^>^ 
 
 X 
 
 
 m. 
 
 '-■h! 
 
 f i-r 
 
 :^' 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 ■CM^- 

 
 a I E) RARY 
 
 OF THE 
 U N I VER5ITY 
 or ILLI NOIS 
 
 f
 
 xz. 
 
 CLEEICAL HEADSHIPS AND FELLOWSHIPS 
 AT THE UNIVERSITIES. 
 
 A SPEECH 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1880, ' 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES S. ROUNDELL, 
 
 M.P. FOR GRANTHAM, 'i 
 
 \ 
 
 LATE FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD. "! 
 
 LONDON: 
 CORNELIUS BUCK, 22, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.O. 
 
 1880.
 
 SPEECH. 
 
 —•-o»;0t •<>->- 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 Friday y ^thJulyy 1880. 
 
 Mr. CHAELES EOUNDELL: Mr. 
 Speaker, it will, perhaps, be convenient 
 if I make a brief statement of the Par- 
 liamentary history of the question which 
 I am submitting to the House. It is 
 just 30 years since Lord John Eussell 
 issued the first Commission from which 
 have followed those changes in the Uni- 
 versities the like of which have not been 
 seen since the time of Archbishop Laud. 
 That period of 30 years has been a time 
 of agitation and controversy for the Uni- 
 versities, and it is with the object of 
 putting an end to that agitation and 
 controversy that I submit this Eesolution 
 to the House. I am strongly of opinion 
 that it is for the interest of the Uni- 
 versities that they should be allowed to 
 carry out their own proper work without 
 let or hindrance from Parliament. There 
 can, however, be no peace for the Uni- 
 versities until this burning question 
 of religious tests and disabilities has 
 been dealt with. The Tests Act of 1871 
 affirmed the expediency of the removal 
 of all religious tests and disabilities, 
 under proper safeguards, for the main- 
 tenance of religious instruction and wor- 
 ship, in the Universities and the Colleges. 
 It, in fact, affirmed the national charac- 
 ter of the Universities; but, while all 
 religious tests on both University and 
 College offices were theoretically abo- 
 lished, they were re-imposed in the case 
 of certain of the most important offices. 
 It cannot be said that in the words of 
 the Preamble of the Act the benefits of 
 the Universities have been rendered 
 freely accessible to the nation so long as 
 a large number of the Headships and 
 
 I Fellowships of the Colleges are closed to 
 to all but clergymen of the Church of 
 England, nor can it be contended that 
 
 the maintenance of religious instruction 
 and worship necessarily involves the 
 imposition of any clerical restriction. 
 The principle that the Tests Act affirmed 
 is this — that the national Universities 
 ought not to be the property of any par- 
 ticular church or sect, but the property 
 of the nation. That is a principle dear 
 to the Liberal Party ; and it is one upon 
 which, however much they were divided 
 upon questions of foreign policy, the 
 Liberal Party stood together as one man 
 even in the last Parliament. I will now 
 show how the particular question of the 
 Headships and Fellowships has been 
 dealt with. In the year 1870, the year 
 before the passing of the Tests Act, the 
 noble Lord the Member for Calne (Lord 
 Edmond Fitzmaurice) moved to include 
 the Headships in the operation of the Bill. 
 He was supported by the then Liberal 
 Government, and the Motion was carried 
 by 205 to 86. In the following year my 
 right hon. Friend the Postmaster General 
 (Mr. Fawcett) moved an Amendment for 
 the purpose of including the Fellowships. 
 For reasons which approved themselves 
 to the Government at that time his 
 Amendment had not the support of the 
 Government, and yet it was lost by a 
 majority of 22 only in a House of ' 
 Members (182 to 160), the majority 
 eluding the Members of the Governmenl 
 and 110 Conservatives. When the Bill 
 came on for the third reading, the right 
 hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister said 
 that — 
 
 " Both he and his learned Friend the Solicitor 
 General thought the question of Fellowships 
 ought not to he allowed to sleep. The tenure 
 of Fellowships was not a thing to he dealt with 
 by a stroke of the pen. It was an old system, 
 fortified by a number of conditions which must 
 be studied as a whole. Let them detach, if they 
 could, the question of religious tests from that 
 of general legislation upon Fellowships. But, 
 first of all, they would watch the fate of that 
 measure in * another place.' If it met with the 
 success they hoped for, they would then apply 
 themselves to considering what practical mea- 
 sures they could best take — whether by the au-
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 thority of the Executive, or "by invoking the aid 
 of Parliament — for placing the Legislature and 
 the Government in a position to deal eflFectively 
 with the subject of Fellowships." — [3 Hansard^ 
 cciv. 779.1 
 
