The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-16 00:00:00

,/~f
<~

f7Tri •

subject, seeing that for several nights in succession the table
was crowded with petitions from almost all the great towns
and all the dissenting congregations, praying for academical
reforms. The reason was that no mention was made-iti any
clause of the admission of Dissenters to the univeihity. He
did not wonder that the mass of the people had troubled
themselves very little about the fate of a meastas, whieh
overlooked that great middle class on whom liberal govern-
ments had been accustomed to rely. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer had boasted of the success of his conciliation ;
but he must have discovered that he had conciliated away
all the support behind his back [referring to- the goats
usually occupied by Dissenting members] on which •he
might otherwise have depended. The failure of the Go-
vernment was manifestly attributable, not se much to • the
presence of opposition as to the absence of isuppert. Every
enactment making an improvement or abolishing an enact-
ment had been got rid of ; and the result was that thi cols
leges were to be left to reform themselves. He would sot
waste the time of the house by showing that this was a
permissive measure. What earthly pretence was there for
conceding to these colleges that which never had been, and
. . .

[PRICE SD.

meaning of the Government to be conveyed in this claus.
should be rendered as clear and distinct as possible.
Mr. L. WIGRAM had apprehended that the words as
they stood would bind the colleges to have reference only
to personal merit and fitness - now, what he wanted to do
was to give them power to retain or abolish local prefer-
ences.

Lord R. CECIL said if he rightly understood the ex- never ought to be, conceded to any corporation in England
planation of the Solicitor-General, local preferences would And yet they had bad some experience of corporation re-
still go for nothing. form. In 1835 they passed a bill to reform municipal cor-
Mr. MALINS insisted, then that if these collateral porations; andhe should like to know what the noble lord
qualifications wore to be abolished, some words ought to would have said if Sir Charles Ntretherall had proposed that
be inserted in the clause to convey tnat meaning, such as Bristol, or Liverpool, or Hull, should reform themselves
these, " according to personal merit and fitness, and the One reason why this particular corporation should not be
main designs of the founders," indulged with this extravagant confidence was that the
Mr. E. DENISON entreated the Government to abide authorities of the various colleges had informed them in
by the clause as it stood in the bill. the most pointed terms that they intended to make no use
Mr. WALPOLE criticised the words "according to," of it. At the close of last year the noble lord (Lord Pal-
which he contended meant "in proportion to," and that merston) addressed a letter to the college authorities re-
being so, he did not think local preferences would be suf- questing to know what steps they were prepared to take
ficieutly respected. in furtherance of this reform, and he believed, with the
After a conversation, a division was called for, and the exception of four, they declared their determination to
members were summoned in the usual way. Crowds have nothing to do with this measure. And yet to these
poured into the hence, and they were much aroused by same college authorities they were going to entrust this
hearin; Mr. Bouverie announce as the subject of the divi- perrniisive reform. His main reason for objecting to this
sion about to take place, that it was proposed to omit the clause was its certain tendency to entail at no distant time
word " according," in order to substitute the words " with the necessity of further parliamentary interference.
due regard." Sir T. D. ACLAND said though he had divided on every
The committee then divided— amendment against the Government ; he saw no objection
For the amendment ......... ........................ 41 to this clause if it were taken in connexion with some that
Against it ............................................. 63-22 followed it. ~
Mr. HEYWOOD then moved another amendment on the The clause was then agreed to.
same clause, to leave out the words " for promoting the On clause 32, ,
main designs of the founders." It would be difficult to Mr. E. DENISON said ho would raskseati appeal to the
state in law what were the designs of the founders of the mercy of Lord John Russell, who had made arrangement*
nineteen colleges; some of them wished to have their souls with hon. gentlemen opposite as to the bill, and he asked
prayed for, and others denounced Protestant doctrines as a him to make some alteration in this clause, which provided
heresy. (Laughter.) The strict definition of a college was that two.thirds of the governing body of the colleges should
a monastery for secular priests ; and the fellows were still have the power of stopping all reform, ,ea
prohibited from marrying. It would be much better
Lord J. RUSSELL said he thought e hon, Member
the colleges altered their statutes, so as to bring them into yo was mistaken in assuming that he could' in any ',fay take
"
harmony with modern ideas; at all events, he hoped the the bill and dispose of it in the way whiiik his holt. friend
commissioners to be appointed under this act would do so• assumed that he could. In fact the''elterationse stel the
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, wdre in their opinion
main designs of the founders, in their largest sense, were for the worse, and they were alterations which they had
the promotion of religion and learning ; but when they thought it necessary to make in conseqUence of the Totes
came to inquire what were their specific or principal ob- of the majority of the house. He had ne hesitation in say. —..........—,
jests, they were involled in great difficulty. On this ground lug that if the provisions of the original: till had been sup.
