o
La
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY
HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE
LF504 .G78ne" UniVers"y Ubrar>'
olin
3 1924 030 614 741
Overs
V*l
'«f8//
Cornell University Library
The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030614741
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
REPORT
OF
HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS
APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO
THE STATE, DISCIPLINE, STUDIES, AND BEVENUES
OF THE
UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGES OF OXFORD :
TOGETHER WITH
THE EVIDENCE, AND AN APPENDIX.
p-EsmtEij to botf) Rouses of parliament &s eDommaift of per JSlafestj),
LONDON:
PRINTED BY W. CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET,
FOK HEK MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.
1852.
LP
K^t^oafc
|
COMMISSION .... |
Pages iii — iv |
|
MINUTES .... |
v — xxiv |
|
CONTENTS OF REPORT |
xxv — xxviii |
|
REPORT ..... |
1—260 |
|
APPENDIX . |
1— 72 |
|
CONTENTS OF EVIDENCE |
i — viii |
|
EVIDENCE . |
1—387 |
COMMISSION,
VICTORIA R.
0
VICTORIA, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith : To The Right Reverend Father in God, Samuel Bishop of Norwich ; Our Trusty and Wellbeloved Archibald Campbell Tait, Doctor of Civil Law, Dean of Carlisle ; Francis Jeune, Clerk, Doctor of Civil Law, Master of Pembroke College in Our University of Oxford ; Henry George Liddell, Clerk, Master of Arts, Head Master of St. Peter's College, Westminster; John Lucius Dampier, Esq., Master of Arts, Vice- Warden of the Stannaries of Cornwall ; Baden Powell, Clerk, Master of Arts, Savilian Professor of Geometry in Our University of Oxford ; and George . Henry Sacheverell Johnson, Clerk, Master of Arts, of Queen's College in Our University of Oxford, Greeting :
WHEREAS, WE have deemed it expedient, for divers good causes and con- siderations, that a Commission should forthwith issue for the purpose of enquir- ing into the State, Discipline, Studies, and Revenues of Our University of Oxford, and of all and singular the Colleges in Our said University :
NOW, KNOW YE, that We, reposing great trust and confidence in your knowledge, ability, and discretion, have authorized and appointed, and do by these Presents authorize and appoint you, the said Samuel Bishop of Norwich, Archibald Campbell Tait, Francis Jeune, Henry George Liddell, John Lucius Dampier, Baden Powell, and George Henry Sacheverell Johnson, to be Our Commissioners for enquiring into the State, Discipline, Studies, and Revenues of Our University of Oxford, and of all and singular the Colleges in Our said University.
And for the better enabling you to carry these Our Royal Intentions into effect, We do by these Presents authorize and empower you, or any four ox- more of you, to call before you, or any four or more of you, such persons as you may judge necessary, by whom you may be the better informed on the matters herein submitted for your consideration ; also to call for, and examine all such Books, Documents, Papers, and Records, as you shall judge likely to afford you the fullest information on the subject of this Our Commission, and to enquire of and concerning the Premises by all other lawful ways and means whatsoever.
a 2
iv COMMISSION.
And it is Our further Will and Pleasure, that you, or any four or more of you, do report to Us in Writing, under your Hands and Seals, within the space of two years from the date of these Presents, or sooner, if the same can reason- ably be, your several proceedings by virtue of this Our Commission, together with your opinions touching the several matters hereby referred for your consideration.
And We will and command, and by these Presents ordain, that this Our Commission shall continue in, full force and virtue, and that you, Our said Com- missioners, or any four or more of you, may, from time to time, proceed in the execution thereof, and of every matter and thing therein contained, although the same be not continued from time to time by Adjournment.
And for your assistance in the due execution of these Presents, We have made choice of Our Trusty and Wellbeloved Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, Clerk, Master of Arts, to be Secretary to this Our Commission, and to attend you, whose services and assistance We require you to avail yourselves of from time to time as occasion may require.
Given at Our Court of St. James's, the thirty-first day of August, 1850, in the fourteenth year of Our Reign,
By Her Majesty's Command,
G. GREY.
[ v ]
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
MINUTES.
The Meetings were all ^held at the Official Residence of the First Lord of the Treasury, in Downing-street.
The first Meeting was held on Saturday 19th October, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Commission was read.
Resolved,
That circular letters, enclosing a copy of Her Majesty's Commission, be prepared and addressed to the Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, and Visitors ; to the Heads and Professors of Colleges and Halls, and other eminent persons belonging to the University of Oxford.
That application be made to the Treasury for an issue of money for defraying the current expenses of the Commission, and
That the Secretary be requested to procure the services of a Clerk.
Mr. Goldwin Smith was appointed Assistant-Secretary to the Commission. (Adjourned till Friday next, the 25th inst.)
S. Norwich, Chairman.
At a Meeting held Friday 25th October, 1850.
Present ■
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed.
The Evidence of N. W. Senior, Esq., Professor of Political Economy in the University of Oxford, having been taken at Oxford by four Members of the Commission, in conse- quence of his having occasion to leave England for a lengthened period, was laid before the Board.
A letter requesting certain returns from the Vice- Chancellor was prepared.
Mr. John Hastings Jephson was appointed Clerk to the Commission, on the recom- mendation of Sir Charles Trevelyan.
(Adjourned till Tuesday next, the 29th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 29th October, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read.
Questions to the University and College authorities were prepared. (Adjourned till to-morrow, the 30th inst.)
S. Norwich.
vi OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 30th October, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Eev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read.
Questions to the University and College authorities were considered. The Cambridge University Commissioners held a conference with the Board. (Adjourned till to-morrow, the 31st inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 31st October, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Eev. H. G. Liddell, The Eev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P- Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read.
The Questions to the University and College authorities were further considered. (Adjourned till to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 1st November, 1850.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read.
Questions to the University and College authorities were further considered. (Adjourned till to-morrow at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 2nd November, 1850.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The 'Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Questions to the University and College authorities were further considered. Replies to Circular letters were read.
(Adjourned till Wednesday the 13th inst., at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 13th November, 1850. .Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Eev. iProfessor Powell, The Eev. G. H. S. Johnson,
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Eeplies to Circular letters were read.
The Questions to the authorities of the University and Colleges were further considered (Adjourned till to-morrow at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. vji
At a Meeting held Thursday 14th November, 1850.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier> Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Questions to the University and College authorities were further considered. (Adjourned till to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 15th November, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The Questions were further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 16th November, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier; Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed.
A Letter from the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford was read.
The Questions were further considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 18th instant, at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 18th November, 1850.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell. The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read. The Questions for Colleges further considered.
The Questions for Public Examiners and Questions relative to the Vice-Chancellor's Court were prepared.
(Adjourned till Monday 2nd December, 1850.)
S. Norwich.
viii OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Monday 2nd December, 1850.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read. Questions for Public Examiners were further considered. Resolved, That the Statutes of the Oxford Colleges be printed.
(Adjourned till Thursday 2nd January, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 2nd January, 1851.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson,
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed.
Replies to Circular letters were read.
Questions for Public Examiners were further considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 3rd February next.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 3rd February, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson,
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular letters were read. Questions for Public Examiners were finally agreed upon.
(Adjourned till Monday 24th instant.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 24th February, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular Letters were read.
The question of the Constitution of the University was considered. (Adjourned till to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. ix
At a Meeting held Tuesday 25th February, 1851.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Replies to Circular Letters were read. The question of University Extension was considered.
(Adjourned till the 1 1th March next.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 11th March, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of the Endowment and increase of Professorships was considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 12th March, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of restriction on Fellowships was considered.
(Adjourned.)
S. Norwich.
At a Special Meeting held Tuesday 18th March, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary).
The Minutes of the last M eeting were read and confirmed.
A communication having been received from the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford, comprising a Case submitted by the University authorities to Counsel and the Opinion of Counsel thereon, together with a letter from the Vice-Chancellor — It was Resolved,
To lay the Case and Opinion before Lord John Russell, and to represent to him that so long as the act of the Crown in issuing the Commission is subject to the imputation which the Opinion throws on it of being not legal, the Commissioners anticipate serious obstruction to their inquiry.
That they, therefore, submit to Lord John Russell the question whether it will be advisable or not for him to take some steps which may satisfy those who entertain doubts of the legality of the Commission, and are therefore deterred from giving evidence.
(Adjourned till Tuesday, 25th instant.)
S. Norwich.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At 'a. Meeting held Tuesday 25th Match, 185].
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley; {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of the College Fellowships was-considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 26th March, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwieh, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of College Fellowships was considered.
(Adjourned till Tuesday 8th April next,)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 8th April, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev, H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq.,. The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of College Fellowships was considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 9th April, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich,
The Dean of Carlisle,
The Master of Pembroke,
The Rev. H. G. Liddell,
J. L. Dampier, Esq.,
The Rev. Professor Powell,
The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of College Fellowships was considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xi
At a Meeting held Thursday 10th April, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Kev. Professor Powell, The Eev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of College Fellowships was considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 11th April, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Kev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. II. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of the general expenses of the University was considered. (Adjourned till Friday the 25th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 25th April, 1851.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddelh . J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The question of University Discipline was considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 26th April, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Previous resolutions were further considered.
(Adjourned till Monday the 28th inst.)
S. Norwich.
b 2
xii OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Monday 28th April, 1851.
^Present":
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Previous resolutions were further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow).
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 29th April, 1851.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dam pier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Previous resolutions were further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday 2nd May, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 2nd May, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. Previous resolutions were further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 3rd May, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The draft of a Report was considered.
(Adjourned till Tuesday 3rd June, 1851).
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xiii
At a Meeting held Tuesday 3rd June, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed. The draft of a Report was considered.
(Adjourned till Wednesday the 25th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 25th June, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday and Saturday 4th & 5th July next.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 4th July, 1851.
Present :
The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H.G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
A. C. Tait.
At a Meeting held Saturday 5th July, 1851. Present :
The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq , The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Wednesday the 9th inst.)
v J A. C. Tait.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 9th July, 1851.
Present : The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroket The Rev. H.G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adiourned till Thursday the 17th mst.)
v J A. C. Tait.
xiv OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Thursday 17th July, I §3]. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor. Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The draft of a Report'was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 18th July, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Thursday 24th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a "Meeting held Thursday 24th. July, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L- Dampier, Esq., The Rev, Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) Th& draft of a. Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 25th July, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Kev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq,, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday 1st August, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 1st August, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J, L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xv
At a Meeting held Saturday 2nd August*, 1851.
Present : Thie Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J- L. D ampler, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned-till Wednesday 6th inst.)
S- Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 6th August, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle^ The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier Esq,, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 7th August, 1851.
Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq.
The R,ev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 8th August, 1851.
Present ;
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle; The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a.Meeting held Saturday 9th August, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Bteport was further considered.
(Adjourned till Tuesday 12th inst.)
S. Norwich.
xvi OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 12th August, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G, Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 13th August, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 14th August, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 15th August, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Wednesday 1st October, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 1st October, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xvii
At a Meeting held Thursday 2nd October, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.) . S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 3rd October, 185 J.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Monday the 6th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 6th October, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 7th October, 851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle. The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday next, the 10th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 10th October, 1851. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Tuesday 11th November, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
xviii OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION,
At a Meeting held Tuesday- I lth November, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 12th November, 1851.
Present ; The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. U.S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.')
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 13th November, 1851.
Present ;
The Bishop of Noi'wich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 14th November, 1851.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 15th November, 1851. Present. ;
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered. •
(Adjourned till Monday 15th December, 1851.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xix
At a Meeting held Monday 15th December, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The M aster of Pembroke, The Eev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Eev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Wednesday 17th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 17th December, 1851. Present ;
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke., The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson. , The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday 19th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 19th December, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Thursday 29th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 29th December, 1851. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 30th December, 1851. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Friday 13th February, 1852.)
S. Norwich.
c2
xx OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Friday 13th February, 1852.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 14th February, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.')
The draft of a Report was further considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 1st March.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 1st March, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.) S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Tuesday 2nd March, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Thursday 4th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 4th March, 1852.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
MINUTES. xxi
At a Meeting held Friday 5 th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 6th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 8th inst.)
S. Norwich-
At a Meeting held Monday 8th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwichj The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich..
At a Meeting held Tuesday 9th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 22nd inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 22nd March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Wednesday 24th inst.)
S. Norwich.
xxii OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 24th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Kev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At. a Meeting held Thursday 25th March, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. .Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 26th March, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq,, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Saturday 27th March, 1852. Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Kev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Monday 29th inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Monday 29th March, 1852.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
Norwich.
MINUTES. xxiii
At a Meeting held Tuesday 30th March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, i The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson. •
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary) The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.) S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Wednesday 31st March, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The. Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Nokwich.
At a Meeting held Thursday 1st April, 1852. Presen t: The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, (Secretary.)
The Report was read and considered.
(Adjourned till Thursday 22nd inst.)
S. Norwich.
At a meeting held Thursday 22nd April, 1852. Present : The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report on the University was finally read and confirmed.
Mr. Edward A. Bond, Assistant in the Manuscript Department in the British Museum, was appointed for the purpose of completing the revision of the Statutes for publication.
(Adjourned till to-morrow.)
S. Norwich.
At a Meeting held Friday 23rd April, 1852.
Present :
The Bishop of Norwich, The Dean of Carlisle, The Master of Pembroke, The Rev. H. G. Liddell, J. L. Dampier, Esq., The Rev. Professor Powell, The Rev. G. H. S. Johnson.
The Rev. A. P. Stanley, {Secretary.)
The Report on the Colleges was finally read and confirmed.
S. Norwich
[ XXV ]
TABLE OF CONTENTS TO THE REPORT.
Page
Preamble. Course pursued by the Commission . . . . , , . 1, 2, 3
I. THE STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY 3_19
The University a National Institution ....... 3
The Visitor of the University, 4.
The Statutes of the University ........ 4
Question as to the power of the University to alter the Laudian Statutes, 4-6. Practice of the University, 6. Recommendation that the doubt should be settled, 6. Changes in the Statutes necessary, 7.
Administration op the University ....... 7
Ancient Constitution . . . . • . . . , . .7, 8
Present Constitution .......... 8-11
The Hebdomadal Board, 8. The Vice-Chancellor, 9. The Proctors, 9. The Chancellor, 10. The High Steward, 10. The Collectors, 10. The Houses of Congregation and Convocation, 10-11. The Veto of the Vice- Chancellor and of the Proctors, 11.
Objections to the Present Constitution, especially to the Hebdomadal
Board ............ n
Proposed Remedies. .......... 12-14
(1) Proposal simply to increase the power of Convocation, 12. (2) Proposal to create a new Hebdomadal Board, 13. (3) Proposal to remodel Congre- gation, and to alter the relative functions of Congregation, Convocation, and the Hebdomadal Board, 13, 14. Standing Delegacies, 15. Proposed Delegacy of Professors, 16. Changes required in the offices of the Vice- Chancellor and the Proctors, 17.
The Numbers of the University ......... 17-19
II. DISCIPLINE 19-56
Discipline as exercised by the University Authorities . . . . 19, 20 The Vice-Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor's Court, 19. The Proctors, 20
Discipline as exercised by the College Authorities .... 20-22 Residence within the College walls enforced by various restraints, 20. Punish- ments inflicted by the University or the Colleges, 21. Effects of Collegiate Life, — its advantages and disadvantages, 22.
Actual State of Academical Discipline. ...... 22-24
Improvements since the last century, 22. Existing Evils : — Vice — Gambling — General Extravagance — Facilities for incurring Debt, 23, 24.
Direct Modes of Preventing Extravagance 24-25
.Indirect Modes ........... 25-2S
Influence of the University Authorities, 25. Arrangements to supply reasonable wants of Students. Influence of College Tutors, 25. Summary Removal of Idle and Extravagant Students — Restraint on the lax discipline of Halls, 26, 27. Religious Services in College Chapels, 27. Fresh inducements to Study, 27, 28. Influence of Parents, 28. Removal of Academical Distinctions of Rank and Wealth, 28-29.
UNIVERSITY EXTENSION 29-54
Alleged Obstacles : —
State of Accommodation in Existing Colleges . . . . 29, 30
Cost of Collegiate Education 30-34
University Fees, College Fees, Board and Lodging— Tuition, 30, 31. Im- provements to be made in the System of College Accounts, 32. Estimate of the actual College Expenses, 32-35.
Plans for University Extension 35-54
Advantage of making the experiment of any or all, 35.
1 . Plan for founding Affiliated Hales 36
2. Plan for founding Independent Halls 40, 43
3. Plan for allowing Students to Lodge in the Town in connexion
with Colleges ........... 43
4. Plan for allowing Stttti>3NTS under due superintendence to lodge in
. _., mi jn,«,«»G connected with Colleges .... 44-52
XXTi CONTENTS TO THE REPORT.
Page
Advantages of a class of Students independent of the Colleges. Combination of the advantages of other plans. Opportunities for Domestic Superin- tendence, 45. Good Effects on the present class of Students, 46, 47. Economy of this plan, 47, 48. Estimate of the expenses of unattached
Students, 49, 5.0. Objections, Stated und answered, 50-52. Proposals for the control of such Students by regulation of Lodging-houses, and by special superintendence, 52,53. Suggestions for granting Degrees without Residence in the University
— Objections to such a plan . . . • • • 53,54
Attendance of Strangers on Professorial Lectures .... 54
Exclusion of Dissenters by Religious Tests — Not within the province of the
Commission ........... 54
The Practice of Academical Subscription to the XXXIX Articles — Its
Anomalies and Evils .......... 55, 56
in. STUDIES 56-124
Course of Study prescribed in the Laudian Cotje . . .. . 56
The Laudian Examination, 57, 58. Its failure, 59, 60. Studies of the University as reformed in the present century . . 60 Examination Statute of 1800 and its consequences, 60-62. Present state of Classical Studies, 62. Present state of Mathematical Studies, 63. The new Statute of 1850, 64-68. Its advantages and its defects, 69. Proposed improvements . . . . • ... . . . 69-85
I. Examination at Matriculation, 68. Objections answered, 69, 70. ii. Increased liberty of ehoice in subjects of study during the last year, 70-82.
Evil effects of the present system on Theologicalj Legal, and Medical studies, 71. Necessity of restoring the connexion between the Universitysand the learned Professions, 71. Recommendation to introduce a better classifica- tion of the higher branches of study under different Schools, 72.
i. School of Theology —
Reasons for making Oxford a place of Theological study, 73. ii. School of Mental Philosophy and Philology .... 74, 75
1. School of Mental Philosophy, 74. 2. School of Philology, 75. in. School of Jurisprudence and History ... ... 75-^78
Proposal to render this school preparatory to Legal studies, 77. Its great advantages, 78.
iv. School of Mathematical and Physical Science .... 78-82 1 . School of Mathematical Science, 78. 2. School ofPhysical Science, 78. Question as to the expediency of making the study of Physical Science compulsory on all, 80. Proposal to render this school preparatorv to Medical studies, 80, 81.
