apparently simple words, but it will be well at the outset 
 to come to a clear understanding as to what precisely 
 is meant by them. The functions of a University are 
 generally held to be three : (1) to impart instruction, 
 (2) to give facilities for acquiring knowledge, (3) to add 
 to the sum of existing knowledge ; in other words, a 
 University has been looked upon as a place for (1) Teaching, 
 (2) Learning, and (3) Research. Most persons will agree 
 that it ought to be a place for all three. In that case 
 it is important to determine the order of these functions : 
 which shall come first and be pre-eminent, and which 
 shall be subordinate. Mark Pattison held that Oxford 
 and Cambridge should be first and foremost seats of 
 learning, the homes of learned men, who by their mere 
 existence would raise the whole tone of the national life ; 
 Research to him came next ; Teaching was to be practised 
 rather because it benefited the teacher than because it 
 benefited the taught. Newman, as we have seen, thought 
 that Research was altogether out of place at a University. 1 
 
 Practical people, however, will be content to take 
 things as they find them. The Universities of Oxford and 
 Cambridge, as they now exist, are teaching institutions. 
 They foster Learning, and they do something for Research ; 
 but these things are subordinate to their main work of 
 imparting instruction, examining men in it, and giving 
 degrees according to the results. University Reform, then, 
 is here taken to mean primarily making the Universities 
 as efficient teaching institutions as possible. 
 
 i See the characteristic passage in his Idea of a Ihiiversity, pp. 
 xiii-xiv. 
 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 293 
 
 This being granted, University Reform may be 
 divided into three branches. It means increasing 
 to a maximum the efficiency of the Universities by 
 
 (1) bringing them into right relations with the Colleges, 
 and the Colleges into right relations with one another ; 
 
 (2) giving the Universities a proper Constitution, 
 or system of self-government ; and (3) bringing the 
 Universities as thus reformed into right relations with 
 the rest of our system of national education. This 
 country possesses Elementary Schools, Middle Schools, 
 Grammar Schools, Local Universities, National Univer- 
 sities. Its system of education, so far as it possesses one, 
 is built up of these different parts. These all should be 
 brought into right relations with one another, and com- 
 munication between them should be as easy as possible. 
 Then England will possess a properly organised system of 
 education. The problem therefore is one of internal 
 organisation and external adjustment. 
 
 In this adjustment the interests of the nation must 
 be paramount. The internal organisation must come 
 before the external adjustment. Oxford and Cambridge 
 cannot, in their present shape, be fitted into a national 
 system. The reason is that they are not Universities like 
 a Scottish, a German, or an American University, but 
 Universities of Colleges, or Corporations of Corporations ; 
 that is to say, collections of practically independent 
 bodies. True, there is more co-operation and correlation 
 than there was between University and College, and 
 College and College, but there is no organic unity, and the 
 time has come when the University must achieve that 
 unity by the co-ordination of the Colleges. The external 
 adjustment can then be effected. Such adjustment is 
 obviously impossible while there are 21 separate Colleges 
 at Oxford and 17 at Cambridge. These 38 institutions 
 cannot each by itself be fitted into a national system. 
 
 Section I. Relations of the Univeksity and the Colleges. 
 
 University Reform, in the first place, is a problem in 
 Federalism, and the difficulty to be faced is that which 
 always crops up in this case, — how to reconcile the claims 
 of the central authority with those of the constituent 
 parts. There may be some who will altogether deny this 
 
294 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 view of the matter. Had Mark Pattison been alive it is 
 probable he would have done so. He says l : " We have 
 learnt that there is no conflict of objects or interests 
 between the Colleges and the University — that they are, 
 in fact, the same men under a different denomination. . . 
 We hear no more of the old complaint of the usurpation 
 of University functions by the Colleges." 2 
 
 Two criticisms may be made upon this statement. It 
 is not as accurate as it once was to say that the University 
 and the Colleges are the same men under a different 
 denomination. Cambridge has of late years been con- 
 stantly reinforcing the ranks of the teachers at Oxford, 
 and Oxford has in one or two cases returned the compli- 
 ment. Besides this, Cambridge has drawn teachers 
 from other Universities, or gone for them outside the 
 Universities altogether. Such persons may be made 
 members of a College, but their feelings for the University 
 will tend to prevail over their feelings for the College in 
 which they are incorporated. 
 
 Again, even if the two classes were identical, they 
 might still hold different views as to the relations 
 which the Colleges ought to bear to the University. 
 The inhabitants of the several States make up col- 
 lectively, and are identical with, the inhabitants of 
 the United States of America; but from the first there 
 have been two parties among them ; the Republicans, 
 emphasising the need of a strong central government ; and 
 the Democrats, anxious before all things to safeguard the 
 ria'hts of the individual States. When Mark Pattison 
 wrote the above words in 1868 the first Elementary Edu- 
 cation Act had not been passed, and two years had to 
 elapse before it became law. Of organisation in Secondary 
 Education there was none. Since then so much progress 
 has been made that the Government is at this moment 
 said to be contemplating a great unifying measure which 
 is to give us a national system of education. The Univer- 
 sities of Oxford and Cambridge cannot be left outside such 
 a scheme, and thus the whole question of their organisa- 
 tion bids fair speedily to become a living issue. In the 
 
 1 Suggestions, pp. 46, 47. 
 2 The passage is given more fully above at pp. 98, 99. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 295 
 
 discussion which the raising of that issue will bring, the 
 relations of the Colleges to the University must hold a 
 prominent place. Before long we may have our Republican 
 and Democratic parties at Oxford and Cambridge, each 
 with a definite principle to advocate, and definite 
 interests to protect. 
 
 In endeavouring thus to mark out the battle-field I 
 am only too well aware that it means choosing the line 
 of the greatest resistance. The Colleges are naturally 
 jealous of their independence and of their separate 
 interests, and they may be expected to fight vigorously 
 against any interference with their present status. Lord 
 Curzon has been quoted in Chapter X. as holding that the 
 reconcilement of the Colleges with the University is the 
 most difficult of all University problems. He makes 
 it quite plain where the difficulty lies. " It needs but a 
 small acquaintance with Oxford men to recognise that 
 while the University has many claims upon their affection, 
 the College, as a rule, has much greater. In the College 
 feeling we have the most powerful sentiment to which we 
 can appeal; . . and any attempt to injure or subvert 
 the Colleges, even in the interests of the University, 
 would excite widespread resentment." No sane person 
 Avould wish to injure the Colleges, much less to subvert 
 them ; but he can provoke quite enough opposition to 
 satisfy him far short of that. The Cambridge Committee, 
 alluded to in the same chapter, agreed on many things, 
 yet when they came to consider the provision of further 
 University teaching, were " of opinion that they were not 
 in a position to consider the requirements of the different 
 studies " ; and as to methods of paying for such teaching, 
 they "make no positive suggestion, and leave to the several 
 special Boards the duty of bringing forward proposals as 
 they may become necessary." 1 In other words, they 
 abandon the problem to others, regarding it as insoluble 
 so far as they themselves were concerned. 
 
 But difficult as the question is, it will have to be 
 faced. Encouragement is to be derived from the progress 
 of events. It is true that Parliament in the Acts of 1854 
 and 1856 did not dare to put in force the recommen- 
 
 i Report, p. 13. 
 
296 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 dations of the Commissioners with regard to University 
 teaching, but what the timidity of our legislators failed 
 to effect is coming about by the natural development 
 of the newer studies. Sir William Hamilton long ago 
 foresaw that the Natural Sciences would have to be 
 taught by the University. They are very expensive 
 subjects, and the necessary laboratories, museums, and 
 workshops, with all their costly specimens, materials and 
 apparatus, are beyond the means of any individual College 
 to provide upon anything like a sufficient scale. Three 
 Colleges at Cambridge, St. John's, Caius, and Sidney, 
 started laboratories of their own. They have all three 
 closed them as such, and the work is concentrated in the 
 University buildings. 
 
 Then again, the Act of 1877 established the right 
 of the Universities to levy a tax on College property, a 
 constitutional advance of the greatest significance. For 
 this, Science again is mainly responsible. The Univer- 
 sity in its poverty was unable to meet the demands of a 
 subject always aggressive and hungry for more. There 
 was nothing for it but to take toll of Collegiate riches. 
 The outstanding fact then of academical history during 
 the last sixty years is the growing power of the University. 
 It had always retained the right of examining and giving 
 degrees, of public discipline, and a portion of the teaching. 
 It has gained a larger proportion of the teaching and the 
 right of taxation. The principles embodied in these 
 achievements have but to be carried to their logical 
 conclusion, and a unified University must be the result. 
 Will the Colleges have wisdom to discern the signs of the 
 times ? 
 
 Parenthetically, it may be remarked, that opinion at 
 Oxford seems to be more advanced than at Cambridge. 
 Lord Curzon writes 1 : " We find the reformers of 1850 
 engaged in the attempt to reanimate and re-enthrone the 
 University as against the alleged encroachments of the 
 Collegiate system, and we recognise the same note in 
 the utterances of the present day." And again : 2 " Never- 
 theless the complaint that the Colleges still dominate the 
 University has been actively revived and is in the forefront 
 
 i Principles, p. 16. ^ lb. p. 121. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 297 
 
 of every call for University Reform." Reformers at Cam- 
 bridge have not been so definite in their statements. 
 
 It thus becomes necessary to examine the Collegiate 
 system and its working somewhat in detail, that both its 
 merits and defects may be made plain. A College is 
 a many-sided institution, being at once a University in 
 little, a Boarding-School and an Athletic and Social Club, 
 and it cannot be fully understood unless all these aspects 
 of it are kept in view. 
 
 It is as teaching institutions that the Colleges try to 
 be Universities on their own account. Each admits mem- 
 bers on its own terms, compels them to attend its own 
 courses of instruction, and rewards them with distinctions 
 and offices. 
 
 The following is a list of the Cambridge Colleges, with 
 the number of undergraduates on their books, and some 
 particulars as to their finances for the academic year 
 1912-3 :— 
 
 
 1^0, of Under- 
 
 Gross Corporate 
 
 Assessment for 
 
 
 graduates. 1 
 
 income (apart 
 
 University 
 
 
 from Trust Funds). 
 
 purposes. 2 
 
 
 
 £ 8. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Trinity 
 
 672 
 
 76,492 2 6 
 
 55,393 
 
 Caius 
 
 
 
 327 
 
 29,639 14 9 
 
 24,930 14 10 
 
 Pembroke . . 
 
 
 
 293 
 
 13,896 3 9 
 
 13,542 13 5 
 
 St. John's .. 
 
 
 
 244 
 
 42,945 7 7 
 
 33,344 2 6 
 
 Christ's 
 
 
 
 227 
 
 14,943 7 11 
 
 12,133 17 10 
 
 Jesus 
 
 
 
 212 
 
 13,505 7 9 
 
 12,968 19 7 
 
 Clare 
 
 
 
 201 
 
 16,558 13 5 
 
 12,924 2 2 
 
 Emmanuel .. 
 
 
 
 192 
 
 19,885 5 3 
 
 17,735 3 1 
 
 Queens' 
 
 
 
 181 
 
 8,686 3 1 
 
 7,843 5 11 
 
 King's 
 
 
 
 166 
 
 37,654 14 3 
 
 25,640 9 
 
 Trinity Hall 
 
 
 146 
 
 8,828 6 
 
 8,138 2 5 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 
 129 
 
 6,063 14 11 
 
 5,719 9 6 
 
 Downing 
 
 
 116 
 
 9,988 12 7 
 
 7,132 9 7 
 
 Magdalene .. 
 
 
 
 115 
 
 6,931 9 3 
 
 6,109 17 
 
 Sidney 
 
 
 
 112 
 
 14,952 11 10 
 
 10,858 10 8 
 
 Corpus 
 
 
 
 85 
 
 12,325 5 7 
 
 10,810 11 4 
 
 Peterhouse .. 
 
 
 
 81 
 
 8,212 3 11 
 
 6,758 14 1 
 
 Totals .. 
 
 
 
 341,508 18 10 
 
 271,983 14 8 
 
 1 See the University Calendar for 1912-13. Objection may be 
 raised to these figures on the ground that the Colleges do not all make 
 their returns on the same basis, i.e. some of them count in as on their 
 books those who are coming into residence in the following October, 
 and some do not ; but the totals, however made up, are sufficiently 
 accurate for the purposes of the present argument. 
 
 2 University Reporter, November 5th, 1912, p. 190. 
 
298 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 It will be seen that in point of numbers Trinity is 
 more than twice as large as the next largest College, and 
 more than eight times larger than the smallest College. 
 
 There is a like disparity in the resources at the 
 disposal of the Colleges. Trinity has a gross corporate 
 income nearly thirteen times as large as that of St. 
 Catharine's. If we perform the operation on which Mark 
 Pattison poured such scorn, but for which we can plead 
 the high authority of the late Marquis of Salisbury, — 
 divide the pence by the pupils — the following are the 
 results in round figures :— 
 
 Yearly Income 
 per Undergraduate. 
 £ 
 
 King's ... ... ... ... ... 227 
 
 St. John's ... ... ... ... ... 176 
 
 Corpus ... ... ... ... ... 133 
 
 Sidney ... ... ... ... ... 133 
 
 Trinity ... ... ... ... ... 114 
 
 Peterhouse ... ... ... ... 101 
 
 Emmanuel ... ... ... ... 100 
 
 Caius ... ... ... ... ... 90 
 
 Downing ... ... ... ... ... 86 
 
 Clare ... ... ... ... ... 82 
 
 Trinity Hall ... ... ... ... 68 
 
 Christ's ... ... ... ... ... 66 
 
 Jesus ... ... ... ... ... 64. 
 
 Magdalene... ... ... ... ... 60 
 
 Pembroke ... ... ... ... ... 50 
 
 Queens' ... ... ... ... ... 48 
 
 St. Catharine's ... ... ... ... 47 
 
 Taking the last three Colleges as approximately equal, 
 King's has roughly four and three-quarters times as 
 much corporate income per undergraduate as Pembroke, 
 Queens' and St. Catharine's ; St. John's has three and 
 a half ; Corpus and Sidney two and three-quarters ; 
 Trinity two and a half ; and Peterhouse and Emmanuel 
 double. Looking at the same facts from another point 
 of view, if King's could make its endowments go as far as 
 St. Catharine's does, it could educate about 800 under- 
 graduates instead of 166. The significant point is that 
 rich Colleges are, as a rule, expensive ; and poor Colleges, 
 cheap. A large endowment does not necessarily mean 
 education at a low rate. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 299 
 
 Now let us turn to the Boarding- School aspect of the 
 Colleges. The Colleges are rival institutions, and like to 
 have their houses full. With all their endowments they 
 would have difficulty in paying their way if they were not 
 full. Accordingly they compete with one another in the 
 open market, and each endeavours to attract to itself the 
 most promising members of the successive generations of 
 would-be students. The method in which they compete 
 deserves attention. Every year, in the first week in 
 December, two wealthy and powerful groups enter the 
 field. Trinity, Clare, and Trinity Hall make up the one ; 
 St. John's, Caius, King's, Pembroke, Emmanuel, Christ's, 
 and Jesus compose the other. 1 The first group has 
 behind it a corporate income of £ 100,000 a year, the 
 second of £185,000, a grand total of £235,000 out of 
 the £341,508. These combinations between them reap 
 practically the whole of the harvest. The other Colleges 
 come straggling in one by one, and glean the scanty ears 
 which their richer rivals have left untouched. 2 
 
 The results are striking and peculiar. Mr. J. A. 
 Venn, who has given great attention to University 
 statistics, published some tables in the Cambridge Review 
 for January 23rd and 30th, 1908, from which the following 
 figures are taken. 
 
 The period 1851-1906 is selected because 1851 was the 
 first year in which there was a free choice of more than 
 one Honour course. The number of Honour degrees 
 taken at each College during this period is represented as 
 a percentage of the total Matriculations from 1848 to 1903, 
 because as the University course is normally for three 
 years, the undergraduate who matriculated in 1848 may 
 for purposes of calculation be held to have taken his 
 degree in 1851. 
 
 i King's has recently dropped out, and now holds its Entrance 
 Scholarship Examination independently. 
 
 2 If this paragraph is thought too severe the plea may be put in 
 that Mark Pattison says the same thing (Suggestions, p. 66), when he 
 points out the effect of the division of the University into indepen- 
 dent, and, for this purpose, rival houses. "Every College is desirous 
 to have its rooms full, and every College is desirous of showing as 
 many University honours as it can. Consequently the Colleges outbid 
 each other in the general market for talent. If one College raises its 
 Scholarships to £100 a year, the others must go as far in the same 
 direction as their means will allow." 
 
300 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 Honours. Table A (1851—1906). 
 
 College. 
 
 Total 
 
 Percentage 
 
 to 
 
 Matriculations. 
 
 
 Honours. 
 
 King's 1 
 
 965 
 
 91'8 
 
 Sidney 
 
 547 
 
 64-3 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 412 
 
 54-9 
 
 Christ's 
 
 1,078 
 
 54-6 
 
 Downing 
 
 223 
 
 52-9 
 
 St. John's 
 
 2,643 
 
 52-0 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 942 
 
 50*2 
 
 Emmanuel 
 
 956 
 
 50-1 
 
 Queens' 
 
 490 
 
 48*4 
 
 Caius 
 
 1,242 
 
 48-3 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 424 
 
 47'8 
 
 Trinity 
 
 4,265 
 
 46-2 
 
 Clare 
 
 760 
 
 39*8 
 
 Corpus 
 
 583 
 
 34-7 
 
 Magdalene 
 
 282 
 
 31-9 
 
 Jesus 
 
 624 
 
 30-6 
 
 Trinity Hall ... 
 
 648 
 
 27-0 
 
 Fitzwilliam Hall 2 
 
 154 
 
 72 
 
 Mr. Venn gives a second table showing the figures for 
 the five years, 1902-6 inclusive, calculated on the same basis. 
 Honours. Table B (1902—6). 
 
 College. 
 
 Honour Degrees. 
 
 Percentage 
 to Matriculations. 
 
 King's 
 
 187 
 
 76-9 
 
 Downing 
 
 33 
 
 66-0 
 
 Sidney 
 
 82 
 
 65-6 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 43 
 
 63-2 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 49 
 
 62-0 
 
 Caius 
 
 184 
 
 55-4 
 
 Magdalene 
 
 31 
 
 55-3 
 
 St. John's 
 
 206 
 
 54-9 
 
 Christ's 
 
 135 
 
 54-8 
 
 Emmanuel 
 
 165 
 
 54-2 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 188 
 
 51*3 
 
 Jesus 
 
 83 
 
 497 
 
 Queens' 
 
 72 
 
 49-6 
 
 Corpus 
 
 41 
 
 43-1 
 
 Trinity 
 
 345 
 
 36*7 
 
 Clare 
 
 107 
 
 36-5 
 
 Trinity Hall ... 
 
 59 
 
 24*3 
 
 Fitzwilliam Hall 
 
 32 
 
 13-4 
 
 1 It must be borne in mind that King's besides giving an education of 
 such superior quality, has to maintain its very expensive chapel and choir. 
 
 2 Fitzwilliam Hall in all three tables represents the Non-Collegiate or 
 Unattached Students. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 301 
 
 Let us next look at the Poll Degrees as given by Mr. 
 Venn : — l 
 
 Table C Poll Degrees, 1902—6. 
 
 College. 
 
 Poll Degrees. 
 
 Percentage to 
 Matriculations. 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 40 
 
 50-6 
 
 Downing 
 
 23 
 
 46-0 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 30 
 
 44-1 
 
 Corpus 
 
 39 
 
 4P0 
 
 Queens' 
 
 59 
 
 40-5 
 
 Trinity 
 
 363 
 
 38-6 
 
 Emmanuel 
 
 108 
 
 35*1 
 
 Clare 
 
 102 
 
 348 
 
 Christ's 
 
 85 
 
 34*5 
 
 Caius 
 
 105 
 
 3P6 
 
 Pembroke 
 
 116 
 
 31-6 
 
 Jesus 
 
 53 
 
 3P3 
 
 St. John's 
 
 115 
 
 306 
 
 Sidney 
 
 36 
 
 28-8 
 
 Trinity Hall ... 
 
 68 
 
 28-1 
 
 Fitzwilliam Hall 
 
 57 
 
 240 
 
 Magdalene 
 
 10 
 
 17-6 
 
 King's 
 
 30 
 
 123 
 
 Mr. Venn inserts in his tables Cavendish Hostel, which 
 is now extinct, and Selwyn which is not on the same 
 footing as the other Colleges. His University totals are 
 thus : Honours 44/4 for the fifty years, and Poll Degrees 
 32"9 or 77*3 combined. 
 
 It will be seen that during the longer period less than 
 half the students obtained a degree in Honours. The 
 shorter and more recent period only shows an increase of 
 1-9 in this percentage. It is still under the half. The 
 rest, if they take a degree at all, have to be content with 
 a Poll degree, i.e. a degree taken on work which for the 
 most part ought to be, and could be, better done at 
 school. " Since about 1820," writes Mr. Venn, 2 " the 
 proportion of students taking a degree has remained 
 constant in the neighbourhood of 77 per cent." In other 
 words, 23 per cent, of the Cambridge undergraduates 
 disappear without taking a degree at all. There must 
 always be a leakage, owing to ill-health, parental mis- 
 fortunes, and other unavoidable causes, but when 
 
 i Cambridge Revieiv, Vol. XXIX., p. 196. 
 2 Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations, p. 13. 
 
302 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 allowance has been made for everything of this kind, 23 
 per cent, remains a very high proportion of failures. The 
 Colleges, as has been pointed out, have got into their 
 hands practically the entire regulation of the terms of 
 admission to the University, the number of Non-Collegiate 
 students being too small to affect the general result. 
 Some of the fruits of this system are made manifest by 
 the figures just given. 
 
 A fourth table, which I compiled in 1907, shows the 
 number of First Classes taken by members of the various 
 Colleges during the ten years, 1898-1907. 
 
 To take the last table first. The power of wealth 
 is here apparent. The richer Colleges can buy the first 
 class men, the poorer Colleges only get them by a lucky 
 chance. What can Magdalene, Corpus and St. Catharine's 
 do against Trinity, St. John's, King's and Caius ? King's, 
 Trinity and St. John's do well, but their work is very 
 expensive. 
 
 The other tables show some extraordinary divergen- 
 cies. Taking Table B, Trinity may be able to buy First 
 Classes, but its percentage of Honours to Matriculations, 
 36*7, is very low, and shows that it wastes its magnificent 
 resources by admitting too many Poll men, its percentage 
 of Poll men, 38'6, being higher than the percentage 
 of Honour men. Poll and Honour men between them 
 account for 75*1 of the entries, showing that just a 
 quarter of the Trinity undergraduates go down without 
 taking a degree. There is a great discrepancy between 
 91*8 and 27, the highest and the lowest figures in Table A, 
 and between 76*9 and 24'3, the corresponding figures in 
 Table B, a proof of very different work being done by the 
 Colleges. Some are doing extremely well, others are doing 
 decidedly badly. The reader can sort out the separate 
 examples for himself. 
 
 A College which has not wealth can compete for 
 entries with inducements of a different kind,— a reputation 
 for success in athletics, or for an easy discipline, or both. 
 Thus Mr. Charles Tennyson says 1 : " College A has risen 
 in the last ten years, since its acquisition of a prominent 
 football player as Tutor, from 150 to nearly 250 under- 
 
 l Cambridge from Within, p. 68. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 303 
 
 eg 
 CO 
 
 -II 1 1 1 1 ! 1 [ 1 
 
 - 
 
 oo 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 D 
 
 94 1-1 °° I 1 [ 
 
 IO 
 
 2 
 
 -* N I N | I 1 | 
 
 X 
 
 p 
 
 o 
 Q 
 
 1 1 I. S 1 H 1 1 1 II 
 
 CD 
 
 
 t^ _| -* t~ I -H 
 
 i-H 
 
 
 IO iH | *-' CO CM 
 
 1— 1 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 — 1 O I CO 1 I 1 CM 1 — 1 1 
 
 CM 
 CM 
 
 u 
 a! 
 
 5 
 
 X ■* | IO I 1 1 1 -H i-H I 
 rH 1 CM 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 OS 
 
 c 
 -a 
 
 OS f-f 1 Mill I I IN 1 
 . — 1 1 00 ) 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 lO 
 
 3 
 
 cs n 1 cs cc "# 1 i-i rti 
 
 i— 1 CM 1 1 1 
 
 co 
 
 J3 
 
 1-11O1— 1 "* l-l I :] —1 i-H CO 1 
 -H N N 1 1 1 
 
 CD 
 
 E 
 
 CM O I 10 10 iH CO | i-H CO | 
 
 -h cm 1 co 1 1 
 
 O 
 
 X 
 
 o 
 
 OS -H 1 CS CO N rH I CM Ol 
 ^H ■* 1 1 1 
 
 CD 
 X 
 
 3 
 
 D 
 
 csio^H n n ^ h 1-1 co -* 1 
 
 rt CM CO 1 
 
 CO 
 
 cs 
 
 g 
 
 1-1 t^ i-H CO I i-H IO I <N t>- I 
 
 i-H "tf CO 1 "H 1 1 
 
 !-H 
 
 
 co co co co -* co co cm <n cm i 
 
 -* CM CD 1 
 
 O 
 
 CD 
 
 l-H 
 
 H 
 
 fa 
 
 H 
 
 CO IO IO 00 iH O CM I IO IO rH 
 t~ CD CD i-H | rH 
 
 IO 
 
 IO 
 CM 
 
 O 
 ft 
 
 EH 
 
 "3 g8: 
 
 • 2 ^ 
 
 '-3 : § fl c3 
 
 H _ .2 a) 
 § .2 22 !jcc 
 
 S O § a Eh h 
 
 CO a X CO 
 
 q Jh q : 
 
 to CS to rt O 
 _ si C ci cS a co 
 
 "3 s 3 .« 2 .2 
 -S .2 J 'g^ § § 
 
 •fH i^ W W y 
 
 W O S § H 
 
 co 
 
304 
 
 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 graduates. He adds 1 : " When everything is said, the 
 mechanism of work at the University is as nothing 
 compared with the vast machinery of play." Mr. Arthur 
 Gray, in his book, Jesus College, has the following 
 passage' 2 : " In 1875 the College boat attained the proud 
 position of Head of the River. It kept it for the un- 
 exampled space of eleven years. . . The inflow of 
 freshmen became phenomenal ; in 1878 they numbered 
 eighty-seven, in the next year seventy-four. These 
 numbers were never again equalled. . . After 1890, 
 Jesus lost its athletic predominance, and since then 
 has suffered a decline in numbers." This is where the 
 Athletic Club side of a College comes in. 
 