 When the question next came before 
 Parliament, the Liberal Government 
 was out of Office ; and yet in the year 
 1877, notwithstanding the large Con- 
 servative majority, proposals for the 
 abolition of the clerical restriction upon 
 the Headships and Fellowships were 
 rejected by such small majorities as 9 
 and 22. That brings me to the Uni- 
 versities Act of 1877, which constituted 
 the Commissions for Oxford and Cam- 
 bridge. Those Commissions are now 
 sitting. The Commissioners are invested 
 with a large discretion for dealing with 
 the subjects of Headships and Fellow- 
 ships in concert with the Colleges. The 
 Act also provides that when the statutes 
 for the Universities and Colleges have 
 been finally sanctioned by the Commis- 
 sioners they are to be laid before Par- 
 liament. It will be naturally asked how I 
 come to be moving a Pesolution to over- 
 ride the discretion vested by Act of Par- 
 liament in a sitting Commission ? Now, 
 the reason why I have not introduced a 
 Bill to deal with those restrictions is, 
 shortly, the state of the Session ; and if, 
 as I hope, a large majority to-night 
 affirms the principle of my Pesolution, I 
 shall be ready at the beginning of next 
 Session to introduce a Bill to give effect, 
 in due Parliamentary form, to what I 
 propose. In taking that course I had 
 the strongest desire to act respectfully 
 and courteously towards the members of 
 the two Commissions. I felt that if I 
 "^had waited till next year, when the work 
 of the Commissions was completed, and 
 the statutes in a complete form were laid 
 on the Table of the House, it might well 
 be urged against me, if I objected to some 
 of the statutes, that it was a strange and a 
 hard thing that I should come down at 
 the twelfth hour and move, as I should 
 be in duty bound to do, the rejection of 
 some of those statutes. The hon. Mem- 
 ber for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Bryce) 
 has given Notice of an Amendment for 
 throwing open the Chairs of Hebrew and 
 Ecclesiastical History in the University 
 of Oxford, and the Chair of Hebrew in 
 the University of Cambridge to others 
 than clergymen. I wish to express my 
 hearty approval of that Amendment on 
 the ground that those Chairs are not 
 
 theological Chairs. If it is said that the 
 Professorship of Hebrew is a theological 
 Chair, because Hebrew is the language 
 of Holy Scripture, the same thing would 
 apply to the Professorship of Greek, 
 because Greek is the language of the 
 New Testament. If it be thought strange 
 that we should claim for laymen the 
 Chair of Ecclesiastical History, I reply 
 that you might as well say that a Chair 
 of Political Economy should be limited 
 to a Member of one or other branch of 
 the Legislature. Is it to be affirmed 
 that a man like Mr. Pobertson Smith, 
 who is thought worthy to revise the 
 translation of the Bible, should be pre- 
 cluded from holding the Professorship of 
 Hebrew at the University of Oxford ? I 
 now come to the case of Headships and 
 Fellowships. Headships are the chief 
 offices in the Colleges. It is in the power 
 of a head of a College to make or to mar 
 his College. Moreover, they are the 
 chief prizes open to the Fellows. It 
 is unreasonable, now that such large 
 reductions have been made in the num- 
 ber of clerical Fellowships, to seek to 
 reserve the chief office in a College to a 
 clergyman, and there is a great body 
 of opinion against it among the resident 
 Fellows and tutors of Oxford and Cam- 
 bridge. The number of Fellowships at 
 Oxford and Cambridge is 704, and the 
 income of those Fellowships, according to 
 a Eeturn made to the Commission in 
 1871, amounts to £204,000 a-year, or, 
 rather, I should say, exceeds that sum. 
 Both at Oxford and Cambridge the great 
 majority of the Colleges have made pro- 
 posals to the Commissioners for the aboli- 
 tion of those restrictions to Holy Orders ; 
 and the question I have to put to the 
 House is whether the wishes of those who 
 best know what concerns their interest 
 shall be regarded or not. I might appeal 
 to the case of three of the wealthiest, 
 and I fear I must add three of the 
 least efficient, of the Colleges at Oxford, 
 Christ Church, Magdalen, and St. John's 
 Colleges ; but I will rest my argument 
 on the case of Christ Church. What is 
 the case of Christ Church ? Although 
 there are still matters unsettled between 
 the College and the Commissioners, they \ 
 are matters of notoriety in the Univer- \ 
 sity. At Christ Church there is a dean 
 and chapter connected with the College. 
 In the Governing Body there are the 
 dean and six canons, of whom five ar 
 Professors of Divinity. Besides thosf
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 there are three readers in natural science, 
 who may be laymen. In addition, ac- 
 cording to the proposal now before the 
 Commissioners, there are to be two classes 
 of students — first, those whom I will 
 compendiously call prize Fellows, limited 
 to a tenure of seven years ; and, secondly, 
 those who are called tutorial Fellows, 
 who may hold office for 1 5 years. These 
 tutorial Fellows will vary in number be- 
 tween a maximum of 1 6 and a minimum 
 of 10 ; but, in any case, as many as six 
 are always to be in Orders. Thus the 
 Governing Body will consist of a dean 
 having two votes, besides a casting vote, 
 and six canons, besides, at least, six cleri- 
 cal students. This will insure apermanent 
 resident clerical vote of 14. I will make 
 no comment upon this statement. The 
 facts themselves are my strongest argu- 
 ment. I appeal to hon. Members who 
 belong to Christ Church, whose sons and 
 whose sons' sons have a vested interest 
 in its efficiency and credit — shall Christ 
 Church, shall Wolsey's great foundation 
 be the first College in a great University, 
 or shall it be dwarfed to the narrow pro- 
 portions of a mere appanage of the 
 Church of England ? I now come to the 
 general policy of removing clerical re- 
 strictions. It appears to me to be im- 
 portant that Colleges should be in a 
 position to elect the best man, and that 
 any restriction whatever must neces- 
 sarily be imdesirable, inasmuch as it 
 tends to limit the field of choice. I need 
 scarcely observe that the object which I 
 have in view is not to exclude clergymen ; 
 but simply that clergymen should not be 
 forced upon Colleges. It appears to me 
 to be an invidious thing, and partaking 
 of the nature of a bribe, to select a man 
 of inferior abilities because he is willing 
 to take Orders, and to reject a man of 
 superior abilities because he is unwilling 
 to take Orders. I am anxious that re- 
 ligious education should revive at the 
 Universities ; but such a revival will 
 never be brought about by the main- 
 tenance of these clerical Fellowships. 
 But this is not a mere College question. 
 It is a national question, and I submit it 
 is not for a casual majority in a College 
 at Oxford or Cambridge to determine 
 a question of large importance — the 
 retention or abolition of religious tests 
 — as a qualification for important offices. 
 [ It is for Parliament to determine that 
 k question. As long as the Colleges of 
 I Oxford and Cambridge were practically 
 