Necessity of encouraging all branches of study by Fellowships 82
Effects of the frequency of Examinations ... 82 83
Present state of the higher Degrees, 83. Examinations for them not
practicable, 84. Suggestion as to the Degree of M.A., 84. Terms and Vacations. Proposals for a better arrangement . . .. ■. 85
Instructors of the University . . . . . 85-110
General comparison of the ancient and the present System of instruction, 85, 86.
College Tutors, 86-88. Their statutable duties, 86. Gradual change 87 Advantages and disadvantages of the present system 87.
Private Tutors, 88. Advantages and disadvantages of the system, 89 90.
Public Professors and Lecturers .... cq_i i o
1. Ancient University Prelectors, now extinct, 89.
2. Collegiate Prelectors, partly extinct, 91.
3. Public endowed Professors — Their gradual rise 91 92. Failure of the Professorial system, 92. Causes of its failure, 93. Reasons
for its restoration, 93. Objections to the Professorial system'as a means of instruction, 94. Answer to these objections, 95, 96. Advan- • tage of Professorships in support of learning, 97. Professors to be assisted by University Lecturers, 98. Combination of Pro- fessorial and Tutorial instruction, 99-101. General wish in the University to revise the Professoriate, 102.
Means of restoring the Professorial System . . 9Q_iin
1 . New arrangement of the Professorial staff, 102 103.
2. Improvement in the present mode of appointing Professors, 103, 104.
3. Removal of Restrictions on Professorships, 106-108.
4. Guarantees for the activity of Professors.
5. Increase of the income of P~ " ""** ""
6. Provision for future changes .■■--. ___
CONTENTS TO THE REPORT. xxvii
Scholarships a<nd Prizes ... ..... 110-114
1. Scholarships in Theology, Philology, Law, and Medicine, 110-113.
2. Prizes for Theological, Classical, and Historical compositions, 114-115.
The Libraries ••...,. . 115-122
Suggestions for improvement, 1 16-122.
The Museums ■•■•.... . 122 123
.Proposal for a new Museum, .123.
IV. REVENUES.
Sources or the Revenues of the University . ... 125-127
1. Estates and Moneys in the Funds, 125.
2. The University Press, 125.
3. Fees, 126.
4. Grants from the Crown and the Parliament, 127.
Expenditure op the ..University ........ 127
Recommendations 127, 128
THE COLLEGES.
Rise and progress of Colleges . 129-134
Halls or Hostels, 129. Private lodgings, 129. Endowments held in trust
by Religious Houses — by the University — by private persons, 130. jFomndation of Merton College, 130 — of Queen's College, .131 — of New College, 131^of Lincoln and All Souls, 132— of Magdalen, 132— of Brasenose and Corpus Christi College, 133 — of Cardinal College, 133 — of the Colleges; after the Reformation, 133.
Constituent tarts of Colleges ........ lM-ISff
The Heads of Colleges, 134. The Fellows, 134. Scholars, 13.4. Servitors, 135. Commoners, 135. General Characteristics of Colleges as defined in their Statutes . 13&
1; Colleges eleemosynary; 136-138. •
2. Colleges communities under a rule of life, 138, 139.
3. Colleges as founded for xeligious purposes, 1.39.
4. Colleges instituted for study, 140.
5. Conditions of eligibility to College Fellowships, 140, 6: Colleges under the control of Visitors, 142.
Present state of Colleges compared with their statutable condition 142:
1. Colleges no longer eleemosynary, 143.
2. Colleges no longer communities under a rule of life, 143.
3; Colleges no longer fulfil the special religious purposes of their Founders, 144-
4. Colleges no longer places of study in the .sense of their Founders, 144.
5. Statutable preferences in the elections to Fellowships generally, though
not universally; regarded, 144.
6. Visitatorial powers little exercised, 145.
Question as to the possibility of changing College Statutes . . 146-150 Oaths to observe the Statutes, 146. "All such oaths should be prohibited as unlawful, 147. Colleges have no power to alter the Statutes, 148. Necessity of the interposition of the Legislature, 148.
Changes recommended as wecessary ....... 149
i. Removal of restrictions on the election to Fellowships . 149
Great importance of such removal, 149.
Evils of close Fellowships, 150.
Advantages of .open Fellowships, 151.
Opinion of the Hebdomadal Board examined, 151. * Connexion of open foundations with encouragement to the studies of the Uniyersity, 152.
Legal difficulties, 153.
Moral difficulties arising from • Founders' Statutes, 154.
Founders' Statutes not observed by the present holders of Fellow- ' ships', 154-157.
Change of circumstances since the Statutes were imposed, 157.
Anomalies caused by local preferences, 157.
And by preference to Founders' kin, 159.
Future liberality not likely to be checked, 16Q.
Mode of overcoming restrictions, 161.
Legislative interference needed, 161.
General recommendation for removal of restrictions as to birth-place or parentage, 161 — of restrictions as to age and as to academical degrees above that of bachelor of Arts, and of connexion between Fellowships and Scho- larships, 162. Restrictions on tenure of Fellowships ..... 163-168 -."-.;,- -'don of residence, to be removed, 163.
xxviii CONTENTS TO THE REPORT.
Page
2. Obligation of taking Holy Orders, to be removed, 163, 164.
3. Obligation of celibacy, to be generally maintained, 164-166.
4. Obligation of resigning Fellowships on coming into possession ot
property, to be modified, 166.
5. Obligation of proceeding to the higher Degrees, to be removed, 166.
6. Limitation of time, to be removed, 167.
Abuses in elections to Fellowships and Scholarships . • loo
Proposed remedies, 169, 170. Change in the mode of election in large Colleges, 169. Appeal from the decision of electors, 169. Disparity op Fellowships .,...••• *70, 171
(1) In emoluments, 170. (2) In privileges, 171. Ecclesiastical patronage op Colleges ...••• 171
Distribution of College Revenues to their proper objects . . 171
1. Number of Fellowships likely to become vacant every year . . . 172
2. Appropriation of certain Fellowships to the new studies of the University 172 3t Application of College endowments to increasing the value and number of
open Scholarships ..... ..... 173-178
Advantages of open Scholarships, 174. General recommendations with regard to Scholarships, 175; with regard to Colleges connected with Schools, 175, 176. New College, 176. St. John's College, 176. Christ Church, 176. Balliol College, 177. Pembroke College, 177. Worcester College, 177. Jesus College, 177, 178. Exhibitions, 178.
4. Application of College endowments to the endowment of University
Teachers 178
Precedents at Magdalen College, Corpus Christi College, Christ Church, Merton, All Souls, New College, and Queen's, 179. Recommendation to establish Professor-Fellowships, 180. Re- commendation for the endowment of University Lecturers, 181. Vested and inchoate rights to be respected, 181.
Election to the Headships op Colleges ...... 182
Visitors ............ 183
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE 185
BALLIOL COLLEGE 188
MERTON COLLEGE 192
EXETER COLLEGE 197
ORIEL COLLEGE 199
QUEEN'S COLLEGE 201
NEW COLLEGE 206
LINCOLN COLLEGE 212
ALL SOULS COLLEGE 215
MAGDALEN COLLEGE 221
BRASENOSE COLLEGE
CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE
CHRIST CHURCH
TRINITY COLLEGE
ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE
JESUS COLLEGE
j
WADHAM COLLEGE
PEMBROKE COLLEGE
WORCESTER COLLEGE .
THE HALLS
CONCLUSION
224 229 232 235 237 240 245 247 252 255
256
[ 1 ]
REPORT.
TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
Your Majesty having been pleased to appoint us Commissioners to inquire into the State, Discipline, Studies, and Revenues of the University and Colleges of Oxford, we humbly beg to submit to Your Majesty the result of our inquiries and deliberations, in the following Report.
It appeared to us that our first duty was to transmit a copy of our Com- mission to the Chancellor of the University, the Vice-Chancellor, the Visitors of the Colleges, the Heads of Colleges and Halls, the Professors and other Officers of the University, and to invite them to assist us in the execution of Your Majesty's commands. Our communications, with the replies which we received, we have annexed to our Report. Appendix B.
Our next duty was to collect information and opinions on the several subjects specified in Your Majesty's Commission. After much consideration we determined to carry on our inquiries by means of printed questions rather than by the examination of witnesses orally. Accordingly we issued in succession six papers, addressed to the several Authorities of the University and of the Colleges, and one of a more comprehensive character, which we transmitted to a large number of eminent members of the University. We have caused the answers to be printed at length, and they are submitted, as a body of Evidence, to Your Majesty. . ,
On three of the points to which our attention was directed by Your Majesty s Commission— the State, Discipline, and Studies of the University and of the Colleges— we have received evidence from the great majority of the Pro- fessors, and from many persons of note resident in Oxford, or closely con- nected with it, though not resident; and we feel convinced that the zeal and ability which these gentlemen have displayed, the knowledge which they have communicated, and the helps to the formation of a right judgment winch their arguments supply, will be duly appreciated.
The Governing Body has withheld from us the information which we sought from the University through the Vice- Chancellor as its chief resident officer; and this, as has been since intimated to us, with the purpose of disputing the legality of Your Majesty's Commission. We have had, however, the means of learning the opinions of the Heads of Houses, as a body, on several of the subjects which we have considered, and, to some extent, the reasons which determined their conclusions. These are given in a document Appends A. issued in 1850, which was signed on behalf of the Board by the V ice- Chancellor, and transmitted to Lord John Russell by the Duke of Wellington as Chancellor of the University. We have also availed ourselves of the Report Append* E. of a Committee of the Board, issued in 1846, on the extension of University Education and the expenses of Students.
The Colleges of Merton, Lincoln, All Souls, Corpus, St John s, and Pem- broke, have, as Societies, supplied us with information. The Dean and Bursar of Balliol College have officially answered our inquiries. Irom the Heads oi Magdalen Hall, St. Alban Hall, and St. Edmund Hall, we have received a similar compliance. Individual Tutors of several other Colleges have fur- nished us with information more or less complete. From the majority of the Colleges, as Societies, we have received no assistance.
With respect, then, to the State, Discipline, and Studies, we have been favoured with copious materials for our Report. But on the subject of the Re- venues of the University, and of many of the Colleges, we have little authentic information to communicate. To state the amount and nature of these
2 OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Revenues with precision, we required the zealous assistance of the University and College authorities. In most instances such assistance has been withheld. For the sake of the University itself, we regret that a different course was not pursued. Frank disclosures would, we believe, have dispelled many impu- tations. But none of our recommendations will be found to depend upon a knowledge of the precise amount of the Revenues of the University or the Colleges.
In the inquiries addressed to the Colleges, we expressed a wish to be fur- nished with the Statutes of each Society. It appeared to us desirable that these documents should be published, not only because of their historical value, but also because of their direct bearing on the present inquiry. Some of the Codes we have obtained from the Colleges; for others we are indebted to the courtesy of the officers of the British Museum, the Bodleian Library at Oxford, the Lambeth Library, and the Record Office. In this part of our undertaking we have also derived great assistance from Mr. Heywood, who has liberally furnished the Commission, not only with copies of the trans- lations of the various Statutes published by him, but with several manuscripts which he had caused to be transcribed at his own cost. To the collection thus made, six Codes of Statutes are still wanting. But the most important of the series have come into our hands ; and, for practical purposes, these will be found sufficient. The character of these Foundations is in the main so similar, that recommendations for the improvement of one will (with a few modifi- cations) be applicable to all; and Ave feel that our conclusions will be safe,, although in some cases a full investigation has not been possible.
The Statutes of the University have been published by the University itself. We have thought it right, however, for the elucidation of some parts of the academical system, to print the earlier Statutes, some of which are perhaps still legally in force, though all have been practically superseded by the Laudian Code.
We are bound to acknowledge the services which have been rendered to the < Commission by Mr. Goldwin Smith, Fellow and Tutor of University College, in the office of Assistant Secretary, to which he was appointed at our first meeting.
As regards our own proceedings, we have done all in our power to show respect for the University, and to obtain impartial information. In the same spirit which animated the First Minister of the Crown when he laid before the Board of Heads of Houses the names of the persons whom he proposed to recommend to Your Majesty as Commissioners, we expressed to the Chan- cellor " our desire to be guided in the course of our inquiry by the convenience . " of the University, and the suggestions of its authorities "; " and our com- munications with the Vice-Chancellor and other eminent persons were couched in similar terms.
In order that all persons interested might be enabled to make known their Opinions, we drew up and printed a paper, pointing out, in the most abstract form, the various subjects connected with the improvement of the University which had been under discussion of late years in Oxford and in the world without. Thus all parties had the same subjects suggested to them, with full time for consideration. We sent copies of this paper to the authorities of the University and of the Colleges, and to other persons who, by their station and character, seemed entitled to give opinions, — to those whom we knew to be friendly, to those whom we knew to be unfriendly, and to those whose opinions were unknown to us. All the documents which we have issued, were trans- mitted without any request that they should be kept private, and have received the widest publicity through the daily press. Every person has had a fair and full opportunity of making what statements or suggestions he thought fit, of defending what he wished to defend, and of explaining what he thought needed explanation. We hoped, from the nature of the topics to which we invited attention, that persons of all opinions might, without compromising any prin- ciple, render us material assistance. We hoped, too, that some able men who ' carried their scruples so far as to decline all communication with us, or whose names we might have overlooked, would make known their sentiments through the press. In these expectations we have not been wholly disappointed.
We fully appreciate the present excellences of the University, and entertain a grateful sense of the benefits, moral and religious, as well as intellectual
REPORT. 3
which it has So long conferred on the country. And, whatever opposition our fciquiry may have < encountered, it is satisfactory for us to observe that the objects of Your Majesty's Commission have been rightly understood by a large foody of Members of the University who have zealously cooperated with us. Many eminent persons, yielding to none in love and gratitude towards the University, have aided us, because they perceive that what is proposed is not to destroy, in order to clear the ground for a new system, but to reform in a right spirit, by improving, restoring, and enlarging ; and because they hope that the results of this inquiry will be to relieve the University from shackles which obstruct its progress, to root it more deeply in the affections of the nation, and to raise it to a still higher position than that which it now occu- pies in the opinion of the world at large.
Our inquiry will, of necessity, extend over a great variety of subjects, difficult in themselves, and complicated still further by their connexion with each other. Each subject must be viewed in relation to the rest ; and, what- ever division be made, some repetition will be unavoidable. We have thought it best to follow the course marked out in Your Majesty's Commission, and to treat first Of the State of the University, understanding thereby its consti- tution and numbers ; secondly, of its Discipline ; thirdly, of its Studies ; lastly, of its Revenues ; and then to proceed to speak of the several Colleges and Halls.
After having thus gone through the whole subject, We propose, in conclusion, to sum up briefly the various recommendations which we have found occasion to suggest.
Before we proceed, however, we must guard ourselves by observing, that in the course of an intricate inquiry which involves a research into the documents, habits, and feelings of remote times, it is hardly possible but that errors should occur. Such errors we could scarcely have hoped to avoid even with the fullest assistance from all the official authorities of the University. But we are confident that defects of this kind will not be found such as materially to affect the recommendations which we may have to lay before Your Majesty.
I. THE STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY.
The University of Oxford is a corporate body, known by the title of the university of "The Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford." Its ^MyitlcES3 privileges have been granted or renewed in many Royal Charters. All previous grants were confirmed by the Act of 13 Eliz., cap. 29, entitled " An Act for " the Incorporation of the Two Universities ;" and the Legislature has since conferred additional benefits on the University of Oxford. Its privileges were confirmed by Letters Patent of King Charles I. in 1635 ; and in 1636 the same Sovereign issued other Letters Patent of still greater importance, to which we shall presently advert. It possesses the power of conferring Degrees, which are necessary to the attainment of many offices of honour and emolument. It is one of the principal avenues to the Ministry of the Established Church. It takes a part in the legislation of the country through its Representatives in Parliament. It has received Licenses of Mortmain to purchase land, and has been empowered by Act of Parliament to receive land by bequest to any amount, without the formalities which in other cases are required. It presents to a large proportion of those Benefices which are in the patronage of persons professing the Roman Catholic religion. Six of its Professorships and the Headships of three of its Colleges have been endowed with cathedral prefer- ment, and all the Heads are included in the small number of clergymen who can now hold a cure of souls without the necessity of residence. It receives some annual grants from Parliament, and its Press has a large interest in a valuable monopoly.
Such an Institution cannot be regarded as a mere aggregation of private ^fI^EfST^TI0N. interests ; it is eminently national. It would seem, therefore, to be matter of public policy that inquiry should be made, from time to time, in order to ascer- tain whether the purposes of its existence are fulfilled; and that such measures should be taken as may serve to raise its efficiency to the highest point, and to diffuse its benefits most widely.
Whether there be power in any hands ordinarily to superintend this great Institution, and to reform it, when reform becomes necessary, and what is the
B 2
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
THE VISITOR OF THE UNIVERSITY.
Wood's Annals, anno 1647, vol. hi., p. 524.
Prynne, "The University of Oxford's Plea refuted." London, 1647. Appendix D, p. 54.
" Substance of the Speech of Sir Charles Wetherell," 1834, p. 6t. Appendix B, p. 34.
See Appendix C. pp. 39—41.
THE STATUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY.
Wood's Annals, anno 1314, vol. i. p. 3S4.
Preface to the Statutes of the University.
Wood's Annals, anno 154!), vol. ii„ p. 100.
Ibid., anno 1556, p. 132,
Statut., Univ. Tit. xi., sec. 2, § 4, Tit. xiii.
Append., Statut., p. 56.
Preface to the Statutes of the University.
Wood's Annals, anno 1633, 1636, vol. ii., p. 385-403.
QUESTION AS TO THE POWER OF THE UNI- VERSITY TO ALTER THE LAUDIAN STATUTES.
Letters Patent of King Charles I., and Letter of Laud, prefixed to the Corpus Statutorum.
Statutes, Tit. x., sec. 2, § 2, 5.
extent of that power, if it exist, has often been a subject of dispute. Such a power has, however, been generally supposed to reside in the Sovereign, as Visitor It has often been exercised by the Crown, and has often been recog- nised by the University. In 1647, the Delegates of the University urged, as a reason for resisting the Parliamentary Visitors, that they "humbly conceived " that they could not acknowledge any Visitor but the King, or such as are " immediately sent by His Majesty, it being one of His Majesty's undoubted " rights, and one of the chief privileges of the University, that His Majesty and "without him none other is to visit the University." Prynne, on the other hand, employed his learning in an endeavour to show that the King was not the Visitor of the University. Within our own memory the right of visitation was asserted to belong to the Crown, in an opinion given by Sir John (now Lord) Campbell and Dr. Lushington in 1836; and this right was admitted in express terms before the Privy Council by Sir Charles Wetherell, when acting as Counsel for the University in 1834. It has never been formally denied by the University, unless such a denial is implied in the petition to Your Majesty adopted in Convocation on the 21st of May, 1851.
