July 30, 1896 i 



jVA TURE 



recently m;ule and in previous statements, always seem to me to 

 assume that those will be the consequences. Their statement is 

 founded upon assumption rather than any proof or evidence. 

 If the members of the Senate shared the view of the opponents 

 of the scheme that the consequences which they assumed would, 

 in fact, necessarily result, I venture to say that the Senate of the 

 University would have been found in the front rank of opposition 

 to the scheme, and if they support the scheme it is not because 

 they are indifferent either to the standard of education or to the 

 interests of the external students, but because they believe that 

 the present work of the University may be made even more 

 valuable than it has been without any such risk as the opponents 

 of the scheme consider must necessarily attach to it. The fear 

 seems to be that the scheme which has been proposed would give 

 the teachers in London schools and colleges more power in the 

 direction of examinations and course of study than they possess 

 at present, and that a likely consequence of their obtaining that 

 greater power would be a lowerinjj of the standard of education 

 at the University. But here again we are not without experience. 

 First let me say that the high standard that has been maintained 

 has been largely due to the exautiners. Who have the examiners 

 been who have thus maintained the standard of the examinations ? 

 They have very largely consisted of the teachers of the London 

 schools and colleges. That is a matter of experience which 

 is of much more value than any mere assumption. There 

 is a very large consensus of ojjinion amongst these teachers, 

 who have had much greater experience than can be claimed 

 by any body of graduates, in favour of the proposed changes. 

 The Royal Commission have impartially considered the views 

 of those who are in favour of the scheme and of those who 

 are opposed to it, and they have arrived at the conclusion 

 that the scheme is one which is likely to be of public advantage 

 and will be detrimental to no one. I only desire further to 

 remark that I think that the scheme of the Cowper Commission, 

 although on the whole an admirable one, is susceptible of 

 improvement in its details, leaving its general principles un- 

 touched. The very object of appointing the Statutory Com- 

 mission is to carry out those recommendations, and that the 

 details should be looked at by a body of able men, and that the 

 weight and force of the objections raised to those details should 

 be fully considered and, where necessary, modified. I know 

 that some of the opponents of the present -scheme desire to 

 create another University in London alongside of the University 

 of London. That is a question that has been considered by 

 men of great weight and authority, who have very largely pro- 

 nounced against the proposal. The House of Commons has 

 emphatically pronounced against it, and I believe that the 

 country has also pronouncetl against it in an equally emphatic 

 manner. Under these circumstances, I believe the best hope 

 for the solution of this question and for the increase, even, 

 of the valuable work which the University of London has done, 

 lies in the direction proposed by the noble Duke. 



Earl Cowper, speaking as chairman of the Commission that 

 considered this question, said that when the vvork of that body 

 first began he was jirepossessed in favour of the Gre.sham scheme, 

 because he thought everybody would admit that, if there was 

 to be a second University, that scheme would have been at 

 least as good as any other which could have been devised. But 

 he found that the large majority of his fellow Commissioners 

 were of a contrary opinion, and as the evidence proceeded he 

 became more and more convinced that the great bulk of opinion 

 throughout the country, and more particularly in the metropolis, 

 was not in favour of a second University, but in favour of one. 

 He could not help feeling pretty sure that everybody who went 

 through the voluminous mass of evidence would gradually come 

 to the same conclusion as that at which he had arrived. 



Lord Playfair said that he introduced a Bill last year for the 

 purpose of converting the present London University into a 

 teaching University, and as the noble Duke had accepted the 

 Bill he would strongly urge that the ('.<nernment should take 

 the matter up in earnest, considering the enormous amount of 

 support which they now had in regard to the scheme. This 

 scheme had been under the consideration of educationists for 

 a whole generation. Three times the Convocation of the exist- 

 ing London University had met and discussed the principles of 

 this Bill, and by increasing and finally by an overwhelming 

 majority had pronounced in their favour. The minority of the 

 Convocation, and individual graduites in the country, refused 

 to accept their defeat, and were still alarmed at the proposed 



NO. 1396, VOL. 54] 