 The Colleges show great differences not only in size 
 and income, but also in tone and temper. A striking 
 illustration of this fact is the recent vote of the Senate on 
 the question of throwing open the Divinity Degrees to 
 persons other than members of the Church of England. 
 It was taken on November 22nd, 1912, when the votes 
 were: In favour of removing the restriction, 434; against 
 removing it, 323; majority in favour, 111. 
 
 The following are the figures for the separate 
 Colleges : — 
 
 Class I. Colleges in favour of removal. 
 
 
 For. 
 
 Against. 
 
 Christ's 
 
 28 
 
 5 
 
 King's 
 
 44 
 
 9 
 
 Downing 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 Selwyn 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 Magdalene ... 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 Caius 
 
 38 
 
 16 
 
 Trinity Hall 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 Jesus 
 
 13 
 
 8 
 
 Peterhouse 
 
 14 
 
 10 
 
 St. John's ... 
 
 66 
 
 40 
 
 Trinity 
 
 113 
 
 72 
 
 Emmanuel ... 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 Class II. 
 
 Colleges against removal. 
 
 
 
 Against. 
 
 For. 
 
 St. Catharine's 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 Corpus 
 
 35 
 
 6 
 
 Queens' 
 
 14 
 
 8 
 
 Pembroke . . . 
 
 24 
 
 13 
 
 Clare 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 i 76. p. 166. 
 
 2 pp. 229, 234. 
 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 305 
 
 Class III. College equally divided. 
 
 For. Against. 
 
 Sidney Sussex ... 7 7 
 
 The voting at St. Catharine's was 7 to 1 in favour of 
 tests ; at Corpus, 6 to 1 ; at Christ's it was 5| to 1 against 
 tests ; and at King's 5 to 1. Those who love darkness 
 rather than light, those who love light rather than dark- 
 ness, and those who like the two blended in an indis- 
 tinguishable twilight can thus be all equally well suited. 
 
 Another remarkable feature in the history of the 
 Colleges is the extraordinary fluctuations in their numbers 
 both when these are taken at longer and shorter intervals 
 of time. In Cooper's Annals of Cambridge 1 there is given 
 a list of the Headships, Fellowships, Scholarships, and 
 Exhibitions in the several Colleges, and the number of 
 Students on the Buttery tables on Commencement Day, 
 1727. The total number of Students was 1,499. St. John's 
 was conspicuously at the top with 351, — nearly a third of 
 the whole University, while it had 60 Fellowships, 100 
 Scholarships, and 100 Exhibitions. It has spent not far 
 short of two hundred years in falling from the first place 
 to the fourth with 244 undergraduates. Trinity during 
 the same period has gone up from 227 undergraduates to 
 672. Thus while the one College has decreased by a third, 
 the other has multiplied itself three times over. There 
 have been other fluctuations by the way. Forty years ago 
 the numbers at St. John's were still 421, in 1905 they were 
 221, in 1907 they were 315. In 1898 Trinity reached 709, 
 by 1904 it had dropped to 629, while it surpassed the 700 
 limit again in 1907 (701) and has now gone down to 672. 
 Many further examples of these fluctuations may be 
 found in Mr. J. A. Venn's Statistical Chart and the 
 descriptive Text issued therewith. " In 1865, Corpus 
 took the place of Caius, and was, for some three or four 
 years, actually third in order of magnitude." It is now 
 bottom but one with 85 undergraduates. " Jesus College 
 was the next to take this precedence, rising rapidly from 
 a very low position. . . Speaking of Pembroke, it is 
 interesting to find that the familiar legend as to the 
 entry there in 1862 being confined to a single freshman 
 
 i Vol. v., p. 504. 
 
306 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 is true in fact. Moreover it is also true that he migrated 
 to Caius, owing no doubt to loneliness. . . Trinity Hall 
 for centuries humbly reposed at, or close to, the bottom in 
 point of size. Then almost at a bound it rose to the head 
 of the second rank." 1 And so instances might be multi- 
 plied. The College endowments do not fluctuate in the 
 same manner. They remain pretty constant in com- 
 parison with the endowments of their neighbours. The 
 mischief of the fluctuations then is this amongst others : 
 at one time when the numbers are low, the financial 
 resources are wasted, the machinery is being driven with 
 too light a load ; at another time when the numbers go up 
 with a bound, the machinery may be overloaded and the 
 resources of the College unduly strained. A slow and 
 steady expansion is as desirable in a College as it is in 
 a commercial enterprise. When the numbers fall below 
 the proper level, the College is not doing its duty as 
 an educational body, and national education suffers 
 accordingly. The 1872 Commissioners were alive to these 
 facts, as shown by their words which have been previously 
 quoted : — 
 
 " There is one point brought prominently out in the 
 result of this inquiry, the great disparity between the 
 property and income of the several Colleges and the 
 numbers of the members. When that number is small, 
 the expense of the staff and establishment is necessarily 
 large in proportion." 2 
 
 This point of the number of students deserves further 
 consideration. Let us suppose a College has forty-eight 
 undergraduates in residence. This is no unfair figure. 
 In 1905 Magdalene had forty-two undergraduates on its 
 books, and these were not necessarily all in residence. Of 
 our forty-eight some will be " Honours men " reading 
 for a Tripos, others will be " Poll men " reading for a 
 Pass degree. We will assume that there are twenty-four 
 of each sort. As the University course is normally for 
 three years, let there be eight men in each year reading 
 for Honours. As there are eleven Triposes it will not be 
 possible to find a man per year for each of them. Let us 
 therefore cut down the number of Triposes for which 
 
 i Descriptive Text, pp. 10-11. 2 Report, p. 37. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 307 
 
 there are men reading to four, the Natural Sciences, 
 Mathematical, Classical and Historical, and let us suppose 
 them to be equally attractive. Each will require several 
 teachers if the instruction in it is to be adequate. How 
 can so large a staff be economically provided for such an 
 infinitesimal number of men as two per Tripos? As 
 there are many varieties of the Pass degree, the same line 
 of argument will apply to the Poll men. 
 
 We may also make a further examination of Magda- 
 lene as it was in 1905. To teach its forty-two under- 
 graduates, to watch over their welfare, and to rouse in 
 them a spirit of emulation, it had a Master, a President, a 
 Tutor, an Assistant Tutor, three Lecturers, a Bursar, a 
 Steward, a Dean, a Chaplain, a Praelector, a Librarian, 
 and five Fellows. As a matter of fact there were seven 
 people to fill the seventeen posts, or one official for every six 
 undergraduates. 
 
 Taking the offices in gross in 1907, the Colleges (in- 
 cluding Selwyn and the Non-Collegiates) were managed 
 by 28 Masters, Vice-Masters and Presidents, 57 Tutors, 
 205 Lecturers, 54 Directors or Supervisors of Studies, 25 
 Deans and sub-Deans, 29 Bursars and Treasurers, 4 
 Auditors, 16 Praelectors, 19 Librarians, 17 Chaplains, 
 Catechists and Readers, 16 Stewards, 8 Organists and 
 Choirmasters, 1 Head-Examiner, and 1 Registrary — a 
 total of 480 officials of one kind or another. Many of 
 these persons hold more than one office, but when full 
 allowance has been made for duplication, it is still true 
 that the system is cumbrous and costly. No one would 
 dream of setting it up, if he were starting de novo. Such 
 then are some of the results of each College striving to be 
 a University on its own account. It may be magnificent, 
 but it is not economical education. 
 
 Facts like those mentioned above have not been 
 without their effect. Since 1856 great strides have been 
 made in the direction of cooperation between the 
 Colleges. Some account of these will be given later on. 
 Meantime the question arises as to what is the logical 
 outcome of this policy. Cooperation had admittedly not 
 been carried as far as it is either possible or desirable. 
 How far, it may be asked, is that ? The growing power of 
 the University, increased Inter-Collegiate action — these 
 
308 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 are the outstanding features of the last 60 years. Putting 
 the two together, is not the result certain in the end 
 to be a unified University ? 
 
 There is thus encouragement to ask where the 
 essence of the College system lies, because if that can be 
 preserved, opposition will be diminished, and the path of 
 less, if not of least, resistance at length be open. There 
 will be no dispute that it lies in its Tutorial and domestic 
 functions. A College was in its origin a house or home 
 for students. English opinion shrinks from the homeless 
 condition of the undergraduates in Edinburgh or Berlin. 
 It likes to think of them as safely housed under protecting 
 and guiding influences. It may be that it idealises Oxford 
 and Cambridge in this respect, but the belief is still 
 strong in "the truly invaluable element of the College 
 system — the close action of the teacher on the pupil, of 
 the matured character on the unformed, of the instructed 
 on the learning mind, not without a very beneficial 
 reaction of the young on the aging man." ' So, too, 
 Lord Curzon speaks of " the inestimable advantages of 
 the College system, with its associations of mingled 
 tenderness and pride, and the moral influence of its 
 society and training," of " the endurance of the Collegiate 
 ideal " as " one of the most remarkable and the most 
 eloquent features of modern Oxford," of " the indescribable 
 glamour of College Society " ; and, again, of " the wonderful 
 growth of personal tuition which has sprung up in our 
 midst almost unawares, and has provided the student 
 with an instructor — half master and half friend." 
 
 The College officer par excellence is the Tutor, and the 
 two things which make a College are the Tutorial system 
 and the corporate life. If these are preserved, everything 
 else is of secondary importance. Assuming, then, that a 
 College performs three kinds of work, (1) Administrative, 
 (2) Educational, and (3) Tutorial, these are here arranged 
 in an ascending order of importance. 
 
 The centralisation of College administration should 
 thus be the least difficult part of the problem of a unified 
 
 i Pattison, Suggestions, p. 78. Pattison draws a distinction between 
 (1) the tutorial and (2) the domestic influence. His eloquent words refer 
 to (1). The domestic influence, i.e. the association of undergraduates 
 with one another (for there is little contact between them and their 
 seniors), he describes as neither " ascetic nor purifying." 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 309 
 
 University. The chief administrative officers are the 
 Bursar and the Steward, the one looking after the College 
 property and finances, the other after its internal 
 economy. The undergraduates very often do not know 
 who the College Bursar is. They may occasionally come 
 across the Steward if the custom of the College allows 
 representatives of their number to complain to him 
 about the dinner in Hall. Bursars and Stewards are 
 practically outside the corporate life, or so little in it 
 that both might disappear without the Collegiate system 
 being seriously affected. The same may be said of the 
 Tutors so far as they take Caution money, send out 
 College bills and receive payment of them. 
 
 Lord Curzon, at the end of his chapter on the Revenue 
 and Expenditure of the University of Oxford, 1 formulates 
 a weighty conclusion : "As I have advanced further in 
 the study of the subject, it has been borne in upon 
 me with increasing conviction that the clue to the 
 majority of University problems, and the condition of 
 the majority of University reforms, is finance : that 
 financial reform means financial control : and that 
 until such control is established decisive progress 
 cannot be made." If then finance is of such import- 
 ance to the University, and of so little importance to the 
 essence of the Collegiate system, we may pass to the 
 consideration of it with some degree of confidence. 
 
 The 17 Cambridge Colleges have between them 29 
 Bursars and Treasurers and 4 Auditors. Each Bursar 
 has his own room or rooms, and his clerk or clerks. A 
 College has also its firm of solicitors and its land agent or 
 agents, to speak of no other necessary officials. If all the 
 work here indicated were done in common, obviously it 
 could be done more cheaply and better, because the level 
 of the worst work could be brought up to the level of the 
 best. The Bursar's Office never seems quite to fit in with 
 the rest of the College. The aim of the institution is 
 educational, not financial, and there is an inappro- 
 priateness in taking a scholar from his proper work 
 and setting him to purely commercial operations. To 
 argue thus is to repeat what has often been said before. 
 
 i Principles and Methods, p. 171. 
 
310 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Mark Pattison and Goldwin Smith differed in most of 
 their views, but they agreed in recommending a unified 
 administration of College property. "Why," asks the 
 former in words already quoted, " should not the 
 Colleges be relieved of the burden of management of 
 their property, and throw their accounts into the same 
 office, with proper provision for superintendence, in 
 which the University business is to be conducted ? " 
 and Goldwin Smith (also before quoted) says : " The 
 time of persons devoted to education ought not to be 
 spent in the management of estates. . . It would, 
 in truth, be a good thing for the Colleges if their 
 property were in the funds." 
 
 This last assertion that the Colleges ought to sell 
 their lands and invest the proceeds in trustee securities is 
 sure to be contested, but it is worth examination as 
 clearing the way for a centralised administration. The 
 Quarterly Reviewer, in the article mentioned above, says : 
 " The Colleges are great land-owners, and have the out- 
 goings of land-owners. Though the expenses of the estate 
 management are only about 7 per cent, of the revenues 
 arising from the estates, yet .£130,000 a year are spent on 
 management, repairs and improvements on the estates, 
 rates and taxes, interest on loans, and the maintenance of 
 the costly College buildings in Cambridge." The question 
 inevitably arises, Ought the Colleges to be great land- 
 owners '? Are they fitted for the task '? Land-owning is 
 an expensive occupation, and those who follow it have to 
 be content with a very low return. Just now many land- 
 lords are putting their estates on the market ; they are 
 tired of bearing the ancestral burdens of ownership, and 
 are attracted by the higher rate of interest obtainable 
 from other forms of investment and the reduction of their 
 labours to the simple task of receiving periodical divi- 
 dends. Would not the Colleges do well to follow their 
 example '? 
 
 The College farms are scattered over a wide area. The 
 bulk of them are in Cambridgeshire and the neighbouring 
 counties, but the Royal Commission Report of 1872 
 showed that at the date mentioned Clare owned landed 
 estate in Yorkshire; Caius in Devonshire and Dorset; 
 King's in Dorset, Wiltshire, Devonshire, and Lancashire ; 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 311 
 
 St. Catharine's in Yorkshire ; Christ's in Gloucestershire 
 and Pembrokeshire; St. John's in Yorkshire; Magdalene in 
 Anglesey, Carnarvonshire and Wiltshire ; and Trinity in 
 Yorkshire and Westmoreland. Land wants to be looked 
 after by some one on the spot. All these estates cannot 
 be properly administered from Cambridge, and they must 
 be either more or less neglected, or put in the hands of 
 agents, which is always a costly arrangement. 
 
 The reader may here be reminded of certain figures 
 given in Chapter XI. It was there shown that the gross 
 receipts of the University of Oxford and its Colleges were 
 £318,000 in 1883, and £387,000 in 1911, an increase of 
 £69,000; but the net receipts were respectively £206,000 
 and £226,000, an increase of only £20,000. The balance 
 of £49,000 represented additional expenditure. Well may 
 Mr. Price complain of the ever-increasing burden of rates, 
 taxes, repairs and improvements ; nor is there any prospect 
 of a change for the better. 
 
 College sentiment, it must be again admitted, will be 
 strongly against the change here advocated, a sentiment 
 which Lord Curzon well voices. 1 " It is doubtful whether 
 landlords more broad-minded or considerate than the 
 Colleges could anywhere be found; and were the tenants 
 allowed a voice in their own destiny, few would probably 
 not resent a change. The relations between the Colleges 
 and their estates have lasted in many cases for centuries, 
 and have engendered a feeling of combined attachment 
 and obligation which it would seem a pity to disturb. 
 The Estates-Bursars, who manage the estates on behalf 
 of the Colleges, have the stimulus of devotion to their 
 College, instead of a merely professional connexion with 
 the estates ; and the visitation of the College Heads — 
 many of whom are exceedingly conscientious in this 
 respect— together with some of the Fellows, are warmly 
 welcomed by the tenants." 
 
 There is an economic side to this idyllic picture. The 
 writer of a special article on " Oxford College Estates " a 
 puts it thus : — " As the agricultural properties of many 
 of the Colleges are very scattered, it follows that their 
 tenants are often left very much to themselves. This 
 
 i Principles, pp. 158-9. 2 The Times, May 26th, 1913. 
 
312 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 policy is not unpopular with the average farmer, who 
 appreciates the absence of restrictions, and dislikes what 
 he regards as excessive supervision. From the landlord's 
 point of view, the policy is successful with a good tenant, 
 but must be disastrous in the case of a bad one, and its 
 fruits may sometimes be seen in neglected buildings and 
 fences and badly farmed land. . . The rents of the 
 farms are usually low, probably because it has been 
 decided that, where constant supervision is difficult, it is 
 more important to retain good and contented tenants 
 than to secure an increase in the College revenues which 
 might be only temporary." It would be interesting also 
 to learn whether the labourers on the estates are all as 
 contented with their cottages as the farmers are with 
 their rents. 
 
 At Cambridge there is, I think, less sentiment than at 
 Oxford, though the same kind of feeling undoubtedly 
 exists. The economic facts are the same in both cases. 
 They may be thus briefly summarised : — (1) Land-owning 
 requires exceptional knowledge and skill, and is at best 
 an expensive luxury ; (2) College lands are often let at less 
 than their economic rent ; (3) they are widely scattered, 
 and therefore of more than average difficulty to manage. 
 Efficiency is a ruthless word, and it may seem cruel to do 
 away with a very picturesque if out-of-date system ; but if 
 the interests of national education demand it, it will have 
 to be done. 
 
 House property stands in a different class. It is 
 easier to look after, and, in certain cases, holds out hopes 
 of an expanding revenue. Where this expectation can be 
 justified, it may be kept; otherwise it should be sold, 
 especially if it is old, and repairs are an increasing item. 
 Building leases would naturally be held till their expira- 
 tion. In any case there should be administration in 
 common for the sake of economy. 
 
 What is here suggested does not necessitate the 
 pooling of the College revenues. A Central Board would 
 collect the income, discharge the liabilities, and hand 
 over to each College its own share, less its proportion of 
 the cost of administration, and its contribution to 
 the Common University Fund. There would be joint 
 management and separate account keeping. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 313 
 
 After the Bursars come the Stewards, in whose hands 
 is the domestic management of the Colleges. In some of 
 these institutions, according to tradition, it is the cook 
 who is the richest man. Encouraged by this example of 
 successful private enterprise, other Colleges have taken to 
 running their own kitchens, not without profit, but 
 combination would produce still better results. Between 
 3,500 and 4,000 men dine daily in Hall during Term. Many 
 of them have other meals sent in from the kitchens. 
 Here is a fine, steady business which might either be 
 managed by a central body, or be let on contract under 
 proper conditions in the open market. An enterprising 
 management would improve on the present system and 
 enable the undergraduates to live more cheaply and better 
 at the same time. A like choice of courses is open with 
 regard to the rest of the bodily wants of the inmates, and 
 the worry about gyps, bed-makers, helps, waiters, coal- 
 porters, boot-blacks, laundresses and all the rest of them 
 would be taken away from men of learning, and be borne 
 by people with a greater relish for business details. 
 
 There remains the maintenance of existing buildings 
 and the erection of new ones. Why should not there be 
 a University Board or a department of a University 
 Board doing these things for the Colleges in common ? In 
 time such a Board might even attempt Fire Insurance. 
 
 There is another matter of great importance which 
 falls to be mentioned here. Lord Curzon has .the follow- 
 ing remarks 1 : — "Different standards of expenditure pre- 
 vail in different Colleges, some spending more on build- 
 ings, upkeep and repairs, others on purely educational 
 objects. One College spends from income, another uses 
 the facilities offered by the Board of Agriculture to raise 
 loans. I take the case of a single College which appears 
 to illustrate these idiosyncrasies of practice in a marked 
 degree : — 
 
 Income from Lands and Houses at rack rent 
 Repairs and Improvements 
 Payment to Common University Fund 
 Total contribution to University Purposes 
 
 i Principles and Methods, pp. 154, loo. 
 
 1906 
 
 1907 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 18,438 
 
 18,725 
 
 7,781 
 
 6,724 
 
 275 
 
 233 
 
 2,775 
 
 2,733 
 
314 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The figures of these years show that this College is 
 in the habit of charging its estate repairs and improve- 
 ments, even when they amount to so large a percentage' 
 of the estate receipts, to the income of the year. Other i 
 Colleges meet such expenditure, if called for, by a loan.! 
 (The College in question has, meanwhile, contracted; 
 loans since 1905 of i'28,000; apparently in connexion withl 
 College buildings and a new residence for its Head.) The i 
 significance of these figures to the University is very\ 
 great, because it is obvious that had the usual practice t 
 of raising loans for large external expenditure beem 
 followed, the payment to the Common University Fundi 
 would have been much larger. For the protection of* 
 University interests, and for the maintenance of some* 
 uniformity in administration, it might be desirable tot 
 enact by Statute that College expenditure on repairs and 
 improvements, external and internal, should not exceed 
 in any one year a fixed percentage of the net income." 
 Lord Curzon then points out other anomalies and discre- 
 pancies, and draws the conclusion that " they are the 
 inevitable consequences of a system in which there is 
 no controlling authority beyond the Governing Bodies 
 of the Colleges themselves, and in which the University, 
 outside the pale of its statutory rights, is powerless to> 
 intervene. . . At the present moment there is no 
 force beyond public opinion — a not too certain check — 
 to prevent a rich College from spending a dispropor- 
 tionate amount of its income upon buildings. These 
 may or may not be necessary. Probably, in the great 
 majority of instances they are. But when it is 
 remembered that in either case the University is 
 penalized, in proportion to the outlay, it does not seem 
 unreasonable that an independent scrutiny and a higher 
 sanction should be required. Is it not probable, indeed,! 
 that both University and Colleges would be the gainers: 
 if some greater degree of uniformity could be introduced, 1 
 and if certain broad guiding principles were laid down, to 
 which, with reasonable latitude, all parties should be 
 asked to conform ? "* 
 
 The writer recurs to the same point at p. 160, under 
 
 i lb. p. 157. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 315 
 
 the heading " The Management of College Estates." 
 After pointing out various drawbacks to the present 
 system, he continues: "Above all, there is no individual 
 and no body to regulate, co-ordinate or control. Thus we 
 may have, as has been shown, one College restricting its 
 expenditure on repairs and improvements, and another 
 College indulging in undue liberality ; different standards 
 and scales of outlay exist side by side. It may be said 
 that the same is true of private properties. But the 
 
 , answer is that the College estates are not private 
 properties; they are held in trust for the nation, and for 
 
 i an object in which every man and woman in the nation 
 is entitled to feel and to express a concern. It is there- 
 fore reasonable that a special measure of vigilance should 
 
 i be applied in their case ; and that the University, no less 
 
 : than the public, should have some guarantee that these 
 
 i large emoluments are being administered not only with 
 propriety and without extravagance, but with a strict 
 regard to the general object for which they were given, 
 and with a due correlation to each other." 
 
 The justice of these remarks cannot be questioned, 
 
 I but the proposals are not as new as might be imagined. 
 
 ; Section 21 (3) of the Act of 1877 lays it down that " the 
 Commissioners, in Statutes made by them, may from 
 
 itime to time, if they think fit, make provision : — 
 
 " (3) For regulating the exercise of the borrowing 
 powers of the University or of a College." So far as I 
 know, the Commissioners never exercised this power, but 
 
 lit was clearly in the mind of Parliament that they should. 
 
 [There will have to be statutory regulations of the character 
 
 [indicated, and one of them must be that the consent of the 
 University will have to be obtained, before a College is 
 
 • allowed to raise money on loan. If this restriction is 
 deemed unworthy and not to be borne, it should be remem- 
 bered that every municipal body from the humblest 
 Parish Council to the great municipal corporations like 
 Liverpool, Birmingham and Manchester, or the London 
 County Council, cannot borrow a single penny without 
 the leave of the Local Government Board. They must all 
 submit their proposals and justify the expenditure. They 
 do so without suffering any sense of indignity. 
 
 Another necessary reform is the public auditing of 
 
316 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 all University and College accounts in place of the 
 private auditing now practised. 
 
 One objection may be urged against certain of the 
 above suggestions, quite apart from any question of College 
 dignity and independence. It is that there is a risk in 
 what may be called Stock Exchange investments owing 
 to the gradual fall in the value of money. There is force 
 in this contention, and the danger may be guarded 
 against in two ways. The Colleges should be allowed to i 
 write off whenever necessary a certain percentage each 
 year for depreciation of their securities, and both the 
 University and the Colleges ought annually to put a 
 certain sum to reserve, so as not only to keep their 
 property intact, but also to increase it with a view to i 
 meeting future educational developments. 
 
 To turn to the question of the necessary machinery. 
 In the scheme mentioned in the Preface it was suggested 
 that the Financial Board should undertake the work, 
 but it might be better to set up an entirely new body. 
 The Financial Board stands to the University somewhat 
 as the Treasury does to the Government, and its Chairman 
 is the nearest approach we have to a Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer. The fresh functions to be discharged resemble 
 rather those discharged by Somerset House and the Board 
 of Works, which are separate Government offices. There 
 might be a University Board of Management and Works, 
 organised in two departments, the one for the management 
 of College property and finance as a whole, and the other 
 for such matters as repairs, buildings, commissariat, etc. , 
 Its Chairman would be an ex officio member of the \ 
 Council of the Senate. 
 
 If the system outlined above was worked loyally and I 
 efficiently, a saving would certainly result. How large it 
 would be, it is impossible accurately to estimate, but it 
 forms one of a number of possible savings which may 
 fairly be expected to set the University free from its 
 present financial embarrassments. 
 
 The administrative work of the Colleges having been i 
 dealt with, their educational or teaching work falls next 
 to be considered. Here again College susceptibilities are 
 certain to be aroused by any scheme of central supervision 
 and control, but there are some considerations which 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 317 
 
 should prevent calmness of judgment being unduly 
 interfered with. Recent years have presented no more 
 pleasing sight than the gradual growth of Inter-Collegiate 
 teaching. Experience has proved that instruction thus 
 given outside College does not in any way tend to the 
 breaking down of the Collegiate system. Attendance at 
 University and Inter-Collegiate lectures does not impair 
 loyalty and affection to a man's own College. It would 
 be possible, I imagine, to find a considerable body of 
 undergraduates, Science men for the most part, who 
 receive no instruction whatever within their own Colleges, 
 and yet they are just as devoted to them as those 
 who may never go outside for a single lecture. It ought 
 to be possible then to consider a great extension of 
 co-operative teaching without undue apprehension of 
 possible disaster to the Collegiate system. 
 
 Two classes of men have to be taught — the Poll men, 
 and the Honours men. 
 
 The Poll men are, practically speaking, wholly taught 
 by the Colleges, 1 and their position will be considered 
 later on. 
 
 The teaching of the Honours men is divided between 
 the University and the Colleges. There are no data 
 available to show exactly what proportion of the work is 
 done by each, but there are certain accessible facts which 
 bear on the point. In the List of Lectures for 1912-13, 
 issued by the authority of the General Board of Studies, 
 a University body, instruction is offered under 21 heads — 
 Agricultural Studies, Anthropology, Architectural Studies, 
 Biology and Geology, Classics, Divinity, Economics and 
 Politics, Foreign Service Students, Geographical Studies, 
 History and Archaeology, Indian Civil Service, Law, 
 Mathematics, Medicine, Mediaeval and Modern Languages, 
 Military Subjects, Moral Science, Music, Oriental Studies, 
 Physics and Chemistry, and the Teachers' Training 
 Syndicate. These subjects may be classified in three 
 divisions, (i) those in which the teaching is wholly or 
 predominantly University; (ii) those in which the teaching 
 is wholly or predominantly Collegiate ; and (iii) those in 
 which the teaching is divided in varying proportions 
 
 i A few Lectures in Science are provided for them by the University. 
 