 clerical seminaries there was a reason 
 for retaining the qualification of Holy 
 Orders ; but now that restriction is 
 simply an anachronism. But then, it 
 may be said, that argument is all very 
 well as regards the question of retaining 
 Holy Orders as a qualification for Fellow- 
 ships in general; but we must have regard 
 to those clauses of the Tests Act which 
 provide for the maintenance of religious 
 instruction and worship in the Colleges. 
 That requirement of the Act, it is said, 
 cannot be satisfied unless the person ful- 
 filling those duties be invested with the 
 dignity and influence of membership of 
 the Governing Body. We must also, it 
 is said, have regard in this matter to the 
 feeling of English parents. And again, 
 we must be careful lest we drive our 
 young clergy away from the Universities 
 into clerical seminaries. These are the 
 arguments which deserve our attention. 
 But I submit that it is quite consistent 
 with the Tests Act that religious instruc- 
 tion in Colleges should be provided with- 
 out imposing the qualification of Holy 
 Orders on holders of these offices. It 
 would be an unwise thing in the present 
 state of public opinion to accentuate the 
 provisions of the Tests Act in the in- 
 terest and for the protection of the 
 Church of Engladd. It appears to me 
 that it is far better to trust to the ope- 
 ration of natural causes, to trust to the 
 religious feeling which exists in the 
 nation. " As with the people, so with 
 the priest." If the English people are, 
 as I am persuaded, a religious-minded 
 people, then some of their best intellects 
 will always devote themselves to the 
 service of the Church, and I am content 
 to trust to that. For my knowledge of 
 Oxford leads me to make this observa- 
 tion — that, however great may be the 
 differences of theological opinions in the 
 Universities, as in other classes of edu- 
 cated society in the country, there will 
 always be found men of strong religious 
 feeling, who, if they be free to act, will 
 naturally betake themselves to the ser- 
 vice of the Church ; and I contend that 
 the influence of those men, freely given, 
 would be far more instrumental for good 
 than that of inferior men who had been 
 chosen Fellows simply because they com- 
 plied with the condition that they should 
 be clergymen of the Church. As to the 
 parents, I contend that what they really 
 look to, both at school and at college, is 
 the efficiency and general popularity of
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 the place of education. We have had 
 recent experience of this in the case of a 
 distinguished College and a distin- 
 guished school, both of which were for 
 a time under a theological cloud ; and yet 
 in neither case was there any falling off 
 in the numbers, not even in the number 
 of clergymen's sons. These difficulties 
 are, in fact, imaginary. Parents would 
 be the first to disregard them. But I 
 will not rest my case upon mere argu- 
 ment; I will appeal to experience and 
 authority. I will first take the case of 
 the great public schools. Take the case 
 of Eton, Harrow, Winchester, West- 
 minster, Eugby, and Charterhouse. Of 
 these six public schools, Winchester is 
 the only one in which the qualification 
 of Holy Orders is necessary for the 
 Head Mastership. At Harrow the Head 
 Master is to be a graduate of an Uni- 
 versity within Her Majesty's Dominions ; 
 and yet the Head Master of Harrow, 
 who may be a layman, is charged by 
 the Governors with the entire control of 
 Divine Service in the school chapel. 
 The case of Eugby is still more remark- 
 able. In that case, the Head Master, 
 who is required to be a Protestant of 
 the Church of England, and may there- 
 fore be a layman, is charged under the 
 Statutes with the care of instructing the 
 boys in the principles of the Christian 
 religion, morality, and good manners. 
 If that is the case with the great public 
 schools, I contend that the Colleges also 
 may be intrusted with the care of pro- 
 viding for religious instruction and wor- 
 ship without being bound to do so in 
 any particular specified way. So much 
 for the public schools. But I have still 
 higher authority for my proposal. On 
 Monday last I presented a remarkable 
 Petition from 131 resident graduates of 
 the University of Oxford."^" Among the 
 Petitioners are 6 Heads of Colleges, 
 15 Professors, 72 Fellows of Colleges, 19 
 other tutors and lecturers, and 19 other 
 resident graduates. The Petitioners, in 
 fact, comprise one-half of the Hebdo- 
 madal Council, the Governing Body of 
 the University, one-half of the resident 
 Professors, and a clear majority of Col- 
 ^*^ge tutors and lecturers. A similar 
 Petition, of at least equal importance, 
 would have been presented from mem- 
 bers of the University of Cambridge, 
 