he had resisted a forms amendment of his hon. colleague ; ported by a majority in this house an'they went on clause
but he thought, retaining this meaning of the words, that by clause, that he should not have despaired of carrying
their main design was to promote religion and learning, the original bill with all its clauses; but when it was obvi.
the commissioners would not have much difficulty in their ous that the bill was changed in many particulars, and that
construction. In Corpus Christi College tho design of the in consequence the Hebdomadal Council and the eongrega-
founder evidently contemplated all kinds of learning ; in time could not have the peculiar character and powers they
r Bra.zenose, the statutes contemplated chiefly theological hail proposed to give them, they considered whether they
learning. But when the commissioners had these statutes should give up the bill altogether, or whether they should
before them they would be able to reconcile them in a make it such a measure as would be likely to pass through
general scheme. Therefore, upon the whole, it might be Parliament. Upon' consideration they came to the eonclu-
advantageous to retain the words in the clause which the sion that it was better to make the alterations, with a vie.
hon. member proposed to omit. His object seemed to be not certainly of improving the bill, but of making very
to create a kind of dead level upon which any kind of study considerable amendments in the constitution of the Unte
might be raised ; but neither the colleges, the commis- versity of Oxford. He certainly was not one of those who
goners, nor the house would consent to such a measure. would say, " Either carry out your principles to their full
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE advocated the system of pre- extent have a measure that shall contain everything that
ferences to districts, and quoted instances, amongst them you think desirable to be done, or else have nothing." He
that of the two Scotts, Lord Eldon, and Lord Stowell, had never acted upon that principle, and he certainly had
of its advantages. Were these preferences abolished, peg- found that by proposing measures from time to time, of
pie would hesitate before leaving their property for cha-
which the tendency and effects were beneficial, more ex.
ritable and learned uses. If the house was led away by tensive reforms were accelerated, and not restricted by
the mechanical sciolists of the present day, they would do that course. With regard to the present clause, his hon•
infinite damage to the universities and society at large. ourable friend asked him whether he would change the
After a few words from Mr. HEYWOOD, latter end of it, by which two-thirds of the governing
The committee divided— body were enabled in a manner that was specified to
For the amendment .. .. l5 defeat the alterations proposed by the commissioners,
Against
Mr. MALINS said it was of the greatest importance to of the bill would be entirely defeated if they did not leave
keep in view the main designs of the founders so that the the clause in that respect as it was. ' It allowed two.
foundations which they instituted should not be applied to thirds of the governing body to prevent, not the action
objects different from what they intended. Ho did not of Parliament, Out the action of the commission. He
understand that the Government had any other object, thought, it a disadvantage if, instead of settling the whole
but as there was great difficulty in understanding what question of university reform in the present session, and
they did mean he proposed to omit from the clause the thereby allowing the question of the University of Oxford
words, "to make ordinances for promoting," so that the to be set at rest, they should find that several of the col.
clause would then run thus, "to ensure the same being leges opposed useful reform. It would then be again a
conferred according to personal merit and the main designs question for Parliament whether by compulsory enact-
of the founders."