318 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 between the University and the Colleges. This grouping 
 works out as follows : — 
 
 (1) University predominant. 
 
 Agriculture, Anthropology, Architecture, Biology 
 and Geology, Foreign Service, Geography, Indian i 
 Civil Service, Medicine, Military Subjects, Physics 
 (which includes Engineering) ,and Chemistry, 
 Training of Teachers (11). 
 
 (2) Colleges predominant. 
 
 Classics, Divinity, Economics and Politics, History ] 
 and Archaeology, Law, Mathematics, Music (7). 
 
 (3) Divided. 
 
 Mediaeval and Modern Languages, Moral Sciences, 
 Oriental Studies (3). 
 Even if this classification is criticised in detail, the 
 deduction from it is plain and unassailable. To repeat 
 what has already been pointed out, since 1850 the Univer- 
 sity has been doing more and more of the teaching. 
 Science and practical subjects are turning the scale in its- 
 favour. This change has not weakened the Colleges. On 
 the contrary, taken collectively, they are more flourishing 
 than ever, and the Collegiate feeling is as strong as ever. 
 What fault then, if any, can be found with the above 
 mixed system of instruction ? Where it is worked by the 
 University, little or none. It is unified and organised, and 
 its defects are due to financial, not educational, causes. 
 W r here the Colleges give the instruction there are the 
 beginnings of better things, but not the full fruition. The 
 Inter-Collegiate system is an immense advance on the : 
 old state of things, when every College, large or small, 
 lectured to its own students and to no others. There is 
 co-operation, but only to a limited extent. What has 
 been done, roughly speaking, is for each College to arrange 
 its own lectures, and then to throw them open to 
 members of other Colleges. There are periodical con- 
 ferences of Lecturers; but these conferences seem, in Lord 
 Curzon's words, " to register rather than revise." There 
 is at present no adequate and complete scheme of I 
 teaching. 
 
 To justify this contention, let us attempt an analysis 
 of one of the Lists of Lectures proposed by the General 
 Board of Studies, — the Classical Lectures for the Lent 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 319 
 
 Term of the current year 1913. 1 The Classical Tripos 
 consists of two parts. In Part I. papers are set 
 containing passages for translation from the best Greek 
 and Latin authors, passages for translation into Greek 
 and Latin Prose, and Greek and Latin Verse, and papers 
 in Greek and Roman History and Antiquities, Philology 
 and Syntax, Greek and Roman Philosophy, Greek and 
 Latin Literature, Sculpture and Architecture. It will be 
 sufficient if we confine our attention to Part I. alone. The 
 best Greek and Latin authors may fairly be held to com- 
 prise Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Aristotle, the Attic Orators, 
 Demosthenes, Euripides, Herodotus, Hesiod, Homer, 
 Pindar, Plato, Sophocles, Theocritus, and Thucydides 
 for Greek; and Catullus, Cicero, Juvenal, Livy, Lucretius, 
 Martial, Persius, Plautus, Pliny, Propertius, Suetonius, 
 Tacitus and Tibullus for Latin ; to say nothing of 
 Xenophon, Horace and Virgil, which may be omitted as 
 school authors. Thirty-one sets of lectures appear in the 
 list, 2 of which five are given by the University. As was 
 stated above, the practice at Cambridge is not to give any 
 set books for translation; passages are selected at the 
 Examiners' pleasure from the best Greek and Latin 
 authors. Translating unseen passages at sight is there- 
 fore a very important part of the training, and a student 
 is practised in it from school onwards. The Univer- 
 sity as such makes no provision for such train- 
 ing, nor does the Inter-Collegiate system of lectures. 
 The same holds good of Composition. It will seem 
 strange to an outsider that the University should not 
 afford complete instruction in two most important 
 subjects in which it holds an examination, and that it 
 has never occurred to the Colleges to co-operate and fill 
 the gap, but so it is. The work in question is done by 
 /the Colleges individually ; and here is part of the 
 explanation why the larger and richer Colleges win so 
 many more first classes than the smaller and poorer. 
 ,They can afford to pay for specialists in each department 
 of instruction, and the other Colleges cannot. 
 
 i Cambridge University Reporter, January 11, 1913, pp. 508, 509. 
 
 2 The two sets given at Selwyn are not included, as Selwyn is not a 
 College in the sense in which the other 17 Colleges are. 
 
320 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Of the courses of lectures on the chief Classical 
 authors the University give one — on Lucretius ; the 
 Inter-Collegiate Lecturers give 11, on Aristotle, Ethics, 
 Plato, Republic II.-IV., Plautus, Suetonius, Cicero, i 
 ad Atticum, Aristophanes, Nubes, Aves, Thesmophor- 
 iazusae, Cicero, pro Flacco and Verrine Orations. 
 Our list above contained the names of 27 authors. The 
 Lecture List contains the names of 6, the balance of i 
 21 being totally unprovided for. Of the 11 courses, three t 
 are on the same three books of Plato's Republic, and twot 
 on the same' two comedies of Aristophanes, Nubes and! 
 Aves. Roman History gets five sets of lectures, Greek 
 History only one ; one course is divided between the two. i 
 What would a German University say to such a scheme ? 
 It is in the embryonic stage, excellent as embodying the e 
 principle of co-operation, but needing to be carried very ; 
 much further before it is even in sight of completion. 
 
 The Report of the Committee on the Constitution 
 and Government of the University before alluded to, has 
 the following remarks on this point 1 : — 
 
 " While in the different departments of Science and 
 in certain other subjects the formal teaching is provided 
 almost entirely by the University, in many subjects the 
 greater part of the teaching is done by the staffs of the I 
 different Colleges in formal lectures (which are almost all 
 open to all members of the University), class work, or 
 individual instruction. 
 
 "In these subjects, in so far as the needs of the 
 different studies are not met by Professors, Readers and : 
 University Lecturers, the Committee believe that more i 
 effective co-operation in the distribution of lectures 
 between College Lecturers might be attained without 
 interfering with the proper freedom of the Colleges in 
 arranging their own teaching. They realise that, in some 
 studies, it is necessary and desirable that more than one 
 lecture on the same subject or the same branch of the 
 subject should be given ; and that in some cases there is 
 a manifest advantage in the lectures being addressed to 
 an audience limited in number with whose needs the 
 Lecturer is familiar. With this qualification, the lectures 
 
 l pp. 12, 13. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 321 
 
 given by College Lecturers might be rendered more 
 generally useful, both by the more effective revision of 
 the lecture lists by the Special Boards, and by the 
 voluntary association of Colleges for lecturing purposes. 
 
 " Some combinations of Colleges are already at work ; 
 and the Committee think that the principle might be 
 extended and that much good might result from such 
 association. The further development of the principle 
 must be voluntary and in some degree experimental, but 
 the Committee think it may be useful to record some of 
 the results of such combinations as have been effected, 
 though it is not in their power to make definite proposals. 
 
 " In one instance the combination of three Colleges 
 (originally the outcome of an informal arrangement made 
 by the Tutors of two of them) has been extended to 
 lectures in all subjects, which are open without fee to 
 students of all the three Colleges. The lectures are 
 arranged in consultation, the dates at which they should 
 begin and end and the dates of the Annual Examinations 
 (which are held in common) are jointly fixed. The com- 
 bination, being more or less informal, has no definite 
 rules : it is managed on a basis of give and take : it has 
 been gradually developed, without friction, during thirty- 
 five years ; and it seems to be accepted by all concerned 
 as normal. 
 
 "Another combination of Colleges has been practi- 
 cally limited to lectures in Mathematics, Classics and 
 Theology. Here also common Examinations are held. 
 
 "A third group of Colleges has for many years been 
 associated for lectures in Mathematics, and this group 
 has recently been enlarged and certain parts of the 
 Mechanical Sciences course have been included in its 
 scope. 
 
 "In these groups the provision of lectures open to 
 all the Colleges in the group is supplemented by class 
 work or work with individuals, in each College, generally 
 confined to the members thereof. 
 
 "Another combination, restricted to Theology, has 
 more recently been formed. 
 
 " It is obvious that co-operation of Colleges for 
 this purpose leads to efficiency and economy in lectures. 
 Fewer formal lectures are needed, and thus the burden 
 
322 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 of each Lecturer is lessened. And, further, students have 
 the advantage of hearing a greater variety of lectures. 
 The combination of Colleges has largely reduced the 
 number of separate examinations, and this practice 
 might be still further extended Avith advantage. 
 
 " The combination between Colleges might be still 
 more effective if Colleges, thus connected, consulted each 
 other informally in making an election to a Fellowship or 
 a Lectureship, when the needs of the different studies in 
 the group might be considered. 
 
 " The co-operation of the Colleges might usefully be 
 extended to the direction of studies and class work in 
 subjects such as History, Modern Languages, Law and 
 Economics, in which each College has not usually a full 
 staff of Lecturers. 
 
 " It has been suggested, as a further mode of combi- 
 nation, that in some subjects, in which teaching is 
 provided in unequal degrees by different Colleges, the 
 Colleges might contribute (in proportion to the number 
 of their students in the subject, or otherwise) to a joint 
 fund from which Lecturers should be paid." 
 
 As for University teaching, the Committee think 
 that the initiative for the provision of further University 
 teaching must come either from the General Board of 
 Studies or from the Special Boards of Studies, 1 and that 
 it is desirable that the constitution of the Special Boards 
 should be reformed so as to make them more fully 
 representative of the teachers. 2 
 
 All these suggestions are sound and good as far as 
 they go ; what they lack is courage. There is too much 
 fear of interfering with what is called " the proper free- 
 dom of the Colleges in arranging their own teaching," 
 which leads the Committee to say that " it is not in their 
 power to make definite proposals." Is the teaching the 
 private property of the Colleges ? Are they not, by the law 
 of the land, national institutions, and bound to look upon 
 themselves in that light ? Is not Lord Curzon right when 
 he describes them as trustees, and that for an object in 
 which every man and woman in the nation is entitled to 
 feel and express a concern ? 
 
 i lb. p. 10. 2 lb. p. 11. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. B23 
 
 The way of salvation lies along the path tentatively 
 marked out in the above extracts. The University must 
 come in as the unifying and coordinating authority in all 
 the Honour teaching, given either by itself or by the 
 Colleges. The machinery lies ready to hand in the 
 General Board of Studies and the Special Boards of 
 Studies ; it only requires to be adapted to present-day 
 needs. The Report of the Council of the Senate on the 
 Constitution and Government of the University says 1 : — 
 
 "A considerable change is proposed in the constitu- 
 tion of the General Board of Studies. In the opinion of 
 the Council, the General Board is at present too large. A 
 reduction in size is impossible if the attempt is made to 
 maintain the separate representation of all the bodies 
 now represented upon it. The proposal which is now 
 made is intended to provide a Board of reasonable size, 
 while maintaining generally a representative character. 
 
 " These proposals are embodied in the following 
 scheme : — 
 
 " That the General Board of Studies shall consist of 
 the Vice-Chancellor and sixteen members of the Senate, 
 to be elected on the nomination of the Council of the 
 Senate. Four shall be nominated in each year. Not 
 fewer than four members of the Board shall be Professors. 
 The Council shall, in making the nominations, have 
 regard to the representation of studies." 
 
 As for the Special Boards of Studies, attention may 
 be drawn in this connexion to the Report of the Com- 
 mittee before referred to' 2 : "The Committee think that 
 under the considerable powers already possessed by the 
 Special Boards and the General Board, steps might be 
 taken to make the organisation of Lectures more effective. 
 . . . The Committee are of opinion that it is desirable : 
 
 (1) That the constitution of the Special Boards of 
 Studies should be reformed so as to make them more fully 
 representative of the teachers. 
 
 (2) That the list of Lectures for the ensuing 
 academic year should be considered by the Special Boards 
 in the Lent Term of each year, and should be sent to the 
 
 i University Reporter, March 1, 1910, pp. 680-681. 
 2 Report, p. 11. 
 
324 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 General Board of Studies before the end of the Lent 
 Term, in order that the General Board may have proper 
 time in the Easter Term to consider the lists and to 
 approve them or remit them for further consideration 
 with alterations and amendments. 
 
 (3) That in the preparation of the Lecture lists due 
 regard should be paid to the grading of Lectures for 
 students of different ability and attainments. 
 
 (4) That Lectures proposed by the Special Boards 
 should be arranged to begin on or about the same date ; 
 that this date should be as near as possible to the begin- 
 ning of Full Term ; and that the Colleges should be asked 
 to make common arrangements for the commencement of 
 residence." 
 
 These last words deserve a brief comment. As the 
 University has no control over who are to be its students, 
 so it has no control over the precise date in each term at 
 which they shall begin their studies. Each College fixes 
 for itself the day on which its undergraduates shall 
 " come up." The above extract shows that they do not 
 all light on the same day. There are thus different times 
 for the beginning of residence and also for the beginning 
 of lectures. Hence a certain amount of confusion and 
 loss of time. The authors of the Report suggest that 
 " the Colleges should be asked to make common arrange- 
 ments " ; that the University should be master in its own 
 house and settle the dates for coming into residence and 
 beginning work has obviously not occurred to them. 
 
 Let us then suppose that the alterations suggested 
 above have been carried out, that the Boards have been 
 made the proper size, and satisfactorily representative in 
 character. Something more will remain to be done. The 
 General Board of Studies excited great hopes when it 
 was first instituted, but it has proved a disappointment. 
 It has not organised the teaching work of the University 
 as was expected. The reason is not far to seek. The 
 Report from which we have quoted considers the 
 " Teaching for Honours-Examinations" under two heads — 
 (I.) Lectures proposed by the Special Boards of Studies ; 
 and (II.) College Lectures. They say : " The lists of lectures 
 proposed by the Special Boards include lectures by 
 Professors, Readers and University Lecturers, and lectures 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 325 
 
 by College Lecturers and others." l This is quite accurate, 
 but the significance of it may be lost on the outsider. 
 The instruction here alluded to is only part of what is 
 given. The rest comes under (II.) College Lectures ; and 
 here, as has before been pointed out, the Report insists on 
 " the proper freedom of the Colleges in arranging their 
 own teaching." 2 This is the rock on which the General 
 Board of Studies has split. There is a large area outside 
 its jurisdiction, and until it is made supreme over the 
 whole field of instruction the old evils will not be 
 removed. The Board must be given control over both 
 University and College teaching. It must be able to 
 make " regulations and instructions in respect to the 
 subjects and character of the lectures to be delivered " 
 not only by the University but by the Colleges. 
 
 Two of the three kinds of work performed by a 
 College have now been examined — the Administrative and 
 the Educational. There remains the third kind, — the 
 Tutorial. This must remain untouched. The task of 
 supervising the studies and morals of the undergraduates 
 can be far better discharged locally than by a centralised 
 body. The Colleges need fear no attack at this point. 
 They will always retain their Tutorial functions, so far as 
 one can see, and nothing can deprive them of their 
 corporate life, save the forcible closing of their doors. 
 Let us then return with minds made easier to the con- 
 sideration of the work of teaching. 
 
 There are difficulties still to be overcome. The 
 Colleges with their widely varying resources in the shape 
 of men to teach and money to pay them, and with their 
 fluctuating numbers, might find grave, if not insuperable 
 obstacles in the way of their joining and playing an 
 effective part in such a scheme as has been sketched 
 above. The fluctuation in numbers is especially serious. 
 For instance, a College which had " for centuries humbly 
 reposed at, or close to, the bottom in point of size," could 
 not " almost at a bound rise to the head of the second 
 rank " without greatly disturbing, if not altogether up- 
 setting, a centralised scheme of teaching. Some plan 
 must be found of equalising resources, and preventing or 
 
 lp. 11. 2 p. 12. 
 
326 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 minimising fluctuations. Nothing seems to meet the 
 case but a closer combination of the Colleges ; but this is 
 such dangerous ground that it will be the height of rash- 
 ness to tread on it without some backing of authority. 
 That backing will be found to be much stronger than 
 most people are aware. 
 
 The first witness to be called is Sir William Hamilton,' 
 who held that " In the smaller Colleges it might be 
 advantageous, if two at least combined, and had in 
 common a single complement of Tutors." Some of the 
 evidence given at Cambridge before the Royal Com- 
 mission of 1850, points the same way. The Rev. J. W. 
 Blakesley said : 2 "I believe that the same degree of 
 efficiency as at Trinity might be secured in the smaller 
 Colleges by a confederation of three or four for the 
 purposes of Tuition. An arrangement might be made 
 between the Tutors of these for a classification of their 
 pupils, and for securing the advantage of the division of 
 labour in lecturing. I do not see the impossibility of 
 extending the union still further, to the free election of 
 Scholars and Fellows indifferently from among the 
 students of the Colleges so united. And I am disposed 
 to think that such a confederation, if the terms of union 
 were framed on a liberal basis, and the arrangement 
 carried out in a generous spirit by the individuals who 
 were parties to it, would in some respects secure the 
 advantages now possessed by the large Colleges, and 
 escape the drawbacks. For instance, a union of four 
 Colleges, which in the aggregate mustered as large a 
 number of students as Trinity, would be able to secure 
 equally efficient lectures, and at the same time would 
 supply a much better accommodation in Hall and Chapel, 
 and be free from the evils attendant on an accumulation 
 of very great numbers within the same walls." 
 
 Dean Merivale gave evidence to the like effect : — 
 "With our existing distinction of large and small 
 Colleges, it seems impossible for the smaller to give 
 uniformly and permanently the same security for efficient 
 tuition which may perhaps be afforded by the larger. . . 
 An arrangement by which three or four small Colleges 
 
 i Discussions, p. 805. 2 Evidence, p. 150. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 327 
 
 could be united for the purposes of tuition, by opening 
 their emoluments one to the other, and extending the 
 circle from which elections to Scholarships and Fellow- 
 ships could be made, would be of immense importance, as 
 it would allow of a fair competition between the Colleges 
 which does not now exist." 
 
 It is only right to add that the Commissioners them- 
 selves rejected this solution in the following passage ' :— 
 " To meet such difficulties it has been proposed to group 
 several such Societies (i.e. small Colleges) into a confede- 
 ration for the purpose of giving their instruction in 
 common. But we are inclined to think there would be 
 found in practice objections almost insuperable to such a 
 mode of proceeding, and at best it would require a combi- 
 nation of so many conditions to be satisfied, that we 
 cannot be induced to rely upon it with any confidence of 
 success." 
 
 Mark Pattison, greatly daring, proposed to amalgamate 
 Merton with Corpus Christi College, and to dedicate the 
 united College to the study of Biology, Chemistry, and the 
 allied branches. 2 Goldwin Smith's opinion has already 
 been quoted in Chapter VIII. " It seems to be generally 
 acknowledged that the system under which each College 
 attempts to be a University in itself must be abandoned, 
 and that the Colleges must combine among themselves 
 and with the University Professoriate for the purposes of 
 instruction." Lord Curzon brings forward the same idea 
 in a different connexion. "It has been suggested that 
 two or three Colleges might be thrown into one, with the 
 result of a considerable saving in respect of College 
 officers and servants."' The President of Magdalen 
 College, Oxford, in his address as Vice-Chancellor, in 
 1907, made special mention of this last suggestion as 
 effecting economies by the fusion of two or more Colleges. 
 
 The Cambridge Memorandum appended to the Royal 
 Commission Report of 1874 has already been quoted. It 
 says: "Provision could be made for the association of the 
 Colleges, or some of them, for educational purposes, so as 
 to secure more efficient teaching and to allow to the 
 teachers more leisure for private study." 
 
 i Report, p. 79. 2 Suggestions, p. 157. 
 
 3 Principles and Methods, p. 70. 
 
328 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 But the strongest authority which can be adduced for 
 the proposal is the legislation which followed the Report. 
 Clause 22 of the Act of 1877, which has been already set 
 out, 1 enacted that the Commissioners in statutes made 
 by them might provide for "the union of Colleges and 
 Halls and institutions, or combination for education," as 
 the marginal note reads. Parliament did not set up this 
 machinery for the fun of the thing ; it intended that it 
 should be taken advantage of. At least it put on record 
 a principle. Has not the time come when this principle 
 should be seriously considered ? 
 
 What may be called the Act-of-1877-policy might be 
 worked out and completed as follows, the Colleges being 
 divided into six groups, Trinity counting as a group by 
 itself: — 
 
 Undergraduates Gross corporate Assessable 
 
 College. on books. income. income. 
 
 £ £ 
 
 1. Trinity 672 76,492 55,393 
 
 2. Trinity Hall 146 ) 8,828 ) 8,138 ) 
 Clare 201 [ 674 1H,558 [ 55,025 12,924 [ 45,992 
 Caius 327 ) 29,639 ) 24,930 ) 
 
 3. King's 166 ) 37,654 "\ 25,640 •) 
 Queens' 181 f 8,686 ( - 7,843 ( ^ M2 
 St, Catb.'s 129 { 5bl 6,063 ( ° 4 ' 72 8 5,719 ( 50 ' 012 
 Corpus 85 ) 12,325 ) 10,810 ) 
 
 4. Pembroke 293 ") 13,896 ^ 13,542 "i 
 
 Peterhouse 81 [ 490 8,212 [ 32,096 6,758 [ 27,432 
 
 Downing 116 ) 9,988 ) 7,132 ) 
 
 5. Emmanuel 192 ") 19,885 ) 17,735 ) 
 Christ's 227 [ 531 14,943 [ 49,780 12,133 [ 40,726 
 Sidney 112 ) 14,952 ) 10,858 ) 
 
 6. St. John's 244 ) 42,945 ) 33,344 ) 
 Jesus 212 [ 571 13,505 [ 63,381 12,968 [ 52,421 
 Magdalene 115 ) 6,931 ) 6,109 ) 
 
 The principle here adopted is the necessary one of 
 propinquity. The result is six groups of fairly equal 
 size and resources, the weak spot being No. 4 — Pembroke, 
 Peterhouse and Downing. If any further approximation to 
 equality was desired, it might be attained by graduating 
 
 i See above, p. 224. It is worthy of note that the Executive Com- 
 mission under the Act of 1877 had many powers which have never found 
 their way into operation. Those relating to the regulation of borrowing 
 by a College, the renewal of beneficial leases, and the union of Colleges 
 have already been mentioned. The power to found University Scholar- 
 ships for poor men, and to transfer a College Library or a portion thereof 
 will be referred to later on. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 329 
 
 the payments to the Common University Fund, as is 
 done at Oxford. On the figures given above all the 
 groups might be taxed at the same rate up to £27,500, 
 and then a super-tax might be levied on each £'1,000 of 
 assessable income over and above that minimum. An 
 extra endowment of £250,000, divided between Peterhouse 
 and Downing, would also be a great help. The principle 
 of emulation cannot be dispensed with while the state 
 of public opinion with regard to education remains as 
 it is ; but these groups could compete on something like 
 a fair footing, and not in the hopelessly unequal fashion 
 that the separate Colleges do now. Fluctuations in 
 numbers would also be stopped, or at least rendered 
 less severe, for a group of three or four Colleges would 
 be much more stable than the single unit. If one 
 member of the group went down, the chances are that 
 one of the others would go up. It would thus become 
 possible for the University to organise and coordinate 
 all the teaching given within its borders. Its instru- 
 ment, the General Board of Studies, might not shrink 
 from driving six well-matched horses together, though 
 it might well hesitate before attempting the same task 
 with seventeen steeds of such varying size, strength and 
 pace. 
 
 The necessity of organising the teaching ma}* also be 
 pressed from the purely University point of view. For 
 the last sixty years the cry has been for more Professor- 
 ships, Readerships, and Lectureships, and there has been 
 a great increase in the number of these posts during that 
 time. But good as all this increase in teaching power 
 may have been, it is of paramount importance to fit the 
 newcomers into a properly organised and coordinated 
 scheme, otherwise their work may be wasted. It is doubt- 
 ful whether all these fresh appointments have justified 
 expectations. If they have not, it is the system which is 
 mainly to blame. 
 
 But this is not the whole of the matter. Instruction 
 at Cambridge cannot be considered fully organised unless 
 a succession of the best teachers has been secured. To 
 this end it is necessary, (1) to give the intending teachers 
 suitable training, and (2) to open a career before them. 
 This latter implies three things : («) sufficient pay from 
 
330 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 the beginning ; (6) a reasonable prospect of promotion ; 
 and (c) a pension when work is done. Sad to say, all these 
 three are yet lacking. 
 
 For elementary education — the simplest form of teach- 
 ing — it is recognised that training is necessary, and the 
 machinery for giving it is highly elaborated and effective. . 
 The power of imparting instruction in a Secondary 
 School or in a University is supposed to be a spontaneous 3 
 gift of nature. Teachers in these higher walks are born, , 
 not made ; and to train them is regarded as a waste of I 
 time. How many teachers are there in the University of f 
 Cambridge who have been specially prepared for their r 
 work ? Some few Secondary School teachers are receiving * 
 training ; and if they ever recruit the ranks of the j 
 University teachers, the University will indirectly get a t 
 trained staff, but not otherwise. One can here only note ■ 
 the facts, as suggestions for supplying the training are • 
 outside the purpose of these pages. 1 
 
 A very frequent complaint of the University reformers 
 from the first has been that teaching at Oxford and 
 Cambridge is not a career. The professions, the Civil 
 Service, the world of business, all present greater attrac- 
 tions, and offer richer prizes; the result being that the 1 
 majority of the enterprising men will not stay on 
 at the Universities. This is, of course, quite true, and 
 must always be so. A teacher at Cambridge can 
 never make as much money as a successful barrister, or r 
 physician, or merchant prince, but his prospects might t 
 be made much better than they are. At present the 
 plan followed by the Colleges, and to a lesser extent by 
 the University, is to take a young man of 22 or 23 who 
 has gained a high place in a Tripos, and put him straight I 
 away to teaching without any previous training. A 
 College gives this young man a Lectureship, and because 
 a Lectureship is poorly paid, it adds thereto a Fellowship, 
 which is to be retained so long as the duty of teaching is - 
 discharged. This method of procedure cannot be deemed i 
 ideal, either for the College or for the individual himself. 
 The appointment is at best an experiment, and may turn 
 
 1 The training of Secondary Teachers is touched on in various places 
 in the Report of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, 1895. 
 See pp. 70, 71, 80, 198-209, 321-323. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 381 
 
 out well or ill. Some such experiments turn out ill. 
 A certain number of the men who are thus appointed 
 never acquire the art of imparting the knowledge which 
 they possess, they are dull and uninspiring, and they 
 remain a perplexity to the College, a stumbling-block 
 in the way of the students, and ill at ease with them- 
 selves. There is another way in which this system is bad 
 for individuals. It gives them too much to begin with, 
 and it offers them no further prospects. A Lecture- 
 ship plus a Fellowship may not be intrinsically of high 
 pecuniary value, but it seems so to a young man who 
 conies fresh from an examination, and who has never 
 earned anything before. After a time the teacher takes 
 stock of the situation. He finds that the College has 
 done all for him that he can expect it to do for many 
 years to come. The Master bids fair to be another proof 
 of the longevity which is associated with that office 
 in the public mind, the Senior Tutor will in his turn 
 be made Master, and there are other men who by 
 virtue of their standing have a prior claim on any 
 Tutorship which may fall vacant. Ambition is thus 
 quenched, and an acquiescence in the inevitable takes its 
 place. The more alert and active of the young graduates 
 look down upon the life of the average Don ; and, 
 attractive as teaching may be to them, they see the 
 Capuan clangers of Cambridge, and betake themselves 
 to careers where they have greater scope. 
 