 * See Appendix A. 
 
 but that it had been too late in the term 
 to obtain the necessary signatures. I 
 also presented to the Prime Minister a 
 day or two ago a most weighty Memo- 
 rial, signed by upwards of 800 persons 
 eminent in literature and science, and 
 representing Nonconformist and other 
 places of higher education.* But that 
 is not all. The Eeport of the first 
 Oxford Commission contained a recom- 
 mendation for the removal of these re- 
 strictions from Fellowships.! That Com- 
 mission included such eminent Church 
 dignitaries as the then Bishop of Nor- 
 wich, who was Chairman, Dr. Jeune, 
 afterwards Bishop of Peterborough, the 
 present Dean of Christ Church, and last, 
 not least, the present Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. With the permission of the 
 House, I will now quote a few figures 
 which will show that at Cambridge there 
 has been a large increase in the lay 
 element. From figures which have been 
 furnished to me, I find that at Trinity 
 College in the year 1854, that is to say, 
 in the time before the recent changes, all 
 the College tutors, five in number, were 
 in Holy Orders ; whereas, in the present 
 year, of four tutors only one is in Orders, 
 and yet there are about 160 matricu- 
 lations at the College every year, and 
 that large number represents but a pro- 
 portion of those who apply for admission. 
 These figures are another proof of the 
 real feeling of English parents. Simi- 
 larly, I find that at the present time 
 there are five Colleges at Cambridge 
 with but one tutor, and that tutor a lay- 
 man. But that is not all. Taking the 
 College tutors and lecturers at Cam- 
 bridge collectively, I find that in 1854, 
 before the recent changes, out of 93 
 tutors and lecturers of Colleges there 
 
 * See Appendix B. 
 t After stating the advantages of open Fellow- 
 ships, and the necessity for such a measure in 
 order " to render the revenues of the Colleges 
 available for the services of learning and edu- 
 cation," the Commissioners go on to say — " It is 
 prohable that, even if the rule [of restriction to 
 Holy Orders] were abrogated in all the Colleges, 
 the great bulk of the resident teachers in Oxford 
 would, after all, remain clerical. It is from a 
 deliberate preference, founded on the highest 
 motives, that many of the Fellows of Colleges 
 become clergymen, and by the removal of the 
 obligation to take Holy Orders, under the 
 penalty of losing a Fellowship, we should only 
 take away one of the inferior motives." See* 
 Report of the Oxford Commissioners of 1850 
 page 163. 
 
 - uiuc :
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 were but 25 laymen. In 1880, out of 
 130 tutors and lecturers 77 are laymen. 
 So again, in 1854, of Fellows of Colleges 
 as many as 205 were in Orders. In 1880 
 only 100, that is, less than one-half, are 
 in Orders. These figures show the set 
 of the tide, the current of opinion in the 
 University. They show, in fact, that the 
 Universities are becoming more and 
 more lay places of education, and, that 
 being so, we may as well struggle 
 against the tide ; we may as well at- 
 tempt to build up a great national 
 institution upon what I will call this 
 " narrow ledge of clericalism," as Mrs. 
 Partington might try to stop out the 
 great Atlantic Ocean with her mop. 
 I will take one more test, that of num- 
 bers at the two Universities ; and I find 
 that, comparing the present time with 
 the period before the late legislative 
 changes, not only has the number of 
 undergraduates, both at Oxford and 
 Cambridge, nearly doubled, but that 
 the number of those who have distin- 
 guished themselves by taking honours 
 at both Universities has largely in- 
 creased.* From these figures I draw 
 these conclusions — that, as restrictions 
 have been removed, numbers have in- 
 creased ; that, as the number of subjects 
 of study has increased, the amount of 
 work done has increased ; and thus that 
 the removal of restrictions has tended to 
 the advancement of learning and edu- 
 cation at the Universities, and in the 
 country at large. Still, it may be said, 
 that is all very well as regards learning 
 and education ; but how about religion 
 and religious influences ? I will reply 
 — Qui lahorat orat — given the spirit of 
 honest hard work, given a sense of con- 
 scientious duty, given earnestness of 
 purpose, and seriousness in the view of 
 life, and you will have gone far towards 
 exorcising the demon of selfish luxury, 
 that bane of society which lies at the 
 bottom of much of the laxity of morals, 
 and indifference to religion, which we all 
 
 See Appendix C. 
 
