NA TURE 



[August 12, 1922 



the first place with regard to the needs of the colleges 

 themselves. 



The schedule deals with such questions as the interim 

 powers of the universities and colleges ; the provision 

 that the commissioners in framing statutes " shall have 

 regard to the interests of education, religion, learning, 

 and research ; the election of college representatives 

 as commissioners ; and procedure generally and other 

 matters of detail. 



Obviously the Bill must be read in the light of the 

 Report. The institution of two bodies of commissioners 

 is the result of a recommendation in it " that a 

 Statutory Commission should be set up to carry out the 

 changes recommended," and the powers of these two 

 bodies are defined, except in special circumstances, by 

 it. As we have remarked in a previous article in 

 these columns the Report is distinctly conservative. 

 Similarly, the Bill, for example in its provision for 

 dealing with trusts and endowments, shows clearly that 

 there is no intention of making sweeping changes. The 

 new commissioners hold office for a season ; the 

 suspension of the autonomy of the universities is 

 merely temporary. 



The new bodies have no easy task before them. The 

 problems will demand knowledge, skill, and tact. The 

 question of the reform of the government of the uni- 

 versity requires delicate handling. The colleges must 

 be brought into closer relationship with the university. 

 The teaching will have to be reorganised and co- 

 ordinated, and proper provision made for research 

 and advanced work. Fellowships, scholarships, extra- 

 mural education, cost of living in colleges, non-collegiate 

 students, and entrance examinations are some of the 

 questions to be dealt with. In addition, there are the 

 twin problems of salaries and pensions. Here it may 

 be expected there will be difficulties. Notwithstanding 

 all that has been done in recent years in the modern 

 universities these are problems still unsolved there. 

 The question is not an easy one. For the Cambridge 

 Commission there is the further question of the position 

 of women in the university. 



The projected reforms can be effected only by a large 

 increase in the income of the two universities. The 

 Report recommends an annual Parliamentary grant of 

 100,000/. to each university. Such a sum is none too 

 great for carrying into effect its financial proposals. 

 At present the grant is 30,000/. to each, and doubtless 

 a further instalment in the immediate future is con- 

 templated. This raises the important question as to 

 whether or not Oxford and Cambridge should have 

 separate and individual consideration in the matter of 

 State aid apart from the modern universities. In some 

 respects it is right and proper that separate and indi- 

 vidual consideration should be given to these ancient 

 NO. 2754, VOL. I io] 



institutions, particularly if due respect is to be paid to 

 the conservation of the best of their traditions. But 

 the case is not on all fours where finance is concerned. 

 Until recently the modern universities had been treated 

 somewhat scurvily by the State, and even now they 

 receive only 1,200,000/. of an annual Parliamentary 

 grant for allocation among something like sixty institu- 

 tions. The largest individual grant for the year 1921-2 

 — that received by the Imperial College of Science and 

 Technology — amounts to 67,500/., a sum in our opinion 

 quite inadequate for the expansion and development 

 of an institution of this standing. Moreover, when the 

 amounts allotted to the other institutions of university 

 rank are considered in detail, it is clear that a sum of 

 200,000/. for Oxford and Cambridge is quite out of 

 proportion. The modern universities are not receiving 

 the financial help from the State to which they are 

 entitled, and, in particular, at the very time when 

 Oxford and Cambridge are receiving for the first time 

 an annual grant of 60,000/., they are being deprived of 

 an annual grant of 300,000/. This withdrawal cannot 

 be justified. In point of fact the financial difficulties 

 of the modern universities are equally as great as, if 

 not greater than, those of the two older universities. 



The question of Parliamentary grants to our universi- 

 ties should be considered as a whole and not piecemeal. 

 In the light of seemingly contradictory statements made 

 in public regarding State aid given to the modern 

 universities it would appear that the whole question 

 should be discussed in Parliament. It is not true, 

 except as a mere technicality, to .say that the annual 

 grant to the modern universities will remain at its 

 present level. Any one who takes this statement at 

 its face value will have a rude awakening in the coming 

 financial year. In our opinion, in such circumstances, 

 it would be a mistake to consider the financial needs of 

 Oxford and Cambridge apart from those of the modern 

 universities. The position of the whole of the universi- 

 ties in the United Kingdom should be considered 

 together, and not simply the position of two of them 

 however ancient and honourable their traditions. 



Paracelsus. 

 Tkeophrasttis Bombastus von Hohenheim, culled Para- 

 celsus : His Personality and Influence as Physician, 

 Chemist, and Reformer. By Prof. J. M. Stillman. 

 Pp. viii + 184. (Chicago and London: The Open 

 Court Publishing Co., 1920.) 10s. net. 



AS is well known, it is the customary lot of revolu- 

 tionaries, whether in politics, religion, literature, 

 or science, or indeed in any department of intellectual 

 activity, to be both vilified and extolled, and the 