 These disadvantages may be minimised, even if they 
 cannot be altogether avoided. Proper training being 
 conceded, the question of adequate payment next arises. 
 The financial difficulty is always with us, and here it 
 meets us in the shape of the Fellowship system. The 
 Oxford Accounts for 1907 show a sum of 4'61,550 19s. lOd. 
 paid to Fellows. The Quarterly Reviewer of 1906 reckoned 
 the corresponding Cambridge figure at £63,000. The 
 exact amounts do not matter for the present argument ; 
 it is enough to know that they are large, and are not 
 directly paid for teaching. The whole question of the 
 Fellowships thus comes up for consideration. 
 
 Few institutions have undergone more frequent and 
 striking changes than Fellowships. Originally allowances 
 on the most meagre scale, with laborious courses of study 
 
332 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 attached to them, payable only to members of a particular 
 church, and that on condition of poverty, celibacy, and 
 residence ; they have become comfortable sinecures, with 
 no duties attached, tenable by any academically qualified 
 person possessed of any amount of money, who may 
 marry and reside where he pleases. Mark Pattison 
 thus describes the course of these changes 1 : " The old 
 Statutes imposed very strict conditions of tenure. For 
 they had, in almost every instance, required the Fellows 
 to proceed to the superior degree in one of the Faculties. 
 Failure to do so was to forfeit the Fellowship, ipso facto. 
 The effect of this requirement, under the old University 
 system, was to impose upon the Fellow, as the condition 
 of his tenure, a prolonged course of study of from twenty 
 to twenty-five years, in a special branch of knowledge — 
 study not merely private and uncertificated, but evidenced 
 by a regular appearance in the public schools for disputa- 
 tion, and by the performance of other public exercises. 
 These exercises had been long disused by the University, 
 and dispensed with for the degrees. The College Fellow 
 was unable to perform the public disputations and was 
 content to take the degree. In many of the larger founda- 
 tions the College Statutes had not merely imposed the 
 Faculty Degree, with its necessary course of study, but had 
 superadded private courses of study for the Fellows, with 
 extra disputations and exercises, as tests of proficiency to 
 be given within the College walls. These had fallen into 
 desuetude along Avith the public exercises. For the public 
 University and private Collegiate appearances and exer- 
 cises no substitute had been provided. These exercises 
 and disputations were, however, only the outward tokens ; 
 the tests, occasions, and evidence of study, or continued 
 pursuit of acquirement ; they were not that study itself. 
 Though the opportunity of publicly proving his pro- 
 ficiency was taken away from him, the Fellow still 
 remained under the same obligation to the study which 
 had constituted the whole purpose of his foundation. 
 
 " This was the statutable state of things when the Act 
 of 1854 and the Commission intervened. . . The Ordi- 
 nances which emanated from it in every instance abolish 
 
 i Suggestions, pp. 88-90; cf. pp. 124-12 7 for further details. For the 
 method of awarding these prizes at Oxford see pp. 94-98. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 333 
 
 the statutable regulations of studies and exercises, as 
 well as the obligation to proceed to the superior degree. 
 In no case do they attempt to substitute an equivalent. 
 But though no duties are provided for him to perform, 
 the Fellow is maintained in the enjoyment of his stipend 
 and emoluments. In other words, the Ordinances of the 
 Commission of 1854 converted the Fellowships into sine- 
 cures. The Commissioners found an enormous abuse 
 subsisting illegally and they legalised it. . . They took 
 the title-deeds, erased the original national and noble 
 purpose, and returned the parchments smilingly to their 
 owners. Was it ignorance of University history, or want 
 of sympathy with science and learning, or timidity?" 
 
 The Cambridge Commissioners of 1850 had no doubt 
 of their own view. They say : l " The Fellowships cannot 
 but be regarded as the chief source of life and vigour to 
 the whole academical system. However valuable may be 
 the various honours which the University bestows on 
 the successful candidates for its numerous prizes, and 
 however stimulating the competition for honourable 
 places in the different Triposes, it is, after all, the College 
 Fellowship which must be regarded as the chief motive to 
 exertion, and the great reward of successful industry and 
 talent." In other words, they believed in the principle of 
 emulation, and they found it in the Prize Fellowship 
 system. 
 
 Experience, however, proved that Prize Fellowships 
 involved serious disadvantages. The growth of the 
 Universities, and the extended range of studies, created a 
 demand for more teaching, and the absentee Prize Fellow 
 was not there to give it. Hence came two movements — 
 the first to cut down the length of tenure, and the second 
 to attach definite College work to the office, thus getting 
 rid altogether of the pure Prize Fellowship. As for the 
 first movement, 2 the latest suggestion is that the tenure 
 should undergo yet another shortening, and "that in 
 general a Fellow should in the first instance be elected 
 for a term of three years, and should be eligible for 
 re-election for a further term of three years." But with 
 every reduction in the number of years, Prize Fellowships 
 
 1 Report, p. 156. 2 Reform Committee's Report, p. 15. 
 
334 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 become less valuable, or, in other words, less attractive^ 
 and to regard them as the chief driving force of the 
 University is no longer possible, nor in fact are they so 
 regarded. Some other means must be found of keeping 
 alive the spirit of emulation. 
 
 As for the second movement, the Quarterly Reviewer 1 
 says that in 1904 there were at Cambridge about 315 
 ordinary Fellows. Of these, " some 245 were Resident, and 
 some 70 Non-resident. Of the Residents, about 225 were 
 holding some University or College office, educational 
 or administrative. Of the Non-residents, and of the 
 Residents who were holding no office, the greater number 
 had earned their Fellowships by holding some qualifying 
 position, such as a Lectureship, for a given number of 
 years, usually 20. Among the Non-residents, in addition 
 to Fellows who hold their Fellowships as a pension, were 
 to be found students prosecuting Research away from 
 Cambridge ; such students are, as a rule, liable to be 
 summoned to reside, as College exigencies may demand. 
 Several other Non-residents are Fellows who have but 
 recently received appointments away from Cambridge ; 
 their Fellowships will, under the new Statutes, lapse in a 
 year or two. The analysis shows that the number of 
 ' Prize Fellowships ' is small, and it is believed that they 
 are steadily diminishing." 
 
 The Reform Committee' 2 confirm this view. They 
 say : " The introduction and development of teaching in 
 old and new subjects has rapidly increased the demand 
 for Fellowships for the support of new teaching and 
 for the encouragement of Research. In consequence, the 
 number of Fellowships held irrespective of conditions of 
 service or Research, has been largely diminished. Some 
 Colleges have, in practice, abolished Prize Fellowships 
 by making it a rule to attach conditions to the tenure 
 of Fellowships. The Committee think it very important 
 that this principle should be generally adopted." Exit 
 the Prize Fellow. 
 
 The reader will gather from these extracts that 
 Fellowships are given in four ways : (1) as Prizes ; (2) 
 as part payment for teaching or other College work ; 
 
 l p. 512. 2 p . 15. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. j 335 
 
 (3) as Pensions; (4) for Research. Let us examine these 
 one by one. 
 
 1. It may be taken for granted that Prize Fellow- 
 ships are doomed. They are bad for the Colleges because 
 they absorb a portion of its revenues without yielding 
 any return in the shape of work done. For the men who 
 receive them they are at once too large and too small. A 
 Fellowship of £200 a year for six or seven years is 
 obviously excessive, and out of all proportion, as a mere 
 prize. On the other hand, it is too small in amount, and 
 too short in point of time, to constitute a career. Yet it 
 not unfrequently deceives the recipient in these respects. 
 Seven years seems a long way ahead to a young man, and 
 £200 a year, with nothing to do for it, a comparatively large 
 income. The result is that no inconsiderable number of 
 Prize Fellows drift along for some of the most important 
 years of life, then their Fellowships run out, and they find 
 they have been handicapped rather than helped as far as 
 a career goes. Actual experience thus weakens the force of 
 the once popular argument in favour of the Prize Fellow- 
 ship, — that it helps a man to a career by bridging over an 
 inevitable waiting time. It has been shown that it may 
 have the reverse effect. Again, it is not the duty of the 
 Colleges to help men to a career. Their primary duty, as 
 the component parts of the University, is to teach ; and 
 until they not only teach well, but pay their teachers 
 adequately, they ought not to give Fellowships on so 
 vague a ground as helping a man to a career. Fellowships, 
 in fact, never are given for this reason. They are given 
 for a high place in the Tripos ; that they help a man to a 
 position outside the University is an accident. 
 
 If, however, it is felt that there is still some force left 
 in the old argument, and that it is good that men should 
 be helped after they have finished their course of study, 
 let the thing be done systematically and according to 
 clearly denned principles. The University should be 
 the responsible body, and the Career Scholarship, as it 
 might be called, should last only so long as it is actually 
 needed, and should be moderate in amount. 
 
 There are two special cases in which such Career 
 Scholarships might be given with advantage to the com- 
 munity, and these are the Scholastic Profession and 
 
336 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Medicine. It is futile to preach the necessity of training 
 for the teaching profession to those who have already 
 difficulty in meeting the expenses of the normal three 
 years' course. If a fourth year is to be added, the extra 
 cost should be provided. Then, again, a medical course is 
 long and expensive; and it is of the highest importance to 
 the State, especially in view of recent legislation, that 
 there should be a full supply of properly qualified doctors. 
 These Scholarships could be given by the University on 
 the result of its own examinations. They are, however, a 
 counsel of perfection, as there are many more pressing 
 claims. 
 
 2. Fellowships as part payment for College work. 
 Fellowships, as has been already seen, are now mostly 
 
 attached to other College offices. A man serves as 
 Lecturer, Tutor, Bursar, Steward, &c. ; and the pay of 
 these posts being generally insufficient to live on, a 
 Fellowship is attached to them so that the holder of the 
 two offices may eke out a subsistence. This is a strange 
 plan, if it is critically examined. Good work is badly paid ; 
 and to make the balance even, a further payment is made 
 for doing nothing at all. Sweated labour is compensated 
 by a sinecure. Two ills are supposed to make one good. 
 Surely the common-sense plan of the world outside is 
 better — to pay well for work done, and to pay nothing 
 except for work done. 
 
 3. Fellowships as pensions. 
 
 As stated above, if a Fellow has served his College 
 faithfully for a number of years, he is allowed to retire 
 from work and retain his Fellowship. A Fellowship thus 
 becomes a pension, but in an unscientific and unbusiness- 
 like shape. A pension ought to be graded in amount 
 according to length of service and previous salary ; and it 
 ought to be paid as a pension, and not as something else. 
 Pension schemes, both for the University and the Colleges, 
 are of the greatest importance, but they must be set up 
 and administered on business lines. The mere continuing 
 of a Fellowship does not fulfil the proper conditions. 
 
 4. Fellowships for Research. 
 
 The whole question of Research is one of great diffi- 
 culty and complexity, and more will be said about it later 
 on. The University and certain of the Colleges are trying 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 337 
 
 to promote it, but it is often in such a way as to render 
 Research an exceedingly perilous task for those who 
 engage in it. A man takes his degree, and on the strength 
 of it, or of some particular piece of work he wishes to do, 
 his College gives him a Fellowship. He applies himself 
 to his task, and at the end of it may be two, three, or, in 
 very exceptional cases, ten years, his Fellowship expires 
 and he is left without resources. A career as teacher has 
 been made more difficult for him, because teaching insti- 
 tutions prefer men who have had experience, and he is by 
 this time too old for the Civil Service both at home and 
 abroad. No one should take a Research Fellowship unless 
 he has private means whereon to live when the Fellow- 
 ship has run out. The Fellowship system can therefore 
 hardly be called ideal for the promotion of Research. 
 
 The Oxford plan, of a separate and additional exam- 
 ination for a Fellowship, demands a brief mention. Mark 
 Pattison says of it ' : " The candidates are practically 
 quite young men of from twenty-one to twenty-five, who 
 are fresh from the Schools, and have not yet entered upon 
 the study of any ' branch of knowledge.' It is a disadvan- 
 tage to a candidate to have devoted any time to special 
 knowledge. . . For the competition is not an examin- 
 ation in acquirement, but turns mainly on the performance 
 of exercises. Electors generally prefer the younger 
 competitors, or rather the examination is so arranged 
 that the younger man has the best chance in it. Colleges 
 contrive to fix their times of election so as to catch the 
 men who are just out of the Schools, as giving them a 
 better field to select from. As are the candidates, such 
 are the awarders of the prize. The whole body of Fellows 
 are electors, who, if not mainly young men, are, as we 
 have seen, men who, as Fellows, have given no guarantee 
 of excellence in any ' branch of knowledge.' They 
 naturally examine in what they know ; and the conduct 
 of the examination usually falls into the hands of the 
 youngest on the list, as himself most fresh from the 
 performance of the exercises of which the competition 
 chiefly consists. A Fellowship examination is thus a 
 mere repetition of the examinations in the Public Schools, 
 
 1 Suggestions, pp. 95, 96. 
 
338 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 by a less competent Board of Examiners. It is entirely 
 meaningless. . . The Fellowships, as now administered, 
 are to the academical course what the Scholarships are 
 to the grammar school — so much prize-money offered for 
 competition among the scholars." 
 
 Report says that Oxford, following in the wake of 
 Cambridge, is now gradually abandoning this system, and 
 more and more giving Fellowships for excellent per- 
 formances in the University examinations. This is 
 satisfactory as far as it goes, as saving an additional and 
 useless test. Consider, however, the position of the yet 
 remaining victims, and of their partners in suffering at 
 those Cambridge Colleges which still give Fellowships 
 by examination or dissertation. The undergraduate 
 enters the University at nineteen as a rule. If he is 
 ambitious of a Fellowship he will probably take a four- 
 year-course, at the end of which he is twenty-three. If 
 he is not elected to a Fellowship till his third and last 
 chance, he continues a mere examinee, untrained for 
 any special pursuit till he is twenty-six, or more than 
 one-third of the allotted span of human life. If he 
 fails after all to get a Fellowship, his position is piti- 
 able indeed. 
 
 Where a Fellowship is not given on examination, it is 
 awarded by co-optation, the existing Fellows filling up the 
 vacancy. The Royal Commissioners of 1850, in their Report 
 about Cambridge were loud in their praise of the impartial 
 manner in which they found that this delicate duty was 
 discharged. They said that "the perfect integrity and 
 impartiality with which Fellowships are for the most 
 part awarded, is one of the most valuable features of the 
 Cambridge system. A student, however friendless and 
 unknown, provided he have the requisite qualifications of 
 character and ability, is as sure of obtaining his Fellow- 
 ship as another of better family or wealthier connexions." 1 
 These words are as true now as when they were written, 
 but they do not state the whole of the case. The figures 
 previously given show how the richer Colleges come into 
 the market, and by giving many valuable Scholarships buy 
 up the best men. The result is that they have not 
 
 i lieport, p. 156. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 339 
 
 Fellowships available for all those who take a high place 
 in a Tripos. On the other hand, the smaller and poorer 
 Colleges may have more Fellowships than they have good 
 men to fill them. They very often fill up vacancies by 
 electing those whom the larger foundations have no room 
 for, but a College always prefers a man of its own if 
 there is one at all suitable. The result is that men 
 from a small College who have taken a lower degree get 
 Fellowships, while men from a larger College who have 
 taken a higher degree are left out. This is a serious draw- 
 back to the Fellowship system as at present worked. 
 There is another consideration generally present to the 
 minds of the electing body which the Commissioners did 
 not mention. The members of a College staff see much 
 of one another, they work together, dine together, live 
 together in the same building. Personal qualifications 
 must therefore be taken into account in the choice of a 
 colleague, or friction may result. It is obviously of great 
 importance that the new Fellow should be someone with 
 whom the existing Fellows can work and live, and no 
 secret is made of this fact at Cambridge. If there is but 
 one man available the College does its duty, personal 
 qualifications or no personal qualifications ; but if there 
 are two or more men in the field, the choice naturally falls 
 on the one who will be the most agreeable to live with 
 and to work with. This is where the Social Club side of 
 a College comes in. 
 
 The various forms of Fellowships have thus been 
 tried, and each has been found wanting. The conclusion 
 to be drawn is that the final step must be taken, and 
 Fellowships abolished, the title of Fellow alone remain- 
 ing. The name may be kept because of its historical 
 associations, and because it has a commercial value 
 in the outside world ; but the emoluments, if not the 
 privileges, must go. 
 
 The possibility of making teaching at Cambridge 
 a career now becomes manifest. We have already 
 assumed that a centralised management of College 
 property and domestic business would result in an 
 increased income. The Common University Fund 
 would automatically benefit thereby. If in addition the 
 whole of the Fellowship and Lectureship funds were 
 
340 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 thrown into one by each of the proposed groups of 
 Colleges, the saving effected would admit of a graduated 
 scale of payments of increased amounts, with pensions 
 on retirement. The scheme might be worked somewhat 
 as follows : There would be Junior Lectureships and 
 Senior Lectureships. Young men would not be appointed 
 to them immediately on taking a degree. They would be 
 required to undergo a preliminary training ; or, if that 
 were dispensed with, to serve a year on probation. The 
 posts would be thrown open to competition, and previous 
 experience would count. The candidates would seek such 
 experience in the Public Schools or the provincial Univer- 
 sities, and look to return to Cambridge when they had 
 won a reputation elsewhere. The Sub-Professorships and 
 Professorships in the University would supply the next 
 stage for legitimate ambition ; and here also a pension 
 scheme, with retirement at a proper age, could be put in 
 operation. The Universities have such strong natural 
 attractions that they might then fairly expect to draw 
 to themselves the pick of the teaching profession. The 
 principle of emulation would be preserved, though in a 
 different form from that which found favour with the 
 Commissioners of 1850. 
 
 Bursars and Stewards have now disappeared. Fellow- 
 ships as sinecures, as part payments of salaries, and 
 as pensions, have also disappeared. The Teachers and 
 the Tutors alone survive. Over them it will be 
 natural to place the Master. He will no longer be a 
 sinecurist, but the active working head of a great 
 educational combination, the chief guardian and guide of 
 the undergraduates, the chief adviser of studies, taking 
 also, if possible, a share in the work of teaching, with a 
 sufficient staff under him, and retiring in due time on a 
 pension. 
 
 Such is a possible scheme of Federation, on the 
 assumption that the University is first and foremost a 
 place of teaching. Obviously it is but one of the very 
 many schemes which might be devised, for the Federal 
 principle is extremely elastic, and may be embodied in a 
 great variety of forms. The British Empire contains at 
 least three such forms. In South Africa, the constituent 
 States, in their desire to form a strong central Govern- 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 341 
 
 ment, have divested themselves of their powers to such 
 an extent that they remain little more than County 
 Councils. In Australia, the opposite policy has prevailed ; 
 and the States, in a spirit of jealous independence, have 
 conceded the bare minimum, without which a central 
 authority would be impossible. Canada has striven, not 
 without success, to hold the balance even between the two 
 extremes. What may be called the South African policy 
 could be applied to our old Universities. The whole 
 property, both of University and Colleges, might be 
 managed in common, and the income applied as the 
 central authority thought fit. The University would 
 then appoint all the teachers, prescribe all the courses of 
 study, and in a word centralise the whole work and 
 management. The Colleges would then sink to the level 
 of Hostels, having indeed a corporate life of their own — for 
 nothing could deprive them of that — the inmates still 
 living together, working together, and taking recreation 
 together ; but all else would be gone. 
 
 The above scheme has been framed on quite different 
 lines, the object being to preserve to the Colleges as much 
 of their independence and separate life as is consistent 
 with an efficient and economically managed University. 
 It could be brought into operation gradually. Offices 
 which had been rendered superfluous would not be filled 
 up when they fell vacant, though it would be a great 
 advantage if the State would grant a substantial sum 
 whereby those persons who did riot fall into the new state 
 of things could be pensioned off, and so the full working 
 of the scheme be accelerated. Six powerful institutions 
 would emerge, strong in numbers, and with ample 
 resources, which could compete with one another on fair 
 terms. Such a prospect ought not to be without attrac- 
 tion, especially to the smaller Colleges. Life would surely 
 be much more worth living under the new conditions 
 than under the old. But that is not the main argument 
 in their favour. The question is one of education, and of 
 service to the whole nation. The Colleges are educational 
 institutions, and their emotions ought to respond to an 
 educational appeal, if it is rightly made. Why should 
 not they themselves take the lead? To compare small 
 things with great — they are now in the position of the 
 
342 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 American States in 1782. What an inestimable advantage 
 it would be if they would come together and frame a 
 constitution for the University. Is there no Alexander 
 Hamilton, one knowing both the Colleges and the 
 University from the inside, who will come forward and 
 show the way? 1 
 
 Section II. University Organisation. 
 We have thus far considered suggestions whereby the 
 University of Cambridge can be made an organic whole. 
 It will further require a Constitution adapted to its new 
 condition. Let us then take in succession the five parts 
 of the existing order of things : — (1) the Chancellor ; (2) the 
 Vice-Chancellor ; (3) the Council of the Senate ; (4) the 
 Electoral Roll ; and (5) the Senate. 
 
 (1) The Chancellor. 
 The Chancellor is the King of the University, 
 dwelling apart and remote, the interpreter of the 
 Statutes, and the arbiter in cases of grave dispute. 
 His powers in this latter capacity will have to be 
 extended. If any difference arises between the Univer- 
 sity and the Colleges on a point of finance or of teaching, 
 or between the various Boards, he will have to decide it. 
 
 (2) The Vice-Chancellor. 
 The Vice-Chancellor is the visible representative of 
 the Chancellor and the working head of the University, 
 
 i The whole problem of University organisation has had fresh light 
 thrown on it by the recently published Report of the Royal Commission 
 on London University. There the problem is also one of Federalism and 
 is recognised by the Commissioners as such. Here are some of the con- 
 clusions to which they have come : — 
 
 " We agree that the power to control teaching is of more importance 
 than the power to test it by granting degrees." 
 
 "The power of the purse is indeed the most important means of 
 control which the University should possess if it is to organise the 
 teaching with Which it is concerned." 
 
 " Experience has shown that the University cannot be certain of 
 securing suitable conditions for the teachers when they are paid for by 
 bodies over which they have no financial control. The first necessity is 
 therefore that the University should provide its own teaching, by which 
 we mean that it should appoint, pay, pension and dismiss its teachers, 
 and not leave these primary duties in the hands of independent corpora- 
 tions." 
 
 " Economical administration of limited funds is inconsistent with 
 financial rivalry between independent institutions." {Report, pp. 17, 46, 
 48.) 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 343 
 
 elected from the Heads of the Colleges. He serves for 
 two years ; that is to say, just as he is beginning to 
 know his work he leaves it. If the suggestions made 
 above as to the grouping of the Colleges are carried out, 
 there will be but six persons available, and a longer term 
 of office will thus become a necessity. It may be assumed, 
 however, in that case that matters will have to be carried 
 further and the University given a permanent Head like 
 the Principal of a Scottish University. There must be a 
 central driving force to keep the whole machinery in 
 motion. To this end a free choice must be given to the 
 general Governing Body of the University, whatever that 
 body shall hereafter be determined to be. The Vice- 
 Chancellor should be paid an adequate salary and have an 
 official residence with a proper staff under him. So great 
 would be the number of his duties that it would be 
 advisable to give him a Deputy, also with an adequate 
 salary. The Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Vice- 
 Chancellor should be (as the Vice-Chancellor is now) 
 ex officio members of the Council and of all Boards and 
 Syndicates, but each Board and Syndicate should elect 
 its own Chairman, who would be responsible for the work 
 of the Board or Syndicate and preside over its delibera- 
 tions. The Vice-Chancellor (and his Deputy) could thus 
 keep himself in touch with all the most important parts 
 of University work, instead of being overwhelmed with 
 business as lie now is through being the Chairman on all 
 occasions. Both he and his Deputy should retire, say, 
 at sixty-five, special powers being given to prolong their 
 tenure of office till seventy, and adequate pensions should 
 be granted them. 
 
 (3) The Council of the Senate. 
 
 The Council of the Senate is the Cabinet. It consists 
 of the Chancellor (who never attends), the Vice-Chan- 
 cellor, and sixteen other members chosen according to 
 " orders " — i.e. four Heads of Houses, four Professors, and 
 eight ordinary members of the Senate. 
 
 The Council recently proposed the following scheme 
 for its own reform, 1 but withdrew it without taking a 
 
 1 University Reporter, March 1, 1910, p. G81. 
 
344 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 vote on it 1 : — "That the Council of the Senate shall 
 consist (in addition to the Chancellor) of 
 (i.) The Vice-Chancellor; 
 (ii.) The Vice-Chancellor-elect (from the date of 
 
 his election) ; 
 (iii.) Sixteen members, provided that not more than i 
 three of the sixteen are members of the same i 
 College, always subject to the restriction that, 
 if a member of any College becomes a t 
 member of any other College, he shall (for the 
 purpose of election into the Council) be 
 regarded as belonging only to the College 
 which he has last joined." 
 The three Orders were thus to be abolished, and 
 freedom of choice given. 
 
 At the time of writing, a similar reform is on the way 
 to be carried at Oxford. On May 6th 2 of this year (1913) 
 Congregation passed a series of resolutions dealing with 
 the composition of the Hebdomadal Council. Resolutions 
 were carried without a division that the number of 
 elected members should continue to be eighteen, and that 
 their existing distribution between six Heads of Houses, 
 six Professors or Readers, and six members of Convo- 
 cation should be discontinued. A resolution to retain 
 three seats for Heads of Houses and six for Professors was 
 negatived by 60 votes to 53, and a resolution retaining six 
 seats for Professors, while abolishing the special repre- 
 sentation of Heads of Houses, was lost by 59 votes to 52. 
 Finally, a resolution that the whole eighteen seats should 
 be open to all members of Convocation of five years' 
 standing was carried by 63 votes to 45. It was unani- 
 mously agreed that non-attendance should be substituted 
 for non-residence as a cause of vacating a seat on the 
 Council. If Convocation agrees to the resolutions passed 
 by Congregation, Oxford will have taken a stride ahead 
 of Cambridge. 
 
