A WEEKLY ILLUSTRATED JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 



" To the 

 Of Nature trusts the mind wJtich 



solid ground 

 hiilds for aye." — Wordsworth 



THURSDAY, MAY 3, 1S77 



THE UXIVERSrriES BILL 



VERY little light has been thrown on the future of Oxford 

 and Cambridge by the discussions in the House of 

 Commons last week and this week. Harassed as they are 

 by the difficulties of the Eastern question, our legislators 

 could not, perhaps, be expected to devote serious thought 

 to the fortunes of higher education in England, but as Mr. 

 Kratchbull-Hugessen said, the debate was "certainly more 

 suited to the debating societies of Oxford and Cambridge 

 than to the arena of the House of Commons." Lord F. 

 Hervey, who opened it, had little weightier to remark 

 than that Mr. Grant Duff was " no doubt a very learned 

 and superior person," and Mr. Grant Dufl''s chief contri- 

 bution was the venerable witticism that Lord F. Hervey 

 ought to be carried round the country by himself and 

 other advanced reformers, as " the shocking example" of 

 the results of the present system. Mr. Trevelyan delighted 

 the House and the country by the amusing patriotic 

 statement that " It would not be possible to find in any 

 European University forty mathematicians equal to the 

 Wranglers in the Cambridge Mathematical Tripos, or 

 twenty classical scholars to compare with those who 

 stood first in the Classical Tripos at Cambridge or in the 

 School of IJtcra Humanioyes at Oxford ; " and with 

 an equally cheerful indifference to the facts Mr. Lowe 

 replied that the teaching of the Universities was " simply 

 disgraceful." When we add that there was much dispute 

 v.hether the glories of Lord Macaulay, who was not " a 

 resident fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge," should be 

 credited to that University, and that Sir William Har- 

 court was delighted to hear that an overworked judge 

 like Sir Alexander Cockburn could find time, in spite of 

 his work, to undertake the arduous office of chairman, 

 which would require the " constant and daily attention of 

 one having entire and absolute leisure," we sum up most 

 of what was interesting and novel in the discussion before 

 going into Committee. 



On two questions, however, which are of speculative 

 importance, much incidental light was thrown. The 

 Bill gives large enabling powers to the Commissioners, and 

 VoT.. XVI, — No. 392 



although, as " An Oxford Man " pointed out in Nature 

 (vol. XV., p. 391), it is very doubtful whether large reforms 

 can be effected even on the initiative of a strong-willed 

 and clear-headed Commission ; it is perfectly certain that 

 little or nothing can be done if the Commissioners are 

 feeble and without origination. In their preparation of 

 schemes for each of the forty colleges they are to be asso- 

 ciated with three residents from the college itself, and it 

 is only from the colleges that they can get money to effect 

 any reforms. It is important therefore to understand 

 what are the views of the Government with regard to the 

 reforms which are practical or possible, because it is to 

 advance these views that the Commissions have been 

 selected. Afterwards, everything depends on the Com- 

 missioners themselves, on the spirit in which they have 

 undertaken their task, and on the diligence, ability, and 

 discretion with which they are likely to execute it. 



The Opposition offered no formal objection to any of 

 the names proposed by the Government, but they sug- 

 gested the addition of three names to the Oxford and of 

 tivo names to the Cambridge list. For Oxford they 

 proposed Prof. Ba.tholomew Price, Prof. Huxley, and 

 Prof Max iMiiller, and for Cambridge Dr. Bateson, the 

 master of St. John's College, and Dr. Hooker, the presi- 

 dent of the Royal Society. The addition of these names 

 would have greatly strengthened the Commissions, and 

 those who are anxious to see the Universities question 

 treated in a generous spirit and v/ith a wide knowledge 

 of the subject might have been reasonably hopeful of 

 good results. To our mind it is a fatal objection to the 

 Commissioners as they stand that they include no mem- 

 bers who are not alumni of the Universities on which they 

 are to sit. Prof. Huxley and Dr. Hooker would have been 

 of the utmost service, because they would have approached 

 University questions from the point of view of men whose 

 lives have been spent outside the Universities. It is 

 certainly important for the Commissioners to have a prac- 

 tical acquaintance with working details, but that would 

 surely have been sufficiently guaranteed by the presence ot 

 nine University men on each Commission even though one 

 outsider had been added to each. Prof. Huxley has sat 

 on the Scotch Universities Commission, and has had the 

 largest experience of teaching at unrestricted institutions 

 like the School of Mines and South Kensington. Dr. 



