338 



NA TURE 



[August i, 1907 



ondowmenls to do what they would all admit was the 

 highest function of a university — namely, to provide a 

 centre for the educational aspirations and desire for know- 

 ledge of the whole country. What thev wanted was that 

 the universities should be so re-organised and that their 

 endowments should be so used as that, whatever there was 

 of real intellectual aspiration and real desire for knowledge, 

 should find its home and instruction in Oxford and Cam- 

 bridge ; and that, and nothing else, should be the real 

 object which the universities manifestly existed to serve. 

 As to the use of post-graduate endowments, there seemed 

 to be wide agreement that the system of prize fellowships 

 as it was established by the last Commission was a mistake 

 • — that post-graduate endowments should be used to sub- 

 sidise either those who were to be teachers or those who 

 were engaged in researches such as were worthy of 

 advanced sludents. In order to redress the balance between 

 the wealth of the colleges and the poverty of the university 

 the principle had been established that the colleges should 

 contribute to the needs of the university. But there was 

 a widespread idea that certain colleges had in recent years 

 grown very wealthy, and that the subsidies from the 

 colleges to the university were in a number of cases very 

 inadequate. If another Commission were appointed, it 

 would be part of the duty of that Commission to inquire 

 into the uses made of the college endowments, as well as 

 the university endowments, and, perhaps, carry further the 

 principle established by the last Commission of contribution 

 from the colleges to the university. 



The Bishop of Bristol spoke against the proposal, so 

 far as Cambridge was concerned. He endeavoured to 

 show that Cambridge had adapted itself to modern con- 

 ditions, and he hoped that, as regarded Cambridge, the 

 Government would not trouble the Commissioners with 

 an inquiry. Last year the endowment of the Universitv 

 of Cambridge from its own property, which it could 

 spend as it would, was half as much again as when he 

 left the University, and it had now reached the large 

 sum of 1965Z. ts. A,d. The quarterly payments from 

 members were 14,500;., fees for degrees 28,000/,, and 

 oddments loooi., which, with 30,300/. received from the 

 colleges, made a total receipt of 75,000/. or 76,000/. 

 There were besides trust funds for various professorships, 

 scholarships, studentships, and prizes. The estates of the 

 colleges provided 220,000/.. while fees, rent of rooms, S;c., 

 amounted to 90,000/. The estate management of that 

 220,000/. cost only 7 per cent., but the management, rates, 

 raxes, improvements, and cost of the national monu- 

 ments came to 130,000/. This left a net amount for all 

 purposes of 180.000/. Of this, scholarships absorbed 

 32,000/. It was difficult to imagine that Cambridge could 

 have adapted itself more completely to modern conditions. 

 But if a Commission were issued, it would be received, 

 not only respectfully, but willingly ; for a Commission 

 could cut some knots which the University could not, or 

 would not, cut for itself. One of these was the question 

 of Greek. Science students ought to be allowed to pass 

 their examinations without a knowledge of Greek. He 

 suggested a small statutory Commission which would be 

 able to make statutes having the force of law. It should 

 be composed of experts who were not faddists and who 

 had full sympathy for the new as well as full respect 

 for the old. The Government might, perhaps, issue two 

 Commissions, one for Oxford and one for Cambridge. 

 Let them give the Bishop of Birmingham all he asked 

 for ; but not one-tenth part was necessary for Cambridge. 

 The Government might well, in grateful recognition of 

 the wonderful manner in which Cambridge had adapted 

 itself, in spite of restricted means, to modern conditions, 

 declare that they would secure to the University an 

 additional 75,000/. a year. 