 But neither the Cambridge nor the Oxford scheme 
 would quite fit in with the changes sketched above. The 
 Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor would be 
 
 i lb. October 17, 1910, p. 109. 
 2 See Times, May 7th, 1913. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 345 
 
 ex officio members of the Council (but not the Chancellor). 
 There are two Boards of special importance already in 
 existence, the General Board of Studies and the Financial 
 Board. A third has been found necessary for our 
 reformed University, a Board of Management and Works. 
 Later on two more Boards will be put forward as 
 desirable, a Board of Examinations and a Board of 
 Post-graduate Studies and Research. If these Boards 
 elect their own Chairmen, there will be five officials, 
 corresponding to the heads of Government departments. 
 They must be ex officio members of the Council, or, so to 
 speak, Cabinet Ministers. The total number of ex officio 
 members will thus be seven, leaving eleven places to be 
 filled by the general Governing Body. This it must be 
 able to do without any restriction of choice. 
 
 (4) The Electoral Roll. 
 
 The Electoral Roll is the House of Commons. It 
 consists mainly of all Masters of Arts or persons of an 
 equivalent or higher degree who live within a mile and a 
 half of Great St. Mary's Church. Of these there are not 
 far short of 700. This is the working legislative body of 
 the University. The reconstruction of it, suggested by 
 the Reform Committee, was as follows: 1 — 
 
 " (1) That Congregation (the new name for it, 
 borrowed from Oxford) shall consist of members of the 
 Senate who belong to any of the following classes : 
 
 (a) The Chancellor, High Steward, Vice-Chancellor 
 University Representatives, and University 
 Officers, the Professors, Readers, and Univer- 
 sity Lecturers. 
 
 (b) The Heads, Resident Fellows, and Resident ex- 
 Fellows of Colleges. 
 
 (c) Resident members of the Senate doing such work 
 
 for the University or a College or a Public Hostel 
 as may be recognised from time to time by 
 Decree of the Senate as qualifying for member- 
 ship of Congregation. 
 
 (d) Resident members of the Senate who have been 
 members of Congregation for ten years (not 
 necessarily consecutive). 
 
 l Report, p. 3. 
 
84(5 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " (2) That the University shall have power to deter- 
 mine by Decree of the Senate from time to time what 
 constitutes residence." 
 
 The Council of the Senate made proposals much on 
 the same lines, only with further concessions to vested 
 interests. 1 They were rejected. Here again Oxford has 
 outstripped Cambridge. 
 
 There is one point which may here be dealt with. If 
 the Universities are to be efficient parts of a national 
 system of education, they must be kept in touch with the 
 other parts of that system and with the national life also. 
 This necessity has been used as an argument in defence 
 of two things — Prize Fellows, and of the supreme control 
 wielded over the Universities by the absentee members of 
 the Senate. It has been, and is, argued that the Prize 
 Fellows, who take their money, go away and live where 
 they like, yet keep the University in touch with the out- 
 side world ; and the same contention has been urged on 
 behalf of the Non-Resident members of the Senate. What 
 fails to be done by either of the above-mentioned devices 
 ought to be done in a scientific manner. An example 
 may be taken from the recently issued Report of the 
 Royal Commission on the University of London. The 
 Court which it is there proposed to set up 2 consists very 
 largely of persons appointed from outside. Such bodies 
 as the Royal College of Physicians, the Royal College of 
 Surgeons, the Institute of Civil Engineers, the Council of 
 Legal Education, the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
 the London Chamber of Commerce, the Royal Agricul- 
 tural Society, the Headmasters' Conference, the Incor- 
 porated Association of Headmasters, and many others, 
 are proposed for representation on it. The same policy 
 should be adopted for Cambridge. As the University is 
 so intimately connected with teaching, what more natural 
 and fitting than that the National Union of Teachers, the 
 Headmasters' Conference, and the Incorporated Associa- 
 tion of Headmasters, should be in official connexion with 
 it '? Further, as the University now gives instruction in 
 Agriculture, Engineering, Architecture, Economics, not 
 
 i University Reporter, Oct. 17, 1910, pp. 106-8. 
 2 Report, pp. 156-160. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 347 
 
 to mention the older Faculties of Law and Medicine, it 
 ought to he kept in touch with the outside bodies which 
 represent these and other subjects. In this way what has 
 hitherto been done, either haphazard or not at all, would 
 be done systematically and scientifically. 
 
 If the number of subjects taught at Cambridge 
 continues to increase, and the number of students 
 increases also, the Electoral Roll with these additions 
 from outside might in time become an unwieldly body. 
 It might thus be well to limit the size of it from the 
 outset, and to lay down a rule that it should consist 
 definitely, say, of 500 members, 450 actual residents 
 and 50 representatives of other bodies. 
 
 A body of this kind might safely be released from 
 the absurd restrictions which now hamper the delibera- 
 tions of the Senate. Discussion and voting need no 
 longer be separated, 1 and amendments could be proposed 
 and carried. The power of initiative might also be given. 
 At present only the Council of the Senate can frame 
 and present Graces or legislative proposals. A fixed pro- 
 portion of members of the Electoral Roll might have the 
 same privilege conferred on it, say 25, or 5 per cent. This 
 would be a return to the ante- 1856 practice in a form 
 suited to modern conditions. If this number of members 
 agreed on a proposal, the Council would have to bring 
 forward a Grace embodying it, and submit it to the 
 general verdict. 
 
 Opportunity may here be taken to cite an instance of 
 the anomalous relations which still prevail between the 
 University and the Colleges — relations which, as Lord 
 Curzon points out, have never been defined. 2 On November 
 14th, 1912, the Vice-Chancellor addressed the following- 
 letter to each of the Masters of Colleges : — :1 
 
 "My Deae Sik— One of the earliest duties which 
 confronted me on entering upon the Vice-Chancellorship 
 was the adjudication on claims for admission to the 
 Electoral Roll. This duty— difficult enough in itself— is 
 
 i By Chapter III., Sec. 1, of the Statutes it is enacted that "no vote 
 shall be taken at the time of discussion." 
 
 2 Principles, p. 103. 
 3 Cambridge University Reporter. March 19th, 1912, p. 252. 
 
348 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 made more difficult to successive Vice-Chancellors by a 
 want of uniformity among the various Colleges in their 
 interpretation of what is meant by ' residence.' 
 
 " The Act of Parliament (TJie Cambridge University < 
 Act 1856) constituting the Electoral Roll (see Statutes, , 
 p. 123) requires for admission to the Roll (except in cases 
 of ex officio membership) that the candidate shall be a 
 Member of the Senate and shall have resided within one 
 mile and a half of Great S. Mary's Church for fourteen 
 weeks at the least between the first day of the preceding 
 Michaelmas Term and the first day of the [then] month 
 of October. 
 
 "Now it is clear that the only means the Vice-Chan- 
 cellor for the time being has of ascertaining these qualifi- 
 cations is through the authorities of the various Colleges; 
 and it seems to have been the practice hitherto to accept 
 this return without question. But some Colleges are 
 stricter in their interpretation of the Act of Parliament 
 than others ; and it is very difficult to adjudicate on the 
 claims of gentlemen whose names are omitted by their 
 College, but who can point to Members of other Colleges 
 with similar, or perhaps less satisfactory qualifications, 
 whose names have remained for years on the Electoral 
 Roll. 
 
 " The meaning of the word ' residence ' in the corre- 
 sponding Act for the University of Oxford was decided in 
 an action brought before the Court of Queen's Bench 
 (7 May, 1872), The Queen v. the Vice- Chancellor and the 
 Hebdomadal Council of the University of Oxford, when 
 Lord Chief Justice Cockburn said : ' " Resident " must 
 be construed strictly, . . it must be actual residence. 
 We must construe residence with reference to . the 
 obvious meaning of the word. Here residence is the 
 essence of the qualification. . . It is an actual, as 
 distinguished from a constructive, residence that is 
 required by the Act.' 
 
 "It has been held (1897, 2 Irish Reports, 563) that 
 ' residence ' means primarily the dwelling and home 
 where a man is supposed usually to live and sleep ; as 
 Lord Blackburn put it, ' a man's residence is where he 
 habitually sleeps' (1, O'M. & H., 1858). In the Oxford 
 case, the mere sleeping ' from time to time ' was held to 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 349 
 
 be insufficient. There must, to constitute an actual 
 residence, be a usual and habitual sleeping in the place. 
 
 " It seems to me that the Vice-Chancellor for the 
 time being is bound by the decision quoted above, and 
 that it is his duty to follow it in deciding any cases that 
 come before him. 
 
 " May I venture therefore to express the hope that 
 College authorities will in future make it their uniform 
 practice to adopt the strict interpretation of the word 
 ' residence ' in the preparation of their returns ? 
 "I am, 
 
 " Very faithfully yours, 
 
 " S. A. Donaldson, 
 
 " Vice-Chancellor." 
 
 The extraordinary spectacle is here presented of the 
 Colleges determining on their account, and in different 
 ways, who shall or shall not be members of a purely 
 University body. The Vice-Chancellor " ventures to 
 express the hope " that they will for the future all decide 
 in the same way, i.e. in the legal way ; but if a College 
 disregards this expression of opinion, and goes on doing 
 what it has always done, what then'? The Vice-Chancellor 
 can continue to express hopes, but he is otherwise power- 
 less. Have we not here an example of what the Oxford 
 Commissioners of 1850 so gently call "an unconsciousness 
 of the claims of the University " ? 
 
 (5) The Senate. 
 
 The Senate is the whole body of voters. It is made 
 up of all the Resident and Non-Resident Masters of Arts 
 or holders of a superior degree. These number about 
 7,000, and have a vote on practically all University matters. 
 This the Non-Residents only give on special occasions 
 (such as Degrees for Women, Compulsory Greek, or 
 Abolitions of Tests for Theological Degrees) ; but there 
 they are, vastly outnumbering the Residents, and ready 
 at any moment to act as a final Court of Appeal under a 
 system of Referendum, voting a simple Yes or No. 
 
 The Reform Committee, to which reference has so 
 often been made, and the Council of the Senate after it, 
 took up the question of the Senate first of all. They were 
 
350 UNIVEKSITY KEFORM. 
 
 confronted with two difficulties: (1) That the existing 
 M.A.'s are not fully representative of those who have 
 taken a degree, owing to the fact that a very large number 
 of B.A.'s do not proceed to their M.A. 1 ; (2) that the Non- 
 Residents are out of touch with University work and 
 thought, and thus are not competent to legislate for it. 
 As for (2), the Committee suggested 2 that the Residents 
 should be erected into a Legislative Assembly, and that 
 practically all business should come before it in the first 
 instance, but in every case an appeal was to " lie to the 
 Senate as a whole, provided that a sufficient number of 
 the opponents of the proposal submitted were prepared to 
 take the necessary steps." The Committee gave up the 
 attempt to assign separate functions to their reconsti- 
 tuted Electoral Roll, and the Senate. The Council of the 
 Senate proposed to legislate on similar lines, but, as has 
 already been told, the Non-Residents came up and carried 
 the day against it. 
 
 The common-sense outsider would probably give up 
 at once the idea of making some 7000 persons scattered all 
 over the habitable world the deciding body in the delicate 
 and complicated work of University education. He would 
 instinctively look to the men on the spot, to those 
 engaged in actual teaching or administration either in 
 the University or the Colleges, to direct what they, and 
 they alone, can be fully acquainted with. My own 
 personal conviction is that nothing can be made of the 
 Senate as a governing body. It will always remain an 
 obstruction to progress, however ingeniously its activities 
 may be limited. Lord Curzon favours the suspensory 
 veto. He says : s " It might, for instance, be enacted that 
 if a Statute were passed by Congregation by a certain 
 majority for two successive years, it should become law 
 unless it were thrown out by Convocation by an 
 equivalent or some other majority. Or it might be laid 
 down that if a measure passed Congregation by a certain 
 majority, it could only be rejected by a certain majority 
 of those voting in Convocation. Many variations of this 
 form of limited prerogative will suggest themselves. 
 
 i In 1909 over 800 men took the B.A., and about 320 the M.A. 
 2 Report, p. 2. 3 Principles and Methods, p. 40. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 351 
 
 These ideas of reform seem to follow the line of least 
 resistance." Let those who favour such schemes frame 
 them. My own preference is for self-government. The 
 argument for self-government is strengthened by the 
 particular form of the Electoral Roll proposed above. 
 The 50 representatives of outside bodies, who presumably 
 would be men of eminence in their own departments, 
 would never consent to see the decisions they had helped 
 to make, overridden by a body of more or less ignorant 
 outsiders. 
 
 The adoption of a reformed Electoral Roll as the 
 governing body of the University would have the further 
 advantage of settling the Women's Degrees difficulty. 
 Why women who have passed the same examinations as 
 the men should not be allowed to write the same letters 
 after their names is a thing hard to be understood. The 
 reason at the bottom of the opposition is that familiar 
 friend, " the thin end of the wedge." It is feared that if 
 women were allowed to take the M.A. degree, they might 
 go on to claim membership of the Senate, and a share in the 
 government of the University. But if the mere taking 
 the M.A. no longer made a man a member of the 
 governing body of the University, this fear would vanish, 
 and a particularly odious incapacity be abolished by 
 general consent. 
 
 Section III. Adjustment of the University to National 
 
 Education. 
 
 The third branch of University Reform is to bring 
 the reorganised University into touch and true relations 
 with the rest of our system of National Education. 1 
 Some may argue that effort in this direction is super- 
 fluous, that our ancient Universities are adapting 
 themselves to modern conditions, and they may point 
 for proof to the increase in the number of students, the 
 multiplication of subjects of study, and the corresponding 
 
 i The question of the relation of Universities and University Colleges 
 to Secondary Education is discussed in the Report of the Royal Com- 
 mission on Secondary Education 1895, pp. 218-255. Points of special 
 interest are: Effect of the Entrance Scholarships, pp. 221-224; Poverty 
 qualification and Local Authorities, p. 226 ; Reduction in value of 
 Scholarships, p. 226 ; Proper age for Matriculation, pp. 230-232 ; Uni- 
 versity Extension and Secondary Education, pp. 249-254. 
 
352 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 growth of the teaching staff. These contentions deserve 
 investigation. 
 
 Let us take the number of students first. The 
 modern history of Cambridge University begins at 1850, 
 the date of the first Royal Commission. During the 30 I 
 years, 1850 to 1880, the numbers of Freshmen were 
 exactly doubled, rising from 400 to 800 per annum. 1 In 
 1882 the new Statutes came into force, both for the 
 University and the Colleges, as the result of the Act of 
 1877. The upward movement continued at Cambridge, 
 and in 1887 the matriculations for the first time exceeded 
 a thousand, the exact number being 1,012. It was three 
 years before the thousand was again reached, the 
 matriculations for 1890 being 1,027. Then another drop 
 took place, and 16 years elapsed before there was another 
 four-figure entry. The numbers for recent years are : — 
 
 Year. 
 
 Matriculations 
 
 1906 
 
 1,067 
 
 1907 
 
 1,083 
 
 1908 
 
 1,164 
 
 1909 
 
 1,163 
 
 191U 
 
 1,218 
 
 1911 
 
 1,191 
 
 1912 
 
 1,156 
 
 These figures represent a growth with many fluctuations. 
 Here are two striking facts. Both Oxford and Cambridge 
 were in the first quarter of the Seventeenth Century as 
 large as they were till 1850, that is, for 225 years ; and, 
 secondly, if there were now the same proportion to popu- 
 lation of students entering as there was in 1600-1625, 
 Oxford and Cambridge would be receiving annually 5,000 
 freshmen. The proportion in 1630 was one in every 3,600 
 of the male population of England and Wales ; at the 
 present day it is one in 9.000. 2 This cannot be regarded 
 as an exhilarating result. The slow rate of progress 
 points to something wrong somewhere. 
 
 It is not that Cambridge has gone back to the 
 slumbers of the eighteenth century. On the contrary, it 
 has made persistent and courageous efforts to adapt itself 
 to modern conditions. The last fifty years, and especially 
 the last twenty-five years, show a great increase in the 
 number of subjects taught, and of people to teach them. 
 
 i Venn, Matriculations, p. 17. 2 lb. p. 12. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 353 
 
 Originally there was but one Tripos at Cambridge— 
 the Mathematical. 
 
 In 1815, came the Civil Law Classes — now the Law 
 Tripos ; in 1824, the Classical Tripos. Then there was a 
 long pause. The first burst of activity was from 1851 to 
 1856, during which time the Moral Sciences Tripos, the 
 Natural Sciences Tripos, and the Theological Tripos were 
 founded. Then came another pause of nearly twenty 
 years, after which the modern period fairly set in. 
 
 In 1875, the Historical Tripos was founded; in 1878, 
 the Semitic Languages Tripos ; in 1879, the Indian Lan- 
 guages Tripos ; in 1886, the Mediaeval and Modern Lan- 
 guages Tripos ; in 1894, the Mechanical Sciences Tripos ; 
 in 1895, the Oriental Languages Tripos (which took the 
 places of the Semitic Languages and the Indian Languages 
 Triposes) ; and in 1905, the Economics Tripos. This year 
 (1913) an Anthropological Tripos has been agreed to. 
 
 Since 1875 the number of Triposes has grown from 
 six to twelve, or exactly twice as many. To put the facts 
 in another way— a student can now take Honours in 
 Mathematics, Classics, Law, Natural Science, Moral 
 Science, Theology, History, Oriental Languages (includ- 
 ing Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, Sanskrit, Persian, and 
 Chinese), in Mediaeval and Modern Languages (including 
 English, Icelandic, Gothic, French, Italian, Spanish, 
 Portuguese, German, and Russian), in Engineering, 
 Economics, and Anthropology. Degrees can be taken in 
 Medicine and Music, and Diplomas are given for Agricul- 
 ture, Anthropology, Architecture, Forestry, Geography, 
 Mining Engineering, Psychological Medicine, Sanitary 
 Science, and Tropical Medicine. Men can be trained 
 practically as physicians and surgeons at Addenbrooke's 
 Hospital, as engineers in the Mechanical Laboratory, 
 as farmers at the Experimental Farm on Madingley Road, 
 as teachers at the Day Training College, and for the 
 Army in the Officers' Training Corps. They can also be 
 specially prepared for the Indian Civil Service and the 
 Foreign Service. Finally, they can be admitted as 
 Advanced Students in various branches of learning ; that 
 is to say, members of other Universities, or, in special 
 cases, persons who are not members of a University at 
 all, may enter as advanced students and obtain a degree. 
 
354 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 There has been a corresponding increase in the 
 number of teachers. Since 1870, fourteen additional Pro- 
 fessorships have been founded. There are now fifty-one 
 Professors, fourteen Readers, sixty-four University Lec- 
 turers, eighteen University Teachers, and thirty-five 
 Demonstrators. In 1870 there was one Demonstrator and 
 one Teacher. The above list, which does not include the 
 Lecturers in Military Science, Mining Engineering, or 
 Forestry, makes a total of 182 teachers of one grade or 
 another. The College Lecturers number some 200, so 
 that the teaching staff of the University and Colleges 
 combined numbers about 380, or about one teacher for 
 every ten undergraduates. Cambridge strives to teach all 
 that a complicated modern society can demand to know. 
 The cause of its stagnation in numbers is not its failure 
 to provide the best and most varied instruction. 
 
 Multiplication of Buildings. 
 
 Nor does the cause lie in the refusal to spend money 
 on buildings and equipment. This point was well put by 
 Mr. Dickson of Peterhouse, in the last debate on Com- 
 pulsory Greek at Cambridge. " Since 1882," he said, 
 " they had spent on an average ±'15,000 a year to make 
 themselves more efficient — or in the last 15 years £225,000. 
 They had recently also spent ±100,000 on new buildings — 
 say ±300,000 altogether in 15 years — and they had no 
 increase to show in the number of their students. Why 
 was this ? " 
 
 There is no mystery about the obstacle in the way of the 
 expansion of Cambridge — it is the heavy cost of a University 
 education. Mark Pattison put the matter in a nutshell 
 when he wrote : " Let Oxford become the first school of 
 science and learning in the world, and at the same time 
 let it be accessible at the cost only of board and lodging, 
 and it will attract pupils enough." ' On this point issue 
 must be joined with the Reform Committee, who in their 
 Report say : " The Committee are of opinion that, with 
 the large sums given to students, a Cambridge education 
 is accessible to any student, however poor, who has given 
 evidence of ability." 2 They arrive at this conclusion in 
 the following way : — 
 
 i Suggestions, p. 81. 2 Report, p. 16. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 355 
 
 " The Committee have given some consideration to 
 the question of University and College fees, and to the 
 necessary expense incurred by the student at Cambridge. 
 
 " The fees paid to the University by each under- 
 graduate (who takes his degree in the normal course in nine 
 terms), for Matriculation, Capitation Tax, Examination 
 and Degree fees, amount in all to about £25, spread over 
 the three years. The Colleges are also taxed by the 
 University on the payments made to them by their 
 members, 1 so that indirectly a somewhat larger sum is 
 received by the University from undergraduates. 
 
 " Apart from College fees for admission and degrees, 
 the fixed payments made to the Colleges for tuition and 
 establishment charges range from £30 to £40 per annum 
 for each student. Other expenses vary with the habits 
 and requirements of each student. 
 
 " The Committee, after investigating the subject, are 
 of opinion that the expenses of a careful student need not 
 exceed £120 for the Academic year. This does not 
 include the student's expenses during the vacations, nor 
 his clothes, nor travelling expenses. Students studying 
 Medicine or Natural Science incur special expenses for 
 laboratory fees which increase the cost on the average by 
 about £20 a year. The expense to a student of Engineer- 
 ing is somewhat greater. If a student resides during 
 the usual portion of the Long Vacation he incurs an 
 additional expense of £12 to £25, according to the amount 
 of instruction required. 
 
 " The Committee are informed that a sum of £80 or 
 £90 will enable a Non-Collegiate student to meet his 
 Cambridge expenses for the Academic year. 
 
 " In view of the increasing demands made on both 
 the University and the Colleges, the Committee cannot 
 anticipate any diminution in the fixed charges made to 
 students by the University and the Colleges. As regards 
 the variable expenses of undergraduates, the Committee 
 are of opinion that the principle of fixed inclusive charges, 
 already adopted at some Colleges, whether in connection 
 with the hostel system or not, affords an effective means 
 by which the expenditure of the student can be regulated 
 and reduced. 
 
 l i.e. on half the tuition tees. 
 
356 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 " The Committee, hpwever, believe that, as stated 
 above, and with the exceptions specified, a careful student 
 attached to a College may cover his Cambridge expenses 
 for £120 a year, and that a Non-Collegiate student may 
 cover his expenses for £80 or £90 a year. In both cases 
 these amounts may with great economy be diminished 
 still further. 
 
 " In the consideration of expense the amount of help 
 given by the Colleges to the students should be borne in 
 mind. College Scholarships and Exhibitions amount to 
 over £35,000 a year. Much additional help is given to 
 students who stand in special need of further assistance, 
 whether scholars or not." 
 
 Some further examination of these figures is necessary 
 before their full force is realised. The £120, which a 
 careful student is supposed to find sufficient, does not 
 include " expenses during the vacations, nor his clothes, 
 nor travelling expenses." Men are " up " about eight 
 weeks each term, or 24 weeks in the year. There are 
 therefore 28 other weeks during which they have to be 
 maintained. Reckoning the cost of this at the moderate 
 sum of 10s. a week, a further £14 must be added to the 
 £120. Clothes will cost at least £20 a year ; and if the 
 student resides at an average distance of 120 miles from 
 Cambridge, six journeys to and fro will cost £3. Most 
 men like to play games, and in many Colleges there is 
 a lump sum per term which covers all the Clubs. In 
 a College bill which lies before me, College Clubs are 
 £1 15s. per term, or £5 5s. Od. a year. There is no 
 compulsion to pay this subscription, but it will be readily 
 understood that it makes a difference to a man's position 
 whether he does so or not. Is this, or a similar item, 
 included in the £120, and is any allowance made for 
 books and pocket money ? Assuming that everything 
 has been reckoned in, the £120 has still grown to £157, 
 without counting Long Vacation expenses. To this, 
 £20 must be added in the case of Natural Science 
 students ; and £25, say, for Engineering students. The 
 £157 rises in these cases to £177 and £182, and it is the 
 students from the more recently founded Secondary 
 Schools who take these subjects — a poorer class as con- 
 trasted with those who come from the great Public 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 357 
 
 Schools. If a Long Vacation is added, with from £12 to 
 £25 extra, the figures mount again to £189 and £207. 
 
 There is another point to be considered. The heaviest 
 financial burden comes on the parent at the beginning of 
 his son's University career. Let us suppose the son in 
 question takes the Previous Examination in October 
 immediately before entering. There will then be : — 
 Previous Examination Fee, £3 10s. 0d.; Matriculation 
 Fee, £5 0s. 0d.; Caution Money to College, £15 0s. 0d.; 
 Entrance Fee to College (varying), say, £2 10s. Od. ; or 
 £25 10s. Od. in all. If the student takes rooms in College 
 there will be furniture to be paid for, (unless the rooms 
 are let furnished at a higher rent), and £25 will be a 
 moderate sum wherewith to furnish and equip a sitting- 
 room, a bed-room, and a gyp-room. Here then is an 
 initial expenditure of £50 down, with at least £150, and it 
 may be £200, for three years more. This is a long way 
 from the Mark Pattison ideal of a University accessible 
 at the cost of board and lodging only. 
 
 Of course there is, on the other side, the plea of the 
 special help given by the Colleges, amounting to the very 
 large sum of £35,000 a year. Cambridge University is an 
 expensive place of education, with its costliness tempered 
 by a system of Scholarships and Exhibitions. The next 
 step is to examine this system. We must begin by 
 distinguishing between Scholarships and Exhibitions : 
 the former being prizes given for ability in examinations ; 
 the latter, strictly speaking, being bestowed as charitable 
 gifts to help poverty. 
 
 The Scholarship system can best be tested by giving 
 the actual awards. Taking the current academical year 
 1912-1913, in four of the smaller Colleges the results are 
 not accessible to the public ; of the thirteen remaining 
 Colleges, three give only the subjects for which the 
 awards are made, and the remainder give both the 
 subjects and the amounts. The results given are accord- 
 ingly only approximate. They are as follows : — 
 
 Number of Scholarships awarded. 
 
 Modern 
 Mathe- Engi- Lan- 
 
 Classics. matics. Science. History, neering. guages. Hebrew. Total. 
 60i 37 £ 40£ 2H 1 5 1 167 
 
358 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 (Where a Scholarship is given for two subjects, half is 
 counted to each.) 
 
