The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-02 00:00:00

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY BILL.

The following is a copy of a Mtter from-the
Royal Commissioners for Inquiry into the Univer-
sity of Cambridge, addressed to the Lord Chan-
cellor, on the subject of the Cambridge University
Bill, as amended in the committee, dated May,
1855 :

"My Lord,—We, the undersigned members of the
late Commission for Inquiring into the State of the
University of Cambridge, beg respectfully to convey to
your lordship the following observations on the amended
bill for the good government and extension of that
University. Our remarks will have reference to the
several sections of the hill as they now stand seriatim.
" Section 5. We greatly regret to find that the duty
of the new Council of the Senate is defined to be the con-
sideration and preparation of Graces. Its functions,
therefore. will be legislative only. It will have no power
of administrat►on. It will be known to the Senate only
by the Graces which it may propose. It will not be the
body whom the Vice-Chancellor would naturally consult
in cases of difficulty or emergency. It will not have a
single power or privilege which is now exercised by the
Heads of Colleges. This latter body will still retain the
power of nominating the Vice-Chancellorship and the
other statutable offices of the Uhiversity. They will
be the assessors and administrative councillors of the
Vice-Chancellor and the authorised interperters of doubt-
ful statutes. In short, the Heads of Colleges will con-
tinue to possess, under the present bill, all those powers
and privileges which, under the statutes of Queen Eliza-
beth, have enabled them to become the actual governors
of the University.
" And here we cannot but observe that the provisions
of the measure of last session for the good government
of the University of Oxford were entirely different in
this respect. There the Heads of Houses had by a
distinct statutable enactment to that effect long been
the irresponsible governors of the university, yet we find
all their powers at once transferred to a new council,
liberally constituted and freely elected. If such a mea-
sure is proper and expedient at Oxford, why is it not
equally so at, Cambridge ? Why should we erect a new
Council-of the Senate, and still leave the old government
standing by its side ? Why should we leave two bodies
in the University with corporate rights and distinct
powers of government, thus sowing the seeds of intrigue
and divided councils ?

" We earnestly hope to see this section of the bill so
modified as to vest in the new Council of the Senate, not
only the powers of the Caput, but also all those powers,
privileges, and functions which are now possessed or
exercised by the heads of colleges in their collective ca-
pacity, by virtue of any statute of the University.
" Sections. 6 to 17.—The amendments which have
been introduced into these clauses, though they provide
for the enfranchisement of all the present members of
the Senate resident in the University, leave no
room for the introduction of those persons who may
hereafter graduate at the private Halls to be erected
under the provisions of the bill. Moreover, that system
of what has been called sectional election, which was
deliberately rejected by Parliament last session in legis-
lating for Oxford, is retained here in an aggravated form.
" For Oxford it was proposed tirahtlio Council should
be elected by three separate bodies— the Heads, the
Professors, and the remaining Members of Congregation.
But Parliament determined that there should be only,
one electoral body for all parts of the Council. At Cam-
bridge, ❑nder the present bill, we shall not only have
the electoral body divided into 19 parts— i, e., the 17
Colleges, the Professors, and the Heads, but we shall
have this additional inconvenience, when the turn of a
College to nominate arrives—it will be limited in its
choice to either a non-regent or a regent, according as it
may stand first or second on the cycle. And when it is
remembered how strongly the inducements to nominate
one of their own members operate in our Colleges at
Cambridge, and how unlikely it is in many cases that
the College, when its turn arrives, should have at band
the most 'suitable candidate, it cannot but be admitted
that the mode of election is singularly ill-adapted for
securing the services of the most distinguished or the
most efficient memb rs of the University. We would
respectfully ask, why are the resident members of Cam-
bridge to be deprived of the privileges of free election
which are conceded at Oxford ? Why embarrass the con-
-titntion of the Council of the Senate with the obsolete
and inconvenient medimval distinction of regents
and non-regents ? Why not resort to a Congregation, as
at Oxford, instead of a mode of appointment by Colleges,
singularly complicated and inconvenient, e Bich will not
only exclude very frequently men of eminencefrom the
Council, but will make it the representative of the narrow
interests of the Colleges rather than of the Univer-
sity, thus tending to perpetuate one of the worst evils
of our system We feel satisfied that there are few per-
sons really acquainted with the University, and not inte-
rested in the maintenance of 'the privileges of the Heads
of Colleges, who will not be ready to admit that themode
of appointment to Council at Oxford is greatly superior in
simplicity, and in the prospect which it holds out of har-
monious and efficient action, to that which is proposed
by the bill for Cambridge.
"But it is said that Cambridge differs from Oxford in
having two large Colleges with a predominating influ-
ence, and that with the Oxford system of election the
smaller societies would be in danger of being excluded
from their fair share in the representation. TEis objec-
tion, it may be re lied could only find place in the event
of the non-residents as well as the residents being in-
cluded in the electoral body. No such objection could
apply to a Congregation constituted on the model of
that of Oxford ; for the united number of residents be-
longing to Trinity and St. John's forms but a small frac-
tion of the whole body of resident members of the
Senate. We believe the whole number of resident mem-
bers of the Senate is now about 250. Of this number
not more than 60 altogether belong to Trinity and St.
John's.