 deplore. This is the question which I 
 now submit to the House. It is not a 
 question of religious liberty, but one of 
 academic freedom. It is a question 
 whether the retention of this remaining 
 test, the most stringent of all religious 
 tests, and the most opposed to the spirit 
 of the Tests Act, can be justified upon 
 any adequate grounds of authority, 
 reason, or policy; or whether, as I 
 contend, the principle of the national 
 character of the Universities shall now, 
 once for all, be frankly and fully accepted 
 in the interest of learning and science, 
 and in the interest of religious education. 
 I beg to move — 
 
 ' ' That this House, while fully recognizing 
 the obligation to make provision for the due 
 fulfilment of the requisitions of sections 5 and 6 
 of "The Universities Tests Act, 1871 " (relating 
 to religious instruction, and to morning and 
 evening prayer in colleges), deems it inexpedient 
 that, save in the case of the Deanery of Christ- 
 church, any clerical restriction shall remain or 
 be attached to any headship or fellowship in 
 any college of the Universities of Oxford and 
 Cambridge." 
 
 After a debate in which, amongst 
 others, Mr. Gladstone, and also Sir 
 Matthew White Eidley (one of the 
 Oxford Commissioners) took part, 
 
 Mr. CHARLES ROUNDELL said, 
 that after what had fallen from the Prime 
 Minister, and also from the hon. Member 
 for North Northumberland (Sir Matthew 
 White Ridley), and especially having 
 regard to the promise of the Prime 
 Minister that the Government would 
 afford a full and fair field for the discus- 
 sion of the statutes of the Commissioners 
 next year, and that they would give a 
 full and fair consideration to the statutes, 
 respectful to the Commissioners, but 
 more respectful to the principles on 
 which University legislation of late years 
 had proceeded, he had no hesitation in 
 responding to the request of the right 
 hon. Gentleman at the head of the Go- 
 vernment, and begged leave to withdraw 
 his Motion. 
 
 Motion, by leave, withdrawri.
 
 ( 8 ) 
 [APPENDIX A.] 
 
 PresentedJuly 5, 1880. 
 
 TO THE HONOUEABLE THE COMMONS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM 
 OF GEEAT BEITAIN AND lEELAND IN PAELIAMENT AS- 
 SEMBLED. 
 
 Sheweth : — 
 
 The Humble Petition of the undersigned Eesident Graduates 
 of the University of Oxford, 
 
 1. That by the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge Act, 1877, it was 
 provided (section 17) that the Commissioners appointed under that Act might 
 among other things make provision for altering and regulating the conditions of 
 eligibility or appointment to any emolument or office held in or connected with 
 any College. 
 
 2. That by the same Act it was further provided (section 59) that the said 
 Commissioners should make provision as far as might appear to them requisite 
 for the due fulfilment of the requisitions of sections five and six of the Univer- 
 sities' Test Act, 1871 (relating to religious instruction and to Morning and Even- 
 ing Prayer in Colleges). 
 
 3. That your Petitioners are of opinion that it is desirable that all College 
 offices and emoluments should as far as possible be conferred according to per- 
 sonal merit and fitness. 
 
 Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that with respect to Statutes 
 to be made for Colleges in Oxford by the University of Oxford 
 Commissioners it may be provided that, subject to the require- 
 ments of the fifty-ninth section of the Universities of Oxford and 
 Cambridge Act, 1877, Holy Orders shall not be imposed or 
 continued as a condition of holding any College office or emolu- 
 ment. 
 
 And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c. 
 
 B. Jowett, Master of Balliol College and Regius 
 
 Professor of Greek. 
 John E. Magrath, D.D., Provost of Queen's 
 
 College. 
 ]\Iark Pattison, B.D., Rector of Lincoln. 
 G. G. Bradley, M.A., Master of University 
 
 College. 
 J. Percival, M.A., President of Trinity College. 
 T. H. Green, M.A., Fellow of Balliol College, 
 
 Whyte's Professor of Moral Philosophy. 
 G. W. Kitchin, M.A., Censor of Students Un- 
 attached, formerly Censor of Christ Church. 
 William Odling, M.A., Fellow of Worcester 
 
 College, Waynfleto Professor of Chemistry. 
 U. B. Monro, M.A., Fellow and Vice Provost of 
 
 Oriel. 
 A. S. Chavasse, M.A., B.C.L., Fellow and Tutor 
 
 of University College, Senior Proctor. 
 Bernard Bosanquct, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 
 University College. 
 H. Peters, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of 
 
 University College. 
 
 Franck Bright, M.A., Follow and Tutor of 
 
 University College. 
 
 H. Butcher, M.A., FcUow and Lecturer of 
 
 University College. 
 
 L. Nettleship, FeUow and Tutor of Balliol 
 College. 
 
 ^' ^- ,^^^^cha".Davidson, Fellow and Tutor of 
 Ualliol College. 
 
 F 
 
 J, 
 S 
 K. 
 
 R. G. Tatton, Fellow and Tutor of BalUol 
 
 College. 
 Evelyn Abbott, Fellow and Tutor of BalHol 
 
 College. 
 A. C. Bradley, FeUow and Lecturer of Balliol 
 
 College. 
 
