UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) BILL. (No. 137.)

HC Deb 01 July 1889 vol 337 cc1201-47

Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clause 14.

Sir G. CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy)

I beg to move the Amendment standing in my name to enlarge the powers of the Commissioners, so that it shall be competent to them "to abolish any faculty" in any University which they may find to be unnecessary. By this Amendment the Commissioners would be able to get rid of any faculty—whether theology, medicine, arts, or anything else. I merely wish to lay down the general principle, that if a faculty is unnecessary there should be power to abolish it.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 10, line 36, after "faculties," insert "to abolish any faculty."—(Sir G. Campbell.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

* MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN (Stirling, &c.)

I would ask the Lord Advocate to say whether he does not think this is already provided for in that part of the Bill which gives the Commissioners power to alter the number of faculties, and to transfer Chairs from one faculty to another? I think, if it is not provided for, the arrangement should be completed by giving this power to extinguish a faculty if it should be considered desirable.

THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. P. B. ROBERTSON,) Bute

I do not think it is provided for in the Bill. I deprecate the suggestion of abolishing faculties. The general tone of the discussions has been that it is desirable to maintain and not to diminish or abate the teaching powers of the Universities. Moreover, I submit this is not a convenient way of raising the question or of suggesting to the Commissioners that they should have such powers as to be able to extinguish a whole faculty. I cannot conceive from what point of view the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy regards this question looking at the other Amendments on the Paper in the name of the Member for the town of Aberdeen and the Member for East Aberdeenshire. The hon. Member's proposal seems to be opposed to the views of these hon. Members. I do not think it desirable that the Motion should be passed. The hon. Member has an objection to the tests and consequently to the Faculty of Theology, and it would seem that he desires, by giving the Commissioners power to extinguish so great a part of the life of a University as a whole faculty, to attain his object in an oblique way.

* MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

I do not think it would be desirable to single out the Faculty of Theology and suggest its extinction. I have given my views with regard to the tests already, but to lay it down as a principle that theology is not to be taught in any University under any circumstances would be a thing I should not be prepared to support. I should have thought, however, that to give the power contained in this Amendment would have tended to complete the whole sphere of the powers of the Commission. As the power is not likely to be exercised in the way desired it would perhaps be as well if the hon. Member withdrew the Amendment.

SIR G. CAMPBELL

I do not think my Amendment is antagonistic in any way to the Faculty of Theology. It is of a clear and simple kind. I do not refer to the Faculty of Theology, but let us take the Faculty of Medicine, for instance, say at St. Andrew's. I think the time has come when the faculty should be done away with. It may be that there are institutions which may properly give degrees in medicine after examination, but much as I admire St. Andrew's, I do not see why people should have to go to a remote part of the country projecting into the North Sea, in order to take a degree in medicine. I should be the last to advocate the abolition of the Faculty of Medicine; that is not the chief end of my Amendment, but I want the Commissioners to have power to abolish any faculty if they deemed it expedient. My Amendment is general in its terms: I do not desire to exclude any particular faculty; I only want the Commissioners to have power to inquire into the matter.

DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, W.)

I should have had no difficulty in supporting the Motion of my hon. Friend if it had not been for the portion of his remarks which shows that he wishes to abolish the Faculty of Medicine at St. Andrew's, in the interests of Dundee. If they have not been able to do good work in medicine at St. Andrew's, it is because two more Chairs are required there.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

Nothing could be further from my mind than to prefer Dundee at the expense of St. Andrew's. My sympathies are all in favour of the University. I only wish that the Commissioners should have power to inquire into the desirability of continuing the faculty.

MR. BUCHANAN (Edinburgh. W.)

I should like to point out that the object of the Amendment is not to destroy any particular faculty in any particular University, but it is to give the Commissioners full power to abolish existing faculties if after inquiry they deem that course expedient.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 96; Noes 157.—(Div. List, No. 164.)

MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

I now beg to move an Amendment, the object of which is to provide that in the election of the rectors of the Universities of Glasgow and Aberdeen, the election shall be determined by a majority of the votes of all the students voting, whenever the votes of the nations shall be equally divided. I think the feeling of both the Universities is in favour of keeping the institution of the nations, and the Amendment I have proposed will retain voting by nations, but will provide that in cases where the nations are equally divided, the election shall be decided by the majority of the votes which are recorded.