We refrain from an examination of this question either in a legal or an- tiquarian point of view. Even if the fullest authority ever claimed by the Sovereign were demonstrated to be constitutional, the long interruption of its use might render it difficult to discover the proper mode of exercising it. Whenever interposition may become necessary, recourse will probably be had to the Legislature for sufficient and indisputable powers.
The University of Oxford, like every other corporate body, possesses the right of making Bye-laws for its own government. This right it has exercised from the middle of the thirteenth century without impediment, unless the name of impediment can be given to the protest of the Bishop of Lincoln in 1314. But it has at various times been compelled to enact or to receive laws by superior authority. It was under the Tudor and Stuart sovereigns that this mode of intervention on the part of the ruling powers became most frequent.
An attempt to frame a Code of Statutes was made by Cardinal Wolsey, but was frustrated probably by his fall. The Commissioners of King Edward VI. drew up an entirely new body of Statutes for both Universities, " in order that " each eye of the nation might be set in motion by similar muscles." This Code was brief and comprehensive ; and, though it seems never to have been formally accepted by the University, and soon fell into disuse, it remained nominally in force till the enactment of the present Statutes. Cardinal Pole sent down Ordinances which, however, were only intended to be provisional; and they fell to the ground on the accession of Queen Elizabeth. During her reign, and that of King James I., the University received many new laws from the several Chancellors of that period, often under the authority of the Crown.
King Charles I. acted on the University with more effect. In the first instance he required the University to confirm several important Statutes which emanated from himself. In the Chancellorship of Archbishop Laud the Statutes were at last digested into one uniform Code, which still governs the University under the title of " Corpus Statutorum Universitatis Oxoniensis." This Code was in part compiled, in part composed by special Delegates appointed for the purpose in 1629 by the Convocation of the University, at the command of the King. After having been tried for one year, it was sent down to Oxford under the seal of Laud, as Metropolitan and Chancellor of the University, together with Letters-Patent under the Great Seal of England, and was formally accepted by the University on the 21st of June, 1636.
It can hardly be doubted that these Statutes were intended by all the parties, to their enactment to be unalterable except with the concurrence of the Royal authority.
The Letters-Patent of King Charles I., in the usual language of Royal Charters, "give and grant for himself, his heirs, and successors, to the Chan- " cellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University for ever," that these Statutes "shall acquire and retain all force and effect in the University." The con- firmation of Archbishop Laud prefixed to the Code " confirms, approves and " ratifies for ever" this volume of University Statutes. It is declared in the Statutes themselves that " the power of explanation is not extended to Statutes " sanctioned or confirmed by Royal authority, without the consent of the Kin°- "himself;" and that "no dispensation, total or partial, shall be proposed coi£
REPORT. 5
" cerning any Statute or Decree framed or to be framed at the command or " suggestion of the Royal authority, unless a change or relaxation has been " expressly enjoined by the like Royal authority." That these prohibitions extend to the whole body of Laudian Statutes seems clear, from the fact that in the Prefatory letters of the Chancellor, and in the Letters-Patent of the King, the whole Code is expressly said to have been undertaken " at the "command" of the King, and is solemnly "accepted, approved, ratified, and "confirmed" by him. If the University cannot interpret or dispense with Statutes so confirmed, much less can it abrogate them.
Such, also, appears to have been the view of the University at the time that the Code was accepted. Secretary Coke, in his oration on that occasion Laud's Chancellor- grounded the validity of the Statutes on the general " axiom and fundamental ^I'P- *dlted by "rule of government" that "all our laws are the King's laws, and none can aro > • " be enacted, changed, or abrogated, without him." The University, in its letter to the King and to the Chancellor, spoke of them as " eternal laws," as Documents in laws which were to endure " in annum Platonicum." The Convocation of the WPP j"dlA^>alsPP 5' University was not called upon, as in former cases, to confirm this Code, but a„n0 1636, vol.'ii., solemnly accepted it ; and the Vice-Chancellor "embraced" it in the name of p- 4os. the University.
The practice of the University for more than a century after the acceptance of the Laudian Code suggests the same conclusion. Only eight Statutes were enacted between 1636 and 1759. These for the most part added to the Code of the University, but abrogated no portion of it. Two of them might seem to contain abrogations of enactments in the Code ; but it is found on inquiry that of these two, one merely carries out an express provision made in the Code ; and with respect to the other, which more nearly resembles an abrogation, it has been maintained that this alters what is only a custom recognised by the Code.
The view which represents the Code as unalterable except by Royal autho- rity, is also confirmed by the analogous cases of the Codes imposed on the University of Cambridge by Queen Elizabeth and Archbishop Whitgift in 1562, and on the University of Dublin by Archbishop Laud in 1637, one year only after the acceptance of the Laudian Code. The Code of each of these Universities is regarded as unalterable. It must, however, be stated, that in both cases abrogation is expressly forbidden by the Statutes themselves.
In 1759 the question of the power of the University to abrogate any of the Laudian Statutes without the consent of the Crown was formally raised. The Heads of Houses had attempted, in a time of great political excitement, to introduce a new Statute affecting the franchise. A case was submitted by them to Messrs. Morton and Wilbraham, whose opinion, together with the case, is given in the Appendix. These lawyers say : " It was not in the power of the " University to delegate their right of making perfect Bye-laws and Statutes Appendix D., p. 46. " to any subject, or even to the King ; and as it was not in the power of the " University itself to enact any Statutes which should remain unalterable or " unrepealable, so it could not delegate a power to any subject, or to the " Crown, to make laws that should not be repealable without the consent of " such subject or his heirs, or such King and his successors." Mr. Justice Hansard's Debates, Blackstone, in an opinion which we have not been able to procure, but Avhich Dec- " '• l83/- is reported as having been quoted by the Duke of Wellington in the House of Lords, agreed " that with respect to any prohibition contained in former " Statutes, it was certain that no Corporation had the power to make Bye-laws " or Statutes abridging the legislative powers of their successors, who had the " same right to enact as their predecessors had ; any more than an Act of " Parliament could effectually make an Act to abridge any future Act. There- fore any academical Act or Bye-law which seemed to assume such power " was either void in itself or voidable, and subject to be repealed by any subse- " quent Act." But the opinions given in 1759 did not set the question at rest. The Proctors of that year maintained that the question really at issue had Appendix D., P. 47. neither been proposed by the Heads nor answered by Counsel. That question was not, they said, whether the University could make Bye-laws, which no one doubted ; nor whether the University could delegate to the King or to a subject its power of making Statutes, which should not be repealable without the consent of the successors of the one or the heirs of the other; but whether the King's Letters Patent, reciting the several titles of Statutes, and not only solemnly
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Appendix D., p. 52,
PRACTICE OP THE UNI- VERSITY AS TO THE ALTERATION OF STATUTES.
GROUNDS OF THE PRACTICE OF THE UNI- VERSITY.
Statutes, Tit. xvii., sec. 1,6 2.
Tit. x., sec. 2, § 2, 5.
Oxford University Calendar, p. 4.
Statut. Univ., Tit. xv., § 6.
-Appendix D, p. 43.
Compare Appendix D, p. 48.
GENERAL RECOMMENDA- TION WITH REGARD TO THE STATUTES.
confirming them, but granting to the Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars that they should be for ever in force, was not virtually a Charter which could not be destroyed by the University after having been accepted and acted on for many
years.
The question was again raised in 1836, when it was proposed to deprive Dr. Hampden of certain rights conferred by the Laudian Code upon the Regius Professor of Divinity. A case was accordingly laid before Sir John (now Lord) Campbell, Dr. Lushington, and Mr. Hull. Their answer was, that " the Laudian Code was binding on the University, as a Charter accepted by it."
The practice of the University, since the year 1759, does not agree with the opinion of Messrs. Morton and Wilbraham, and that attributed to Mr. Justice Blackstone, as above quoted, nor on the other hand with that of Lord Campbell. Some of the Statutes, to which we shall refer presently, are still regarded by the University as unalterable ; but from the middle of the last century, the University has taken upon itself not only to make new enact- ments, but to abrogate large portions of the Laudian Code, the Royal license having never been sought. The grounds, on which this practice has been justified, are scarcely consistent with each other.
1. It is said that a clause in the Laudian Code empowers the Chancellor, " with the consent of the University, to sanction statutes and ordinances, and, " when requisite, to abrogate those which have been sanctioned" (ordinationes et statuta, poscente sic usu, cum consensu Universitatis, sancire vet sancita abrogate). But it seems certain, from the context, that this clause was intended only to save the power of the Chancellor and University to make Bye-laws ; and that the Statutes which they are permitted to abrogate are those only which they have made by their own authority. •
2. But the view commonly taken, is that "the Royal Statutes," which the University is forbidden to interpret or to dispense with unless with the Royal consent, are not the whole Code, but such Statutes only as Avere promulgated by Royal authority before 1636. These Statutes are commonly said to be three ; namely, that which constitutes the Hebdomadal Board (Tit. xiii.) ; that which regulates the election of the Collectors in Lent (Tit. vi., sec. 2, § 4) ; and the Statutes on the Procuratorial Cycle, contained in the Appendix to the Code.* We can find no ground for the distinction attempted to be drawn between these three Statutes and the rest of the Laudian Code ; the whole of which as it now exists, was, as we have seen, "accepted, approved, ratified and "confirmed" by the King in the most solemn terms. Under any interpretation of the prohibition in question, we know no reason for selecting the three Statutes above mentioned, as the only Statutes which emanated from the Crown, previously to the enactment of the Laudian Code. One other is expressly ascribed to King James I. in the Code, and it was asserted in 1759 that there are many more of Royal origin. To ascertain the sources of the several Statutes incorporated in the Code must, at this distance of time, be difficult, if not im- possible. At all events the opinions of Morton and Wilbraham, and of Mr. Justice Blackstone, make no such distinction between the different parts of the Code, but consider the whole equally subject to repeal ; as Lord Campbell and Dr. Lushington, on the contrary, consider it all equally unalterable except by consent of the Crown. It would seem probable, also, that the Royal Statutes, anterior to the Laudian Code, did not fall within the descrip- tion of " Statutes confirmed by Royal authority." The Laudian Code was " confirmed " by the Letters Patent of the King. But the " Caroline Statutes" on the Procuratorial Cycle, though " issued " (edita) by Royal authority, were " confirmed " only by the University ; nor did they receive the Royal confir- mation till it was given to them in common with the whole Code into which they were incorporated.
It is evident then that the grounds on which the University has assumed the power of altering the Laudian Code are, to say the least, so doubtful that some step ought to be taken to set the matter at rest. If, as was held by Lord Campbell and Dr. Lushington, the Laudian Code be a Charter the University should be indemnified for the changes which, with the best inten- tions, it has made in that Code, and should be set at liberty for the future
* The expression " Caroline Statutes," though sometimes applied to these three, is in the CnA* iurif applied only to the last; whilst in common parlance it is often (not improperly) used of the whole Cod
REPORT. 7
The changes which are, in our opinion, necessary in the Statutes, will be stated as we proceed with our Report.
The necessity of change in the Statutes was urged fourteen years ago, in the changes in the House of Lords, by the Duke of Wellington speaking as Chancellor of the STATUTES necessaey. University, and admitted by the Heads of Colleges acting under his advice. In the year 1837 his words are thus reported : —
" I am one of thoso who have long been of opinion that some amelioration Hansard, Debate " should be made, and, very shortly after I became Chancellor of the Univer- on the Universities " sity of Oxford, I had a correspondence with the governing body on that caKd^Mays, "subject, and recommended them to take into consideration the circumstances 1837. " in which they were placed, and to adopt such ameliorations as might be con- " sidered safe and necessary. I believe that they have had that subject under " their consideration from that time till now, and I am authorised to say that " they are on the road towards making those inquiries and those ameliorations " which the noble Lord (the Earl of Radnor) has so strongly urged upon the " House."
In the next year we find more definite statements made by the Duke of Wellington to the same effect : — ■
" I have had some conversation with the Heads of the University of Oxford, " and was assured that there existed a desire to review those Statutes, and " that the work was actually in progress.
" With respect to the Colleges, I have received accounts from several of them, ibid., July 9, 1838. " that they are reviewing their Statutes. Several of the Colleges are in com- " munication with their respective Visitors, and others are in communication " with the Fellows of the College, with whom they must communicate, in order " to make effectual reforms in their Statutes. They are going on as well as " they can at the present moment, and I entreat your Lordships to let them " work out those reforms as they think fit ; and if they are not executed in " accordance with your Lordships' wishes, it will then be time for the House " to take such steps as may seem necessary."
The anticipations which the Chancellor thus confidently expressed have been realised to some extent with regard to the University. But as regards the Colleges they have not been realised at all. In fact, whatever be the case with regard to the University, without the aid of the Legislature, it is clear that the Colleges are wholly unable to effect the alterations thus strongly recommended.
Two principles, however, to which we shall appeal in subsequent parts of our Report, were at that time recognised by the University in the legislation which it adopted in accordance with the Duke of Wellington's advice. These principles are, first, the expediency of repealing regulations, which have become incapable of observance at the present day, and, secondly, the propriety of rescinding Oaths to the observance of Statutes, even when those Statutes have been accommodated to modern times. Instead of the Oath formerly taken by Students at Matriculation to observe the University Statutes, an admonition from the Vice- Chancellor was substituted ; and all Oaths formerly required at Degrees, with the exception of those of Allegiance and Supremacy, were abolished.
From the Statutes of the University we pass to its Administration. ADMINISTRATION
The present Constitution of the University cannot be properly understood OF THE UNIVEESITY. without a brief description of the earlier state of things.
The University, like all the older Universities of Western Europe, appears to ancient constitution. have been at the first an association of teachers united only by mutual interest. Every association requires a legislative body, and executive officers ; but in all voluntary associations these essential elements exist originally at least in their simplest form. It is said, and it seems probable, that the Legislature of the University in early times consisted of one House only, in which all the Masters the house op congke- : or Teachers had a seat, called " the Congregation." Being engaged in the daily .business of the Schools, the Masters were always at hand, and could be con-
vened at any moment except in the holidays. The House which still bears the name is even to this day summoned only by the sound of a bell ; at the close of each sitting its business is declared by the Vice-Chancellor to be " con- "tmued," not prorogued, except at the beginning of each vacation. It also 'confers all ordinary Degrees, which are even now in form what they were once in fact,— licences to teach. The House of Congregation is the real repre- sentative of the primeval Legislature of the literary republic of Oxford.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
THE HOUSE OF CONVO- CATION.
THE CHANCELLOR.
Wood's Fasti, p. 2. Wood's Annals, anno 1288, vol. i., p. 326.
Ayliffe's History of Oxford, vol. ii„ p. 162.
Wood's Annals, anno 1552, vol. ii., p. 113.
THE PEOCTOES.
Wood's Annals, anno 1538, 1541, 1542, 1578, 1579, 1580, 1628. THE PRESENT CONSTI- TUTION.
THE HEBDOMADAL BOARD.
THE HEADS OF HOUSES.
Wood's Annals, anno 1569, vol. ii., p. 167.
In the course of time it would seem that an increasing body of persons arose who sought the licence to teach as an honour rather than as a profession ; of these, many continued to live in the place, and retained an interest in the University. It is probable that from this cause, and with a view of leaving to the actual Teachers the management of those matters which peculiarly belonged to them, the expedient was adopted of forming a second House with legislative powers, to be composed of all who had attained a certain academical rank, whether they were or were not Teachers. This body, which was called the "great Congregation," met only at intervals, and also bore the name of " Con- vocation," as requiring a regular summons by bedells. The House of Convo- cation naturally became the more important of the two, as comprehending both the Members of Congregation and the ever-increasing number of those who were not actual Teachers, and also as determining the questions which were of interest to the whole academical community.
The chief ruler of the community bore at first the name of Rector Scho- larium, and afterwards of Chancellor. The Chancellor was elected by the Masters from the earliest period of which there is any record to our own times; but till the reign of King Edward III. the confirmation of the Bishop of Lincoln, who was at that time the Diocesan, was required to give validity to the election. The University was after many struggles exempted from the jurisdiction of the Diocesan through the intervention of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that of the Pope. Ecclesiastics continued to fill the office till the reign of King Edward VI., when Sir John Mason, a layman, was chosen under the new Statutes given by the Commissioners of that Monarch. The Chancellor was, in early times, a resident Graduate, and was elected for one, two, or more years. The first perpetual Chancellor was Bishop Russell, in 1484. He was assisted by Commissaries, who seem to have stood in the same relation to him as the Pro-Vice-Chancellors to the Vice-Chancellor in our days. The first non-resident Chancellor was George Neville, Archbishop of York, in 1454.
Almost, if not quite on a level with the Chancellor, were the Proctors (Pro- curatores) of the University. They were two in number, one for each of what were called "the two nations/' in reference to the great divisions of England north and south of the Trent. The Proctors were elected by the whole body of Masters of Arts, or according to the Statutes of King Edward VI., by the Regents, that is, by those actually engaged in teaching. But they were some- times appointed by the Chancellor, sometimes by the King.
It has been necessary to state thus much of the earlier condition of the University, in order to show the comparatively recent date of the present Constitution, and the importance of the changes which have taken place in an Institution often supposed to have remained in its original state. Many ancient names indeed remain. But identity of name by no means implies identity of power. The several institutions of the University have been considerably modified in the course of time ; and their rights in a great degree transferred
to officers and bodies of later origin.
Wood's Annals, anno 1590, vol. ii., p. 241.
The most important change was the institution of the Hebdomadal Board. This Board consists of the Vice- Chancellor, the twenty-three other Heads of Houses, and the two Proctors. The Vice-Chancellor or one of his Depu- ties must always preside, and the presence of the Proctors or their Deputies is regarded as necessary to constitute a meeting.