ment they should not enforce those useful reforms. His
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the amendment of the hon, and learned gentleman cut at hon. friend in reading the passage left out some material
words. The words were that "if two-thirds of the go-
the object he professed to have in view, because it provided yarning body of the said colleges shall, by writing under
that the main object of the founders was to be kept in their hand and seal, declare that in their opinion the orni-
view with regard to personal fitness, and make no provision nances and regulations will be prejudicial to the said col-
for that purpose with regard to any other matters. The lege as a place for learning and for adulation." Therefore
clause as it stood ranged over all matters. two-thirds of the governing body or the colleges were ob-
Mr. NEWDEGATE asked why the same latitude should liged to say that in their opinion the ordinances were pre-
not be given with regard to particular schools and local judicial to the college as a place for learning and for edit-
preferences which was given in the case of personal merit, cation. Now, he thought if they were ordinances making
Mr. VfIGRAM said the fear on his side of the house was reforms that were obviously useful—for learning and edu-
that the clause would have the effect of giving separate and cation, it would be difficult to find two-thirds of the go-
distinct powers to the colleges, and that they would not be verning body to declare in writing that they were not use-
hound to carry out the main design of the founders. If ful for this purpose. The hon. member for Newcastle re-
words were introduced at the end of the clause, declaring ferret' to another question on which they should have a
that the ordinances were to be consistent with the main debate at some future time, and he should leave it until
designs of the founder, it would meet the view on his then • but he thought the hon. member totally misunder.
side of the house. If these foundations were made to de- stood. He had stated the facts several times, but the hon.
pond on an act of Parliament, and not on the wills of the gentleman did not understand. (A. laugh.) In 1850 his
founders, it would be asked afterwards why might not hon. frietd the member for North Lancashire (Mr. Hey-
Parliament devote them to other purposes. (Hear.) wood) proposed a commission of inquiry into the Univer-
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Buy. It was then a question which was under the
effect of such words would be to negative the vote to consideration of the cabinet, and had been under the con-
' which the committee had just csmo, and to override the sideration of some of its members two years previously.
Whole construction of the clause. The hon. and learne 1 When the matter was then proposed by his hon. friend,
gentleman laid down broad propositions on this subject he (Lord J. Russell) stated that a commission would be
which were wholly untenable. The hon. and learned gen- issued, but he stated at the same time that he thought the
tlernen said that the whole property of those foundations question of tiro admission of Dissenters to the University
was enjoyed under the sanction of tho founders' bequests. should he kept a question atntrt, .and that that enestiee
Here was a case with regard to tho foundation of All woul I not he submitted to the consideration of the corn.
Souls, the rounder of which endeavoured, by every pro- mission. Therefore, it was in consequence of aro proposal
vision that the wit of man could suggest, to tie up the of his right hon. friend the Chancellor or the Exchequer,
hands of all officers, from the visitor downwards, from nor of any desire to fall in with his views, but in cones-
doing or prescribing anything varying from the letter of quence of an opinion formed previously to and declared in
the statutes ; yet be found an Archbishop of Canterbury teen, that he (Lord J. Russell) thought that the two ques-
ordering that whereas certain members of the college who tions ought to be kept entirely distinct. (Hear, hear.)
were abroad with the king were deprived of their emolu- lee was at this moment as convinced as he was in 1850 of
meats by reason of certain ordinances, these ordinances of the propriety of that decision. He was quite sure that
should be so construe 1 that those who were abroad in the if the Government had proposed a bill with the most ma-
kings immediate service should not be prejudiced thereby, trued and well considers 1 provisions for the improvement
but were to be taken as present in the college. (Laugh- of the course of study at Oxford, and had put into that
ter.) He could find a hundred of such proceedings, and bill a clause for the admission of Protestant and Roman
yet the hon. and learned gentleman says that they should Catholic Dissenters, and also other persons differing from
not interfere. (Hear, hear.) the Church of England, that the attention of the house
Lord CECIL begged to observe, as a member of All cud of the country would have been turned to that pro-
Souls, that if the right hon. gentleman, instead of looking vision, and that the whole discussion would have turned
to the text of the college statutes, had looked to the charter upon that question, the provisions with regard to study . .