" It may further be observed that the word 'resident'
in the seventh clause will require a definition either in
the bill itself, as was done for Oxford, or by a by-law of
the University. We shall thus have in effect all the
machinery requisite for the construction of a Congrega-
tion, and no additional cuange will be imported into the
academical system beyond that which is already contem-
plated by the bill, in order to give effect to our recom-
mendations.

" Sections 27and 28.—Although the University is em-
powered, and in the event of the University failing to do
so, the commissioners are required, to make statutes for
the regulation of private halls, no power or direction
is7given by the bill for the repeal or revision of the uni-
versity statutes now in force. The University of Oxford
bad only two permanent statutes ; one constituting the
hebdomadal bo trd, which was repealed by the aet of
last session • the other constituting the cycle of proctors,
which is still in force. All other matters are within the
competency of Convocation to regulate at pleasure. At
Cambridge the case is widely different. The cumbrous,
and in many respects obsolete, code of Queen Elizabeth
is still in existence, and no power is given by the bill to
enable the university or the commissioners to revise or
to repeal it. It is well known that considerable progress
has been made by the university itself in the labour of
amending its statutes, and it is expected that before long
a petition, which has only been delayed on account of
the impending bill in Parliament, will be presented to
the Queen, for the Royal sanction to a new code of uni-
versity statutes. The executive Government would
probably refer such a new code of statutes to the coin-
mis•ioners appointed by the bill, for their opinion and
approval ; and yet they will have no power whatever to
deal with the question. '
"If a Council of the Senate were satisfactorily consti-
tuted, it would probably be found sufficient to define by
the bill the order'of the proctors' cycle, and to leave all
other matters to be regulated by bve-laws of the uni-
versity, as occasion may require, from time to time,
subordinate to the provisions of the bill.
"Section 29. The preamble of this section is borrowed,
with slight alteration', from the 28th section of the Act
for the Government of the University of Oxford. As it
now stancl.4, it becomes the bails of all the powers con-
ferred upon the colleges and the commissioners jointly,
for the regulation of a great number of very important
details, which are not afterwards enumerated in the
enacting parts of the bill. Bearing in mind the import-
ance of avoiding- frequent appeals to our courts of law
in matters regarding the exercise of special powers, we
cannot do otherwise than express a' wish that the seve,
ral points which require the revision of the colleges and
the commissioners may be more distinctly defined, lest
there should be any miscarriage on putting the powers
of the act into operation. As nothing can be done in
these respects under the bill, except with a certain con-
currence of the colleges and the commisaoners, we ap,
prebend that no -obj-ction can be made to a detailed
enumeration of the subjects in which a change may be
either necessary or desirable. The following are the