The Heads of Houses had, as such, no statutable power in the University before the middle of the sixteenth century. The influence which they had by that time acquired could not but be recognised; and naturally led to the changes which resulted in giving them their present position. The first recorded step in this direction was taken in the year 1569 by Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, who, as Chancellor of the University, and apparently with but slight opposition, procured orders to be framed by a Delegacy, and then passed into Statutes, to the effect that, whereas formerly measures had been dis- cussed in an assembly called the "Black Congregation" before they were submitted to Convocation, for the future this deliberation was to take place in a meeting of the Vice-Chancellor, Doctors, Heads of Houses, and Proctors. This change marks an intermediate stage between the ancient Congregation and the present Board. The Doctors, a considerable body of Graduates at all times, and one capable of indefinite extension, thus shared the governing power • but they seem to have lost their seat at the meeting, before the ordinance issued by
REPORT. 9
King Charles I., in 1631, in consequence of which this body was formally
limited to the Heads of Houses and Proctors, and received the name of the
" Hebdomadal Board," or Weekly Meeting. By this Ordinance, which in 1636
was inserted into the Laudian Code, the Board was invested with the rights and
entrusted with the duties, which have ever since belonged to it. They are em- Statut., Univ., Tit. xiii.
powered to "deliberate, as occasions may arise, on the defence of the privileges
" and franchises of the University, and to advise, inquire, and take counsel for
" the observance of statutes and customs. Also if they, or the greater part of
" them, think any proposition necessary for the good government, academical •
" proficiency, repute, or common weal and use of the University, they are em-
" powered to discuss it," in order that it may, after such deliberation, be laid
before the two assemblies of Masters of Arts, of which we shall speak presently.
And in another Statute it is decreed, that this Hebdomadal Board shall draw Tit. x. sec. 2, § 2.
up all new measures before they are submitted to Convocation.
These two Statutes give to the Hebdomadal Board the sole initiative power in the legislation of the University, and the chief share in its administration.
The effects of this change, by which the Constitution of the University of Oxford is essentially distinguished, not only from its own ancient form, and from the Constitution of all Scottish and Foreign Universities, but also from that of the sister University of Cambridge, will best be considered, when we have gone through the other branches of the executive and legislative power, which were affected, more or less, by the same revolution.
The office of Vice-Chancellor was unknown, by name at least, to the most the vice-chancellor ancient Constitution. The Commissaries of the Chancellor are mentioned as code. early as the year 1230. These Commissaries first rose into importance when the Chancellor ceased to be resident, and his functions were accordingly for the most part entrusted to a deputy. The title of Vice-Chancellor is given for the first time in Wood's Catalogue to Dr. Humphry, appointed during pleasure by Lord Leicester in 1574; but it also occurs in the Statutes of King Edward VI. Those Statutes direct that this officer shall be annually elected, as is still the case at Cambridge, by the Masters of Arts. It was not till the year 1569 that the Earl of Leicester, as Chancellor (to use the words of Wood), " took Woods Annals, " upon himself the right of naming the Commissary or Vice-Chancelloi-, some- anno 1 569, vol. a. " times without the consent of the Convocation, rarely or never done in former " times." The Laudian Code legalised the power thus assumed. It enacts that the Vice-Chancellor shall be nominated from the Heads of Colleges by the Tit. xvii. sec. 3. Chancellor, with the assent of Convocation, and shall hold his office for one year. Into his hands have passed the powers of the Chancellor, with a few insignificant exceptions. This is sufficient to make him the most important officer of the Uni- versity. To these powers must be added the influence which he has acquired from being Chairman of the Hebdomadal Board, as well as of all its Committees, and from the prolongation of his tenure of office (by re-appointment) from one year to four. The Vice-Chancellor is empowered by Statute to appoint four deputies, called Pro- Vice- Chancellors, ordinarily the two Heads who have held the office before him, and the two next in seniority to himself. Of these last the senior commonly succeeds as Vice-Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor possesses a discretionary power of appointing his deputies, which affords the means of preventing an objectionable or obnoxious individual from obtaining the Vice- Chancellorship. Every Head is considered to be bound to accept the office if tendered to him ; but it is not pressed on those who intimate their inability or their unwillingness to discharge its duties. The statutable stipend of this high functionary is ten pounds a-year ; the real salary is derived from certain Tit. xvii., sec. 3, § 3. bequests, from fees, and from the profits which he may be able to make by using the balances of the University revenues placed in his hands during his term of office. We are unable, in the absence of evidence from the authorities of the University, to state the average amount of income derived from each or all of these sources.
The Proctors are no longer the two great officers who bore that name in the the pkoctoks since ancient Constitution. Their importance was diminished by the change which THE LAUDIAN exalted the Heads of Houses. The ancient popular elections had continued, though not without interruptions, till 1628, when King Charles I. issued a special Ordinance, which was afterwards, in 1636, incorporated into the Laudian Statutes, and by which it was enacted that, in consequence of the tumultuous proceedings which often took place at the elections of the Proctors they should
C
10
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
THE CHANCELLOR SINCE THE LAUDTAN CODE.
THE HIGH STEWARD.
THE COLLECTORS.
HOUSE OF CONGREGA- TION SINCE THE LAU- ! DIAN CODE.
HOUSE OF CONVOCA- riON SINCE THE LAU- DIAN CODE.
tTS POWERS.
hereafter be chosen from the several Colleges by turns. This new mode of election, although a sufficient remedy for the disorders which it professed to correct, has tended considerably to reduce the importance of the Procuratorial office. The Proctors do not now represent the University, but at most the par- ticular Colleges which elect for the year. The Cycle, by which the election is regulated, is so unequally arranged, that some of the Colleges which take the least part in the education of the University, elect more frequently than others which stand in the foremost rank. The choice, rendered thus narrow by Statute, has been rendered still more narrow by the almost invariable custom of nominating the Proctors, not from all the members of the College, but only from its Fellows, and not from the Fellows with any regard to their qualifica- tions, but simply according to seniority. This system has sometimes led to the appointment of persons of little fitness for the office, and has proportionally affected its dignity and influence. The Proctors, however, have still sufficient importance, from their right of nominating Examiners, their share in the choice of Select Preachers and of Delegates, and their administration of the Discipline of the University, to render unfit appointments to the post a source of consi- derable mischief.
The Chancellor is elected by Convocation, usually from political considera- tions ; he rarely appears in Oxford, and seldom takes any part in academical government. Still his office is one of much dignity and influence ; and his advice always has weight with the ruling body of the University. As he is usually a Peer, he is virtually the representative of the University in the Upper House of Parliament ; he is also the organ by which the Government usually communi- cates with the University. He is Visitor of Pembroke College ; he appoints the Provost of Worcester College from the list of those who are or have been Fellows ; and he has the absolute nomination of four out of the five Principals of Halls. No emolument is attached to the office ; on the contrary, the Chan- cellors have, for many years, given prizes to the amount of 601. per annum.
The office of High Steward, though always conferred like that of Chancellor on persons of high rank, is now merely honorary.
The office of Collector, once so important as to have given occasion to one of the three Statutes in the Laudian Code, which are often regarded as pecu- liarly binding, is now never filled up.
We proceed to speak of the remains of the ancient Constitution which are still to be traced in the two Houses of Congregation and Convocation.
The House of Congregation has been greatly changed, and that principally by the enactments of Leicester and of Laud. Many of its functions have been transferred to the Hebdomadal Board, and those which it retains are purely formal. It consists of the Vice-Chancellor and Proctors, the resident Doctors, the Heads of Colleges and Halls, the Professors and Public Lecturers, the Examiners, the Deans or Censors of Colleges, and " Necessary" Regents. The Doctors have long since ceased to teach. The name of Regent has become a mere title. The College Tutors, who now chiefly conduct the instruction of the University, have as such no place in this body. Of the right of legislation which once belonged to it nothing remains, but that in it must be promulgated all Statutes three days at least before they are proposed to Convocation. What was once the important and exciting business of admitting to Decrees has dwindled into a form. The present House of Congregation meets&only for the purpose of hearing measures proposed which it cannot discuss, of con- ferring Degrees to which candidates are already entitled* and of' granting Dispensations which are never refused.
In what manner this body might be modified, so as to meet the wants of these times and to exercise advantageously its ancient powers, will be presently considered.
The House of Convocation, which consists as formerly of all Masters of Arts and Doctors, who have taken out their Regency, and who are Members of a College or Hall, is now a much more important body than that of Congrega- tion. It possesses the power of debating on the measures proposed by the Hebdomadal Board ; and, by its acceptance, those measures become Statutes^ It elects the Chancellor, the Representatives of the University in Parliament* many of the Professors, and various University officers, while on certain other appointments it exercises a veto. To it belongs the Ecclesiastical patronage of the University, and the right of conferring Degrees out of the ordinary course
REPORT. II
whether honorary or by diploma. Some persons have supposed that the
Statutes give Convocation a power of amendment on the measures proposed to Evidence of Mr.Foulkes,
it by the Hebdomadal Board ; but no such power, we believe, has ever been p' 223'
exercised.
The right of debating is virtually annulled by the necessity of speaking in Statut.Univ.,Tit.xi,§3. Latin at all times. It is true that a dispensing power in this matter is vested in the Chancellor ; but except at the election of Burgesses, this power has been exercised, so far as we know, only on one occasion, namely in 1845, when Mr. Ward was heard in English in his own defence. Few Members of Convo- cation are now able to speak fluently in Latin, and a custom has arisen of reading written speeches. But even written speeches are seldom delivered, and, from the nature of the case, they can produce little impression.
Convocation seems to have a statutable veto on the important appointment to the office of Vice-Chancellor ; but the power of rejecting a person nominated by the Chancellor is now, practically at least, abrogated. Whether or not it was conceded by the Laudian Statutes, we are not aware that it was ever claimed till the year 1844. In that year the nomination of the Warden of Wadham was opposed. It is understood that the opinion of eminent Counsel was taken by the Hebdomadal Board ; and that it is in consequence of the opinion then obtained, that the consent of Convocation to the appointment of the Vice-Chan- cellor has not since been asked. Before that year, the question of approbation or disapprobation had always been put to the House.
The only Legislative power then which practically belongs to Convocation is the power of accepting or rejecting without amendment the measures proposed to it by the Hebdomadal Board.
The Laudian Constitution vested in the Vice- Chancellor singly, and in the the veto of the vice- two Proctors jointly, a Veto on all measures brought before Convocation. This £5^^j5££?/?n£NI) 0F power is analogous to that which in the University oi Cambridge belongs to each of the five Members of the Caput.
The Veto entrusted to the Vice-Chancellor is rarely if ever exercised, except as a matter of convenience, when Statutes are proposed clause by clause to Convocation, and the rejection of one clause may have rendered necessary the withdrawal of others which follow and are dependent on it.
The Veto entrusted to the Proctors was exerted on several occasions in the last century ; in the present, we believe, three times only ; — once in 1825, on a proposition to appoint a Delegacy; again in 1836, in order to prevent a censure on Dr. Hampden ; lastly in 1845, when a proposition was made to condemn certain principles laid down in the 90th "Tract for the Times."
Such generally is the Constitution of the University, as it was finally confirmed by King Charles I. and Archbishop Laud, and as it has ever since remained.
As to some parts of this Constitution no dissatisfaction has been expressed, peesent state of No one desires any interference with the high office of the Chancellor. To the J^g,0^1^ w0^? powers of the Vice-Chancellor and to the mode of his appointment no objections stitution. of moment are made. With regard to the former we have no suggestions to offer ; with regard to the latter, suggestions on matters of detail only.
But as to Convocation and the Hebdomadal Board, the complaints are loud and general, and the evidence which has been laid before us on the subject is copious, explicit, and, in its general principles, unanimous. One voice only has been raised in defence of the present system. It is, however, the voice of an eminent man who is himself a Member of the chief governing body. " I am Evidence, p. 264. "satisfied," says Dr.. Cardwell, Principal of St. Alban's Hall, "with the " present constitution of the University, and believe that in the hands of honest " and able administrators it is, upon the whole, better calculated than any " other hitherto proposed to discharge its proper duties."
The dissatisfaction respecting the Hebdomadal Board is very strong. Grave g|^c0™^T o the^ objections have been urged against its composition and powers, not by one party only, but by persons of various opinions in the University.
We have before shown that the power of legislation belonged in early times to those who were actually engaged in giving instruction, and that causes of a temporary nature in a great degree determined the successive interventions by which the government of the University was reduced to a narrow oligarchy. There is no reason why an arrangement which may have been thought at one time advisable, whether from State-policy, or other motives, should be per- petuated for ever. It is anomalous that the government of this great Institution
C 2
12
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Evidence, p. 82. Compare Evidence of Prof. Walker, p. 22. Mr. Jowett, p. 30, 31. Mr. Stoddart, p. 239. Prof. Ogle, p. 41. Mr.Melville,p.57,58. Mr. Bart. Price, p. 60. Mr. Wilkinson, p. 72,
73. Mr. Cox, p. 93, 94. Mr. Strickland, p. 99. Mr. Temple, p. 133. Mr. Freeman, p. 1 35. Prof. Wall, p. 151. Mr. Congreve, p.152. Dr. Twiss, p. 155. SirE. Head, p. 160. Mr. Litton, p. 175. Mr. Bonamy Price,
p. 192. Mr. Griffiths, p. 202. Mr. Henney, p. 206. Mr. Foulkes, p. 223.
SUGGESTIONS FOE AMENDING THE CONSTI- TUTION.
I. PROPOSAL TO IN- CREASE THE POWERS OF CONVOCATION.
Evidence of — Mr. Strickland, p. 99. Mr. Freeman, p. 135. Mr. Foulkes, p. 223. Mr. Stoddart, p. 230.
Compare Evidence of — Prof. Walker, p. 22. Mr. Jowett, p. 30, 31. Mr. Wilkinson, p. 72. Mr. Temple, p. 135. Mr. Congreve, p. 152.
Evidence, p. 93.
Evidence of — Prof. Browne, p. 6. Prof. Walker, p. 22. Mr. Jowett, p. 38, Mr. Wilkinson, p. 81. Mr. Temple, p. 129. Mr. Congreve, p. 153. Dr. Twiss, p. 156. Dr. Macbride, p. 221.
should be committed to persons, thegreat majority of whom are elected by the Fellows of the separate Colleges out of their own narrow circle, often for reasons of a personal or social nature, and with little or no regard to the welfare of the University. It is more anomalous still, that the literary interests of the University should be committed to persons who are not necessarily chosen for literary qualifications ; while on the other hand the Professors and the Tutors have, as such, no right to suggest or amend or even to discuss any measure, how much soever it may affect the literary and educational interests of the place; and can, at most, reject or accept what is proposed to them in Convocation, in common with hundreds of others whose sole title to interfere is a Degree.
For a full appreciation of the feeling which prevails in the University against the present constitution and powers of the Hebdomadal Board, we must refer to the Evidence itself. We will content ourselves here with quoting one passage only, from the Evidence of Professor Vaughan, in which this subject is briefly and temperately discussed : " Whatever (he says) may be the merits and " efficiency of this part of our present Constitution, it is not a fundamental and " aboriginal system. And I cannot but think that it is somewhat more exclu- " sive in its character than can be necessary or beneficial. The Heads of " Colleges are elected by their respective societies, and owe their promotion to " the confidence which these bodies repose in them. This confidence may arise " from a sense of past services, or the acknowledgment of qualities adapted to " manage the details of finance, property, and discipline; or from social merits " calculated to govern and harmonise the society. But the Heads of Houses " do not necessarily, or even very generally, follow literary and scientific pur- " suits. Nor are they directly and closely connected with the instruction of " the place. They simply appoint the Tutors, and preside with more or less " activity (at the terminal examinations in College. They live generally with " their families, and do not immediately imbibe the spirit or learn the wishes " of those who more directly carry forward the instruction. They constitute " a most valuable element for legislation as well as administration ; but I think " that it would be advantageous, if in addition to this, other influences were " admitted to give their aid in suggesting and framing the laws of the Uni- " versity."
The unanimous expression of dissatisfaction in every part of the Evidence in which this subject is handled confirms our own conviction, that into any plan for University Reform must enter some modification of the Academical Consti- tution, as regards the legislative powers now almost exclusively confided to the Hebdomadal Board. With respect to the nature of the change required, how- ever, there is not (as might be expected) the same concurrence of opinion as there is with regard to its necessity. The different plans proposed, or at least indicated, in the Evidence, may be classified under three heads.
I. Some persons would modify the powers of the Hebdomadal Board simply by investing Convocation with the right of debating and of amending all pro- positions submitted to its vote.
The objections to this scheme are very strong. It is not desirable to invest a large promiscuous body with extensive powers of legislation, especially in matters affecting education. Even if this were desirable, Convocation would not answer the purpose. It consists of more than three thousand members scattered throughout the country. Few of them, comparatively speakin°\ can rightly apprehend or even fully learn the nature of the measures submitted to their vote. Measures of reform brought forward by the Hebdomadal Board have often been thwarted or defeated by the adverse votes of Convocation.
Moreover this plan leaves to the Hebdomadal Board its sole right of initia- ting measures; and the Board, always jealous of Convocation, would become much more so, in case its measures were made liable to alteration. Supposing it to retain its sole right of initiation, its movements would become slower than ever.
Further, as regards the elective powers of Convocation, the Evidence bearing on the subject is almost unanimous in stating that of all modes of electing Professors, that by Convocation is the worst. Mr. Hayward Cox sums up his remarks on this point in the following words : " Of elections in Convocation " it may be said, that even where the result has been to secure the appoint- " ment of the best candidate to such chairs as those of logic, political economy " or poetical criticism, the election has, in point of fact, generally turned upon
REPORT. 13
" considerations wholly irrespective of those of fitness for the office." A body which so discharges one important part of its functions, can hardly be entrusted with increased powers in more difficult and delicate matters.
We are, therefore, of opinion that it is unadvisable to give to Convocation any- further power than it now possesses. Indeed we shall feel ourselves compelled to advise that the right of appointing many of the Professors, Avhich now belongs to Convocation, should be withdrawn. In other respects its powers might be left unaltered. Its right to elect the Chancellor of the University and the Burgesses who represent it in the House of Commons, it ought to retain. And, since we consider it undesirable to abolish any part of the existing Con- stitution without necessity, we think that Convocation should keep its present power of accepting or rejecting measures emanating from those in whose hands the initiative will be vested.
II. A second proposal is that, Convocation remaining as it is, a change ir proposal to * should be made in the constitution of the Hebdomadal Board alone. Some create a new hebdo- persons would simply diminish its numbers. Some would create an entirely Evince o^AR°
new Board, composed of a select number of Heads of Houses, Professors and P«>f- walker, P. 22. Tutors. Others would simply add the Professors to the existing Board. All Mr! Barf Price j°60. these proposals would leave the powers of the Board undiminished, and its Frof.vaughan, p. 82. relations to Convocation unaltered. Prof.w'afi.V'is1-
By simply diminishing the numbers of the Hebdomadal Board little or no sir k Head, pieo. advantage would be gained. Even if we grant that some of the less useful Mr.'jowett,'p.3o,3i. members might thus be removed from the Board (though the contrary is just Mr. Wilkinson, p. 72, as likely to happen), this scheme would give no increase of influence to the Mr. cox, p. 93. Professors or the Tutors ; and we think that any plan of reform which did not give due weight to the Teachers of the University, would be ineffective, or rather, mischievous. The next of these suggestions is intended not so much to alter the number of the present Hebdomadal Board, as to alter its con- stitution by introducing into it a proportion of Professors and Tutors. It would, no doubt, provide for the paramount object to which we have just referred. But we see many objections to this plan ; for, however it may be See especially modified, it involves the necessity of frequent elections, which all would wish <jen'ce°p.e3|S. V' to avoid if possible. Moreover, if the numbers of the Board were either diminished or left as at present, we think that much the same complaints would be raised against it, as against the existing Board. Members of Con- vocation would not be satisfied to leave the sole right of initiation in so small a body. Or if, according to the third of these suggestions, the present Board were increased by the addition of the Professors, the body, however well fitted for legislation, would become too large and cumbrous for executive and admi- nistrative purposes.