 F. de Paravicini, Fellow and Tutor of Balliol 
 College. 
 
 A. Toynbee, Lecturer of Balliol College. 
 Arthur L. Smith, Lecturer of Balliol College. 
 W. H. Forbes, Fellow and Lecturer of Balliol 
 
 College. 
 T. L. Cheyne, Fellow and Lecturer of Balliol 
 
 College. 
 Arthur Higgs, M.A., Balliol College. 
 John Watts, M.A., BaUiol College. 
 W. F. Donkin, M.A., Magdalen College. 
 T. F. Tozet, B.A., Balliol College. 
 
 G. F. Nicholl, Lord Almoner's Professor of 
 Arabic, Balliol College. 
 
 William Unwin, B.A., Balliol College. 
 
 John Mac Cunn, B.A., Balliol College. 
 
 J. Virinan Jones, B.A., B. Sc, Balliol College. 
 
 Francis P. Simpson, B.A., Balliol College. 
 
 W. C. Sidgwick, M.A., Oriel CoUege. 
 
 E. A. Whittman, M.A., Lecturer of Oriel and 
 
 Lincoln Colleges. 
 Charles L. Shadwell, M.A., Fellow of Oriel 
 
 College. 
 J. Cook Wilson, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College.
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 F. H. Hall, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College. 
 
 Lancelot R. Phelps, M.A., Fellow of Oriel 
 College. 
 
 George Rolleston, M.D., F.R.S., Linacre Pro- 
 fessor of Anatomy and Physiology and Fellow 
 of Merton (with limitation of scope of Peti- 
 tion to offices and emoluments already exist- 
 ing and subject to the operation of the Uni- 
 versities Act of 1877). 
 
 Edwin Hatch, M.A., Vice Principal of St. 
 Mary Hall. 
 
 William Wallace, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 Merton College. 
 
 F. H. Bradley, M.A., Fellow of Merton Col- 
 lege. 
 
 William Esson, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 Merton College. 
 
 G. R. Scott, M.A., FeUow and Tutor of Merton 
 College. 
 
 J. W. Russell, M.A., Fellow of Merton College 
 and Lecturer of Balliol College. 
 
 T. Bowman, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of 
 Merton. 
 
 R. B. Clifton, M.A., Fellow of Merton College, 
 Professor of Experimental Philosophy in the 
 University of Oxford. 
 
 H. W, Jackson, M.A., Sub-Rector and Tutor of 
 Exeter College. 
 
 Charles W. Boase, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 Exeter College. 
 
 Ingram By water, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 Exeter. 
 
 Charles J. C. Price, M. A., Fellow and Lecturer, 
 Exeter College. 
 
 Henry F. Pelham, M.A., Tutor of Exeter Col- 
 lege. 
 
 E. Ray Lankester, M.A., Fellow, late Lecturer 
 of Exeter College. 
 
 P. F. Willert, M.A., Fellow of Exeter College. 
 
 Thomas Fowler, M.A., Professor of Logic and 
 Fellow of Lincoln College. 
 
 W. Warde Fowler, M. A., Fellow and Tutor of 
 Lincoln College. 
 
 N. Bodington, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Lin- 
 coln College. 
 
 R. W. Raper, Fellow and Tutor of Trinity Col- 
 lege. 
 
 Robinson Ellis, Vice President and Lecturer, 
 Trinity College. 
 
 ,T. S. Mann, Fellow and Lecturer of Trinity 
 College. 
 
 William R.Anson, M.A., Fellow of All Souls. 
 
 T. R. Buchanan, M.A., Fellow of All Souls. 
 
 A. H. Johnson, M.A., Tutor and Chaplain of 
 All Souls College, formerly Fellow. 
 
 Walter Gordon, M.A., Lecturer and Tutor to 
 Students unattached. 
 
 J. Dennis Hind, M.A., Lecturer to Students un- 
 attached. 
 
 R. Lamb Abbot, M.A., Lecturer to Students un- 
 attached. 
 
 William Little, M.A., Fellow and Tutor, Corpus 
 Christi College. 
 
 Arthur Sidgwick, M.A., Tutor j, Corpus Christi 
 College. 
 
 W. W. Fisher, M.A., Aldrichian Demonstrator 
 of Chemistry. 
 
 Henry Nettleship, M.A., Corpus Professor of 
 Latin. 
 
 Charles Plummer, M.A., Fellow, Chaplain, and 
 Dean of Corpus Christi College. 
 
 Thomas Corse, M.A., Tutor, Corpus Christi 
 College. 
 
 G. E. Thorbury, M.A., Sub-Warden and Tutor 
 of Wadham. 
 
 P. A. Henderson, Fellow and Tutor, Wadham 
 College. 
 
 Herbert Richards, Fellow and Tutor of Wadham 
 College. 
 
 J. Capel Hanbury, Chaplain and Divinity Lec- 
 turer, Wadham College. 
 
 Alfred Robinson, M.A., Fellow of New College. 
 