 The money values, so far as they are given, are : 
 
 Modern 
 Mathe- Engi- Lan- 
 
 Classics. matics. Science. History, neering. guages. Hebrew. Total. 
 £ £ £ £'£ £ £ £ 
 
 2,410 1,935 1,955 740 80 140 40 7,300 
 
 At Cambridge, as at Oxford, 1 Classics head the list. 
 Its predominance would be increased if the money values 
 for King's were available. The four Entrance Scholar- 
 ships appropriated at that College to Eton and the Open 
 Entrance Scholarships are mainly given in this subject- 
 Cambridge does far more for Mathematics and Science 
 than Oxford. History too is better helped ; as at Oxford 
 less than one-fifth of the number of Scholarships are 
 given for it, as compared with the number given for 
 Classics, while the proportion at Cambridge is just over 
 a third. Cambridge has thus shown itself much more 
 open to modern influences than Oxford, especially with 
 regard to Science. The predominance of Science over both 
 Classics and Mathematics in the number of its students 
 is the great feature of modern Cambridge. For all that, 
 Classics remain the chief bounty-fed subject. The great 
 Public Schools carry off the lion's share of the spoils in the 
 shape of Scholarships. These Schools are the recognised 
 highways to the Universities ; and by adding Science to 
 the two older subjects they have contrived to maintain 
 their ancient superiority. The candidates who are the best 
 prepared have the best chance. The rich foundations 
 win the prizes because of the splendid tuition which they 
 can give. The result is that many of the Scholarships 
 are won by men who do not need them. What propor- 
 tion these bear to the whole number it is impossible to 
 say, but most people will put it higher than Lord Curzon 
 does. He has his own special standard of poverty, and in 
 proportion as that standard is lowered we shall approxi- 
 mate to Bishoj) Gore's statement, that two out of five, or 
 40 per cent, of the scholars of Oxford, do not need the 
 emoluments they receive. 2 
 
 1 See Lord Curzon's table at p. 77 of his book. 
 2 Principles and Methods, pp. 82, 83. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 359 
 
 Exhibitions raise the difficult question of helping 
 poverty. To inquire into a man's means is always an 
 invidious task, and the Colleges are ill-fitted to perform 
 it. If it is to be done at all, it had better be done locally. 
 And here surely there might be more co-operation between 
 the Universities and the County Councils and the 
 County Borough Councils acting as the local education 
 authorities. Most of these bodies have Scholarship 
 schemes which include the helping of poor students to 
 take a University course. They have special facilities for 
 finding out the real financial position of parents and 
 guardians. 
 
 Scholarships and Exhibitions then are mere pallia- 
 tives ; they do not go to the root of the matter, and the 
 problem of the expensiveness of a University career still 
 faces the reformer as it did in 1854, and 1856, and again in 
 1877. In the Acts of 1854 and 1856 the great idea was to 
 provide Halls or Hostels for poor men. The Halls never 
 got started in any appreciable number. Where they exist 
 to-day they are not popular, and men escape from them as 
 soon as they can. A Hostel saves expense by having more 
 meals in common and by other boarding school arrange- 
 ments. The men envy the greater freedom of rooms or 
 lodgings, and are apt to think they are looked down upon 
 by the other undergraduates as socially inferior. After 
 the Hostels came the Non-Collegiate or Unattached Stu- 
 dent scheme. This again is a failure, as far as Cambridge 
 is concerned. The tables given above show that the per- 
 centage of Honour degrees to Matriculations at Fitzwilliam 
 Hall is 7"2, and in Poll degrees 24*0, that is to say, less than 
 one-third of all the men who enter the University as Non- 
 Collegiate students take a degree as such. This does not 
 mean that they are either lazier or more stupid than the 
 other men, but that they get into a College as soon as 
 they can. The attractions of College life are too much for 
 them. It was in vain that the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 got his amendment inserted in the Act of 1877 [Clause 
 16 (11)] enabling the University Commissioners "to make 
 provision for diminishing the expense of University 
 education by founding Scholarships tenable by students 
 either at any College or Hall within the University, or 
 as unattached students, or by paying salaries to the 
 
360 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 
 
 teachers of such unattached students, or by otherwise 
 encouraging such unattached students." This provision 
 remained a dead letter. 
 
 Hostels, the Non-Collegiate student system, the 
 Exhibition system, including Sizarships, all labour under 
 the disadvantage of differentiating between men, and so 
 introducing class distinctions. What is wanted is a 
 reduction of expense which shall be common to every- 
 body. This is matter of the more economical use of 
 existing resources, which is again a matter of organisation. 
 Three methods of effecting economies have already been 
 suggested : (1) The centralised administration of College 
 property and business; (2) the abolition of emoluments 
 for Fellowships; (3) a centralised system of teaching. 
 A fourth method would be to use to greater advantage 
 the £35,000 a year, now spent on Scholarships. Let a 
 portion of the savings from these four sources be used in 
 abolishing all worrying fees and dues, such as Matricu- 
 lation fees, Capitation Tax, Entrance fees to College, 
 Caution Money and terminal payments to College, and 
 above all let the tuition fees both in College and 
 University be reduced, or if possible abolished altogether. 
 Then an approximation will be made to the democratic 
 ideal of board and lodging expenses and nothing beyond. 
 Let the Colleges offer Scholarships only, and these of 
 reduced amount, and let the Local Authorities come in 
 with supplementary grants in aid. These need not be 
 known to the Universities at all, and thus no class 
 distinctions would be created. If the strain on the Local 
 Authorities proved too great, the Government might fairly 
 be asked to step in and increase the grant for Secondary 
 Education, so that no student fit to come to the 
 University should be left outside. 
 
 It will not be possible, nor would it be advisable, to 
 do away with Scholarships altogether. Mark Pattison, 
 who has been thought a misanthrope, had in this respect a 
 touching faith in human nature. He says 1 : " Free intel- 
 ligence as such has an elasticity of its own. The mind in 
 its spring puts itself forth on all sides. It requires no 
 stimulation, but only to be directed. The reason, by its 
 
 i Essays on the Endowment of Research, pp. 17, 18. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 361 
 
 own nature, seeks truth. The young mind desires to 
 know, to explore the unknown, to find out the nature and 
 causes of things. The task of the teacher is easy; it is 
 only to satisfy this longing. He has but to guide and 
 aid ; he may have to restrain ardour, never to urge 
 reluctance. The stimulus to acquisition is within. . . 
 This method is wholly voluntary ; it submits to no com- 
 pulsion from the State, it employs no artificial allure- 
 ments, but depends entirely upon the attraction which 
 Science, Letters, and the humanities exert upon the classes 
 possessed of wealth and leisure. In opposition to this 
 method stands the method of recruitment by bounties." 
 
 The faults of our systems of elementary and second- 
 ary education may be the cause why this spontaneous 
 desire for knowledge is not more often seen ; but here 
 again the reformer must take things as they are. Emula- 
 tion is a stimulus to learning, and as such cannot yet be 
 dispensed with. The Scholar's distinctive gown and his 
 special table in Hall are stimuli of an inexpensive charac- 
 ter, and might be generally adopted. Besides these, there 
 must be Scholarships, but these should be awarded in 
 a far more scientific manner than at present. The 
 Scholarship system, as it exists at Cambridge, is open to 
 several grave objections. The date of the Examinations 
 is too early. On May 16th of this year the great group of 
 six Colleges — Pembroke, Caius, Jesus, Christ's, St. John's 
 and Emmanuel — offered 56 Entrance Scholarships and 
 a large number of Exhibitions to be competed for on 
 December 2nd next. The Examinations for Trinity, 
 Clare and Trinity Hall will be held on the same date. 
 Of old, Entrance Scholarship Examinations used to be 
 held in March or April. In the eagerness of the Colleges 
 to be first in the field and so carry off the best men, the 
 date has been gradually moved forward till it is now at 
 the very beginning of December — nearly a year before the 
 successful candidates enter the University. Two dis- 
 advantages result. Students at this period of their mental 
 development often come on very rapidly, and an examina- 
 tion of the same candidates held some months later would 
 in many cases show different results. Candidates should 
 be tested as near the time of their coming up as possible. 
 Again, the winner of a Scholarship is tempted to think 
 
362 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 he has already attained, and, by a natural reaction, to 
 rest on his oars. A later date of examination would 
 minimise this disadvantage. With groups of Colleges 
 and single Colleges holding examinations at different 
 times for Scholarships of different values, there must 
 inevitably be different standards and different degrees 
 of merit. Some who deserve to succeed fail, because they 
 go where the competition is excessive, and some succeed, 
 who, because the competition is small and the standard 
 low, deserve to fail. The University obviously ought to 
 step in and hold the examination itself, so that there 
 should be one standard for all alike. Candidates would 
 be allowed to put down their names for any College or 
 group of Colleges in the order in which they preferred 
 them, and in the event of success would be assigned to 
 the College of their choice so far as was possible. Scholar- 
 ships should be of two sorts only, Minor and Major, say 
 of i'40 and £60 a year each. Both should be tenable for 
 one year only as a period of probation. The University 
 should examine again at the end of the year, displacing 
 the College "Mays." Then the election would be to a 
 Foundation Scholarship for two years, with power to 
 the Colleges to prolong it for a third year. Honours men 
 taking the first and second parts of a Tripos would thus 
 be examined at the end of each year of their course, and 
 would thereby be kept up to the mark. The number of 
 Scholarships in each subject should not be definitely 
 fixed beforehand ; and the examination should be in all the 
 subjects which can properly be taught at school, Classics 
 Mathematics, the Natural Sciences, History, and Modern 
 Languages. Those who come up to standard in any 
 one (or more) of these should have scholarships awarded 
 them, so far as the funds available permit. There should 
 no longer be any specially bounty-fed subject. 
 
 The Colleges ma}' be expected to offer strong opposition 
 to these proposals. They are keen to win reputation for 
 themselves by distinctions in the Triposes, and Scholar- 
 ships are the natural means for achieving this end. 
 After what has been said about the principle of 
 emulation, it is impossible to condemn the Colleges on 
 this count. But there is another road to the same result. 
 Let the grouped Colleges vie with one another in giving 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 3G3 
 
 the best instruction and the best supervision, and they 
 will have no cause to complain either of the number or 
 the ability of the students they attract. 
 
 A University fails to do its duty as a constituent 
 part of a national system of education, if it does not 
 make it as easy as possible for all deserving students to 
 avail themselves of the advantages it offers; so also it 
 fails in its duty if it does not exclude the undeserving. 
 At present there are many men kept away from Cam- 
 bridge who ought to be here, and many here who would 
 be better away. As an all-round reduction in the expense 
 of a University course is needed in the case of the one set, 
 so a University Entrance Examination is needed in the 
 case of the other. The demand for this examina- 
 tion is a very old one. As long ago as December 
 8th, 1847, a Grace was offered for the appointment 
 of a Syndicate to consider the expediency of insti- 
 tuting an examination of all students (except those 
 of King's College) previous to their residence. It 
 was rejected in the Caput. On January 14th, 1849, the 
 Rev. J. J. Smith, of Caius College, proposed a Grace to the 
 same effect. It was rejected in the Non-Regent House 
 the votes being : Placets, 11 ; Non-Placets, 29. 1 Nor has 
 the proposal lacked influential support. Whewell, Donald- 
 son, Blakesley, Merivale, and Wratislaw were all in favour 
 of it, to mention no others. The Oxford Commissioners 
 of 1850 expressly recommended it. Archbishop Whately 
 held that every other reform would fail if this particular 
 one was omitted. Newman, as we have seen, selected the 
 absence of a University Entrance Examination as the 
 most conspicuous example of the way in which the 
 Colleges had set their own interests before those of the 
 University. Lord Curzon 2 calls attention to the fact that 
 Oxford and Cambridge are the only two Universities in 
 the world which have not the right of laying down their 
 own terms of admission, and urges all the arguments 
 that need be used in favour of giving them this right. The 
 resistance still conies from the same quarter. The 
 Colleges, as boarding-schools, do not like to be empty 
 
 i Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, Vol. IV., pp. 697, 707. 
 2 Principles, p. 103. 
 
364 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 while their neighbours are full ; and, further, with their 
 present system of finance and administration, they require 
 all they can get in order to keep going. They are thus 
 tempted to admit anybody who can pay his bills, what- 
 ever his attainments or want of attainments. An 
 Entrance Examination would keep out many who now 
 come in; therefore the Colleges will have none of it. Here 
 is one explanation of the 21 per cent, of men who enter 
 Cambridge and leave it without taking a degree. This 
 year a Memorial was presented to the Senate asking for 
 the appointment of a Syndicate " to consider the whole 
 question of Examinations conducted by the University 
 for which preparation nominally takes place at School." 
 The Memorial finishes thus : — " We should not suggest 
 that the University should interfere with the present 
 freedom of the Colleges to admit students who have not 
 passed the Previous Examination, as such legislation 
 might operate harshly in particular cases." Exactly so. 
 Nothing but an Act of Parliament will, I fear, ever give 
 Oxford and Cambridge a University Entrance Examina- 
 tion. 
 
 The Colleges, for all that, have been taken in the flank 
 by the course of events. The obvious necessity of an 
 Entrance Examination has led to the Previous Examina- 
 tion, or Little-Go, gradually approximating thereto. The 
 Previous, it may be explained, is not an examination held 
 previous to entrance, but previous to any further examina- 
 tion. When it was first instituted 1 it used to be held in 
 an undergraduate's fifth term, just half-way through his 
 course, which was then eleven terms. The Cambridge 
 Commissioners of 1850 noted that the Colleges had up till 
 then defeated all attempts to put it earlier. They were in 
 dread of the thin end of the wedge. But later attempts 
 were more successful. The date was moved forward to 
 the Lent Term of the first year; now the Examination 
 may be taken before residence. Other Examinations may 
 also be substituted for it: as the Senior Local, and the 
 Oxford and Cambridge School Examinations. So it has 
 
 i The Grace establishing the Examination was passed on March 
 13th, 1822; the first Examination took place in the Lent Term, 1824, 
 for undergraduates who had come into residence in October, 1822. 
 —Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., p. 535. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 365 
 
 come about that a large number of students pass the 
 Previous Examination, or its equivalent, before beginning 
 residence. But the present state of things is not satisfac- 
 tory. What is already done by many should henceforth 
 be done by all. Nor is the Previous a suitable test ; on 
 the contrary, it is one of the most grotesquely absurd 
 examinations on the face of the earth. Something better 
 must be substituted for it. 
 
 The Memorialists above mentioned are obviously 
 on right lines when they suggest " that it might be 
 advisable to create a single examining body which should 
 control both the Previous Examination and the exam- 
 inations at present conducted by the Highest Grade 
 Schools Examination Syndicate and the Local Examin- 
 ations Syndicate." Such a body could frame a proper 
 Entrance Examination, excluding therefrom Compulsory 
 Greek, which is a great obstacle in the way of boys coming 
 from the newer Secondary Schools. There seems no 
 reason why this same body should not also hold the 
 Entrance Scholarship Examination which might be the 
 Honours portion of what the Entrance Examination 
 would be the Pass portion. The University has appointed 
 the Syndicate asked for, and it is to report before the end 
 of the Lent Term, 1914. 
 
 Here again Oxford is ahead of Cambridge. A Statute 
 for the reform of Responsions 1 (the Oxford equivalent 
 of the Previous Examination) will be promulgated in 
 Congregation on Tuesday, October 21. It provides that 
 Responsions shall in future be conducted b} T the Delegates 
 for the Inspection and Examination of Schools, and 
 makes important new regulations. The distinction 
 between stated and additional subjects is retained, the 
 stated subjects being: (1) Greek; (2) Latin; (3) English; 
 (4) Elementary Mathematics; and (5) one subject selected 
 from a list which includes French, German, Italian, 
 Spanish, English History, Geography, Elementary Politics, 
 Elementary Logic, Elementary Trigonometry, Statics and 
 Dynamics, and Elementary Physics and Chemistry. The 
 Examinations will be held in March, July, September, 
 and December, at Oxford, and at such schools and other 
 
 i See The Times, May 29th, 1913. 
 
3(56 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 places as the Delegates for the Inspection of Schools may 
 determine, and a candidate may satisfy the Examiners in 
 the same or in separate Examinations, provided that the 
 Delegates may prescribe that every candidate shall in one 
 Examination satisfy the Examiners in English and in 
 other subjects. Additional subjects, necessary for certain 
 subsequent Examinations, may be chosen from the 
 optional stated subjects. The general purpose of the 
 Statute is to substitute for Responsions the school 
 certificates of the Oxford and Cambridge Board. With 
 the exception of (1) the alternative of set books in Greek 
 and Latin, and (2) the addition of the optional subjects, 
 the Examination will be of the same character and 
 standard as that for school certificates. 
 
 If this Statute receives the approval of Congregation, 
 a further Statute will be promulgated, the purpose of 
 which is to provide that candidates for the ordinary Arts 
 course shall not be allowed to matriculate until they have 
 passed in at least three of the subjects required for 
 Responsions, and to make provision for conferring a 
 temporary status on certain " candidates for matricula- 
 tion," who will be subject to University discipline, and, if 
 they are ultimately matriculated, will be entitled to count 
 the period during which they had the status, for purposes 
 of standing and residence. This last regulation applies to 
 candidates for Diplomas, Research Degrees, and Degrees 
 in Music. A further Statute will be required dealing 
 with examination exempting from Responsions. 
 
 These proposals go a long way towards establishing 
 an Entrance Examination. It seems a pity that they do 
 not go the whole way. 
 
 Our ideal University has now been adjusted to the 
 national system of education in three ways : (1) The 
 expense of a University course has been reduced to a 
 minimum ; (2) the unfit have been excluded by a proper 
 Entrance Examination ; (3) the teaching has been made 
 sufficient and of the best. The fourth requisite is that 
 the students shall be duly tested in the instruction given, 
 and true certificates issued of the results. 
 
 We are thus led to the subject of Examinations and 
 Degrees. A strange fact confronts the inquirer at the 
 threshold. As everybody is supposed to be able to teach 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 367 
 
 in a Secondary School or a University without any 
 previous training, so is he supposed to be able to 
 examine by the light of nature. The supposition is a 
 dangerous one with regard to teaching ; it is still more 
 dangerous with regard to examining. A teacher may 
 make a mistake one day, and put it right the next ; 
 but an examiner, when once his verdict is announced, 
 has no opportunity of revising it, and may unwittingly 
 damage or wreck an examinee's career for the whole 
 of his life. Cases from time to time crop up of 
 candidates who unaccountably fail in their exam- 
 inations. Are there no examiners' mistakes among 
 them? Again, as an examiner's work is peculiarly delicate 
 and important, one would expect to find it particularly 
 well paid. On the contrary, it is as a rule badly paid, and 
 is looked on as an odd job by which a few pounds can be 
 picked up at times when other work is slack. Strange 
 that in a country where there are so many examinations, 
 and where so much depends on them, there should be so 
 little system. This aspect of the case seems almost 
 entirely to have escaped notice, and among the many 
 educationists with whom the writing of this history has 
 brought me in contact, I have found only one who 
 has been struck by it. The late Dean Merivale, in his 
 evidence before the Royal Commissioners of 1850, said ' : — 
 " The conclusions to which I have come are these : What 
 is faulty and imperfect in private tuition can only be 
 corrected and supplied by raising the standard of College 
 and Professorial Lectures, and by care in framing 
 College and University Examinations. Much of the 
 imperfection of our system is to be traced to the 
 inexperience of examiners, and the absence of control 
 and system which pervades the Examinations. Education 
 in the present day, with the abundance of books and 
 other helps, must, I conceive, tend more and more to 
 become a cycle of Examinations ; and our best endeavours 
 ought to be directed to improving our system in this 
 respect. 
 
 " In framing a system of Classical Examinations, such 
 as I should like to see instituted in the University, it 
 
 i Report, pp. 174, 175. 
 
368 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 would be important to lead the students seriatim 
 through a range of proper authors. . . 
 
 "I think that it is vain to attempt to assign by- 
 legislative enactment the due place and subordination of 
 Professors, College Tutors, and private assistants. These 
 must and will be regulated by the sense the students 
 entertain of their own interests. The only security the 
 University can have for the efficiency of the instruction 
 imparted through any of these channels is through its 
 Examinations. . . I conceive that the University has 
 the power of securing that which is the main point to 
 aim at by a carefully and methodically arranged system 
 of Examinations. At present, the most important 
 Classical Examination (that for the Classical Tripos) is 
 confided to very young and inexperienced examiners, and 
 great complaints are heard of the variable and capricious 
 manner in which it has frequently been conducted. 
 
 " Without presuming to give the details of the system 
 I would recommend, I venture to urge that the object to 
 be attained is a full, searching, and methodical examin- 
 ation of the Classical Students three times, at least, in 
 the course of their three years. . . If there be these 
 three General Examinations appointed, the authors to be 
 redd, and the kinds of composition to be practised, should 
 be fixed and arranged on a certain system. All this 
 would require a perfect understanding between the 
 various Examiners, and it could only be worked under 
 the supervision of a Board. It would be necessary, I 
 conceive, to combine a Board of Permanent Examiners 
 with a Staff of a more fluctuating character. . . I 
 would try to reduce examination to a science." 
 
 The University of Cambridge has instituted a Board 
 of Examinations, which made its first appearance in the 
 University Calendar for 1874. It was confined in the 
 first instance to the Previous and General Examinations, 
 but has since been extended to the Specials, so that it has 
 practically to do only with those Examinations which 
 lead to a Poll as distinguished from an Honours Degree. 
 It is the duty of the Board to consult together from time 
 to time on all matters relating to the Examinations in 
 question, and to nominate the Examiners. Here is the 
 beginning of what Merivale desired to see. There should 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 369 
 
 be a Board dealing with the Examinations as a whole. 
 Some kind of training or preparation for Examination 
 work would then be feasible. A beginner could be set to 
 do simple work under supervision, and as he showed him- 
 self competent and acquired experience, he could work his 
 way up. When he had proved himself possessed of special 
 capacity, he would be eligible for a permanent place on 
 the Board. 
 
 The facts of the case emphasise the need for more 
 system. Triposes in general are now divided into two 
 parts which cannot be taken in the same year. One 
 Tripos, the Oriental Languages, remains undivided. The 
 First Part of the Mathematical Tripos may be taken 
 at the end of the student's first year, no other First Part 
 can be taken till the end of the second year; a Second 
 Part cannot, as a rule, be taken till the end of the third 
 year ; but in the Theological Tripos, the First Part cannot 
 be taken till the end of the third year, when both parts 
 may be taken at once. It is also possible to take this 
 Tripos up to the end of one's fifth year. In most of 
 the Triposes, passing Part I. is now sufficient for a degree, 
 provided a Special (the final Examination for the Ordinary 
 Degree) other than that in the subject in which the 
 candidate has already been examined, be taken in 
 addition. As Part I. of the Mathematical Tripos may 
 be taken at the end of the first year, an undergraduate 
 may spend two years in passing any Special except the 
 Mathematical — an extraordinary waste of time. A Part I. 
 Law man may take any Special. These regulations gave 
 rise to a difficulty. Part I. of a Tripos is generally taken 
 at the end of the second year, but three years' residence 
 is necessary for a degree. A Special is contemptible in 
 the eyes of those who have taken a Tripos, so now a man 
 may be excused it, if he resides three years and at the 
 end of them can produce a certificate showing he has 
 " diligently pursued a course of study in the University." 
 This is an arrangement which seems to open the 
 door to a dangerous laxity. Why have examinations 
 at all, if certificates do as well? And why, too, 
 have Second Parts, and then discourage them by 
 making them unnecessary for a degree ? In Part I. 
 of the Mathematical Tripos the candidates are arranged 
 
370 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 in three classes, in alphabetical order ; in Part II. 
 they are arranged in the same way, but the alpha- 
 betical order is qualified by marks of distinction for 
 special merit. In the Classical Tripos there are three 
 classes with three divisions as a rule in each ; the 
 candidates being arranged in alphabetical order in the 
 divisions, nine classes being thus made. In the Moral 
 Sciences Tripos there are three classes, and the second 
 class only is divided into two divisions, the arrangement 
 being alphabetical in both classes and divisions. In the 
 Law Tripos, arrangement in order of merit still survives. 
 In the Classical Tripos, the Examiners are nominated 
 partly by the Special Board of Classical Studies and 
 partly by the two Colleges whose turn it is to present 
 the Proctors for that year. In all other cases they are 
 nominated by the particular Special Board concerned. 
 There may be reasons for all these differences, but they 
 are hidden from all save the specially initiated. Most 
 of the Examinations have been frequently altered without 
 finality being reached, or a thoroughly satisfactory 
 result attained. Others, like the Law Tripos, may 
 escape change for nearly a quarter of a century. 
 
 The original principle was unrestricted competition 
 — "The one good rule of unfettered and open competition," 
 as the Cambridge University Royal Commission Report 
 has it. In an unrestricted competition the candidates 
 must be placed strictly in order of merit. This necessity 
 brings with it a natural preference in the minds of the 
 Examiners for that which is easiest to assess and mark. 
 Facts are easier to mark than style, because style is a 
 matter of opinion and taste, and facts are not. Cambridge 
 examination papers, roughly speaking, are long strings of 
 questions about facts, and the answering of them is a 
 race against time, the man who can write fastest and 
 pour out the greatest quantity of facts accurately and 
 concisely stated coming out top. The possessor of the 
 latest and best fountain pen has an advantage over a 
 candidate who sticks to the old-fashioned quills which the 
 University still supplies. There has been some reaction 
 against this unrestricted competition. The alphabetical 
 order, whether in the classes or the brackets, is proof of 
 this. The Tripos Regulations also direct the Examiners 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 371 
 
 to have regard to style, but these modifications do not go 
 very far. At Cambridge, facts still hold the highest place 
 in popular esteem. 
 
 Of facts there is no end, and the love of them has led 
 the University to overload its Honours Examinations and 
 make them excessively difficult and complicated. Two 
 examples may suffice. Take for one instance the First 
 Part of the Classical Tripos. In the old days the whole 
 undivided Tripos consisted of eleven papers, six in Trans- 
 lation, four in Composition, and one in History. At 
 present the First Part of the Tripos consists of fifteen 
 papers, five in Translation, four in Composition, and six 
 General papers divided as follows : — 
 
 1. Philology and Syntax. 
 
 2. Short passages for translation illustrating Greek 
 
 and Roman History and Antiquities. 
 
 3. General paper in the same. 
 
 4. Short passages illustrating — (1) Greek and Roman 
 
 Philology ; (2) Greek and Latin Literature ; 
 (3) Sculpture and Architecture. 
 
 5. General paper on — (1) a set book of Greek Philo- 
 
 sophy ; (2) Greek and Roman Literature ; (3) 
 Sculpture and Architecture. 
 