We believe that all the advantages which these schemes contain, will be found in the plan which we now proceed to discuss.
III. This plan is not proposed in its complete form by any one person, but ^g^l^^j^c,^ has been framed after a careful examination of several schemes, more or less tion.
similar, and a very full discussion of the whole subject. We will endeavour first briefly to state the principles which have guided us.
We have thought it essential that the opinions and feelings of Convocation, which can now be made known merely by Latin speeches and a power of veto, should have some more full and legitimate mode of expression ; but at the same time we have been anxious to guard against establishing, what Mr. Jowett Evidence, P. 3 1. ■ calls " a vast debating society, in which (as occasion offers) every political, " ecclesiastical, and religious question, is liable to be discussed."
We are also satisfied, that the power of initiating measures should be at least shared with the Hebdomadal Board by those who have an equal, not to say a SeeespMiaiiyEvi- greater, interest in the education given by the University, and in its character Mr.ejowe°t, P. 31 as a learned body,— that is to say, the Professors, Public Lecturers, and College p^^™;^!. Tutors, none of whom have, according to the present Constitution, any more prof! WaiLp.'15'i. ' real power than the youngest Master of Arts. sir'E.WHead,'p\5i60.
Lastly we have wished, as far as possible, to retain the ancient forms of the Mr. Litton, 'P. i 75. University, and to remodel and renovate rather than to create anew.
Our purpose then has been to bring together a body not unmanageably large, and composed of such men, as from their high position, their literary character, and their close connexion with the University might be expected to supply a
14
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Evidence, p. 82.
Evidence, p. 83.
THE HOUSE OF CONGRE- GATION UNDER THE PROPOSED ALTERATION.
Council of wise and liberal temper, alive to academical interests, and not likely to degenerate into a mere popular assembly.
It seemed to us that such a body might be found in the House of Congrega- tion, once important, but now a shadow. This House consisted originally, as we have stated, of the actual Teachers of the University. We propose to restore this state of things, with some modifications, and to remodel the House according to what we believe to have been its spirit and purpose in ancient times.
The Members of this remodelled Congregation should be the Heads of Houses and Proctors, who would sit there as the administrative Officers of the University, together with the Professors and Public Lecturers, who are its authorised Teachers, and who, as we think, ought to be considerably increased in number and raised to a position much higher than that which they now occupy. " It would be well," says Professor Vaughan, " at least to comprehend " a learned element, such as in many European Universities has the chief, if " not the only sway. It would be desirable that, in a seat of learning and " instruction, those who have attained the highest position as cultivators of " literature and science, who must be considered as intimately acquainted with " the state of the several departments of knowledge, who are brought into " occasional contact with Students of all ages and degrees in the place, who " have proved themselves to possess a considerable degree of intellectual power, "and who are necessarily interested in the success and reputation of the " University, should take some active part in making and administering the " laws." We think also that the College Tutors, who must be recognised as University Teachers, should have a voice in the deliberations of this Council. But, as it would be inconveniently enlarged by the admission of their whole number, we propose that they should be represented by the Senior Tutor of each College. The Doctors, and the so-called Regent-Masters, who have now long ceased to exercise the right of teaching which their names imply, would fairly cease to be Members. The more important Colleges would indeed, as regards their representation by their Tutors, be placed on an equality with the smaller, but they would find compensation in the larger number of Professors and Public Lecturers which they would supply. With so large a proportion of the Instructors of the University, it would hardly be necessary for the public interests that the Examiners should have seats in the House.
The House of Congregation thus remodelled, or rather restored, would consist of the persons most interested in the education of the place, which is the chief subject of Academical Legislation. " A body thus constituted," says Pro- fessor Vaughan in speaking of a somewhat similar proposal, " would bring into " action most of the valuable elements for legislation which the place would " supply — age, intellect, ability, practical habits, the feeling and opinion of the " time, a knowledge of the subjects which the University proposes to teach, of " its state moral and instructional, and of its trusts, property, and finances." The duty of this body would be to deliberate on all measures proposed to it by its own members, or by the Hebdomadal Board. These measures would then be finally submitted to Convocation.
For the purpose of enabling Congregation to fulfil its deliberative functions, its members should be allowed the same free use of the English language which is granted to the Hebdomadal Board.
We believe that the character and station of the persons whom we have designated as Members of Congregation would be enough to prevent this body from degenerating into a " debating society." But to guard against the possi- bility of such a danger, and the formation of organised parties, we propose that Congregation should not meet regularly for legislation. The Vice-chancellor should call it together for this purpose, whenever propositions, either emanating from the Hebdomadal Board or contained in a requisition signed by a fixed number of the Members of Congregation, are proposed for discussion. The propositions to be brought forward should be printed and circulated a certain time beforehand, so that all Members might come duly prepared for deliberation.
Congregation, as thus constituted, would consist of more than one hundred Members, and may seem too numerous a body for academical legislation. But this objection applies to all deliberative assemblies worthy of the name. It is
REPORT. 15
brought by Mr. Griffiths even against the Hebdomadal Board. It admits of Evidence, p. 202. an easy answer. All deliberative assemblies appoint Committees to report on measures submitted to them; and this practice is recognised by the Statute which provides for the appointment of Delegacies. These Delegacies or Com- mittees would not be nominated by the Proctors, or by the Proctors and the Vice-Chancellor, as at present, but would be proposed by the persons who brought forward the measure, and the names would be submitted to the approval of Congregation. Such Delegacies would, no doubt, be appointed to draw up all important measures. They would naturally be composed of persons of all grades in the Congregation, who would thus be brought into closer union with each other.
The restoration of this Legislative Body does not, as we propose it, involve the abrogation of any of the existing elements in the Constitution of the University.
The Hebdomadal Board would remain. To maintain discipline, and to the hebdomadal transact the ordinary business, it appears to us that no other body could be pkoposed^^eration found so competent as that which has hitherto discharged these functions, closely connected as it is with the Colleges, possessing the traditions of administration, and alone having sufficient leisure at its command. This body, not inefficient at present for these purposes, will become a better representative of the intelligence of the University, than it can be now, if the changes which we shall hereafter recommend in the Colleges, be carried into effect. We are of opinion that it ought to retain the right, though no longer the exclusive right, of initiating measures to be submitted to Congregation. This would be very convenient as regards many regulations of practical importance, which might not otherwise be brought before Congregation. Moreover the Heb- domadal Board would naturally be anxious to keep up its influence by anticipating improvements likely to be proposed by Members of Congregation ; and it would so frame its measures as to secure their easy passage through the ordeal of a debate in that body.
The House of Convocation would retain the right of veto on all measures THE house op convo- passed in Congregation. Its members would not have the same reason to com- SpopostoTltfrat m\r plain as they have now ; since the most eminent of them would have a seat in Congregation, and it is to be hoped that the free discussion which every proposal would necessarily there receive, and the facility with which Members of Con- vocation would be able to make their wishes known to Members of Congre- gation would diminish the tendency of the former body to obstruct measures submitted to its vote ; and dispose Convocation to receive with favour, rather than with suspicion, the propositions sanctioned by the persons more imme- diately interested in education.
Convocation would retain, as we have stated, the right of electing the register of members Chancellor of the University, and the Burgesses. On this head we have to 0F convocation. suggest that a Register of the members of Convocation, with their addresses, should be kept by a Bedel, or some other officer of the University, and that it should be freely accessible. The manner in which the right to vote is authen- ticated is by a return prepared by the Butler and signed by the Head of each College or Hall ; but the addresses of those whose names are on the list do not there appear. Formerly, comparatively few but residents kept their names on the books, and no inconvenience resulted from the manner in which the Register of Convocation was made up. At present, the supporters of candidates are obliged to accept as a favour any information which may enable them to communicate with the voters ; and that information cannot always be obtained by the supporters of a candidate whose pretensions are not viewed with favour by a. College or its officers.
Before we conclude our examination of the Constitution, we must notice the standing delegacies. Standing Delegacies or Committees, which are appointed for the purpose of managing various branches of University business. Some of these have large executive duties, the duties of some others are merely nominal. There are Delegates of Accounts, of Estates, of Privileges, of the Press, and of Appeals from the Vice-Chancellor's Court. To these must be added the Curators of the Bodleian Library, of the Taylor Institution, and of the University Galleries, who are in fact Delegates under another name.
Most of these Delegacies and Curatorships are composed of members who hold their seats for life. The Delegates of Privileges are appointed partly for
16
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
PROFESSORS TO FORM A NEW STANDING DELE- GACY OF STUDIES.
CONFERRING DEGREES.
life, partly by the year. The Delegates of Appeals are nominated for one year only. The appointment of Standing Delegates is vested in the Vice- Chancellor and Proctors. Delegacies are also nominated for special purposes. Their members are chosen by the Proctors. The administrative powers of Delegacies are, in many cases, absolute and irresponsible.
Many of the matters committed to the sole charge of these Standing Dele- gacies are very important, as, for instance, the business of the University Press. The Press is, we believe, admirably managed now ; but when the able men by whom it is at present administered became Delegates, it was in a very different state. What has happened once may recur, unless provision be made against it. Besides, we think that a Legislative body, such as Congregation would become if constituted on the plan we recommend, ought to have some control over all branches of the Executive. We suggest, therefore, that every Standing Delegacy should be bound to lay an annual Report of its proceedings before the House of Congregation. In regard to the appointment of the Members, we recommend that in each Delegacy there should be one or two official and irremovable Members ; and that of the other Members, a certain number should retire yearly, but that they should be re-eligible. The names of the non-official Members of each Board should be submitted to Congregation by the Proctors. Some inconvenience results from the requirement that the Vice- Chancellor must be Chairman of every Board of Delegates ; as the multiplicity of his duties often obliges him to defer business which demands immediate attention. We recommend that every Standing Delegacy should be empowered to choose a Chairman to preside in the absence of the Vice-Chancellor.
We further propose that the Professors should form a new Standing Delegacy for the supervision of the Studies, the Examinations, and the Public Libraries. We shall hereafter recommend measures, calculated greatly to raise the importance of the Professorial body, so that we may hope to see its ranks filled with active and able men in all departments ; and therefore it is not much to ask that such a body should have an independent and recognised position in the University. At present, the Professors (as such) have no voice in any part of Academical business ; and even in the amended Congregation, they would only sit in common with the Heads of Houses, and a portion of the Tutors. The Professors, if formed into an Official Delegacy, would have such a position as we desire. And there would be this further advantage, that by giving to the Professors the supervision of the Studies, and a chief voice in the appointment of Examiners, much would be done towards securing a stability and con- sistency, which are wanting in the present system of Examinations.
Such is an outline of the scheme which we venture to propose for adjusting^ the constitution of the University to its wants. We do not propose this plan as the only one, or as the best, which could be devised, but as that which on the whole seems with the least change to afford the greatest facilities for future im- provement. If a body, such as we have suggested, were constituted with full legislative powers, it might be entrusted with the care of carrying out details and filling up the outline which we have given. Men of high station in the University would doubtless observe due caution in making alterations, while their experience would suggest the best mode of dealing with many matters with which it is not desirable that any external power should interfere. We are of opinion that the Imperial Legislature, or the Crown, should lav down only a few broad principles, not to be departed from without permission, and that it should give the University full liberty in all besides. To put the University into a condition to exercise such liberty beneficially, is the end which we have proposed to ourselves in the foregoing recommendations.
The duty of conferring Degrees would still remain with Congregation. The University would do well, without unduly curtailing the ceremonial which becomes an ancient Institution, to follow out the course which it began in' 1827, by still further retrenching or simplifying forms, and greatly diminishing the number of days which are now unprofitably spent in Congregation by many whose time is of value to themselves and to others. The business of Congre- gation at present chiefly consists in granting dispensations for non-observance of obsolete statutes. These dispensations seem to be retained for no other reason than because fees are paid to obtain them. This, of course, is a strong addi- tional motive for their abolition. On this, however, we need not dwell Life- less forms and pecuniary exactions would soon be swept away if the government
REPORT. 17
of the University were placed on a better footing. And, if the process of con- ferring Degrees were shortened, and the number of days on which they are conferred diminished; and if, according to the above proposal, Congregation were really composed of the most eminent persons in the University, the cere- mony, instead of being tedious, as at present, might be rendered dignified, and even impressive.
As regards the office of Vice-Chancellor, we have already intimated that we changes eequieed in have little to suggest. The doubt which exists as to the mode of his appoint- ™ra chSelIoe E ment should be removed. We see no reason why the Heads of Halls, who are Evidence „«■- often among the ablest men in the Hebdomadal Board, and whose revenues from Mr- Co*>,p- 93- private or public sources, as well as their residences,, are, in many cases, not Mr' GrlflUh8' p' m' inferior to those of Heads of Colleges, should not be called upon to discharge this office. It has been suggested that they were excluded from it on the ground that the Halls were specially subject to the authority of the Vice- Chancellor. This jurisdiction, however, having become merely nominal, as regards the Heads of those Societies, their exclusion seems needless.
Some persons are of opinion that the Professors also should be eligible. Evidence of— But we cannot concur in this recommendation. Even if the Professors were r' lttc"1'p" all sufficiently well endowed to undertake the office, yet few of them would wish to be engaged in a constant routine of business, and none of them (we will add) ought to have sufficient leisure for such a purpose.
We are of opinion that the Vice-Chancellor's emoluments ought not to depend emoluments of the on uncertain profits ; and that he ought to be remunerated by a competent vice-chancelloe. salary. It is generally felt that many of the formal duties of the office might with advantage be transferred to other hands.
Of the arbitrary and uncertain mode in which the Proctors are now appointed, changes eequieed in
r t j J i t r THE OFFICE OF THE
we have already spoken. peoctoes.
An additional impediment to the selection of fit persons and to their proper Evidence of— discharge of their duties when appointed, lies in the circumstance that gentle- m™/ jowewp 32?2' men are often brought up from the country to fill the office long after their Mr. Bart Price, P.6o. connexion with the University has ceased, and that their tenure of it is so brief M*' c^ ^94' p" 7 " that they have scarcely become familiar with its duties before they retire from Mr. Scott, p. 111. it, to be succeeded by others as inexperienced as they themselves were twelve Dr'.TwIs^'iM. months before. If their election were for the future vested in the Congrega- ^rr-^°pf edve> Po- tion, if their office lasted for two years, at the end of which they might be re- Mr. Lake* p. m. eligible, and, if one of the Proctors always went out of office some considerable Mr.Borf'price4' 192 time before the retirement of the other, these evils would be abated. It would Mr. Griffiths, 'P.' 202.' be beneficial also to rescind the present rule by which the tenure of this office vr.mZb7deV,'v22ii is restricted to Masters of Arts of not less than four, nor more than ten years' Mr. Fouikea/p.223.' standing, on the ground that where it is difficult to find fit persons for an office Dl" G,tenhlll=P- ™- at all, the fewer the restrictions the better.
We see no reason why the Proctors should not retain their academical rank, and occupy seats as at present in the Hebdomadal Board, in Congregation, and
in Convocation. But the Veto which is entrusted to them, would naturally Evidence of—
cease under the system which we propose. We should also wish to see the f^E^^ieo'.
right of appointing Examiners placed in fitter hands. Dr.Macbride, p.219.
These are the recommendations which we have to make for improving the Legislative and Executive functions of the University. We have now to examine its State as regards Numbers.
We have no means of ascertaining the exact number of Students residing at THE STATE OF THE
any one time in Oxford, but we can furnish an estimate sufficiently accurate for ™IVERSITY AS
J ,. n ' REGARDS NUMBERS,
practical purposes.
The average number of Students matriculated annually in the first thirteen
years of this century was about 267- It rose rapidly at the termination of the
war, having amounted to 359 in the year 1814, and to 372 in 1815. The
average number admitted in each year, from 1814 to 1840 inclusively, was
about 364. The largest number admitted in any one year during that period
was 422 in 1829. The matriculations fell off considerably from the year 1831 g^P™ tJie
to the year 1834, when they did not exceed 318. This diminution was sup- Committee of Heb-
posed to be occasioned by the apprehensions entertained as to the security domadai Board on
of the Established Church, during that period of political agitation. In si07(eAsJpye„dxitxeE>
1835 the numbers began to rise again, attaining in that year to 370, and in 1838 p. 55, 56).
18 OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
to 4 13. For the ten years, from 1 84 1 to 1 850, they have averaged 400, or ratheu more. The largest number admitted in any one of these ten years was in 1849, when 446 were matriculated. In 1851 they fell to 359. Whether this fall is due to a permanent or temporary cause is not yet apparent.
Making all the necessary deductions for absence from various causes, perhaps; we may estimate the number of Students actually resident in Oxford at the pre- sent time to be about 1300. There are, at this moment, more Students in Oxford than at any time in the last two centuries.
It is stated (and we believe with justice) in the Report of the Committee of Appendix E., pp. 55, the Hebdomadal Board, appointed in 1846 to consider this very subject, that 56, "the number of educated persons sent forth annually by the University has
" been considerably increased, in a ratio, indeed, exceeding that of the increase " of the population of England and Wales during the same period ;" " and that "the number of persons now existing who have been educated at Oxford must " be between 4000 and 5000 more than were living 30 years ago."
The number of persons who have passed the Final Examination for the Degree of B.A. has, during the last ten years, averaged annually 287. The number matriculated averages, as we have stated, 400, or something less. It follows, therefore, that the number of those who eventually proceed to a Degree is not quite three-fourths of those who enter the University.
The total number of members of the University on the 31st of December, 1850, was 6060. The number of Undergraduates on the books, resident and non-resident, was 1402. The number of Members of Convocation was 3294. The remaining 1364 members were either Graduates who had not yet ac- quired the franchise, or Graduates who, having once lost it by removing their names from the books, have not yet recovered it by the statutable means. The number of Graduates of all ranks residing in Oxford does not, we believe, exceed 300.
These results may appear small when we remember the large endowments belonging to the Colleges. All feel it to be desirable that the benefits offered by the English Universities should be extended far more widely, and that, if possible, the most able and promising of the youth of the whole Empire should be attracted to these great Institutions, pTfU^? why the There are several causes which tend to limit the number of Students at
The education imparted there is not such as to conduce to the advancement in life of many persons, except those intended for the ministry of the Estab- lished Church. Many are now called to the Bar, and raised to the highest judicial functions, who have not been members of any University ; and a large proportion of those Barristers who have received an academical education are said to be Cambridge men. Few Physicians are now educated at Oxford. Nor do many persons take a Degree with a view to enter into the legal profession as Solicitors, though the Legislature has given to Graduates an advantage as regards the duration of their articles.