changes in the constitution of the present University. At the 

 basis of their opposition was the fear that the new University 

 might lower the value of degrees, and thus lessen the honour in 

 which the existing graduates were now held. This fear did not 

 seem to be shared to any extent by graduates who had the 

 highest degrees. They had never had it explained why an 

 organised teaching University should think it to their interest to 

 lower the , value of the degrees. One would say that their 

 interest was to keep up the degrees to the highest value, and he 

 thought the graduates, when they considered the question, 

 would gradually come to this view. London was the only 

 large town — he would not say the only capital — which did not 

 possess an organised teaching University. It was a most 

 melancholy fact— a fact that was a disgrace to the metropolis, 

 that, although the towns of great population possessed organised 

 teaching Universities, the London University did not yet do so. 

 It was impossible that the London University, with its present 

 powers and its present charters, could constitute a teaching 

 University in accord with the science of the time. Teaching 

 by verbalism was more and more going out in .science. 

 Lecturers were of far less importance than experimental 

 work in laboratories. For this piirpose well-equipped 

 colleges were absolutely necessary, and the object' of 

 the University would be to raise itself continually up to 

 the level of science. The object of this scheme, for which 

 educationists had been agitating for so many years, was to 

 produce this result. The Bill would provide a system of 

 education capable of raising itself continually to the heighten- 

 ing and advancing state of knowledge. It did not provide 

 the mean.s, however ; but if they erected an organised Uni- 

 versity of which Londoners and the people of this country 

 would lie proud, he was perfectly sure that the funds would 

 not be lacking. He would give one instance of why they 

 should have that confidence. The late Royal Commis- 

 sion appointed a small committee, consisting of Prof Burdon- 

 Sanderson and himself, to consider the scientific part of 

 the report ; and they recommended the foundation of research 

 laboratories for chemistry and physics, independent of the 

 existing colleges, but open to any of the graduates who showed 

 the power of advancing the boundaries of science by original 

 researches. Their recommendation was adopted after some 

 hesitation on the part of their colleagues, because they thought 

 they were asking too much, for no funds were in view for build- 

 ing and equipping such laboratories or for maintaining them 

 when equipped. The generosity of one scientific manufacturer 

 — Mr. ilond — had already founded these laboratories, which 

 two years ago looked so hopeless of accomplishment. Like 

 results would follow in regard to other recommendations 

 of the Commission. He would like to point out how 

 important it was that a large community like that should put 

 itself into the position of having organised University teaching 

 as other places had. They were doing nothing in this 

 country at the present moment compared with what was 

 being done in other countries for the promotion of higher 

 University education. After the Franco-German war the 

 French Institute had a most interesting discussion upon the 

 question, "Why did our late crisis produce no great people 

 in this country?" and the universal feeling in the Institute was 

 that France had not sufficiently attended to her higher Univer- 

 sity education. Renan, in summing up the whole debate, said : 

 — ''It is German -science that won the day at Sadowa and 

 Sedan. The German national spirit is a product of the German 

 Universities, and the German Fatherland is a product of that 

 spirit." Inspired by these views France, since the war, had 

 spent nearly loo millions of francs in equipping her higher 

 colleges, so that they might suffice for modern scientific 

 requirements ; and it now spent annually about as much as 

 Germany in higher education. Germany had not stood still. 

 When she acquired Strasburg as a result of the war, she spent 

 UBon that small town no less than ;^7ii,ooo sterling in the 

 building of a new University and its scientific laboratories, and 

 annually voted above ^50,000 sterling for their maintenance. 

 The future competitions of the world would not be determined 

 by armies and navies alone, but would be mainly governed by 

 the intellectual development of the people. In the presence of 

 these facts, surely England could not allow its great capital to 

 remain the only large town, either in the United Kingdom or 

 abroad, which had no means by which organised University 

 teaching could be given to her people. 



