342 



NATURE 



\March 2, 1876 



tained." The second principle enunciated by Lord 

 Salisbury is the endowment of research — a principle 

 which has been long advocated in these columns, but 

 which now for the first time appears destined to obtain 

 legislative sanction. In the case of its distinguished 

 sojourner, Prof. Max Miiller, the University of Oxford 

 has already admitted its duties in this matter ; and now 

 research in the physical sciences, under the aegis of Lord 

 Salisbury, and with all the authority that Parliament can 

 lend, will put in its claim to be " made a part of the regular 

 and recognised machinery of the University." To many 

 persons this will be thought the greatest novelty con- 

 tained in the speech, and it is significant that none of the 

 three peers who followed the mover made any allusion to 

 it in their brief remarks. But it is not necessary now to 

 expatiate upon the importance of the proposal, or the 

 valuable results that will flow from it. It is the first fruits 

 of the Royal Commission on the Advancement of Science, 

 and will lead, we trust, to the adoption of more of the 

 recommendations made by that laborious body. It is of 

 more importance on this occasion to call attention to a 

 distinction which Lord Salisbury has apparently drawn, 

 and to which the Colleges would do well to take heed. 

 If we understand his words aright, he would impose upon 

 the University the duty of supplying, of course from the 

 College endowments, the capital sum that will be required 

 " from time to time for buildings and apparatus, neces- 

 sary for the purposes of research ; " while he would leave 

 to the individual colleges " to provide for 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." This distinction seems to us an im- 

 portant one, partly because it assigns to each the functions 

 which they can best perform, with the least revolution in 

 their characters ; and still more because it insists upon 

 two separate modes of endowing research, which are of 

 equal value, and must be both demanded alike. We 

 cannot forbear quoting at some length the comprehensive 

 views of Lord SaUsbury on this subject : — " We are of 

 opinion that the mere duty of communicating knowledge 

 to others does not fulfil all the functions of a University, and 

 that the best Universities in former times have been those 

 in which the instructors, in addition to imparting learning, 

 were engaged in adding new stores to the already acquired 

 accumulation of knowledge. There are new sciences 

 which have gained, and which are pressing for, admission 

 to the Universities, and I think no one can doubt that it 

 is for the interest alike of the students and of the nation 

 at large that such sciences should have full encourage- 

 ment. . . . What I am particularly anxious for is that all 

 branches of culture should have equal encouragement, and 

 should be regarded, not as rivals, but as allies in the great 

 and difficult task of cultivating and developing the human 

 mind." Apart from these two leading features of the 

 Government scheme of University Reform — the endow- 

 ment of the University by the Colleges, and the endow- 

 ment of Research— it remains only to notice the ease with 

 which Lord Salisbury, in one short sentence, brushes 

 aside " the religious difficulty " as unworthy of attention. 

 " The teachers at Oxford are not clergymen now, and if we 

 want to get the best men, we must get them from other 

 sources than that which formerly supplied them." 

 With regard to the machinery by which these great 



reforms are to be effected, it is better that criticism 

 should wait until fuller explanation is given. On a first 

 glance, it would seem that the colleges are to be allowed 

 a year and a half to devise their own schemes of reform 

 subject only to the approval of the Commissioners. On 

 this point we confess to a feeling of distrust of such 

 " permissive legislation ; " and are disposed to adhere to 

 the old-fashioned liberal theory, which had its advocate 

 in the Archbishop of Canterbury. " He believed that the • 

 Colleges are not an exception to the general rule which 

 has been found to exist everywhere, that hardly any cor- 

 poration was capable of entirely reforming itself without 

 external pressure." It should never be forgotten that 

 some colleges have already tried their hands at reform, 

 and that none have yet made adequate provision for the 

 wants of the University or of scientific research. The 

 College which, in all educational matters, is usually re- 

 cognised as the most efficient, has obtained final sanction 

 to a scheme which does not allude to either of these 

 subjects. Another college imagined but a few years ago 

 that it was reorganising itself in accordance with the 

 most modern ideal, when its teaching staff obtained per- 

 mission from their episcopal visitor that they might one 

 and all incontinently marr}-, and bought off his natural 

 opposition by agreeing to retain all the existing clerical 

 restrictions. It is whispered, at the present moment, 

 that a third college has just matured a scheme by which 

 each of the tutors shall receive a fixed salary from endow- 

 ment of 800/. per annum. With these instances in view, 

 it will manifestly be the duty of all sincere reformers to 

 urge that the powers given to the Commissioners should 

 be strong enough to override the possibility of such 

 abuses. If only this be done, and if the name of Cam- 

 bridge be added to the bill, the Government project will 

 become in all respects praiseworthy. 



LEGISLATION REGARDING VIVISECTION 



IN our observations last week upon the Report of the 

 Vivisection Commission, we remarked that some 

 might be inclined to think that in the legislative measures 

 recommended Science has made too great concessions 

 to popular feeling, and a more careful perusal of this 

 bulky volume tends to convince us of the correctness of 

 this opinion. One of the most astonishing things referred 

 to in the whole report is the small number of persons 

 for whose restraint the new law is to be passed. Judging 

 from some of the statements made by opponents of 

 vivisection, one would think the vivisectors in this 

 country must be counted by hundreds ; but the Commis- 

 sioners inform us that, on the contrary, not more than 

 fifteen to twenty at the utmost are systematically engaged 

 in the performance of experiments on living animals. 

 They add, however, that experiments are, there is little 

 doubt, occasionally performed by private persons, of 

 whose number they can form no accurate computation. 

 As there might be many such, and their experiments 

 taken collectively might give good grounds for the belief 

 that vivisection is extensively carried on in this country, 

 we have tried to gain some information on this point from 

 the statements of various witnesses. The Society for the 

 Protection of Animals liable to Vivisection has published 

 a pamphlet containing such extracts from the Report ot 