The great bulk, we repeat, of those who actually resort to Oxford are destined for the ministry of the Church ; and, so long as a Degree is required for Ordination, a considerable number of persons will repair to the University, be the education what it may, and though the expenses should remain what they now are. But the number of Students intended for Holy Orders would we believe, become much greater if the expenses were considerably reduced. Indeed, the foundation of such institutions as Durham, Lampeter, and St. Bees, is probably owing in part at least to the great cost of an Oxford or Cambridge education.
The number of Students at Cambridge is greater than at Oxford, though at Cambridge the accommodation within College walls is more limited, and the endowments are much less considerable. This may be owing in part to the greater facilities for admission into a good or a popular College at Cambridge together witli the greater advantages there offered by open Fellowships and Scholarships ; and another reason may be that the Examinations in that Univer- sity can be more easily passed by persons who have not received a classical education. The absence also of a religious test at Matriculation, may some- times cause a preference to be given to the sister University. But however it may be accounted for, the fact of such a superiority in numbers proves that
REPORT. 19
Oxford, which has more Colleges and ampler revenues than Cambridge, ought to send forth a larger number of Students than at present.
While, however, we entertain a strong hope that the benefits of the University beingEinceea1edE °F may be more widely extended, we limit our expectations by the circumstances and exigencies of modern times. It would be vain to look for the almost fabu- lous multitudes, which are said to have resorted to Oxford in the reign of King Henry III. At that time the University of Oxford was, we may almost say, the chief charity-school for the poor, and the chief grammar-school in England, as well as the great place of education for Students of Theology, of Law, and of Medicine. The oldest of the great Public Schools was not yet founded. The Inns of Court and the Schools of Medicine had no existence, and many students from foreign Universities thought their education incomplete until they had visited the most celebrated seat of English learning. There is,, however, much to encourage the belief, that many impediments to the greatness of Oxford may be removed by the University or the Legislature, and that large classes, at present excluded, may, in future generations, and even in our own, be attracted by the ample rewards, and the excellent education which Oxford may easily be enabled to offer. We shall hereafter show on the authority of the highest names, that it is possible to render Oxford a place of preparatory education both for Law and Medicine. Professional knowledge, in the strict sense, cannot be given in a provincial town. It must be acquired where the Professions are practised, that is, in Chambers and Courts of Law, and in the Hospitals ©f great cities. But young men intended for the higher branches of both Professions might, with advantage, spend the three or four years after seventeen in Oxford, provided that, besides the general training of the place, they were enabled and required to master the principles of those branches of knowledge which they must afterwards study in detail. The changes which are taking place in the administration of justice seem to render it necessary that persons in all grades of the Legal profession should receive an Academical education. It is certainly desirable that the manufacturing and mercantile, which has arisen by the side of the landed aristocracy, and which is exercising a great influence on the public counsels, should seek to have its sons brought up where so many eminent statesmen of past and present times have been trained ; and that the Universities should not cease to send forth a succession of persons qualified to serve God in the State as well as in the Church.
It would be inconvenient fully to enter into this subject till we have con- sidered the next department of our inquiry, namely, the Discipline of the University.
II. DISCIPLINE.
We now proceed to consider the Discipline of the University. We propose also to discuss under this head all that relates to the conduct and expenses of the Students during their academical career, and, as we have just stated, the great question of University Extension.
Discipline is exercised by the authorities of the University, and the Colleges.
The Discipline of the University is chiefly maintained by the Vice-Chan- discipline as exek- cellor and the two Proctors. It is the duty of the Vice-Chancellor to repress gilf ^utS-hesT™"' offences against order, morals, and religion. He presides over a Court, in which suits are brought against Members of the University, or against townsmen in certain cases; but justice is usually administered in that Court by his Assessor. He is also a magistrate for Oxfordshire and the adjoining counties. The two Proctors direct the police of the University. Each Proctor appoints two deputies, who must be Masters of Arts of four years' standing.
On the administration of discipline by the Vice-Chancellor personally, we the administration have no suggestions to offer. No one has questioned its wisdom and beneficial Eo^and^t^Itce^' effects. But, as regards his Court, complaints are frequent. As the Assessor chancellor's court. has not replied to our inquiries, we can give but little authentic information, and we cannot make any specific suggestions concerning it. A slight reform was made in its procedure in the year 1850, but that procedure is still believed to be inconvenient and expensive. The Proctors of this Court, who are at once advo- cates and attorneys, are, in practice, limited to two, appointed by the Vice- Chancellor. Till very recently both were, and one now is, in Orders. There is no security for their legal qualifications. Instances of misconduct on the part of
D2
20
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Statut. Univ., Tit. xxi. § 5.
THE ADMINISTRATION THE PROCTORS.
Evidence'of— Mr. Cox, p. 93. Mr. Lake, p. 173. Mr. Jelf, p. 184. See also the Evi- dence quoted above, p. 17.
EMr Hennt- 206 former Proctors of tnis Court have tended to bring discredit upon it. We do See^isoEvldenee of n°t see that any benefit results to the University from that branch of its juris- Mr. Eaton, p. 204. diction which relates to the recovery of debts ; but, if the Court is to retain this power, the procedure should be made as brief and as inexpensive as that of the County Courts, and its practice should be thrown open in fact, as it seems to be by Statute. Notice should at once be given to the Head of each College or Hall, when an action in this Court is commenced against any of his Under- graduates.
We have already stated that the mode in which the Proctors of the Univer- sity are appointed renders the selection of fit persons, in a high degree uncer- tain. This evil, great when viewed with reference to their legislative func- tions, is still greater when viewed with reference to their important duties as the chief administrators of University Discipline. There are many sources of mis- chief beyond their control, but the immediate temptations, against which the University is especially bound to defend the weakness of its younger Members, are well known to prevail or to decline according to the vigilance or the laxity of the Proctors ; and very different effects are produced on the harmony and good order of the University, according as a Proctor brings, or fails to bring, to his delicate and responsible task sound judgment, good feeling, con- ciliatory manners, and energy. Yet to this arduous office men are often chosen who have long retired from the University, and whose qualifications for their duties hardly enter into the consideration of those who appoint them. That cases of extreme incapacity have been rare, and that instances of eminent fitness in persons so appointed have occurred, is no valid reason for continuing a hazardous system in a matter which seriously affects the well-being of the University. If there were a greater security for good appointments, there can be little doubt that a longer tenure of the office would be desirable. On these grounds, therefore, we again urge the adoption of the remedy which we have already suggested in the previous section of our Report.
These are the authorities who enforce Discipline in the University. As for the University Discipline itself, it is so closely connected with the administration of the Colleges, that we must consider them together.
The peculiar relation of the Colleges to the University has affected the atjt horiti™E C0LLEGE character of the University in this as in every other respect. The causes which
have given rise to this connexion will appear in the subsequent portion of our Report.
The Discipline of a College is administered chiefly by its Head, and by officers known by the various names of Yice-gerent, Subwarden, Censor, or Dean. The Tutors also take part in the control of the Students. In Christ Church the discipline is administered by the Dean of the Cathedral, with the assistance of the Subdean and Censors ; but members of the Foundation can only be expelled by the sentence of the Chapter.
The University Statutes prescribe that every Student shall eat and sleep within the walls of his College or Hall during the whole of his Undergraduate career ; but in practice a considerable relaxation of this rule is tolerated. The more frequented Colleges compel their Students, after twelve Terms' residence within the walls, to take lodgings in the town. Some of them, when pressed by want of accommodation, allow Students during their first Term, or even longer to pass the day in lodging-houses, the letter of the Statute being observed by their sleeping in College. The Vice-Chancellor is empowered to grant dispen- sations in particular cases. These are chiefly granted to persons in ill-health or, in the Halls, to men of maturer years.
By the University Statutes it is enacted that all Students shall return to night " tneir chambers before 9 p.m., that the College gates shall then be closed,
and (in accordance with an Ordinance of King James I.) that the Head shall occasionally search the rooms of the Students after that hour to satisfy himself of their presence. The College Statutes, in some case's, require much earlier hours. According to the present practice no Undergraduate resident in College is allowed to go out after the gates are closed at 9.15 p.m. but, in most Colleges, all are at liberty to remain out till midnight, or, in some cases, till 1 1 p.m., the exact time of their entrance, after the closin'o- of the gates, being notified to the authorities of the College. The porter°receives a considerable part of his income from the fees levied on each member
Above, p. 1 7.
DISCIPLINE AS EXER-
RESIDENCE WITHIN THE COLLEGE WALLS, HOW FAR ENFORCED.
RESTRAINT IMPOSED BY
Statut. Univ., Tit. xv. § 6.
REPORT. 21
whose entrance he thus reports. The injunction of the Statute is doubt- less disregarded from its incompatibility with the greater freedom, it may be added with the later hours, of modern society, and with the different age at which the Students now come to the University. Men cannot be governed like boys ; but it would be well that the Statute should be altered, since it cannot be enforced.
The College Lectures, at which attendance is required, with more or less by college lectures, strictness at different Colleges, act also as a restraint on the liberty of the Undergraduates. They take place, as a general rule, between the hours of 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. There are few after that hour; but some zealous Tutors employ a portion of their evenings in superintending the studies and exercises of their pupils. In most Colleges an Undergraduate is expected to attend two Lectures every day ; sometimes attendance on one only is required ; and sometimes, though very rarely, the number is three. On some one day in the week there are no Lectures in many Colleges ; in others, Lectures are intermitted on Festivals and Saints' days. Lectures on the Articles, or the Greek Testament, are in a few Colleges given on Sundays. In one College notes of one of the Sermons preached at St. Mary's are required l'rom the Undergraduates.
The officers of every College have the opportunity of ascertaining whether by hall dinner. the Students are present at dinner in the Hall, which usually takes place between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. Attendance is not rigorously en- forced, except on particular occasions, as, for instance, when it is desired to prevent Students from being present at races, or similar amusements, at a dis- tance from Oxford.
Thus the whole time, from two in the afternoon till midnight, is every day left at the disposal of the Undergraduate ; and he often has two whole days in the week unoccupied by College duties beyond attendance once in the day at Chapel. Many Students, as we have seen, live in the town in lodgings of their own selection, to which they may return as late as they please ; and they may even pass the night away from their lodgings, with little risk of detection.
Having pointed out the restrictions to which Undergraduates are subjected, university punish- we may now notice the punishments by which such restrictions are enforced. MENTS- On the part of the University these are : 1 . Literary impositions. 2. Fines. 3. Confinement to the walls of the College. 4. Rustication. 5. Expulsion. The two first of these are usually inflicted for some breach of discipline, in cases which imply no breach of morality, as, for instance, appearing without the academical dress on public occasions or at night, or for infringing the Statute de vehiculis; the third and fourth for gambling, or being found in circumstances implying vice ; the fifth, which is very rare, for aggravated cases of immorality, and for such breaches of faith as would endanger a system of discipline which is necessarily dependent on the integrity and honourable con- duct of the younger members of the University in dealing with their superiors.
On the part of the Colleges, the punishments are much of the same kind : college punishments. the first and second being used for trivial offences ; the third and fourth for the same class of offences as those just indicated in the case of the University, and also sometimes for inveterate idleness-, the fifth being very rare, and involving expulsion from the University, as well as from the College.
To these must be added, admonitions before the Head and Fellows of the College, and two kinds of removal, short of expulsion. These are known by the names of " Liceat migrare" and "Bene discessit," which are the first words of the Latin forms, in which members of one Society received per- mission to transfer themselves to another. The " Liceat migrare " is given in cases sufficiently serious to warrant the delinquent's exclusion from his Col- lege, but not from the University. A Student so removed can migrate either to another University or (after the expiration of one year) to any Society in Oxford which may be willing to admit him. The " Bene discessit" is granted in less grave cases; usually when the Student has failed to pass his public examinations within a given time. He may in that case be immediately admitted elsewhere. One Hall in Oxford generally receives Students of the latter class ; another admits those of the former class also. These Halls being more expensive than the Colleges, the punishment, in such cases, besides the loss of position which follows it, becomes in effect also a pecuniary penalty.
22
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
EFFECTS OF THE COL- LEGIATE LIFE.
ITS ADVANTAGES.
ITS EVILS.
See Statutes of Jesus College, c. 27.
ACTUAL STATE OF ACADEMICAL DISCI- PLINE.
Evidence, p. 9.
Knox, on " Liberal Education," c. 43, 45, 46.
These are the actual punishments. Some others which are enjoined m the Statutes are obsolete, and are suited only to a different state of society.
It is obvious that, from the mode of life engendered in a society such as the Collegiate system implies, some of the chief characteristics of the education of the University must proceed. The Student is enabled to enjoy a con- siderable amount of independence, limited though it be by such restraints as are imposed by living in common with his equals, and by the control more or less strict, of his superiors. Opportunities are afforded far social intercourse of a more intimate and genial character than would be found m a system of solitary study. By the combination of instruction and discipline in the hands of the College authorities, the points of contact between Teachers and Pupils are multiplied. The bond formed thus early between the various Members of a College is one far stronger and more lasting than is found to exist in academical bodies «ot composed of Collegiate societies. Even the most thoughtless Student is often found to take an interest in the credit and welfare of his College, though he may remain indifferent to the credit and welfare of the University.
On the other hand it must not be overlooked, especially in comparing the present Collegiate system with other modes of supervision to which we shall presently advert, that these advantages cannot be secured without counter- balancing evils. The amount of individual freedom which we have described necessarily opens great facilities for idleness, extravagance, and dissipation. The easy intercourse of College life is apt to degenerate into lounging and indolent habits, and from these the transition is sometimes rapid to gambling and vice. Experience proves that it is very difficult for the College authorities to obtain the confidence of their Pupils, and without this their influence must be slight. The close bond which unites the Members of each College together, though in itself one of the most pleasing features of academical life, has often led to a culpable disregard of the higher duty which they owe to the Uni- versity ; and has often given to a College the appearance of a combination to promote private interests, rather than that of a Society founded for pubKc purposes, and forming part of a great National Institution. The preference of fellow-collegians to all others in University elections is, in some cases, even enjoined in College Statutes.
On these more general results of the Collegiate system we do not, how- ever, propose to enlarge. We confine ourselves to its effect on academical Discipline. It will of course be understood that the influence which it exercises in this respect is often of a nature too indefinite to admit of a precise description, or to be fairly represented by an account, however minute, of the rules by which it is enforced. Nor, again, must it be overlooked that the effects of the system vary widely, according to the mode in which it is administered in the several societies of which the academical body is com- posed. The difference between the habits of Students, and the temptations to which they are exposed, in a strict College and a lax Hall, is almost as great as if the persons, who are placed in circumstances so widely different, belonged to different Universities.
It is satisfactory to find, when we compare the discipline, the order, and the morals of the University with what they are reported to have been even within the memory of living men, that a decided reform has taken place. The venerable Mr. Philip Duncan says, " I have resided within the walls of " New College for above 60 years, and have had great satisfaction in wit- " nessing many admirable improvements in discipline, morals, and education " in the University." For some of the gravest charges formerly brought against both the authorities and the students of the University there appears now to be little or no ground. In the account of Oxford, given by Dr. Vicesimus Knox, towards the close of the last century, the Proctors are accused of attending chiefly to " vexatious formalities," and " passing unnoticed," or but slightly correcting, for the sake of appearance, •*< drunkenness and de- " bauchery ;" the Deans of Colleges are said *l seldom to choose to incur the " odium of being disciplinarians, and of inspecting, with any peculiar vigi- " lance, the conduct of the juniors ;" of being " often very attentive to court " the favour of the young men who are to succeed to Fellowships, and who " may afterwards reward the negligence of the Dean by conferring upon him
REPORT. 23
" the honourable and profitable office of a Principal." The Fellows of Col- leges are said to " employ their attention and time in the pursuit of vulgar " enjoyments, such as the uneducated chiefly delight in — in the bottle and in " the joys of the chase." " In no places of education are young men more " extravagant : in none do they catch the contagion of admiring hounds and " horses to so violent a degree; in none do they more effectually shake off " the fine sensibilities of shame, and learn to glory in debauchery ; in none tl do they learn more extravagantly to dissipate their fortunes ; in none do " they earlier acquire a contempt for their parents ; in none do they learn so " much to ridicule all that is serious and sacred ; in none do they run greater " danger of ruining their health, fortune, character and peace of mind ; in " none can they be less soberly brought up to the sacred function, or to any " other useful or honourable employment. Much of the corruption of morals " and unbelief of religion, which is now visible throughout the nation, is " derived from the ignorance, carelessness, and vice of Clergymen trained in
" the Universities of England If the most unbounded libertinism of
" sentiment and practice is a qualification for a Senator, then let him be
" educated in an English University as now constituted." This description,
running as it does so completely counter to the eulogy pronounced by Dr. goswelPs Life of
Johnson on the Oxford College system, was probably too strong even for that Johnson, vol. ii.,
time. But Jtohnson could see no defect in what he loved ; and language like p' 53i
that of Dr. Knox could hardly have been used without some ground.
In all the points here mentioned the University and the Colleges have, under the influence of the general improvement of society, made a great advance. The grosser exhibitions of vice, such as drunkenness and riot, have, in Oxford, as in the higher classes generally, become rare. The intercourse of the Undergraduates with their Tutors has, in many cases, become more con- fidential and more frequent. The influence of the senior on the junior part of the University has increased, and is, for the most part, exercised for good. Greater attention is given to theological instruction; greater reverence is observed in the performance of Divine service. A religious Student is not now an object of persecution or scorn, but, as a general rule, of respect and confidence.
There still remains, however, much to be done towards the attainment of such excellence in Discipline as may be fairly expected; and the improvement which we have noticed in the University, and in the better Colleges especially, may warrant a hope that the amelioration will be progressive, and that all the parts of the system may be raised more nearly to the same level.
Of existing evils the most obvious are sensual vice, gambling in its various existing evils. forms, and extravagant expenditure.
Little can be done by direct enactments to restrain the two first of these vice. evils. External decency, on the whole, is well preserved in the town of Oxford. The amount of temptation to the unwary, however, is such as might, ^ Jelf! pp. m, by increased vigilance on the part of the Proctors3 be still considerably reduced. 183. But in the villages round Oxford, and in places still more remote from the Proctors' jurisdiction, the opportunities to vice are too abundant. The Metro- polis itself is not beyond the reach of ill-disposed or weak young men, who, as we have shown, may often have the whole day at their command.