issued by Henry IV., he would see that the regulations being entirely neglected in a matter of so much greater in- n
issued by every succeeding archbishop were to have the terest. (Hear.) It seemed to him that the two questions
same power as if they were issued by Archbishop Chichely were entirely distinct, and that the question of internal
himself, the founder of the college. (Hear, hear.) reform would be snore calmly and therefore better discussed
Mr. MOWBRAY thought that the alteration proposed if taken alone. He had already stated the reasons why
by the lion. and learned gentleman near him (Mr. the Government had thought it proper to alter the latter
Malins) might have the effect of weakening the clause, but part of the bill. It was indeed a question whether the
he would support the insertion of the words proposed bill should be abandoned, or whether it should bo put into
by the hon. and learned member for Cambridge (Mr. the form in which it at present stood. (Hear, hear.) The
Wigram.) Government thought it better to go on with the bill, he it
Mr. HENLEY thought that due force had not been oontained very considerable amendments upon the present
given to the distinction between the words "to amend constitution of the University of Oxford. With regard to
statues" and "to make ordinances." Keeping this die• any arrangement as to the frame of the bill, he could assure
tinction in view, it was plain that the power of altering the committee that he believed the right hon. gentleman
the statutes with regard to eligibility to headships, fellow- the member for Midhurst (Mr. Walpole) was totally unaes
ships, and other college emoluments had reference to per- quainted with the provisions which the Government in•
scared merit and nothing else. It seemed to biro that as the tended to propose until he saw them in print. The right
clause stood regard would not be had to the main designs hon. gentleman had said that they went far to meet his
of the founders with respect to headships and fellowships, views, but the committee had seen in the discussion and
but that the authorities would be constrained to pay at- divisions which had taken place that the Government
had
tention to the main designs of the founders as regarded not gong the length which the right hon. gentleman would
ordinances,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in answer hanvievewrsisithyedoinf
Oxford.
tking o
bill entirely optional upon th •
u
to Lord Cecil, denied that the subsequent Archbishops of Mr. WALPOLE was quite ready to admit that the bill
Canterbury had ever claimed the exercise anything like an was not what he couldta have
kenthewcioshed in all points, but the
corer it had he thought it
equal right to make statutes with Chichely, and the fellows Government ha
moreover swore that they would obey Chichely's statutes would have eenvinwgron if tho
the billbecause
It was his wish
Lord CECIL replied that what the fellows swore to
to see the University in all respects as complete as it could
maintain were the statutes of the college.
Mr. MALINS was more at a loss than ever. He had be, and so long as power were given to the University to
given the right hon. gentleman credit for a fixed desire to
effect necessary amendments and reforms, he did not feel
j
respect the "main designs of the founders," but now he in doing more than opposing the minor details
(the right bon. gentleman)quoted previous departures from of the bill, where he thought them objectionable with•
ttlhte sthattuttrat it in order to justify further departures. He 1 out endeavouring to throw the measure out entirely.
was a most serious thing to encouraged Upon that principle he bad acted, and should continue
oyug
p precedent of disregarding the wishes of those benevo- to act. lie was decidedly of opinion that the house
lent rsons who had founded institutions for the advance- had given strong proof that it was not prepared to act on
anent of religions or learning. the principle of forcing upon the university and colleges of
Mr. HEYWOOD would state whence he had derived Oxford a compulsory deviation from the designs of the
his impression as to the respect in which founders were
held. He had been three years at Trinity College, Cam- founders. (Hear.) He believed that the object of thon.e.
house was that the main designs of the founders.ehe
and
bridge, but except when a clergyman prayed for the royal not be interfered with unnecessarily, and thator gift.,cgen
and religious founder of that college (Henry VIII.), and endowments made for particular districts sued
cfnminputlisiono.
except at an annual "commendation" service, when the persons should not be put an end to by re
names of all the benefactors of the college were read from
a pulpit, he never observed that any notice was taken of it might
• be varied from tb.ent
tßheol!eevviniegwst,hhatowtotrbmillucihn its present shaepre fell in with
them. But to give a more general illustration of the great
object of the founders of colleges was to secure residence ; 2 tpiposrfitrst(igeoedrsuc)tion to the house, he gave it his cordial
and yet at Cambridge in 1618, an interpretation of the Lord J. RUSSELL thought it his duty to state that it
statutes was passed by which all persons who had taken f enabling the poor of this country '
was never contemplated by the Government that endow-
ments for the purpose o
their bachelors' degree were exempt from residing.
Mr. MALINS said lie would take another opportunity ef. to rise to stations of eminence should be at all obstructed
•nterfered with by this bill. (Hear, hear.) When, how-
raising the question, and withdrew his present amend
envrelr, the right hon. gentleman mixed that question up with
ment.