 Philology and Syntax, Greek and Roman History, 
 Greek and Roman Antiquities, Greek and Roman Philo- 
 sophy, with a set portion of an author in the former, 
 Greek and Latin Literature, Sculpture and Architecture ! 
 Truly a portentous list, and it all may be taken, and very 
 frequently is taken, at the end of a man's second year. 
 
 Yet it may be doubted whether the First Part of the 
 Law Tripos is not still more heavily over-loaded. In this 
 the subjects are General Jurisprudence, Roman Law, 
 English Constitutional Law and History, and Public 
 International Law. In the case of the Classical Tripos 
 the candidates have had years of School preparation. In 
 the case of the Law Tripos there is, or ought to have been, 
 none, for Law is not a School subject. The Law student 
 thus breaks entirely new ground about the middle of 
 October, and before the end of the next May year, or in a 
 year and seven months, is supposed to be proficient in all 
 the subjects mentioned above. Three of these are particu- 
 larly formidable : — Roman Law, English Constitutional 
 
372 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Law and History, and Public International Law. A man 
 can well give a life-time to any one of them. Then there 
 is the peculiar choice of General Jurisprudence as the 
 fourth subject. The usual order is first the concrete, then 
 the abstract ; Arithmetic, for example, is generally taken 
 before Algebra ; but in the Law Tripos the student begins 
 the study of abstract principles before he is allowed to 
 make the acquaintance of English Law at all, and while he 
 is wrestling with the totally unfamiliar system of Roman 
 Law. Perhaps the reason why Cambridge makes the 
 Honours Degrees so hard is because the Poll Degrees are 
 so easy, the average of the two representing what may 
 fairly be demanded. 
 
 There is just now a reaction against the multi- 
 plicity of Examinations, but they can never be wholly 
 done away with. Up to a certain point no serious 
 student would be without them. They are indispensable 
 for testing his knowledge. But when once a student has 
 learned how to learn, examinations are superfluous for 
 him, and become a hindrance rather than a help. A 
 genuine student is impatient of the beaten track, and 
 should be left free to choose his own course at the earliest 
 possible moment. Again, the Universities have a freedom 
 in the matter of examinations which the State has not. 
 The State must avoid all appearance of political partiality, 
 and therefore is obliged to carry out the competitive 
 principle to the full, and adopt the strict order of merit. 
 It is the Prize Fellowship system which has exercised a 
 like compulsion at Oxford and Cambridge ; but with the 
 disappearance of that system, greater liberty will return. 
 Some of the elementary principles on which an Examina- 
 tion system should be based have thus become apparent. 
 
 1. Too much should not be attempted. It is enough 
 to classify the candidates, which means an alphabetical 
 order in all cases, without stars or letters, or other circum- 
 venting devices. Nor is a superfluity of classes desirable. 
 Oxford gives the world four classes in its Honour Schools; 
 Cambridge confines this excessive subdivision to its more 
 elementary examinations. One wonders whether the 
 occupants of the fourth classes ought to be allowed any 
 place at all. 
 
 2. The examinations should not be too difficult. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 373 
 
 However varied and elaborate a Tripos may be made, 
 finished Mathematicians, Classics, Scientists, Historians, 
 Theologians, Lawyers, Philosophers, and Economists 
 cannot be turned out at from 22 to 23 years of age. If 
 the present vain attempts so to do were abandoned, 
 students could be admitted to the University at 18, finish 
 their preliminary training in three years, and at 21 begin 
 their Professional training or be free to continue their 
 previous studies. 
 
 3. The Examinations should not entail excessive 
 strain. The Triposes were divided to relieve the strain 
 on the candidates. This principle should be adopted in 
 every case, and both parts of a Tripos made necessary to 
 a degree. 1 
 
 4. Cram is best avoided, not by asking many ques- 
 tions, but by giving a wide choice, plenty of time, and 
 insisting on a thorough knowledge in such questions as 
 are selected. 
 
 A Special Board, proceeding on well defined lines, 
 would give the unity and consistency which are now 
 lacking in the Cambridge Examinations. 
 
 The University of Cambridge, with all its piling up of 
 papers and demands for an exhaustive knowledge, still 
 sends forth annually many graduates who cannot properly 
 be called educated men. The following are the opening 
 sentences of the Preface to Notes on the Composition of 
 Scientific Papers, by Sir Clifford Allbutt, the Regius Pro- 
 fessor of Physic at Cambridge University: — "In the course 
 of the year I peruse sixty or seventy theses for the degree 
 of M.B. and about twenty-five for the degree of M.D. The 
 matter of these theses is good, it is often excellent; in 
 composition a few are good, but the greater number are 
 written badly, some very ill indeed. The prevailing 
 defect of their composition is not mere inelegance ; were 
 it so, it were unworthy of educated men : it is such as to 
 obscure, to perplex, and even to hide or to travesty the 
 sense itself." In plain language, these M.B.'s and M.D.'s 
 cannot write their own mother tongue. The absence of 
 an Entrance Examination, with a proper standard of 
 
 i If ever a Royal Commission is appointed, it should, among other 
 things, take medical evidence as to the effect of the Triposes on the 
 mental and physical conditions of the examinees. 
 
374 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 attainment in English, is partly to blame for this lament- 
 able state of things. Would it not be well for men taking 
 such subjects as Engineering and Natural Science to 
 study them historically and biographically ? They would 
 thus be introduced to great ideas and great men, with the 
 possibility of good educational results. 
 
 There remains the question of the Pass Examinations 
 — ought they to be retained at all ? Many of the re- 
 formers, as we have seen, have been in favour of getting 
 rid of the Poll men altogether ; but they are an established 
 institution, and may be counted on to struggle hard for 
 their lives. The Colleges will be on their side, as they are 
 a profitable source of income. The Pass men are charged 
 the same tuition fee as the Honours men, but they cost 
 less to teach, because they are taught less. The University 
 knows them not, save to examine them, and take fees and 
 dues from them. Both processes are profitable to it ; so 
 that until the clay of financial reform conies, the Pass men 
 will hold their ground. An improvement, however, has 
 been made of late years in the Pass course. Of old it was 
 Previous Examination, General Examination, Special 
 Examination. Since the change referred to, a Poll man 
 may take two Specials, instead of the General and a 
 Special. A further extension of this power of choice 
 might have beneficial results. The Triposes are highly- 
 specialised examinations, too much so from an educational 
 point of view, though the modern practice of allowing 
 a candidate to take the First Part of one Tripos and then 
 the Second Part of another is a counteracting influence. 
 General knowledge, as opposed to special knowledge, is at 
 a heavy discount in Cambridge ; but other Universities 
 think more highly of it, notably those in the United 
 States. If there were a proper examination before 
 entrance to the University, and a student had to take 
 three Specials, one at the end of each year, and these 
 were made into examinations worth passing, a course 
 of study could be marked out embodying the principle 
 of variety as opposed to that of specialisation. Such a 
 course of study would appeal to a large number of men, 
 and might fairly be rewarded with a degree. There 
 should be an ample range of choice— Classics, Mathe- 
 matics, Divinity, History, Law, Modern Languages, 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 375 
 
 Economics, and the various branches of Natural Science 
 — but the student should be compelled always to take 
 some literary subject or subjects, so as to insure his 
 getting a humanising education. The University might 
 then be asked to organise a course of instruction on 
 these lines. 
 
 The nation may also fairly claim that when a Uni- 
 versity tests knowledge it should accurately describe the 
 results ; in other words, a degree should be a real proof of 
 achievement. The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge 
 fail to come up to this standard in two notable respects, 
 to mention no others. Firstly, they give the same titles 
 of B.A. and M.A. to Pass men and Honours men alike ; 
 secondly, they give the degree of M.A. without any quali- 
 fications beyond those required for the B.A., save those of 
 being three years older, and of having paid an additional 
 fee. In both these respects their degrees tend to deceive 
 an ignorant but confiding public. The first shortcoming" 
 might be met by making the Poll degree really worth 
 having, as previously suggested. The second might be 
 met by doing away with the B.A. degree altogether and 
 giving the M.A. at once. The only difficulty in the way is 
 the pecuniary one. 
 
 It has been previously pointed out that genuine 
 students should be relieved from the confining and 
 cramping influence of examinations at the earliest 
 possible moment. The University of Cambridge has of 
 late years done something to encourage the class known 
 as Advanced or Research Students. Should not Oxford 
 and Cambridge more and more make it their aim to be 
 the places for advanced work and research, the Professorial 
 teaching being chiefly utilised for these two purposes? 
 Local Universities are springing up all over the country. 
 They bring instruction to the student's own doors, and 
 can thus teach him cheaply; they are not hampered by 
 old traditions or obsolete methods, and are thus free to 
 develop on their own lines. These local Universities 
 ought to feed the older foundations with their best men, 
 and they would do so if Oxford and Cambridge were 
 properly organised. The structure of national education 
 would then be on the way to completion. 
 
 This last consideration leads naturally on to the 
 
376 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 kindred subject of the Endowment of Research. This 
 is a difficult problem. The amount of money available 
 for it is small. The University has a few Studentships^ 
 some of the Colleges give Research Studentships, and 
 an occasional Research Fellowship. The present system 
 is not above criticism. The usual plan is to give a 
 Studentship or a Fellowship to some young man who 
 has just taken a brilliant degree, and then to turn 
 him loose to pursue his own way. The University or 
 the College makes, in fact, a speculative investment ; it 
 may yield a handsome return, or it may prove a failure. 
 The young men in question often spend the first year 
 of their time in making up their minds as to what line 
 of research they will pursue. Sometimes the Student- 
 ship runs out at the end of a year. If a student has 
 not already struck out a line of his own, why is he given 
 money before he has proved that he can use it to good 
 purpose ? If he has struck out a profitable line of investi- 
 gation, why cut him short just when he is beginning to 
 pay for encouragement ? 
 
 This evil, the short period for which a Studeutship 
 can be granted, is occasionally mitigated by the grant of 
 a Research Fellowship. But this plan is only a mitiga- 
 tion. There is a great reluctance to prolong these 
 Fellowships much beyond the normal six or seven years. 
 Even Research Fellows are human ; they want a definite 
 career so that they can marry and settle down. At 
 present their prospects are of the most precarious nature. 
 
 The promotion of Research is obviously a work 
 that should be undertaken in common. The University 
 should direct it in co-operation with the Colleges, and 
 there must be machinery for the purpose. The General 
 Board of Studies in our reformed University would have 
 enough to do in organising the teaching. A Special 
 Board for Advanced Study and Research should be insti- 
 tuted. Existing resources could then be better utilised. 
 The University Scholarships and Prizes might also be 
 examined with a view to utilising them for research 
 purposes. They should be awarded, as far as possible, on 
 the results of the Triposes, so as to avoid the multiplica- 
 tion of examinations. If these proved insufficient, appeal 
 might be made to the State and to private individuals. 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 377 
 
 Then as to the persons who should do Research ; 
 obviously those who already know the most, and are thus 
 at the borders of their subject, can best tell how those 
 borders may be extended. It is the most advanced 
 teachers, the Professors and sub-Professors, who should 
 be encouraged to undertake further investigations. To 
 enable them to do so, it would be necessary to set them 
 free from teaching, either entirely for short periods, or 
 partially for longer periods. Teaching and Research 
 must be linked more closely together. Teaching can be 
 made a career ; and the difficulty of paying adequately 
 for Research, and getting value for the money expended, 
 can thus be surmounted. The payment would be for 
 the Teaching, and the Research would come in inci- 
 dentally. With the highest ranks of University teachers 
 the most brilliant of the younger men would naturally be 
 associated. If the Advanced Students are handed over as 
 suggested to the Professors, they will form the natural 
 body from which to draw the Research Students, Advanced 
 Study and Research going naturally together. An under- 
 graduate, for example, who has just taken a first-class in 
 the Second Part of the Classical Tripos would not be 
 awarded a Studentship for a single year and then be 
 abandoned to shift for himself; he would be offered the 
 opportunity of continuing his studies at Cambridge or 
 elsewhere, under the actual instruction and guidance 
 of a Professor or other approved person. Then, if he 
 showed aptitude, he should be enabled to continue 
 his special work, and as soon as possible be given a 
 teaching post, the duties of which were not too onerous. 
 In this way, after a few years, the genuine lovers of 
 Research would be discovered. They are the enthusi- 
 asts who only want to be enabled to live in order 
 to give themselves entirely to learning. They might 
 be made in due course Professors Emeriti, and be 
 allowed to teach or lecture just as much or as little 
 as they pleased. A Board of Advanced Studies and 
 Research, with sufficient funds and accumulating ex- 
 perience, might be trusted to work out a solution of a 
 problem which has hitherto been very inadequately dealt 
 with. 
 
378 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The Library difficulty has not yet been solved at 
 Cambridge. 1 Each College has its library, so that with 
 the University Library, Cambridge possesses eighteen col- 
 lections of books, none of them satisfactory. The University 
 Library does wonders with insufficient funds. It cannot 
 buy and house all the books it would, nor can it arrange 
 them so as to be of the greatest advantage to students. It 
 has long desired to have a Central Reading-room, with 
 the necessary books, reference, and a proper staff of 
 assistants, but it cannot afford it. 
 
 If the University Library with its privileges under 
 the Copyright Act cannot do what it would, how hopeless 
 is it for even the richest College to try to succeed where 
 the University fails. Here again salvation can only come 
 through co-operation. The University and Colleges must 
 do the work between them. The University must 
 definitely undertake a certain portion of it, say, the 
 
 1 The following were the sums expended by the Colleges on their 
 Libraries as shown by the last Abstract of Accounts {Cambridge Uni- 
 versity Reporter, February 19th, 1913) : — 
 
 Peterhouse 
 Clare ... 
 Pembroke 
 Caius ... 
 Trinity Hall 
 Corpus ... 
 
 King's Corporate Income 
 Trust Funds 
 
 Queens' Corporate Income 
 
 Trust Fund ... ... 109 17 10 109 17 10 
 
 St. Catharine's Corporate Income 
 
 Trust ... ... ... 36 11 4 36 11 4 
 
 Jesus Corporate Income 
 
 Trust 
 Christ's Corporate Income 
 
 Trust ... 
 
 St. John's 
 
 Magdalene (Library and Plate) ... 
 
 Trinity (including Librarian's 
 
 Dividend) 
 Emmanuel 
 
 Sidney Corporate Income 
 Trust 
 
 Downing (Library and Prizes) ... 
 
 The University Library for 1912 cost about £8,000. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 116 13 
 42 18 
 89 11 
 
 267 6 
 
 a. 
 
 6 
 2 
 
 7 
 2 
 
 80 6 
 117 13 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 173 13 
 
 1Q7 1Q 
 
 6 
 
 ft 
 
 ■ r )4 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 54 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 7!) 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 18 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 105 
 337 
 
 11 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 G 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1447 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 
 
 is 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 76 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 94 
 79 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 £3252 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
SUGGESTIONS. 379 
 
 providing the Reading Room and Reference Library with 
 works of General Literature and foreign books; the 
 Colleges specialising in, say, some technical branch. A 
 beginning on something like these lines has already 
 been made. The Squire Law Library has relieved the 
 University Library to some extent. Then there is a 
 specialised library at the Museum of Archaeology, and 
 the various Laboratories are beginning to form libraries 
 of their own. But these developments merely transfer the 
 burden from one part of the University to another. The 
 Colleges must come in and help. That they should do so 
 has long been the intention of the Legislature, as may be 
 seen by reference to the Act of 1877 [Clause 18, (4)] , which 
 empowered the Commissioners to frame Statutes whereby 
 the Colleges, under certain conditions, could hand over 
 the whole or portions of their libraries to the University. 
 This is a power which the Commissioners never exercised. 
 The Colleges ought also to spend so much a year in pro- 
 viding books, as agreed on with the central authority, 
 each College Library to be open at proper hours to duly 
 accredited students. 
 
 Some drastic changes will have to be made before this 
 scheme could become effective. The housing of a con- 
 tinually increasing number of books is always a problem. 
 The old and worthless must be sacrificed to the new, as 
 the new in their turn will have to be to the newer. The 
 shelves of the University and College Libraries are 
 cumbered with books which are never moved from their 
 places except when they are dusted. Suppose a time 
 limit were enacted, and all books were removed that had 
 not been read or consulted for a hundred years. It would 
 provide a large amount of valuable space. Then there 
 must be in these eighteen libraries many duplicates. 
 The superfluous volumes could be sold or otherwise 
 disposed of, and so more room could be found. 
 
 The Royal Commissioners of 1850 were of opinion 
 that the privilege which the Copyright Act gives to the 
 University might be advantageously commuted for a 
 money payment to be expended in the purchase of such 
 books as might be deemed worth preserving. 1 There is 
 
 i Report, p. 129. 
 
380 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 grave doubt as to whether the word "advantageously" 
 is here rightly used. A money payment is fixed, but the 
 number of books goes on continually increasing, so that 
 it may be better to have the books than the money. If 
 the money payment could be made to increase with the 
 number and value of the books published, it might be 
 more advantageous to have the money, as it could be 
 used in the purchase of foreign as well as of home- 
 produced books. 
 
 The Prime Minister informed the House of Commons 
 on its reassembling in May, 1913, after the Whitsuntide 
 recess, that it was not the intention of the Government 
 to advise the issue of a Royal Commission. Two widely 
 different interpretations may be put on this announce- 
 ment ; the first is that the present Ministry do not think 
 University Reform is pressing ; the other is that they 
 hold it to be so ripe for treatment that legislation is 
 possible at once without the delay involved in the holding 
 of a further inquiry. If I may give my own opinion, 
 University Reform is pressing ; but the issues which it 
 raises are so many and so complicated, and have, as far 
 as my knowledge goes, been so little discussed, that further 
 inquiry is necessary. This would, according to precedent, 
 take the form of a Royal Commission. Legislation would 
 follow in due course, laying down general principles and 
 setting up a Statutory Body to carry them out in detail. 
 Here Parliament must avoid the mistake of past years. 
 The Executive Commissioners of 1852, 1854 and 1877 all 
 failed fully to carry out the intentions of the Legislature. 
 Any fresh Executive Commission should have the lines 
 on which it is to proceed so marked out that no falling 
 short is possible. Then the Universities could be started 
 once for all on a course of natural development, and the 
 next Royal Commission be the third and the last. 
 
SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 Part I. The University. 
 
 The Chancellor. 
 
 The nominal duties of the office to be abolished, the 
 real duties to remain as at present, with extended powers 
 of deciding appeals from the various Boards and Colleges. 
 
 The Vice-Chancellor . 
 
 To be the permanent acting head of the University, 
 chosen without restriction by the Electoral Roll, with an 
 adequate salary and an official residence, retiring on 
 pension when an age limit has been reached, and having 
 a Deputy also chosen without restriction by the Electoral 
 Roll, with salary, etc.; the Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy- 
 Vice-Chancellor to be ex officio members of all Boards and 
 Syndicates, but each Board or Syndicate to choose its 
 own Chairman, who shall be responsible for its business. 
 
 The Council of the Senate. 
 
 To consist of the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy- Vice- 
 Chancellor, the Chairmen of the General Board of 
 Studies, the Financial Board, the Board of Examinations, 
 the Board of Management and Works, and the Board of 
 Advanced Studies and Research, ex officio, and eleven 
 other members chosen from and elected by the Electoral 
 Roll without restriction. 
 
 The Electoral Roll, or Senate. 
 
 The Electoral Roll to become the Senate, and to con- 
 sist of the Senior 450 M.A.'s or persons of equal or superior 
 degree holding University or College office, together with 
 50 other members co-opted on the nomination of such 
 outside educational bodies as shall hereafter be deter- 
 mined on. This body to have all the legislative and 
 administrative powers now possessed either by the 
 Electoral Roll or the Senate. 
 
382 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 The General Board of Studies. 
 
 To have control both of University and College teach- 
 ing, in conjunction with the Special Boards in each subject; 
 to arrange for the requisite staff, and for its payment, in 
 conjunction with the Financial Board. 
 
 The Board of Examinations. 
 
 To have the superintendence of all Examinations, to 
 nominate and train Examiners. 
 
 The Board of Advanced Studies and Research. 
 
 To have the superintendence of Advanced Studies, 
 Post-Graduate Studies, and Research, and of the special 
 funds available for these purposes, together with such 
 additional funds as the Financial Board may vote from 
 time to time. 
 
 The Financial Board. 
 
 To administer the University finances, to provide 
 funds for the work of the various Boards, and to have 
 power over capital expenditure by the Colleges. 
 
 The Board of Management and Works. 
 
 To take over and do for the Colleges in common the 
 work now done by Bursars, Stewards and Tutors, so far 
 as these last are concerned with money matters. 
 
 Appeals. 
 
 In the case of any disagreement between the Colleges 
 and the Administrative Boards, or between the Admin- 
 istrative Boards themselves, an appeal to lie to the 
 Chancellor, whose decision shall be final. 
 
 Finance. 
 
 The Common University Fund to be increased to 
 not less than one-fifth, and not more than one-half, 
 of the assessable College incomes. All University and 
 College accounts to be publicly audited. Pensions and 
 age limits to be attached to all University and College 
 offices. 
 
SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS. 383 
 
 Conditions of Entrance. 
 
 All students to pass an examination before entrance 
 to the University, in which Greek shall not be a 
 compulsory subject. Distinctions of nobleman, fellow- 
 commoner, pensioner, sizar, to be abolished. Students as 
 a rule to enter at 18, and graduate after a three years' 
 course. 
 
 Entrance Scholarships. 
 
 To be awarded by the University on the results of an 
 examination held as near as possible to the date of entry. 
 
 Terms. 
 
 Ten weeks' instruction to be given in each of the 
 three Terms. 
 
 Degrees. 
 
 The B.A. degree to be abolished and the M.A. 
 substituted for it. 
 
 Application of Savings. 
 
 The money saved by the grouping of the Colleges, the 
 centralising of the administrative work, the co-ordination 
 of the teaching, the abolition of Fellowship emoluments, 
 and the reduction in the value of Scholarships, to be 
 applied, under statutory obligation, to 
 
 (1) The reduction of the cost of a University career 
 
 by reducing or abolishing all fees, dues, and 
 charges for tuition ; 
 
 (2) The payment of adequate salaries with pensions ; 
 
 (3) The institution of a Reserve Fund ; 
 
 (4) The endowment of Research and the extension 
 
 and improvement of University teaching ; 
 
 (5) The training of teachers and examiners ; 
 
 (6) The provision of University Scholarships for 
 
 intending teachers, physicians and surgeons ; 
 
 (7) University Extension. 
 
384 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
 
 Part II. The Colleges. 
 
 The Colleges to be grouped according to the scheme 
 already laid down. Each group to govern itself under 
 one working Head, in accordance with a scheme framed 
 by itself, embodying the administrative reforms already 
 outlined, and approved by a Statutory Authority, or in 
 default of such a scheme, under a scheme framed by the 
 Statutory Authority itself; and to provide the share of 
 instruction laid upon it by the General Board of Studies. 
 
LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 
 
 Allbutt, Sir CLIFFORD. Notes on. Composition of Scientific Papers. 
 
 CAMPION, Rev. W. M. Cambridge Essays, 1858. 
 
 Cooper. Annals of Cambridge. 
 
 COPLESTON, Bp. Reply to the Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review. 
 
 CURZON, Earl. Principles and Methods of University Reform. 
 
 Dictionary of National Biography. 
 
 Donaldson, Dr. Classical Scholarship and Classical Learning. 
 
 Edinburgh Review. Vols. XL, XIV., XV., XVIL, LIL, LIIL, LIV., LX. 
 
 [Grant, A. R.] The Next Step. 
 
 Gray, A., M.A. Jesus College. 
 
 Hamilton, Sir William. Discussions (Second Edition). 
 
 Hansard. Parliamentary Debates. 
 
 Jebb, Dr. Quoted by Dr. Whewell, in Of a Liberal Education. 
 
 Lyell, Sir Charles. Travels in North America. 
 
 Molesworth, W. N. History of England. 
 
 MORLEY, Lord. Life of Gladstone. 
 
 MULLINGER, J. B. The University of Cambridge. 
 
 Newman, Cardinal. The Idea of a University. 
 
 Historical Sketches. 
 Pattison, Mark. Suggestions on Academic Organization. 
 Essays on the Endowment of Research. 
 Peacock, Rev. George. Observations on the Statutes. 
 PRICE, Prof. Bonamy. Suggestions for the Extension of Professorial 
 
 Teaching in the University of Oxford. 
 Oxford Reform. 
 Quarterly Review, April, 1906. 
 
 Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 : Cambridge. 
 Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 : Oxford. 
 Report of the Royal Commission of 1872 : Oxford and Cambridge. 
 Report of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, 1895. 
 Report of the Royal Commission on University Education in London, 1913. 
 Report of the University Reform Committee, Cambridge. 
 Smith, Prof. Goldwin. Reorganization of the University of Oxford. 
 Tennyson, Charles. Cambridge from Within. 
 Venn, J. A. Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations. 
 
 Statistical Chart. 
 Whewell, Dr. William. Of a Liberal Education. 
 
 Study of Mathematics. 
 WRATISLAW, A. H., M.A. Observations on the Cambridge System. 
 
 CC 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Aberdeen, Earl of 133 
 
 Accounts 223 
 
 Act of Uniformity 201 
 
 Acts of Parliament 10, 204 
 
 Advowsons 221, 222 
 
 Africa, South 340 
 
 Albert, Prince, Chancellor of Cam- 
 bridge University 105, 106 
 
 Allbutt, Sir Clifford 373 
 
 Anatomy 72 
 
 Apparatus 222 
 
 Arnold, Kev. T., of Rugby 92 
 
 Arnold, Matthew 260 
 
 Articles, the Thirty-nine 30, 59, 
 146, 152, 201 
 
 Arts and Faculties 3, 9 
 
 Asquith, H. H., Prime Minister 
 380 
 
 Auditing of Accounts 315 
 
 Australia 341 
 
 Awdry, Sir J. W. 144 n. 
 