Gambling is carried on in the University, as elsewhere, in such a manner as to gambling. make it extremely difficult of detection. When discovered it is always severely punished. At times, within the last twenty years, it has reached a great height. It is usually introduced into a College by one or two individuals, who bring the practice from without. A fashion thus springs up in the circle of their immediate acquaintance, which, indeed, often dies out when that one generation of Students has passed away, but which is very fatal in the mean time, since, from the nature of the case, it can be discovered only by accident. A system of espionage; would be wholly uncongenial to the spirit of the place.
The habit of extravagant expenditure is more widely extended than either general exteava- of the evils just mentioned. But flagrant instances of misconduct in this ^^fe'of_ respect, such as come before the courts, and raise the indignation of the ^r. Melville, p. 52. public, are less frequent than formerly; and a large number of Under- g*-^g£8J;220. graduates are disposed to practise as strict an economy as their position admits. This is attested by the fact, that nearly one-half of the Students deal ^J^f ^ for grocery with a tradesman who refuses credit in all cases. But between the
24
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Evidence, p. 4.
Evidence, pp. 183, 184.
Evidence of — Mr. Wilkinson, p. 69, Mr. Jeif, p. 184. Dr. Macbride, p. 220,
FACILITIES FOR INCUR- RING DEBT.
DIRECT MODES OF PRE- VENTING DEBT.
EXTRAVAGANCE.
Evidence, p. 19.
Evidence of — Prof. Browne, p. 4. Mr. Mansel, p. 19. Mr. Jowett, p. 32, Mr. Strickland, p. 99. Mr. Scott, p. HOi'l Prof. Wall, p. 146.
small class which is guilty of disgraceful extravagance, and the larger! body which is prudent, there'is still a considerable number of young men who spend far more than they have any right to spend. ' '
Two or three specific forms of extravagance may be mentioned, some of them petty indeed in themselves, but which all help to swell a young mans aggregate expenditure. The power of the authorities may do something towards diminishing these ; timely warning and good sense will do more. ?
One such point is alluded to by Professor Browne. "The debts," he observes, " into which Undergraduates are led, by the growing taste for furniture, and " decorations, totally unsuitable, are ruinous." This language is strong but the evil to which it points is very serious. We cannot forbear from alluding also to the excessive habit of smoking, which is now prevalent. Tobacconists' bills have, and that not in solitary instances, amounted to 401. a-jear. Aithird cause of expense 'is the practice of dining at inns, taverns, and clubs^in or about Oxford, a practice which may be checked, as has been proved, under, the administration of active Proctors. The Evidence of Mr. Jelf> shows at 'con- siderable length the great evils hence arising, and the mode in which the practice may be, and has at times been, effectually repressed. ^ - ;r,
Driving, riding, and hunting are also causes of great expense. The Uni- versity regulation, which imposes a heavy fine on those who are found driving, unless they have obtained permission from an officer of their College and one of the Proctors, is more or less) enforced, and restrains the practice to some extent. Undergraduates are forbidden by Statute to keep horses without the sanction of the Head of their College; a rule which, however, is only partially enforced, and niay be easily evaded by the use of hired horses^ | Of these amusements the' most expensive is hunting. It seldom costs less than four guineas a day. Some of those who indulge in it are accustomed to it at home, and can afford it; and on this ground, as well as on the supposition ithat it often takes the place of worse pursuits, it is in several Colleges overlooked or permitted. It is, however, a matter which ought to be under strict control. A moderate indulgence in it has in some cases been found compatible with serious study and academical distinction. But the present license ought to be repressed ; and hunting ought at least never to be permitted by the College authorities without the express sanction of parents. In such cases, the temp- tation held out by the example of those who can afford the amusement to those who cannot, should always be taken into consideration.
These are some of the chief forms of extravagance in Oxford. They are attributable in some measure to a want of determination on the parti of the authorities, but in a greater measure to the easy credit given by tradesmen to the Students. What a parent allows his son is too often expended in foolish or vicious indulgence, and the youth is enabled to obtain necessaries on trust. It is credit, then, which fosters the worst evils ; but credit will be given as long as tradesmen are eager to sell. This is a subject which has often been discussed in the University, and out of it, and the Evidence laid before us contains several suggestions for meeting the evil, though more in the way of palliation than of cure. Many such propositions have been made and rejected after consideration, either from the practical impossibility of carrying them into effect, or because it was thought that if carried into effect they< would encourage rather than check the evil.
It has been suggested to us that ready-money payments should be encouraged or enforced. So far as this is possible, it would, of course, be most desirable. We have already stated that there is a large class of Students who appreciate, and are well disposed to make use of the advantages of the readyrmoney system. Many, however, still remain, who will not of themselves act pru- dently ; but any attempt to constrain them by Sumptuary laws would*! we fear, be as ineffectual as such regulations have always been at the University and elsewhere. " An attempt," says Mr. Mansel, " was Imade in St. John's " College to appoint a body of College tradesmen, with whom every member "was recommended to^ deal, and who pledged1 themselves to send in their " accounts twice every year; and if not 'paid within the ensuing term,; to com- " municate with the authorities of the College. The plan* did not ariswer, and " was ultimately discontinued, chiefly because the tradesmen complained that ," they lost custom by It." However, by concert between Tutors, iand> parents* credit, might be somewhat restricted, and tradesmen might be encouraged to
REPORT. 25
send in their bills soon after the debt was incurred, and at regular periods. The benefits to be derived from such a course are strongly insisted upon by- many who have offered opinions on this head.
Some go so far as to recommend that the Legislature should interfere in this matter by very stringent provisions. It is suggested, for instance, that an Evidence 0f- Act should be passed, declaring " that no Bill whatever should be recovered Prof- Walker> p- 22- "from an Undergraduate;" that "no credit should be given to an Under- Mr. Grove, P. 28. " graduate by any tradesmen at the University;" that if tradesmen failed to send in their bills to Undergraduates at specified times, " the debt should be Mr. Jowett, P. 32, "afterwards made irrecoverable;" that "all persons in statu pupillari at the Mr. Scott, p. 1 1 1. ; - " University, or until a certain standing there, should be considered in law as Mr" Jelf' p" m" " infants."
It is, perhaps, too much to expect that the Legislature will enact that a Student, who may be several years past twenty-one, who may be a member of either House of Parliament, and who may be (at that very time) purchasing Evidence of— whole estates in other parts of the kingdom, should be made incapable of Mr! jwkes?" P?222. contracting a simple debt while at Oxford, because there he is in a state of pupillage.
We think, however, that the law might with advantage provide that no debt whatever shall be recoverable which has been contracted by a Minor in statu pupillari, unless the bills shall have been sent to the young man in the same Term in which the articles were supplied, and unless, in case of non-pay- ment, a second bill shall have been sent to his Tutor within a given time after the delivery of the first ; the suit to be commenced within six months of the date of the earliest item in the bill. We would have all debts whatever included, because the provision, which leaves juries — juries, perhaps, of trades- men— to distinguish between what are necessaries and what are not, renders the present law almost nugatory.
Such an enactment might stop some foolish youths in the career of ex- travagance. But there is a great concurrence of Evidence to support the E^ld*nS.eof— .
• • 1 t • <• ii tit • i -r • i Prof. Browne, p. 4.
opinion that direct interference, whether by the Imperial Legislature or by Mr. Mansei, P. 19. University Statute, will, after all, be of little avail. As the case stands, only m?! Wiikinron,3p.'69. a small portion of the debts which extravagant young men incur can even now sir c. Lyeii, P. 119. be recovered by process of law. The creditor knows this; yet he trusts to ro' a 'p' the honour of the youth, and he is not often a loser. So it will be in the face of all Acts of Parliament. Besides, it must be remembered that the most ruinous debts are not due to fair tradesmen. An infamous race has arisen, whose business it is to advance money to young men at ruinous rates of dis- count, and who try to evade danger by expedients which recal some of the most ludicrous scenes of a great French dramatist. It is within the knowledge of one of our own body, that a young man accepted bills to the amount of 425L, and received only 201. in cash. This sum of 201. was the alleged proceeds of the sale of beds, pigs of iron, and other goods, to one confederate, which same articles the unhappy youth had purchased for the sum of 4251. from the other confederate. Against such persons no law will avail.
Our opinion, then, is that direct interference will do comparatively little to indirect modes. prevent debt; and in this opinion we are supported by the Report of the Committee of Heads of Houses in 1846. " As to expenses without the walls Appendix E., p. 56. " of Colleges, they must depend for the most part upon the prudence and " principle of the Students themselves, and upon the efficient co-operation of " their parents with the endeavours of the College authorities. The subject " has frequently engaged the serious attention of the authorities of the Uni- " versity. There are existing and effective regulations against expense ; others " have from time to time been devised, and abandoned as ineffectual. „ If the " Student will combine with the tradesman to evade the sumptuary laws of "the University or the College, he will frequently succeed and escape " detection ; and additional impediments have been opposed of late to the " University laws affecting the tradesmen of the place by the rapidity of " communication with the metropolis."
There are, however, various indirect means of control, which seem to us capable of effecting much good.
As Mr. Grove suggests, it might be made known, as the wish of the Uni- Evidence, p. 23. versity, that parents and guardians should avail themselves of the present legal ^iveksttyauthoki- means of resisting claims for other than necessaries, or (it may be added, in ties.
E
26
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
ARRANGEMENTS TO SUPPLY REASONABLE WANTS OF STUDENTS. Evidence* p.' 151). Compare also the Evidence of-r- Prof. Browne, p. 4. Mr. Jelf, p. 180. Mr. Eaton, p. 204.
INFLUENCE OF COLLEGE TUTORS.
Evidence of — Mr. Pattison, p. 43. Mr. Wilkinson, p. 69.
Evidence, p. 144.
THE SUMMARY REMOVAL OF IDLE AND EXTRAVA- GANT STUDENTS.
Evidence, p. IOC. ■Evidence, p. 28. Evidence, p. 191.
case the law should be extended) any claims where the tradesman has not duly- sent in his bill as required.. On its being publicly known, that such was the wish of the University authorities, less delicacy would be felt in pleading or countenancing the plea of infancy to actions brought for improper debts ; and a check would thus be put on the encouragement given to extravagahce by fraudulent tradesmen. "•'
The Colleges may also do much to diminish temptation to expense by them^ selves providing for all the average and reasonable wants of their members. "All possible facilities," says Sir Edmund Head, "for satisfying such wants " should be afforded within the walls of the College itself;" and he enters into1 details to show that a plan of this kind is practicable. The Evidence of the Tutors of Pembroke College shows that such arrangements have been made in that College with satisfactory results.
But it is manifest that extravagance is too closely connected with general habits of idleness and vice to be considered apart from them. We cannot,, therefore, refrain from touching, though briefly, on the means of moral influ- ence or restraint which the University possesses, and which can or ought to be> brought to bear alike on all matters of academical Discipline; : The good effect produced by the personal intimaey of Tutors with their pupils has been already noticed. Several portions of our Evidence insist strongly on the importance of such intercourse. The " impassable gulf," which has been described as separating the Authorities and the Undergraduates, should no doubt be filled up. But habits of intimacy and familiarity between elder and younger men, in order to exercise a really beneficial influence, require great judgment on the part of the seniors. The characters of young men must be formed chiefly by intercourse with their contemporaries. Nor indeed is it possible for Tutors to associate with the Undergraduates of a College generally. Still much advantage might be derived from more direct superintendence than is commonly exercised at present ; and, if Tutors could from the first come to an understanding with parents, and cause it to be felt by the Students that they were constantly under the eye of men who deserved their respect, and that their mode of life would be made known to those whom they have most reason to love and would most fear to grieve, a great step would be taken towards checking vice and extravagance. But we fear that even these means might too often fail. We learn from Professor Wall, as the result of his own experience* that, if a Tutor ventures to communicate to a parent any suspicion of his son's society, expenses, or habits, " he is pretty sure" to be told, " that the parent w has questioned his son, and feels perfect confidence in his explanation." This mode of influence, however, is a matter so purely personal and private in its. nature, that we can only offer general recommendations upon it.
It might be desirable in many cases, as Professor Donkin advises " that " the Colleges should make more frequent use of their power to remove those " who, after a fair trial, give no ground for hope that, their continuance in the " University will be other than hurtful both to themselves and to their fellow " students." This remark is especially applied in other parts of the Evidence to the case of extravagance. " When any such cases," says Mr. Gr(
rove,
" became known to the College, I would deal severely with the delinquent
" and, in flagrant or repeated instances, rusticate or expel." And Mr. Bonamv
Price : " If every Undergraduate were made to understand that expensive
" habits were inconsistent with his College life, and would, if persevered in
" lead to his removal, there would soon be a positive change."
There is danger, indeed, lest such measures, if rigidly enforced, might defeat Evidence, p. 159. their own object. For, as Sir Edmund Head, remarks, " It must be remem- " bered too, that if the College authorities are to discourage running in debt bv " expelling or rusticating members known to be guilty of such conduct then " the very weight of the penalty would lend force to the demand of the trades- " man, and would cause him to rely on the individual doing all he could to " pay. The threat of exposure to the College would be more effectual than " a suit at law. Great caution, therefore, must be used in applying any means "of this kind." Still there can be no doubt that more might be done in this direction, than has yet been attempted. And, at present, no fair trial can be given to this kind of punishment, because there exists a mode by which its' more serious consequences may be escaped.
We have already noticed that Students dismissed; from. Colleges, either for
REPORT. 27
neglect of study or offences against morals, are allowed (in the latter case after a year's interval) to migrate to a Hall. Such a Hall (there is at present only one, we believe, that gives unlimited admission to those who have with- drawn from other Societies), is not merely a receptacle of the worst elements in tthe University — to be deprecated even if at a distance from Oxford — but it becomes a source of mischief to the University from the connexion often kept up between these students and ! their former associates. ' It would; doubtless, he hard, (by total expulsion from the University, to debar a young man who has misconducted himself from the possibility of retrieving his character; but if i such apersoh'ibe allowed to remain, he ought to be subjected to a stricter discipline than before. "It may be desirable," says Mr. Lake, u that there "i should be a, >locus paeinitmtice among us for young men, whom the stricter Evidence, p.m. " Colleges cannot retain on account of faults, which are not of the worst kind; '?.but it is surely a great evil that any College or Hall should have even the Compare Evidence1 " icharacter of beinga loeus licentice." It is indeed a redeeming feature of such °,f Mr- ^elf' P- 184- Halls that they have been the means of adding able and accomplished men to the Hebdomadal Board. But under a better system, a fitter position might be found for such men. i , A further evil, of a less grave kind, which is tolerated in few Colleges, but which is almost essential to the existence of such a Hall, is that the members of it are allowed to present themselves for examination again and again. It is said that a Degree has 'been obtained after a dozen failures. Such cases must be, the ,result either of great incapacity for study or of incorrigible idleness. We think that,!for the Credit of the University, as well as for the sake of the Candidates themselves, no one should be allowed to present himself for exami- nation after a certain number of failures.
The College authorities might also consider how far the directly religious religious services in services of the place are so regulated as to promote the spirit of true religion, colleges. .which ought to be the most powerful means of counteracting vice. We fear that these services are not turned to so much advantage as they might be. The obvious mode of appealing to the moral and religious feelings of the Students, by short practical addresses in the College chapels, has not been so generally adopted as might naturally have been expected, The mischievous practice of forcing the Students to participate in the Holy Communion, though less fre- quent than formerly, seems not to have been altogether disused. That of making attendance on Divine Service a penalty for College offences has been discontinued to a great extent, since notice was called to it by Lord Stanley in 1834, but it is not entirely abolished. The Aularian Statutes, re-enacted by the University in 1835^ impose on the members of Halls the necessity of com- municating three times a-year. The practice of using a selection of prayers, rather than the whole morning and evening service, which prevails in Christ Church, Worcester College, and, on some days, in Wadham College, has been followed nowhere else, though it is evidently suitable to the age and character of the Students. The College Statutes furnish no defence of the existing practice, having reference either to Roman Catholic services, which have ceased to be observed, or in other cases enjoining an amount of attendance, which is now nowhere enforced. Authority, if needed, might doubtless be obtained for such a deviation from the Act of Uniformity, as would permit a short form of prayer to be used in College chapels. This permission would be amply justified by the example set in so many of the chapels attached to Episcopal palaces.
Finally, it is important to observe that no permanent good results can be fresh inducements to ■expected from these or any other means, unless a change is effected in the study. habits and the temper of the Students themselves. Those who are studious at present are, for the most part, moral and frugal. But a large proportion of Students are now unemployed, and require additional incentives to study. Without this there' is no effectual security against vice. The University, there- fore, applied ! What we trust will be found a great and real remedy, when, m a recent Statute, it determined that more frequent proofs of diligence should be required .from the young men. Extravagance, like other vicious habits, springs from idleness. "To correct these - evils," writes Professor Wall, "we must Evidence, P. ue. " make study and not; amusement the law of the University," " The most Evidence, p. 121. "^effective mode of preventing idleness," says Sir Charles Lyell, " and thereby " promoting good conduct, is to interest the great body of the Undergraduates
" in the Studies of the Universities,"
E2
28
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
INFLUENCE OF PARENTS.
Evidence, p. 21.
,3! ..f.v. ■•IBM i •to,') Evidence^p. 152." '
it , <vl' W -I/!
."<: ...j >■> I") .00! f],l i!jji« ui 'i? it/'
.»■! ..,.1M! :,.:'i ,l\(
?V ,■[ ,v«<;n( I . W
Compare the Evi- dence of — 'Prof. Browne, p. 5. Mr. Jowett, p. 32. Prof. Wall, p. 144.
BAD EFFECTS OF ACA- DEMICAL DISTINCTIONS OF RANK AND WEALTH.
NOBLEMEN.
■j.v:£ i\ic,vd: i,
GENTLEMAN-COM- MONERS.
