334 



NATURE 



[November ii, 1920 



part of his career in a school or technical college 

 of non-university rank before becoming a uni- 

 versity teacher, he is to be mulcted of some por- 

 tion of his pension benefits. This being so, a 

 barrier is set up, and not only the schools suffer, 

 but also the universities. 



The position is quite indefensible. The Council 

 of the Federated Superannuation System, the 

 primary function of which should be the con- 

 servation and the extension of pension benefits to 

 university teachers, ought to recognise this. If 

 our understanding of the position is correct, the 

 council may rest assured that university teachers 

 will not be content to remain passive under such 

 an anomalous scheme. We may remind our 

 readers that the conference of representatives of 

 universities and colleges which waited upon the 

 Chancellor of the Exchequer on June 17 last pre- 

 sented the following resolution to him : "That this 

 conference is of opinion that the interests of 

 English and Welsh education as a whole demand 

 the institution of a scheme of superannuation for 

 university teachers and administrative officials 

 conferring benefits not inferior to those granted 

 under the School Teachers (Superannuation) Act, 

 1918, and of a like retrospective character." This, 

 we understand, is the absolute minimum which uni- 

 versity teachers demand ; if anything beyond this is 

 granted, they are willing to pay for the additional 

 benefits. They believe that their services, to say 

 the least, are no less valuable to the State than 

 the services of those who benefit under the Act, 

 and that they should receive treatment no whit 

 inferior. Their treatment under existing condi- 

 tions is enough to rouse the righteous indignation 

 of every just citizen. We had before us recently 

 the case of a university professor who was com- 

 pelled to retire on account of ill-health, after 

 having taught for more than thirty years. All 

 that he can receive from the Federated Super- 

 annuation System is a lump sum of 780Z., whereas 

 had he been a teacher eligible for a grant under 

 the Superannuation Act he would be entitled to 

 a superannuation allowance of five-eighths of his 

 average salary for the last five years of service, 

 which would amount to a pension of 240Z. per 

 annum, and in addition he would have a gratuity 

 of 640?. This is a typical case, and it would be 

 easy to give many similar examples of manifest 

 injustice to university teachers. 



The suggestion that by receiving equal benefits 

 they will put the yoke of State control round their 

 necks is unworthy of the acumen of the Chan- 

 NO. 2663, VOL. 106] 



cellor of the Exchequer, .'\lready the universities- 

 receive an annual grant of 1,500,000?. (the total 

 Education Vote this year is about 52,000,000!.), 

 and yet they are not State-controlled. Is it con- 

 ceivable that a Government for an addition of one- 

 twentieth of the university grant — for this is 

 approximately the annual amount that would be 

 required to give university teachers similar benefits 

 to those under the Teachers (Superannuation) Act 

 — will demand State control of the universities? 

 Why has the Government not demanded it up ta 

 now? Simply because it has the prescience tO' 

 recognise that State control of the universities 

 would be fatal to the highest development — intel- 

 lectual, social, and industrial — of the community. 

 The Chancellor of the Exchequer himself in his 

 remarks to the conference expresses a doubt as to- 

 whether "it is an exaggeration to say that what 

 did as much for the ruining of Germany as any- 

 thing was the lack of independence and the lack 

 of independent power of speech and thought by 

 the teachers of the youth of Germany through all 

 the branches." Is it likely that the Government, as 

 a quid pro quo for a comparatively small addition 

 to the annual grant, would propose to deprive the 

 universities of their freedom when highly placed 

 statesmen speak such language ? Most unlikely t 

 Is it likely, indeed, that the universities would 

 submit to State control? In our opinion, the 

 bogey of State control of universities as conjured 

 up by Mr. Chamberlain is unthinkable. We begin 

 to wonder what other argument will be adduced 

 to support an absolutely untenable position. 



One other fact remains to be stated. The Asso- 

 ciation of University Teachers, comprising some 

 fifteen hundred full-time teachers in the universi- 

 ties and institutions of university rank in England 

 and Wales, co-operated in the conference referred 

 to above, and supported it in its demand. As a 

 result of the failure of the deputation to the Chan- 

 cellor of the Exchequer, it immediately instituted 

 a postcard vote amongst its members, settings 

 forth three alternative proposals. Seventy per 

 cent, of the voters declared in favour of the ex- 

 tension of the School Teachers (Superannuation) 

 Act to university teachers, and in consequence the 

 executive has decided to adopt this as its super- 

 annuation policy. Here we have a significant fact. 

 If the Council of the Federated Superannuation 

 System, the University Grants Committee, and the 

 Treasury are wise, they will ponder carefully over 

 this indication of the direction in which the uni- 

 versity teachers are moving. 