 Baden-Powell, Prof. 107 
 Baines, Rt. Hon. M. T. 153 
 Bateson, Rev. W. H. 112, 206 
 Bellamy, Dr. James 219 
 Benefices 267 ; presentation to 
 
 221, 222 
 Beresford-Hope, A. J., M.P. 103 
 Bernard, Dr. Montagu 219 
 Bible Clerks 9 
 Blackburn, Lord 348 
 Blakesley, Rev. J. W. 326, 363 
 Boards of Studies : General 231- 
 
 232 ; Special 230 
 Boards of Faculties 234 
 Borrowing powers 223, 315 
 Bouverie, Rt. Hon. E. P. 151, 219 
 Bright, John, M.P. 144, 200 
 Brougham, Lord 60, 198 
 Buildings 222 ; extension of 227 
 
 Cambridge University : — 
 A Lay Corporation 1 
 Appeals 382 
 Auditors 307 
 B.A. Examination 101 
 Board of Examinations 345, 368, 
 
 382 
 Board of Management and Works 
 
 382 
 
 Cambridge University— cont. 
 Board of Advanced Studies and 
 
 Research 345, 376, 377, 382 
 Board of Studies, General 118, 
 
 323, 324, 329, 382 
 Boards of Studies, Special 117- 
 
 120, 323, 324, 370 
 Borrowing powers 315 
 Buildings 354 
 Bursars and Treasurers 307, 309 
 
 311 
 Bye-Fellowships 123, 124, 155 
 Capitation Charge 271, 360 
 Caput Senatus 11, 12, 113, 153 
 Career Scholarships 335 
 Cartwright, Thomas 10 
 Caution Money 360 
 Celibacy 124 
 Central Board 312 
 Chancellor 5, 342, 381 
 Chaplains, Catechists, Readers 
 
 307 
 Civil Service 330 
 Classics 358, 362 
 ' Close ' Fellowships and Scholar- 
 ships 112 
 College Clubs 356 
 College Laboratories 296 
 College Lectures 324 
 College Libraries 378 
 Combination of Colleges 313,321 
 Commission, Report of Royal 
 
 1, 11 n., 67, 112-132, 333, 338 
 Common University Fund 228- 
 
 229, 274, 285, 312, 382 
 Contributions of Colleges 285 
 Council of Senate 343, 347, 349, 
 
 381 
 Council of Studies 130-131 
 Cram, to avoid 373 
 Day Training College 353 
 Degrees 353, 383 
 Demonstrators 354 
 Deans and Sub-Deans 307 
 Deputy Vice-Chancellor 343 
 Diplomas 353 
 Directors and Supervisors of 
 
 Studies 307 
 Disputations 113 
 Divinity Degrees 304 
 Electoral Roll 154, 262, 345, 347, 
 
 348, 350, 351, 381 
 Entrance Examination 363, 364, 
 
 365, 366, 373, 383 
 
INDEX. 
 
 387 
 
 Cambridge University— cont. 
 Entrance Scholarships 358, 383 
 Estates, College 310-311 
 Exhibitions 155, 356, 357, 359 
 Fees 355, 360, 383 
 Federation 340 
 Fellowships 79, 123, 129, 155, 
 
 281, 330, 337, 339 
 Fellows, election of 123, 129 
 Financial Board 316, 345, 382 
 General Examination 368, 374 
 Graces 5, 113 
 
 Greek, compulsory 349 
 
 Grouping of Colleges 328, 384 
 
 Halls 126, 359 
 
 Head-masters' Conference 346 
 
 History 358, 362 
 
 Holy Orders 124 
 
 Honours 300 
 
 Hostels 126, 359, 360 
 
 House Property 269, 312 
 
 Income of University 282 
 
 Incomes of Colleges 274-277, 
 
 279-281 
 Incorporated 1 
 Inter-Collegiate Lectures 317 
 Jesus College 225 
 Junior Optimes 36 
 King's 7, 16; Undergraduate 
 
 Fellows of 107 
 Law 152 
 Lectures 323 
 Lecturers, College 79, 307 
 Lecturers, University 116, 117, 
 
 282, 354 
 
 Lectureships 122, 329, 330; 
 Senior and Junior 340 
 
 Legislative Assembly 350 
 
 Library 128, 378 ; Reading-room 
 at 128, 378 
 
 Librarians 307 
 
 Local Examinations 101, 364 
 
 Masters, Vice-Masters, Presi- 
 dents 307, 340 
 
 Mathematics 4, 38, 39, 358, 
 362 
 
 Matriculation 352, 360 
 
 Medicine 152, 336 ; Degrees in 
 353 
 
 Memorandum of Resident Fellows 
 to Mr. Gladstone 206-207 ; 
 Mr. Gladstone's Reply 207-208 
 
 Memorial to Senate 261 ; recom- 
 mendations rejected 263 
 
 Modern Languages 362 
 
 Moderators 4, 32, 33, 35 
 
 Music, Degrees in 353 
 
 National Education 351 
 
 National Union of Teachers 346 
 
 Natural Sciences 362 
 
 Cambridge University— cont. 
 Non - Collegiate Students 126, 
 
 135, 356, 360 
 Non-Regents 5, 44, 112 
 Non-Regent House 11, 113, 
 
 114 
 Non-resident Fellows 80, 129, 
 
 334 
 Officers' Training Corps 353 
 Organisation 342 
 Organists and Choirmasters 307 
 Pass Examinations 374 
 Pensionaries 126 
 Physwick Hostel 126 
 Poll Degrees 301 
 Previous Examination 365, 368, 
 
 374 
 Prize Fellowships 281, 333, 334, 
 
 335 
 Prizes, University 376 
 Proctors 6, 34, 35, 114 
 Professors 78, 114, 117, 122, 282, 
 
 377 
 Professorships 121-123, 329, 340, 
 
 354 
 Readers, University 282, 354 
 Readerships 329 
 Reform Committee 349 
 Regent House 11, 112 
 Regents 5, 12, 44, 49 
 Registrary 131, 307 
 Research 334, 336-337, 375, 376, 
 
 377 
 Reserve Fund 383 
 Residence denned 348 
 Resident Fellows 334 
 Scholarships 129, 155, 356, 357- 
 
 358, 360, 362, 376, 383 
 Scholarship Examinations 361 
 Science 279, 358 
 Scrutators 11, 114 
 Senate 6, 112, 262, 347, 349, 
 
 350 ; Non-resident members of 
 
 346 
 Sextumviri 12 
 Special Examinations 368, 369, 
 
 374 
 Squire Law Library 379 
 Statistical Tables 269, 270, 273, 
 
 274, 275, 276, 297, 298, 300, 301, 
 
 303, 378 
 Stewards 307, 313 
 Stocks 274, 316 
 Studentships 376 
 Sub-Professorships 340 
 Teachers, University 283, 354 
 Terms 383 
 Tests 126, 128 ; abolition of 225, 
 
 349 
 Theology 152 
 
388 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Cambridge University— cont. 
 Tripos : Mathematical 17, 20, 
 353, 369-370 ; Law 353, 370, 
 371,372; Classical 20,319,353, 
 368, 370, 371, 377; Moral 
 Sciences 105, 128, 353, 370 ; 
 Natural Sciences 105, 128, 353 ; 
 Theological 353,369; Historical 
 353 ; Oriental Languages 353 ; 
 Economics 353 ; Anthropologi- 
 cal 353 
 Tuition Fees 271, 383 
 Tuition Fund 281 
 Tutors 78, 79, 115, 307, 308 
 Unattached Students 125 
 Undergraduates at Cambridge 
 
 Colleges 297 
 University Chest 273 
 Vice-Chancellor 5, 342, 343, 381 
 Women, Degrees for 349, 351 
 Wranglers 36 
 Cambridge in 1800 17 
 Cambridge Reform Committee, 
 Report of 262-263, 320-322, 345, 
 354-356 
 Cambridge University Bill 151, 
 
 217 
 Cambridge University Calendar 
 
 297 n. 
 Cambridge University Reporter 
 
 297 n., 323-324 
 Camden, Marquis 60 
 Campion, Rev. W. M. 62 n. , 85 n. , 
 
 105 n., 159 
 Canada 341 
 Canning, Viscount 146 
 Capitation charges 270-271 
 Carlingford, Lord 217 
 Carnarvon, Earl of 216 
 Cavendish, Lord Frederick 206 
 Caution Money 272-273 
 Cecil, Sir William 10-11 
 Celibacy 9, 14, 144 
 Chancellor 5, 163 
 Chapel, attendance at 205 
 Charles II. 201 
 Chemistry 72, 230 
 Christie, W. D., M.P. 102, 199 
 Church and State 10, 63 
 Cleveland, Duke of 206, 212 
 Clinton, Lord 206 
 Cockburn, Lord Chief Justice 219, 
 
 348 
 Coleridge, Sir J. T. 144 n. 
 Coleridge, Sir J. D. 201 
 Collections 222 
 
 Colleges 6, 48 ; foundation 17 ; 
 compared with monasteries 8 ; 
 revenues 213, 223 ; combination 
 224 ; income 226 
 
 Common University Fund 228- 
 
 229, 234 
 Congregation 140, 141, 144, 147 
 Contributions from Colleges 142, 
 
 226 
 Cooper In., 13, 106, 113n., 130n., 
 
 198-199, 305, 363 
 Copleston, Bp. 20, 21, 25-26, 27, 
 
 28, 29-32, 46, 60, 83-84 
 Corruption 51 
 Curzon, Earl 67, 233-261, 283-289, 
 
 295, 296, 308, 309, 311, 313-315, 
 
 318, 322, 327, 347, 350, 358, 363 
 
 DAMPIER, J. L. 107 
 
 Degrees 3, 16, 44, 55, 58 
 
 Derby, Earl of 133, 199-200 
 
 Dickson, J. H. D. 354 
 
 Dilke, Sir Charles, M.P. 217, 218 
 
 Disputations 4, 332 
 
 Dissenters 37, 51, 52, 58, 143, 
 
 144, 146, 153, 200, 202 
 Divinity Degrees 198, 225, 304 
 Doctors 48 
 
 Donaldson, Dr. 67, 81-82, 98, 363 
 Donaldson, Rev. S. A. 347-349 
 Duncannon, Lord 60 
 
 Edinburgh Review 20, 21-25, 26, 
 
 37, 38n., 69 
 Edgeworth, R. L. 24 
 Education, Government scheme 
 
 294 
 Edward VI. 201 
 Elementary Schools 244 
 Elizabeth, Queen 201 
 Ellesmere, Earl of 144 n. 
 Emoluments 221, 222 
 Endowment 221 
 Espriella, Don Manuel 21 
 Esquire Bedells 6, 113 
 Estates 227, 266 
 Examinations for Degrees 4, 20, 
 
 58 
 Executive Commission proposed 
 
 by Mr. Gladstone 137 
 Exhibitions 220, 266 
 Expenditure 272 
 
 Faculties 3, 9, 43, 44, 63 
 Fawcett, Prof. 201 
 Federalism 293 
 Fellows 46 ; non-resident 9 
 Fellow-commoners 34, 57 
 Fellowships 134, 142, 144, 214, 267, 
 
 332, 333 
 Financial Board 229 
 
INDEX. 
 
 389 
 
 Financial resources 264-291 
 Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond 201 
 Foundations 265, 267 
 
 Gibson, Milner, M.P. 199 
 
 Gilbert, W. S. 242 
 
 Gladstone, Et. Hon. W. E., M.P. 
 101, 108, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 
 144, 145, 148, 150, 198, 202, 203, 
 205-206, 206-207, 207-208, 217, 
 218, 236, 264 
 
 Gog and Magog 22 
 
 Gore, Bp. (of Oxford) 233, 241, 
 248, 358 
 
 Goschen, Rt. Hon. G. J., M.P. 
 202, 218 
 
 Governing Body 234 
 
 Graham, Bp. (of Chester) 1 12, 153 
 
 Grammar 3, 58 
 
 Gray, A. 225, 304 
 
 Groups of Colleges 299 
 
 Grove, Dr. William 219 
 
 Halls 48 See Cambridge, Ox- 
 ford 
 
 Hamilton, Sir William 17n., 28, 
 37, 38-57, 61, 64, 65, 66, 67, 84, 
 92, 102n., 131, 150, 154, 162, 
 254, 296, 326 
 
 Hardy, Rt. Hon. Gathorne, M.P. 
 218 
 
 Hatherton, Lord 60 
 
 Heads of Houses, privileges 11, 49 
 
 Heathcote, Sir William 145, 148 
 
 Hemming, G. W. 219 
 
 Herschell, Sir John 112 
 
 Heywood, James, M.P. 103, 108, 
 143, 144, 146, 153, 156, 199, 200 
 
 Hinds, Bp. (of Norwich) 107 
 
 Hodgson, K.D. 206 
 
 Holland, Lord 60, 198 
 
 Holy Orders 218 
 
 Hostels In., 7 See Cambridge, 
 Oxford 
 
 House Property 266, 269 
 
 Howley, Abp. 59 
 
 Idle Fellowships 214 
 Illegality 51 
 
 Income of Universities and Col- 
 leges 269, 298 
 Inglis, Sir Robert 103 
 Innes, H. McLeod 262 
 
 James, I. 13, 152, 201 
 Jeffrey, Lord 20 
 
 Jervis, Sir John, Attorney-General 
 
 105 
 Jesuits 102 n. 
 Jeune, Dr. 107 
 Johnson, Rev. G. H. S. 107 
 Jowett, Dr. Benjamin 101, 110, 
 
 136, 137, 240, 241, 260 
 
 KEBBEL, T. E. 27 
 
 Laboratories 229, 296 
 
 Ladv Margaret 5 
 
 Lands 266, 268 
 
 Latin 4, 9, 31, 149 
 
 Laud, Abp. 13, 48, 49, 51 
 
 Law 3, 63 
 
 Leases, beneficial 224, 268 
 
 Lecture rooms 229 
 
 Lecturers 11 See Cambridge, 
 
 Oxford 
 Lectureships 142, 220, 221, 266 
 Legislation 198-232 
 Legislative interference 162 
 Leicester, Robert Dudley, Earl of, 
 
 13, 51, 62, 201 
 Libraries 222, 229 
 Liddell, Dr. H. G. 107 
 Lightfoot, Prof. (Bp. of Durham) 
 
 219 
 Logic 58 
 
 Longley, Abp. 144 n. 
 Lonsdale, Bp. (of Lichfield) 153 
 Louvain 47 
 
 Lowe, Rt. Hon. Robert, M.P. 101 
 Lyell, Sir Charles 67, 70-76 
 Lyndhurst, Lord 153, 156 
 Lytton, Lord 60 
 
 Magistrates of the University 50 
 Mary, Queen 201 
 Masters 7, 44, 48 
 Mathematics 4, 17, 58 
 Medicine 3, 63 
 Melancthon 102 n. 
 Melbourne, Viscount 60, 198 
 Merivale, Dean 326, 363, 367- 
 
 368 
 Miall, Edward, M.P. 143, 200 
 Molesworth 104 
 Monasteries, Dissolution of 265 
 Morley, Earl of 216 
 Morley, Lord 101, 106, 136, 143, 
 
 145 
 Morgan, Osborne, M.P. 217 
 Mullinger, J. B. 2, 3, 5, 7 
 Museums 229 
 
390 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Natural Sciences 55, 58, 72, 296 
 Newcastle, Duke of 17 
 Newman, Cardinal 19-20, 37, 51, 
 
 67, 69, 85, 87 n., 94-97, 292, 363 
 Newton, Sir Isaac 17, 64 ; his 
 
 Principia 35, 40 
 Next Step, The 77 
 Noblemen 57 
 
 Nonconformists 62, 63, 160, 204 
 Non-resident Fellows 15, 79 
 Non-resident voters 14 
 
 Oath of Supremacy 152 
 O'Connell, Daniel 198 
 Oral teaching 4 
 Ordination, compulsory 144 
 Oxford University : — 
 
 Accounts 285 
 
 Amalgamation of Colleges 179, 
 183, 245 
 
 Ancient House of Congregation 
 236 
 
 Annual payment to University 
 270 
 
 Architecture 190 
 
 Architect, University 259 
 
 Art 190 
 
 As it is 53 
 
 As it might be 54 
 
 Balance-sheet, University and 
 Colleges 284 
 
 Balliol 53 
 
 Biological Sciences 179, 183 
 
 Board of Education 196 
 
 Board of Examinations 184 
 
 Board of Faculties 256, 257 
 
 Board of Finance 289-291 
 
 Bodleian Library 285 
 
 Business Education 254 
 
 Caution Money 246 
 
 Celibacy 110 
 
 Chemistry 72, 179 
 
 Christ Church 53, 62 
 
 Clarendon Press 24, 260, 288 
 
 Classics 4, 190, 193, 250 
 
 Clerk of Works 259 
 
 ' Close ' Fellowships and Scholar- 
 ships 158 
 
 College Statutes 258 
 
 Commission, Report of Koyal 1, 
 15, 67, 107-112, 264 
 
 Common University Fund 260, 
 288 
 
 Congregation 44, 48, 49, 111, 147, 
 164, 197, 217, 235, 344 
 
 Constitution 164-167, 235 
 
 Contributions of Colleges 150 
 
 Convocation 6, 44, 48, 49, 73, 
 147, 165, 237-241, 344 
 
 Oxford University— cont. 
 Corpus 62 
 
 Council, University 234 
 Curators of the Chest 259 
 Delegacy 195 
 Diplomas 366 
 Dues 246 
 Engineering 190 
 English Tongue in Congregation 
 
 149 
 Endowments 166-175, 234 
 Entrance Examination 194, 235 
 Estates, Management of 287 
 Examinations 92, 184-185, 252 
 Examination Statute 100 
 Exhibitions 169, 170, 234, 247, 
 
 248 
 Faculties 181-183, 188, 194, 257 
 Fees 246 
 Fellows 87, 88 
 Fellowships 110, 172-173, 192, 
 
 234 
 Financial Board proposed 166 
 ' Greats ' 188 
 
 Greek in Responsions 235, 252 
 Halls, Public and Private 149, 
 
 243 
 Headships 192, 280 
 Hebdomadal Board 73, 111, 140, 
 
 158 
 Hebdomadal Council 140, 141, 
 
 144, 147, 164, 214, 235, 260, 288 
 History 183, 186 
 Honorary Degrees 261 
 Honours Degree 184 
 Hostels 243 
 House Property 269 
 Incomes of Colleges 277-278 
 Inter-Collegiate instruction 185, 
 
 256 
 James I. 196 
 Keble College, meals in common 
 
 245 
 Laboratories 193, 260 
 Language and Literature 190 
 Law 186, 190, 194 
 Lecturers 190, 193 
 Lectureships 111 
 Legislative Assembly 194 
 Libraries 260 
 
 Local Examination Delegacy 253 
 M.A. Degree 240 
 Mathematics 190, 193 
 Mathematical and Experimental 
 
 Sciences 183, 190 
 Matriculations 189, 366 
 Medicine 190, 194 
 Moderations 4, 186, 188, 189 
 Moral and Mental Sciences 183 
 Music, Degrees in 366 
 
INDEX. 
 
 891 
 
 Oxford University — cant. 
 Natural Science 193 
 New College 7, 16, 107 
 Non - Collegiate Students 110, 
 
 242-243 
 Organisation 254 
 Pass Degree 184, 253-254 
 Pass Examinations 184, 194 
 Pattison's Scheme 181-185 
 Pension Fund 261 
 Poor Men 241-242 
 Praelectorships 109 
 Prize Fellowships 192 
 Prize Scholarships 169, 170, 249 
 Professors 87-89, 91, 109, 193, 
 
 255 
 Professorships 111 
 Redistribution of Endowment 
 
 Fund 175-181 
 Registrar 259 
 Research 90, 260, 366 
 Responsions 4, 365, 366 
 Scholarships 110, 169, 189, 234, 
 
 247, 248 
 Schools, Inspection and Exami- 
 nation of 253 
 Seminars 260 
 Statutes, 150 
 Studies, conflict of 186-188; 
 
 arrangement of 189-191 
 Subsidies to Education 167-172 
 Teachers in Elementary and 
 
 Secondary Schools 244, 250 
 Tests 158 
 Theology 190 
 Tuition Fees 271 
 Tutors 86-87, 190, 193 
 Unattached Students 171, 255 
 University Extension 234, 241 , 
 
 243 
 Vice-Chancellor 195, 259 
 Visitation 196 
 Visitors 196 
 
 Women, Degrees for 261 
 Working Classes 242 
 Working Men's Colleges 234, 
 
 244, 250 
 Oxford in 1800 17 
 Oxford University Gazette 236 n., 
 
 289-291 
 
 Palmer, Roundell (Lord Selborne) 
 
 104, 219 
 Palmerston, Lord 103, 133-135, 
 
 198 
 Paris University 2, 47 
 Parker, Abp. 11 
 Patronage 58 
 
 Pattison, Mark 61-62, 67, 98-99, 
 102 n., 109, 148, 157-159, 162-191, 
 197, 208-211, 239 n., 241, 260, 264, 
 292, 294, 298, 299 n., 308, 310, 
 327, 332-333, 337, 354, 357, 360 
 
 Peacock, Dean 13, 64, 72,80, 112, 
 153 
 
 Peel, Rt. Hon. Sir L. 153 
 
 Peel, Sir Robert 202 
 
 Pensioners 57 
 
 Pension Fund 55 
 
 Pensions 220 
 
 Perjury 51, 5^ 
 
 Peter Lombard 2, 3 
 
 Philosophy 58 
 
 Phillimore, Lord Chief Justice 137 
 
 Philpott, Bp. (of Worcester) 219 
 
 Play fair, Prof. 20, 23 n. 
 
 Poetic 58 
 
 Politics 30, 58 
 
 Praelectors 8 
 
 Preparatory School 101 
 
 Price, Prof. Bonamy 57, 67, 85-94. 
 131 n. 
 
 Price, Bartholomew 206 
 
 Price, L. L. 277 n., 280, 311 
 
 Prizes 220 
 
 Proctors 6, 7 
 
 Professorial and Tutorial Teaching 
 compared 56-57 
 
 Professorial System 66, 69, 70 
 
 Professoriate 5, 18, 45 
 
 Professors 45, 72, 73, 74, 78 
 
 Professorships 142, 220, 221, 266 
 
 Property 268-270 
 
 Pry me, Professor, M.P. for the 
 Borough of Cambridge 60, 61, 
 113n. 
 
 Psychology 58 
 
 Public Schools 101, 358 
 
 Puritans 10 
 
 Pusey, Dr. E. B. 85 
 
 QuADlUVlUM 3, 4 
 
 Quarterly Review 278-280, 310, 
 
 331, 334 
 Queen's Speech 211, 217 
 Questionists 6, 34 
 
 Radnor, Earl of 59, 60, 198, 199 
 Rayleigh, Lord 206, 219 
 Redesdale, Earl of 219 
 Reformation 1 6 
 Regius Professors 5, 18 
 Residence 15 ; defined 348 
 Responsions 4 
 Restoration 16 
 Rhetoric 30, 58 
 
392 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Ridley, M. W. 219 
 Ripon, Marquis of 202 
 Romilly, Sir John, Attorney- 
 General 112 
 Roundell, C. S. 206 
 Royal Charter 1 
 Royal Commission (1872), Oxford 
 
 and Cambridge, Report of 264- 
 
 273 
 Royal Commission on Secondary 
 
 Education, 1895, Report of 330n., 
 
 351n. 
 Royal Commission on University 
 
 Education in London, Report of 
 
 342 n. 
 Royal Letters Patent 1 
 Russell, Lord John 104, 105, 133, 
 
 136, 138-143, 145, 150, 159, 198, 
 
 229. 236 
 
 Salamanca 21 
 
 Salisbury, Marquis of 202, 203, 
 
 211-216, 217, 298 
 Scholars 8 
 Scholarships 142, 220, 221, 244, 
 
 266, 267 
 Secondary Education 294 ; Royal 
 
 Commission on 351 n. ; Grant 
 
 for 360 
 Secondary Schools 356, 365 
 Sedgwick, Prof. Adam 112 
 Selborne, Lord 104, 219 
 Sewell, Rev. William 67 
 Smith, Prof. Goldwin 10, 13-15, 
 
 63, 67, 97, 107, 144n., 191-196, 
 
 197, 310, 327 
 Smith, Prof. H. J. S. 219 
 Smith, Rev. J. J. 363 
 Smith, Rev. Sydney 20 
 Sophista Generalis 29 
 Stanley, Lord 153 
 Stanley, Rev. A. P. 107, 143 
 Statutes: Laudian 13, 44, 62; 
 
 Founders' 59 ; Elizabethan 80, 
 
 82; new 273 
 Stephen, Sir Leslie 65, 67 
 Stipends 229 
 Stokes, Prof. 219 
 Stocks and Shares 266, 269 
 Stuart, John, M.P. 106 
 Subscription 59, 198-199 
 Summerhill, Lord 60 
 
 Tait, Abp. 107, 216, 359 
 
 Teacherships 266 
 
 Teachers in Primary and Second- 
 ary Schools 244 
 
 Temple, Abp. 101 
 
 Tennyson, Charles 302 
 
 Terms 226 
 
 Tests 112, 142, 151, 199, 200, 201, 
 204, 225 
 
 Theology 3, 63 
 
 Thring, Lord Henry 137 
 
 Tithe Rent Charges 266, 269 
 
 Treason 51 
 
 Trivium 3, 4 
 
 Tripos : See Cambridge 
 
 Trusts 215, 266 
 
 Tutorial System 45, 47, 65, 66, 
 69 
 
 Tutors 8, 40, 46, 78 
 
 Unattached Students 212, 220, 
 
 359 
 University Extension 68, 241 
 University v. Colleges 42, 69-99 
 
 Vaughan, Prof. H. H. 21 n., 85, 
 
 109 
 Vaughan, Rev. C. J. 153 
 Vice-Chancellor 5, 11, 14, 49, 165, 
 
 381 
 Visitors 9 
 
 Wallis, Dr. John 46 
 
 Walpole, Rt. Hon. Spencer, M.P., 
 
 141, 144, 201, 217 
 Wellington, Duke of, Chancellor 
 
 of Oxford University 105 
 Wendeborn 16 
 Whewell, Dr. W. 32-36, 38, 39, 
 
 67, 75, 363 
 Whitgift, Abp. 10 
 Williams, Colonel 198 
 Winchelsea, Earl of 146 
 Wood, SirW. P., Vice-Chancellor 
 
 153 
 Wood, George, M.P. 198, 203 
 Wratislaw, A. H. 78-80, 363 
 
 D =9 0, 
 
 Printed by W. Heffer & Sons Ltd., 104 Hills Road, Cambridge. 
 
V* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 /" 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '^CT 
 
 v N 
 
 0° 
 
 
 
 

 V 
 
 v 
 
 j> * 
 
 
 
 v* 
 
 
 
 ->\ 
 
 
 V 
 
 r ^o^ 
 
 & ' 
 
 / 
 
 o V 
 
 
 : r*+* -.« 
 
 ^ 
 
 •^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 °o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 4° 
 c 
 
 *°-v -j 
 
 
 
 o '* ,^ 
 
 V 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 X ^ 
 
 cr 
 
 
 % J ; >. ** / :f- 
 
 <, 
 
 4? 
 
 1 . 
 
 > v "* 
 
 
 ( 
 
 v-o' 
 
 ' o 
 
 & 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 
 
 OOBBS BROJ. 
 
 ^> 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 A 
 
 .^ 
 
 S ^AUCUSTINE 
 32084 
 
 'I* 
 
 
 
 ^' 
 
 
 r > 
 
 
 "'-^^ c>' 
 
 .c,,r