Evidence^, 26. >i>
But it must be remembered in speaking thus of the tone mow too; pre- valent amongst the Students', that in the matter of extravagance at least, if not of Vice generally, no light portion of the blame lies on parents, or perhaps (it might be more justly said) on the state of public feeling. li " The real " causes of extravagance," says Professor ■Walker* " are, the. state of society in " general, and the weakness of parents, who wish their sons to be like other " young men." " A different tone of social morality," says Mr. Congreve, "on "the two points of extravagant expense and idleness must prevail both at " Oxford and in the country generally, before there can be any effectual-check " to these evils. > Among the higher classes of English society public opinion " on these points is very lax: To spend more than their income, to waste /theira "time, and to be moderately disorderly in conduct, have been and; still . : are '•' so usual in ordinary English education- of the -upper classes* that they are " tolerated by a very indulgent treatment in society, treated as privileges fof^he "rich and easy classes, and only complained of by the great majority >of sfcch '* classes when they lead to too marked a failure, or to too heavy bills ".l^ u, n Some parents who are rich but not distinguished feyirank, aretoo/oftertiglad to place their sons on a par, as regards expenditure at leastjiwiththos© of (higher birth, or even to give them a larger • allowance Some even of those whbrare not rich prefer an expensive College, and do not greatly repine at ifollies cdm- mitted in aristocratic company. i>n. i *■> ir'iU 'n r r u/.', ,\> >u jm-i •>•! iua. -i ■' ' When the tone of the University shall have been improved by the (extension of the range of its Studies, by a; more effective system of Examinations, byiitihe offer of more numerous rewards to merit and industry, by 'the presence of a much larger number of Students taken less exclusively from one portion" of society, these influences of home and of fashion will, we trust, have less force, and 'then the authorities may begin to look more hopefully than rtKiey» caul at present On direct propositions for checking extravagance and folly. .//, -ihH i "
This, perhaps, is the most convenient place to offer some remarks/ am a subject not unconnected with that of which we have been treating, jiiieu* in
'Several of. those who have given us evidence lay, stress on the bad effect Caused by the distinctions of rank and wealth which the University still iretairfs among the Students.' Young noblemen wear a distinctive academical idrfsa^ take precedence of their academical superiors, are permitted, to take Degrees > at an earlier period than other Students,1 and in genei-al are treatediin a way thtii seems to indicate too great a deference to rank in a place of education. v: The soils of Baronets and Knights are also permitted to graduate earlier. jThis is a relic of a past /state of things, when the different orders of society -were much more widely separated than they are at present. Among! the .Fellows and Tutors of Colleges, whatever may be their tbirth, their fortunes or their social position out of the University, a perfect; equality subsists, t This isvery beneficial, and among the junior members of the University i it might at least be 'expected that there should be nothing in r the .institutions of the place, to encourage anopposite feeling." > ■ i ■ *>p.,, s-iu. < ,of,> (*"(i*ii<. : , jd bii'ui^
If distinctions of birth, even where they are in some measure warranted by the law' of the land, are objectionable in a place of education,, those made1 on the ground of mere wealth are still more objectionable; and the distinction between Gentleman-Commoners, as they are called, and Commoners, rests on no other ground. We are here, however, bound to quote the argumerribby which Archbishop Whately has defended the existing usage: — it: °ihm -,.\ A ' >(I "I am not for abolishing the distinction (or something amountingito.it) "between Commoners and Geiitleman-Commonerst;! i If ..restrictions.. as. to " expense are laid down, such as are suitable to men who can only .afford to " spend from TOO/, to 20(3/. per annum, or even considerably less, it cans hardly " be expected that these will be conformed to by men bf ten or twentyotimts "that income. 1'Why 'should a man not beallowedia valet, or a horsey who "has been always used' to such luxuries, . and to whom they Jarel not. morfc "extravagant luxuries than shoes and stockings are to his lelloafistudtote? " And if restrictions arelaiddown, which are in great measure eyadecL dr Iheifr " violation connived at, there is rmore danger of bthers ; being, drciwn inio-iefxroeS? "siye habits ('which they can ill iafford, and would faiii avoid) !if> UhewrMotg " tb> the same clasfc which tfnfdulges" in those habit&fj 10 Tsd^iun mit o,j noit i»- " All sumptuary laws1 mad© allowance £ for. diffier&nceslbflexpettiitiuflte Ai xrieft " of different classes. Their failure arose from the impossibility of classifying
REPORT. 29
'■ ' property in the > whole commonwealth, and , of. keeping men in the plasses laid 'fidownl which in a College may easily be effected* ,, , ..- ,,
■•V IlVyou can i afford such and such luxuries, and wish for them, you must; "wear a silk gown; and be rated as Gentleman-Commoners., If you decline tf this, you must be subject to the restrictions. on Commoners.",
i >This argument' is, in our opinion, answered by the consideration, that prac- Evidence of— tically* the class of Gentleman^Commoners is, as such, liable to. the most p^^wn"^!'?!6' serious disadvantages, as has been pointed out in various parts of the Evidence. Mr. joweit, p. 39. A'Gentlleman^Commoner is well known to be marked out for every kind of m£cox.Vi>.97.' ' imposition^ < • He is usually courted by the worse amongst his equals :,, he Mr.strickknd,p.ioo. r-ecdiives less instruction, and is, subjected to a less careful discipline; and thus proY. wl7i!p.pi50. " bothithe College and the individual suffer from the continuance of the system. Mr- Congreve, p. 153. 'riff This class may be regarded; taken collectively," says Professor Daubeny, Evidence, p. 16. *5iaSithe 'worst educated portion of the: Undergraduates, and at the same time V the one least inclined for study. If the qualification we'e even that ofirank " or statiaiil, ^ometMng* might be said in its defence ; but it is notoriously only V.that' of .) wealth; aiid ifit be alleged in its behalf that its; existence tends to "set upia wholesome lane of separation between; those, who can afford to 'iiindulge> ini expensive luxuries and, those who cannot, and thus to diminish "((the ehaneeof rivalry between the two, with respect to their habits of living, " it may be replied, that in the largest and more aristpcratical Colleges it fails ff. in i effecting tMs, nowjthatiso many wealthy parents are wise, enough to enrol y. ftheir, sons in «themlmerelyi as CommOners, whilst it .might be expected that P if the class of 'Gentleman-Commoners were abolished there would be then '^•not inducements for. men of fortune to resort elsewhere, excepting it were to ," secure the advantage,' of! superior tuition, or ^mpre, careful discipline; and t* hence that the l^taaiqing societies would, either consist wholly of youths, of " moderate means; or that, if they contained an intermixture of ; young. men !' of wealth, the latter Would consist of such as were studious in their habits, " and disinclined to extravagance." u-
( • We' mayi 'add, that parents generally seem to concur in disapproval of the distinction spoken of. ) Young men of the hest families, and of great wealth or expectations^ are frequently entered as Commoners.. The practice of taking Gentleman-Commoners hasibeen discontinued in several Colleges from a sense ofits/Lnexipediencyji . At Corpus Christi College it has been abolished since the issuing iofnYour>Majestys Commission. .
,lWe must remark, however, that- at Worcester College, and at most of the Halls, the Genikman-Commoners or Fellow- Commoners (as they might here be more fitly .narked) .are. a different class of men., They are, for the most part, elderly Students,: who, by entering the College under this name, are exempted from regulations which are unnecessary in their case, and which would , be irksome; Special exceptions might be made in favour of such peiv sons ; ihuV as regards younger men,. we are of opinion that aU such distinctions should be abolished as anomalous and prejudicialjn an academical body.
n>We have before intimated that it was our, intention to reserve the important .university extension. question of University Extension till we should arrive at the portion, of our Report relating to Discipline, with which the whole subject is intimately con- nectedM, ..a, ,'j •■ ■ ,j> - ■-, ■ ■■'■ ; ,
It is sometimes assumed that the principal obstacle in the way of increasing accommodation in the the number of> Students in the .University* is the limited accommodation in the existing colleges. existing Colleges and Halls.. But as long as the present system shall remain unchanged^, this will not bes found to be the case, It is true, that at present thie better Colleges' are full to overflowing ; but there is, probably, no in- stance in which a 1 Student, ihas been , obliged to seek education elsewhere because he could! not find room in some College at lOxford. The accommoda- tion'of >/thei.. University ^ considerably increased since the beginning of thet-presenVcentucy. .During the last thirty years many' new buildings have ibeen I ereetedi^by (various Colleges, as by University, Balliol, Exeter, and -Pembroket 1 Mafedfdeuf HalL has been , rebuilt onr a large, scale on the site of llertfoi^aedll^e^^nA^fcdahimodaAionlhaS'thtis been secured for a great, addi- tion to the number of Undergraduates. .•■■, Ne*i Inn Hall, .also has been built. «he; Committee >iofl(theoilefeticJmadaI Boards, in !,1 Hfyf&tyfA; the increase of "grrV&wh to vrAkusi'.'jJm 3fr+ 'ioil ■ -- , '■ . otwgiji'j tov,'.: in*
30
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
Report of Com- mittee of the Hebdomadal Board, Appendix E., p. 56.
COST OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION.
I. UNIVERSITY FEES.
2. COLLEGE FEES.
3. BOARD AND LODGING.
4. TUITION.
Evidence, p. 125. Evidence, p. 385.
rooms thus obtained since 1812 to be one hundred and seventy. Within the past year propositions have been made both in Balliol and Magdalen Colleges for an enlargement of their buildings. Corpus Christi College has, .withuvthe same period, for the first time admitted Commoners. Several Colleges are not fully occupied. In 1846 it was stated that the vacant rooms in ,the University amounted to sixty or seventy. We believe that the number ds now considerably greater. * •><>
Qt the limited class who desire a University education, many are deterged from coming to Oxford by the faults of the present system, tf iOxford have lost Students, it has not been because they could, not obtain admission into a. College, but because they could not obtain admission (into a good College.! Qpod tuition, rewards for merit, a high tone of feeling and manners, recom- mendations which might belong to all Colleges if their foundations were thrown open, would fill them all alike. Till such a reform has, been -.made it; is evident that the capabilities of the University are not exhausted; : At present the usefulness of most Colleges is greatly impeded byrrestrictionsronthe^elfiCjT, tion of Fellows. In; some, these restrictions arq so narrow as to prevent the. possibility of securing , good Tutors. In .Colleges, where the choice is thus; limited, the Fellows, and the Tutors who are taken from their ^number,, are ! often inferior men. It thus appears that want of accommodation .is by no means the chief obstacle in the way of University extension. t
A more real obstacle is found in the expenses of College life. ,. Under ,the present system the cost, even the legitimate cost, of a University r education, 1 which is an obstacle to many persons even of the same rank of life, as , the present Students, renders the admission of a much larger class impossible. The discussion, therefore, of the subject of expense must precede any investi- gation into further modes of University extension. , i r- i.
The amount paid to the University as distinct from the College to, which the Student belongs is not great. It varies with the rank of the party^ as -may he seen by referring, to the section of our Report, in which we .speak of (the , Revenues ©f the University. The ordinary Fees paid at' Matriculation, at the several Examinations on taking the Degree of B.A., and in annual, payments for, University purposes,! amount to about 18^. " , „ .;
These Fees ought to be rendered uniform for all Students. It is probable that, they might be reduced in amount. They should not exceed a fair com- pensation to the officers actually engaged in the service of the .Student, nor be, made means of raising money for the general purposes of the University. Such Fees ought to be levied by equitable taxation on its members generally.
The College Fees at entrance usually amount to a sum between 31. and1 4^. Besides these, a deposit called " caution money " is required, amounting com- monly to 30/. It may be regarded as a payment in advance, to secure the College against loss from bad debts. There are also annual dues, which vary in different Colleges, and which we have no means of ascertaining. The .Fees to the College at the first Degree usually amount to a sum between 51. and 71. In some Colleges fees are paid at entrance and at graduation to the servants, ,
Of the charges made in the several Colleges and Halls for board and lodging, we cannot speak with such exactness as we could desire. From several of the Colleges we have no information. No two probably include within their " battels," or accounts, precisely the same items. The rates of charge differ considerably in the various Colleges; and not always in proportion to the advantages or the accommodation afforded.
,For Tuition, about 64 J. is paid during the University course of 16 terms ; an amount which in some Colleges is distributed over three, in others over four years. At Christchurch the amount paid by Commoners is only 12 guineas annually for four; years, or 501. 8s. for the whole course; but Gentleman-rCoap-> moners pay 30 guineas per annum, and noblemen 45 guineas. At Balliol, and probably in some other Societies, the tuition money of, a commoner is 671. 45 paid in three years. In St. Edmund Hall the charge during the four years is 501. 8s. In those Halls which receive Students from other societies, the. rate is,, we believe, higher, and the dues are levied as long as the. parly, continues to ib© an Undergraduate,; that is, in many cases for. a period considerably* beyond, the fourth year of standing. ■ i, ; ■ ,. ,»,,;, , ,,
It would seem that the cost p£ maintaining! young men, during eighty-four,
REPORT. 31
weeks' which is about thelength of residence usually required in Colleges, might he easily ascertained; and that in establishments avowedly not conducted with a view to profit, liable to no losses (since caution money is virtually a payment in advance), generally exempt from parochial rates, distributing their common expenses over many persons, and fluctuating but little in numbers, the wants of Students, even those of the higher classes, might be amply provided for at a low rate.
Mr. Wall suggests a plan according to which College bills, in a society with 85 Undergraduates; might be brought within 59/. for 26 weeks. This would lowest estimate of be about 190/. for 84 weeks, or for the whole expense of the Student during his s™ EE<5UIEED- University course. This would not include payments for washing, loss on fur- Evidence' p- 145- niture, entrance fees, groceries, lights, fees to- Libraries, or University dues at entrance and graduation. He supposes the Student to live sparingly, and never to mix in society.
• Mr. Melville, late Principal of Bishop Hatfield's Hall, at Durham, is of Evidence, p. 58. opinion that the sum which might adequately meet all expenses of residence is 60/. per annum. This estimate supposes the Students to be educated in a Hall for which either rent or interest upon the money expended in its erection is to be paid. Travelling expenses are not included in either of these estimates.
To persons who are not acquainted with the Universities, the smallest of the amounts above named would, perhaps, appear not inadequate ; and at any rate such persons would think that the lowest sum (and it is a very low one, as things are) for which the Tutors of Pembroke College inform us that they have known a young man to complete his University career (namely, 300/. for all expenses whatever, books excepted), is quite as large a sum as should be required even for Students not called upon to practise strict economy or great self- denial.
It is, however, certain that the whole expenses even of prudent and well con- ducted Students greatly exceed 300/.; nor could they perhaps be generally reduced to anything like the low estimates here given, unless the College authorities took upon themselves the same responsibility, and exercised the same control over the young men and their expenditure as the masters of boarding- schools over their pupils. To most Academics such a change in the habits and character of Oxford would appear very prejudicial.
There is no doubt, however, that the College expenses might, by good manage- ment, be reduced below their present rate.
The singular system of College accounts which now exists appears to have system of college originated in times very dissimilar to the present. The foundation Members accounts. of the older Colleges were supported by a small weekly or daily allowance, sometimes varying according to their position. The allowances, or " commons," of each person were to be accounted for separately, and with minute accuracy, in, the books of the butler. A similar system seems to have been followed in regard to the Boarders or independent Members. Every article consumed; every service received, every one of the common objects to which each person in the College contributes, is made a separate item in the accounts. So much is paid for room rent, in some Colleges so much for the butler, the porter, the cook, the bed-maker ; so much for each portion of meat, for each piece of bread, for each ounce of cheese ; so much for plates, for knives, for cleaning of plate, for hall fires, the items being various in the several Colleges. From the early origin cf this system it has also followed, that, numerous as are the articles specified in each person's account, many things which are indispensable at present, are left to be paid for by the Students, such as the services of the laundress, groceries, lights, and coal, which were little needed, or not needed at all, by our predecessors of a ruder age. Several Colleges have thought it expedient to include some of these latter items in the " battels ;" others have made little or no change, and the practice is not uniform in any two. The minute particularity of this system may appear to imply that it is strictly just. It can never be wholly so. It has a tendency to cause the lesser articles to be enormously dear, inasmuch as the smallest charge which can be made for them separately affords far too large a profit on the original cost of the article. It tends also to convert servants into functionaries with vested rights, while in a private family they are removable at pleasure ; to perpetuate needless offices ; to ' render eharges, originally fixed when prices were high, permanent though
32
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMMISSION.
DUTY OF REGULATING THE COLLEGE EXPENSES.
ESTIMATE OF THE ACTUAL COLLEGE EX- PENSES.
IN PEMBROKE COLLEGE. Evidence, p. 377.
markets have fallen; to introduce countless perquisites little differing from thefts, except in being regular and tolerated. No one but the Student has much interest in desiring economy ; and he seldom has either the will or the power to enforce it, while it is the interest of a number of persons to make the charges to which he is subjected as high as possible.
there is a belief prevalent that in some Colleges a large per centage is added to the battels for the benefit of the Fellows. We think it right to call attention to this allegation. At all events it would be well that every College should take the obvious means of refuting injurious representations by a distinct statement given to each Student of the charges to which he is liable, and their application.
In advising a more economical system, we would not wish to sacrifice the great and obvious advantages of the present Collegiate mode of living. The freedom enjoyed seems essential to the development of character, and is an admirable preparation for the full liberty which the young man must sooner or later possess. But it is to be hoped that the College authorities will exert themselves more than is generally the case at present to remove all exorbitant or unintelligible charges; for the benefits of the Collegiate system may be secured at little cost. In the Colleges indeed which are now best conducted, no large reductions may be possible : but it is of great importance that in all Colleges the accounts should be made simple and intelligible, and that the greatest publicity should be given in the College itself, and among parents, to the charges which are sanctioned ; and that the officers of the College should be active in watching the proceedings of the domestics, and the expenditure of each young man.
In the Halls which are unendowed larger payments may be with some reason exacted from the Students, and yet it appears from the Evidence that St. Edmund Hall is at present one of the cheapest places of education in Oxford.
It may be thought that while the Universities have what almost amounts to a monopoly of the education of the Clergy, and while the Colleges and Halls have a monopoly of the Students, and are, therefore, tolerably sure of keeping up their numbers, whether they be cheap or dear, well or ill managed, the Authorities are not likely to exercise a very steady or vigilant control over the expenses of Students. Competition would, no doubt, produce great improve- ments in this as in many other points. But we trust that the Governors of Colleges and Halls will of themselves endeavour to overcome all impediments (and we know that there are many) in the way of cheapening collegiate educa- tion, and exert as great vigilance as if they had undertaken to maintain their Students at a fixed price, and were themselves liable to suffer from dishonesty or carelessness. Reforms which it may be difficult or impossible to introduce into a single College, will become easy if all Colleges can be induced to agree upon a uniform system and simultaneous action. This is incumbent upon the Authorities of Colleges, if only because it is alleged to be for the advantage of the Students themselves that they are now compelled to undergo the expenses incidental to connexion with a College or a Hall in order to graduate in the University.
We have before said that we are not able to lay before Your Majesty an exact account of the sums charged by each College, or of the items included in the bills delivered to the young men. No two Colleges make precisely the same charges, and perhaps no two individuals in the same College pay the same amount. The knowledge, therefore, which we possess ourselves, and eVen the bills of Undergraduates which have been laid before us, do not enable us to °ive such information as would be rigorously true of the Colleges in o-eneral or of other individuals whose accounts we have not examined. We must be content with offering an approximation.
We must premise that we have assumed 26 weeks as the ordinary length of an academic year, and 84 weeks as the whole necessary time of residence during the four years which pass between Matriculation and the first Degree.
The following calculations, based on the Evidence, will convey a °-eneral notion of the expenses incurred by College Students : —
In Pembroke College we find that the average College battels, including tuition, washing, coals, and entertainments, besides '• the ordinary expenses of