 Hereford B. George, M.A., Fellow of New Col- 
 lege. 
 
 WilHam Leonard Courtney, M.A. Fellow of 
 New College. 
 
 John Baron Moyle, M.A., Fellow of New Col- 
 lege. 
 
 Arthur D. Prickard, M.A., Fellow of New Col- 
 lege. 
 
 Arthur C. Cranpreys, B.A., Assistant Lecturer 
 of New College. 
 
 W. Hatchett Jackson, M. A., New College. 
 
 G. S. Baker, M.A., Fellow and Vice President 
 of Magdalen College. 
 
 W. D. Allen, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen Col- 
 lege. 
 
 W. A. B. Coolidge, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen 
 College. 
 
 T. Herbert Warner, M.A., Fellow and Tutor, 
 Magdalen College. 
 
 M. A. Lawson, M.A., Magdalen, Professor of 
 Botany. 
 
 T. H. T. Hopkins, M.A., Fellow and Tutor, 
 Magdalen College. 
 
 Albert Watson, M.A., Fellow of Brasenose Col- 
 lege. So far as is consistent with the proposals 
 submitted by the College and the Oxford Uni- 
 versity Commission. 
 
 Wm. Stoelser, M.A., Fellow of Brasenose. 
 
 C. B. Heberden, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of 
 Brasenose. 
 
 Charles A. Whitluck, M.A., Fellow and Tutor 
 of Brasenose. 
 
 Richard Lodge, B.A., Fellow and Lecturer of 
 
 W. li. Pater, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Brase- 
 nose College. 
 
 T. H. Ward, M.A., Tutor, late Fellow of Brase- 
 nose College. 
 
 R. H. M. Bosanquet, Fellow of St. John's Col- 
 lege. 
 
 T. C. Snow, Fellow of St. John's. 
 
 F. A. Clarke, Fellow of Corpus Christi College. 
 
 T. S. Osmond, M.A., St. John's College. 
 
 E. W. Symons, B.A., Fereday Fellow of St. 
 John's. 
 
 John Griffiths, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of 
 Jesus College. 
 
 E. R. Marton, M.A., Lecturer and late FeUow 
 of Jesus. 
 
 J. R. Illingworth, M.A., Fellow of Jesus, Tutor 
 of Keble. 
 
 John Rhys, M.A., Professor of Celtic, hon. 
 Fellow of Jesus. 
 
 W. Hawker Hughes, M.A., Fellow and Tutor 
 of Jesus. 
 
 Edward B. Poulton, M.A., Jesus College. 
 
 David E. Ritchie, B.A., Fellow and Assistant 
 Tutor of Jesus College. 
 
 W. E. V. Collins, M.A., Jesus College. 
 
 Bartholomew Price, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow of 
 Pembroke College and Sedleian Professor of 
 Natural Philosophy. 
 
 Charles Lewesdorf, M.A., Fellow of Pembroke. 
 
 A. T. Barton, M. A., FeUow of Pembroke Collego.
 
 ( 10 ) 
 
 John. C. G. Mowat, M.A,, Fellow of Pembroke 
 
 College. 
 J. Barclay Thompson, M.A., Senior Student 
 
 and Lee's Reader in Anatomy, Christ Church. 
 J. A. Stewart, M.A., Lecturer at Christ Church, 
 
 late Senior Student. 
 Robert E. Baynes, M.A., Senior Student of 
 
 Christ Church and Lee's Reader in Physics. 
 A. Vernon Harcourt, ]\I.A., Senior Student of 
 
 Christ Church and Lee's Reader in Chemistry. 
 A. H. D. Acland, M.A., Junior Student at 
 
 Christ Church. 
 T. York Powell, M.A., Law Lecturer of Christ 
 
 Church. 
 S. J. Owen, M.A., Reader in Indian History. 
 Reginald W. Macan, M.A., Senior Student and 
 
 Tutor, Christ Church. 
 
 Carteret J. H. Fletcher, M.A., Worcester Col- 
 lege. 
 
 Charles J. Faulkner, M.A., University Col- 
 lege. 
 
 William Markby, D.C.L., Reader in Indian 
 Law. 
 
 James Legge, M.A., LL.D., Corpus Christi Col- 
 lege, Professor of Chinese. 
 
 F. Max MUller, All Souls College, Professor of 
 Comparative Philology. 
 
 H. G. Wood, M.A., Tutor and late Fellow of 
 Trinity. 
 
 Franklin T. Rickards, M.A., Lecturer and late 
 Fellow of Trinity. 
 
 St. George Stock, M.A., Pembroke College. 
 
 Edward Purcell, B.C.L., Lincoln College. 
 
 [APPENDIX B.] 
 
 MEMORIAL TO ME. GLADSTONE. 
 
 CLERICAL RESTRICTION'S AT THE UmVERSITIES. 
 
 TO THE EIGHT HONOUEABLE W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P., FIEST 
 LOED OF THE TEEASUEY, ETC. 
 