Lord SEYMOUR moved to omit the words, "In the following out the designs of the founders, he (Lord J. Bus-
Lord
ottwhoint,,hinniogrsewcobulicdh bweesrueree lily*
case of some of the colleges" from line 30. Ile. thought sell) thou was mixing
that if money was to be raised for the general improve- tire y different.
ment of the university, it had better be done by a fair said than that the main design of the founders was to pro-
contribution from all the colleges. mote religion and learning, and this main design he
that it, thought ought to be of course carried out. If the hour!
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
was entirely out of the question to think of making such wale te consider the particular deeigns of the founders, is
would be obvious that they could not be carried out to il°
a demand upon many of the colleges.
Mr. G. VERNON instanced the case of Christchurch• letter. Some foundations were for the purposes of spread-
the Roman Catholic religion, others the
.Prc'.'°. _sete.asnie:
It had no doubt a great many emoluments, but it already ifi-6,_
To obtain learning, a founder might have inetisueeo
supplied six of the profess , o es, • but
right for a certain school to send boys to a coffee '
The proposal was negativedor withoutam
of the feander
that school having decayed, the very object
0. his e;......
Mr. L. WIGRAM proposed an . amendment, division.
after*
word " purposes," in the 40th line, to insert the following would be actually overlooked if the letter only
.1 "‘""
It was the
wor •
de • "So always that such regulations and ordinances tion were regarded. Hence he thought that
be not inconsistent with the main designs of the founders
or donors." The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, he ob- duty of Parliament to keep in view the
served, stated that it was a principle of the bill that the
- the letter of the direction of founders—(hear, hear)--and
with that view the present measure wast
spirit rather than
main designs of the founders or donors should not be dis-
turbed Government
of any change was
; and it was in order that that might be clearly
to Atlhr. .0 HENLEYfa
ctthat
onlycalled
two the
months' at t en ti onoticen. of t the
h
to he given by the commissioners. If notice ware
On a division, the numbers were—
For the amendment . B7 givenw a a
noatotnhee
al it e
Oxford,ginning
uld be very inconvenient.
oitf
wthoe long vacation, when there
Against it
Majority 5 taken to guard against
ttordigihffitcuthltayt
induperacoatricee.shonld be
marked that this statute refused a
The SOLICITOR-GENER A. 1., said ho proposed, after Mr. R. P.,
the word " purposes," to insert " further alterations and right of vetoktLoM
t He thought it would be better
eEtenßarlet.eratiou in two-thirds of the govern-
amendment of such regulations and ordinances."
Mr. HENLEY wished to know whether the Chancellor to alter this to in
thetlTDl-tvheirsd' sYs.rf the governing body present at
in body
consider the said alterations.
of the Exchequer would consent to fix some limited period a meeting te
G• VERNON proposed to introduce the words
within which the commissioners should either approve or Art• .s,
reject schemes submitted by the colleges. He did not see tutors ought to " and tutor" after "e
partiesg ovetronitnhgisbroitglyht."of He thought that
why they shonld not do so in three months.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Sir J. PAIn.INGTON thought that thercommittee ought
colleges were to exercise within a definite period the prero- to have some information as to what the words, " goTor,"
body" really 'lreton,. He wished to ask the Chancelloe
gative which was to be fluid ; whereas the answer of im
bodies were.
commissioners might not be final, but a rernission.it theto oliitf:ggthe Eaeheqner whether he could state what the'toveras
statutes for further amendment. It was imposer The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQU tIR. said it was
provide for every case in an act of Parliament.
Mr. BLACKETT thought that was the proper time for difficult to define the boiler towhich this responsible power
This was was committed. He did not agree in the suggestieu that
discussing the principle involved in the clause
the first of the new clauses affecting the centre Character of the words " governing bod"
clauseshould be retained in tie
vernment for clause, and that another should be framed defining
the bill. He did not quarrel with tiro
for he thought what such body was. In most cases iu Oxford, except lle
withdrawing some of the original clauses; which they met two or three colleges, there was no difficulty in defining the
that, considering the determined opposition_
with, they bad no alternative buttodo with a good grace governing body which was the cult
F Fellows. The
what they must others ice have done on
enthusiasm Why two most prominent eases where that definition was mot
was it, however, that so little popular had been satisfactory were Christ Church and Brazenose, the go.
elicited on behalf of this measure of educational reform ? verning body in Christ Church being the dean and canes.,
was indifferent to the all but the former were practicallyvit off from any put.
It could net be said that the country