In replying on behalf of the Government, the Earl of 

 Crewe said : — There is no doubt that for some time what 

 may be called university reform has been in the air. That 

 is due to a variety of causes. The fields of study have 

 been widely expanded in the manner so fully described by 

 the Bishop of Bristol. Then there has been the upspring- 

 ing of the new provincial universities with all their con- 

 sequences ; and there has within the last few vears been 

 impressed upon the public mind the whole question of 



NO. 1970, VOL. 76] 



university extension and the methods by which the endow- 

 ments of the universities can in some way be applied for 

 the benefit of those poorer citizens of this country for 

 whom, as has been so truly said, they were originally 

 intended. 



The appointment of a Commission is urged upon various 

 grounds. We are told that it is important to deal with 

 the problems of the government and constitution of the 

 universities, and to deal with the problems of study, both 

 as regards the nature of the different studies carried on 

 and what I may call the financial side of the question — 

 such matters as scholarships and prize fellowships. Then, 

 again, it is urged ihat the relations between each university 

 and its colleges, and between college and college — wiin 

 special relation, of course, to endowments — demand a close 

 inquiry. We are reminded, loo, that it is almost thirty 

 years since the h.st Commission sat, and that even if thd 

 universities desired to reform themselves from within, yet 

 it would not be possible for them to do so without the 

 intervention of a Royal Commission. And it is further 

 pointed out that the very work of the last Commission 

 has in some cases proved to be of an actually hampering 

 nature, and that the errors into which as human beings 

 the commissioners in some cases naturally fell could only 

 be set right by legislation founded on the report of a 

 further Commission. Those are the reasons for which we 

 are told that a Commission ought to be appointed. On 

 the other hand, certain objections have been made, both 

 in the course of the debate and outside. Lord Burghclere 

 specially alluded to the requests whieh have been made by 

 the Chancellors of both universities publicly for those who 

 have been educated at each respectively to come to their 

 aid. They no doubt bear in mind the fact that if such 

 a movement is to succeed it must be to some extent of a 

 national character, because the old universities cannot 

 make those appeals to local patriotism which have been 

 responded to so freely in the case of the newer universi- 

 ties. 1 have no doubt, also, that they compare the state 

 of things somewhat sadly with virhat obtains in the United 

 States, where it is estimated that during the last thirty 

 years 48 millions sterling have been privately subscribed 

 for the benefit of the universities of .America. And my 

 noble friend argued that, if we were now to accede to the 

 request for the appointment of a Royal Commission, the 

 flow of money which has come in to some extent, and 

 which, it is hoped, will come in to a greater extent, would 

 be, if not stopped altogether, seriously checked. Then, 

 further, it is urged against the appointment of a Royal 

 Commission that, although it is true that there are certain 

 things in the direction of allowing greater flexibility 10 

 colleges and universities which the new Commission might 

 do by undoing what has been done by the last one, still 

 you cannot have any guarantee that the Royal Commission 

 would undertake that duty, and that it might not imitate 

 its predecessor in making very distinct and positive sugges- 

 tions which would have to be carried out, and some of 

 which might prove, as former ones have proved, to be 

 erroneous and unfortunate. And, again, we have been 

 told that really more time is wanted to watch the effect 

 upon our national life and our education generally of the 

 foundation of the new universities. It is urged that it is 

 only after some experience of their work that we can 

 decide what place Oxford and Cambridge really ought to 

 take in our national life. Everyone will, 1 think, agree 

 that we do not wish these universities to plunge into a 

 competition of science and technology with such universi- 

 ties as those of Leeds and Birmingham, and consequently 

 we are asked to wait in order to see what the next few 

 years at any rate may bring. 



Those are the various opposing views which are set 

 before His Majesty's Government. I may remind the 

 House that the Government, as such, has only "had the 

 opportunity of considering this matter at all for about ten 

 days, and we certainly do feel that the appointment of a 

 Royal Commission, like other 'important events in life, is 

 one which is not to be undertaken lightly or inadvisedly. 

 We have, as a matter of fact, only what I may call casual 

 evidence of the feeling which actually exists either at 

 Oxford or Cambridge, such intimations as people have been 

 kind enough to send before this debate began, and we 



J 