 We the undersigned beg to express an earnest hope that Her Majesty's Govern- 
 ment will afford their support to the following Eesolution, which will be submitted 
 to the House of Commons by Mr. Eoiindell, on the 9th of July : — 
 
 " That this House, while fully recognising the obligation to make provision for the due 
 fulfilment of the requisitions of Sections 5 and 6 of ' The Universities Tests Act, 1871 ' (relating 
 to religious instruction, and to morning and evening prayer in Colleges), deems it inexpedient 
 that, save in the case of the Deanery of Christchurch, any clerical restriction shall remain, or be 
 attached to, any Headship or Fellowship in any College of the Universities of Oxford and Cam- 
 bridge." 
 
 And that they will also support the following addition to such Eesolution, to 
 be proposed by Mr. Bryce : — 
 
 " Or to the professorships of Hebrew and Ecclesiastical History in the University of Oxford, 
 and the professorship of Hebrew in the University of Cambridge." 
 
 When the Universities Tests Abolition Bill of 1871 was before Parliament, 
 it was only by small majorities that proposals for the abolition of clerical Head- 
 ships and Fellowships were rejected ; one reason assigned for the opposition of 
 the then Government to the proposal being that a Commission would probably be 
 appointed to examine the whole question of the tenure of Fellowship and College 
 offices. When, in 1877, the Bill for the appointment of Commissioners, with 
 power to make Statutes for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and the 
 Colleges therein, was brought in (by the Conservative Government), clauses pro- 
 viding for the abolition of clerical restrictions were rejected by the small majorities 
 of nine, and twenty-two ; notwithstanding the opposition of the Government, with 
 its normally large majority. 
 
 At the present time, it is believed that in some of the Colleges the strong 
 representations of the College authorities have induced the Commissioners tS 
 Ihfn a^^ ^r'^ ii"" ^^t-^^^lition of the restriction, in the case of both the ^e^^- 
 clerical HeaclSii'''''iiT }^- ^>^', ^^^^ever, understood that in other Colleges the
 
 ( 11 ) 
 
 The Statutes have not yet been settled for the whole of the Colleges, and none 
 of the Statutes will have force until they have been laid before Parliament. We 
 are therefore desirous that, while the negotiations between the Colleges and the 
 Commissioners are still in progress, there should be an expression of opinion on 
 the part of the newly elected House of Commons that the principle of the 
 Universities Tests Act of 1871 should be fully recognized by the Commissioners. 
 
 We are also of opinion that no sufficient reason can be advanced why the 
 Chairs of Hebrew and of Ecclesiastical History at Oxford, and of Hebrew at Cam- 
 bridge, should be filled only by clergymen of the Church of England, or ministers 
 of any religious body, and that, in the interest of learning, and even of religion, 
 as well as on the ground of justice, these Professorships should be thrown open 
 to laymen. 
 
 We desire to call your special attention to the fact that Mr. Roundell's 
 Motion fully respects the compromise, in regard to religious instruction and 
 worship in the Colleges, upon which the Universities Tests Abolition Act was 
 based ; it being understood to be practicable to make provision for such instruc- 
 tion and worship without the retention of the existing system of clerical Fellow- 
 ships. 
 
 June, 1880. 
 
 Note. — To the above Memorial about 850 signatures were attached, including 
 men of eminence in literature and science, a large number of Members of the 
 House of Commons, of the Principals and Professors of Colleges and educational 
 establishments in England, Wales, and Scotland, and of persons occupying an 
 official position. The majority are graduates of various Universities, and, 
 although many Nonconformist names are included, the Memorial is of a general, 
 rather than of a Nonconformist, character. 
 
 [APPENDIX C] 
 
 OXFORD. 
 
 I. Matriculatiom. 
 
 1851* 369 
 
 1879 798 
 
 Or more than double since 1851. 
 
 II. Total Number of Undergraduates. 
 
 1862 1,484 
 
 1879 2,814 
 
 Or an increase of nearly 90 per cent. 
 
 III. Honours in the Final Examinations. 
 
 For the period 1856-1860 .. .. 690 
 „ „ 1875-1879 .. .. 1,531 
 
 Or an increase of nearly 122 per cent. But the 
 latter period includes 212 Honours in the School 
 of Theology, which came into operation in the 
 year 1875. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE. 
 I. Matriculations. 
 
 1850 
 
 1879 
 
 Or nearly double since 1860. 
 
 441 
 866 
 
 II. Total Number of Undergraduates. 
 
 1856 1,569 
 
 1880 2,653 
 
 Or an increase of 69 per cent. 
 
 III. Honours in the Final Examinations. 
 
 1866 216 
 
 1879-80 .. .. 273 
 
 Or an increase of 26 per cent. 
 
 * This year is taken because it precedes the late legislative changes, and also the Crimean 
 War, when the number of Matriculations largely decreased. 
 
 LONDON: CORNELIUS BUCK, 22, PATERNOSTER ROW, B.C.
 
 ^' 
 
 f :«l 
 
 
 y, 
 
 'M 
 
 
 
 r*. 
 
 5 
 
 
 few 
 
 i> 
 
 111 
 
 
 
 Sl 
 
 ,r •■ 
 
 -'t 
 
 m 
 
 a:'o 
 
 
 fi.