REMINISCENCES. xciii 



and that all persons are expressly excluded from it on Sundays 

 {Ih. 251). 



" I think, therefore, that I may reasonably ask the members of 

 the Senate not to pass the proposed Grace, by which the character 

 of the Garden would be totally changed from the use for which it 

 was designed by its founder, and the workmen employed in contra- 

 vention of the Divine and human laws regulating the Lord's Day." 



The amended report of the seven Syndics, dated 7th May, 1881, 

 may be seen in the Reporter for 10th May, pp. 531 — 2. On the 

 19th May, the report as amended, was confirmed by 144 votes 

 against 129 {Reporter, 29th May, p. 589). 



On the 6th of May, 1882, seven Syndics signed a report recom- 

 mending the renewal for 1882 of the former grace {Reporter, 9th of 

 May, 1882, p. 529). On the 10th of May {Ihid. 16th of May, 1882, 

 pp. 558 — 9), this report was discussed in the Arts' School. 



The Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Porter, Master of Peterhouse, explained that he 

 signed the report only because he thought it right that an opportunity should 

 be afforded to the Senate of considering it. The recommendations of the 

 present report were almost identical with those of last year, the chief change 

 being the omission of the recommendation that the services of a policeman be 

 obtained. This change was due to the fact that the Watch Committee had 

 last year declined to supply the services of a policeman, thinking it undesirable 

 to increase the labours of the police on Sundays. He strongly took the same 

 view, and thought it very undesirable that any unnecessary labour should be 

 placed upon any official on Sundays. Three members of the Syndicate had 

 not signed, viz. the Master of Clare, Dr. Paget, and the Professor of Botany. 

 Two other members of the Syndicate had not been present at the meeting, and 

 had not had the report sent to them. 



Dr. Paget had no objection to the report being brought forward, but he 

 could not recommend as a member of the Syndicate that the proposals be 

 accepted. He had not a strong opinion on the subject, but on the whole he 

 thought the Garden had better not be opened on Sunday. 



Professor Babington thought it highly undesirable that either the Curator 

 or his deputy should be required to be in his house or in tbe Gardens on 

 Sunday afternoon for the convenience of Members of the Senate. It was a 

 Garden for scientific purposes, and there were six days for those purposes, and 

 could be no necessity for a seventh. He did not wish to see the point of the 

 wedge inserted by increasing work on Sunday, and thus encouraging those who 

 were in favour of opening museums and other places of public resort on 

 that day. 



On the 25th of May, 1882, the report was confirmed, placet 87, 

 non-placet 77 {Reporter, 30th of May, p. 623). 



On the 10th of May, 1883, seven Syndics again recommended 

 the opening of the Garden for the summer months {Ihid. 15th of 

 May, 1883), but the question was not brought before the Senate. 



Endowments of the University, p. 529 : " The Act declares the New 

 Botanic Garden to be under the direction, government, management, 

 and superintendence of the same persons, and subject to the same 

 orders and regulations, and with all such powers and provisions for 

 the maintenance, support, and conduct thereof, as the Old Garden." 