Clause 14, page 10, line 40, leave out from "the matriculated," to end of sub-section, and insert— The election shall be determined by the majority of the votes of all the students voting whenever the votes of the nations shall be equally divided.

Amendment agreed to.

MR. HUNTER (Aberdeen, N.)

The Amendment which comes next has for its object the provision that no fee higher than three guineas shall be charged in any class to be hereafter established and I hope that the Government will offer no objection to the introduction of the provision.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

The hon. Gentleman, I have no doubt, rightly desires that the present low fee shall be retained in the number of classes to which access is now had by poor students; thanks to their exceeding cheapness as well as the excellence of their education. But there are other classes where a higher scale of fees is appropriate, and where they produce no hardship, because a larger amount of time is devoted to the course of the study.

MR. HUNTER

Will the Government accept the Amendment, if it is modified so as to be restricted to the Arts Faculty?

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I think it would be better to leave the matter in a general sense. We had better keep the present flexible rule, and I do not think any one is likely to object to it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

SIR GEORGE TREVELYAN (Glasgow, Bridgeton)

I have an Amendment on the paper to omit Sub-section C, which empowers the Commissioners to regulate the compensation to be paid to existing professors, whose interests may be injuriously affected by ordinances made under the Act. The amount of funds available for the Universities under the Bill is very limited, and it is therefore exceedingly important that it should he utilized as far as possible. But that cannot be done if it is not in the power of the Commissioners to abolish useless Chairs, and to apply the funds thus obtained to other purposes. I trust that the Lord Advocate will be able to assure the Committee that the Government will at least on the Report stage give the Commissioners power to effect the object. I think it would be a great convenience if the Government could at once give an answer in the affirmative.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I think it is in every way desirable that there should be a power of suppressing useless Chairs, and if there is any question as to the phraseology of the clause as it stands, enabling that to be done, I can only say I think it should be settled at once.

SIR GEORGE TREVELYAN

That intimation modifies my views, and I will not press my Amendment, as I anticipate now that the important reform of abolishing useless Chairs will be introduced.

Sir GEORGE CAMPBELL

I also have an Amendment on the Paper to meet Sub-section C, and my objection to the clause is that it directs compensation to be given to existing professors whose interests may be injuriously affected by the operation of this Act. I admit that something must be done for existing holders, but my point is that an enormous monopoly has sprung up in the case of some professors who have very large classes, which they teach by the aid of assistants, and if every man who is injuriously affected by a change in the system is to receive compensation, I think we shall perpetuate a very great abuse. I would suggest that power might be given to grant a retiring allowance, but it should not be so sweeping as that implied in the clause. I therefore beg to move my Amendment.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 11, leave out Sub-section C.

* SIR LYON PLAYFAIR (Leeds, South)

I think my hon. Friend cannot have noticed the governing part of this clause, which says that the Commissioners shall have power to do certain things. The clause does not make it compulsory on the Commissioners to give compensation, but it only enables them to do so, should they see fit. It is a mild provision, for the Commissioners themselves are to determine whether they will make changes which in some cases may require compensation to be given.

Sir GEORGE TREVELYAN

I very much hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy will not divide the Committee on this Amendment. I believe there is no Member of this House who, providing that a Chair is abolished, would hold that no compensation should be given to the holder of it. But there are a great number of Members who think that if the too large classes, which at present exist in some of our Scotch Universities, were considerably diminished by counter attractions, there would be no necessity for payment of any compensation whatsoever. I, therefore, trust my hon. Friend will withdraw his Amendment, especially as a subsequent one is calculated to attain the object which we have in view.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

I must confess I cannot look on this clause without some misgiving, but as I understand that the subsequent Amendment, which deals with the same subject, will be favourably considered, I shall be quite willing to withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. HUNTER

The Amendment I have now to propose is to limit the effect of what seem to me dangerously wide words. The clause provides for compensation to professors whose interests may be injuriously affected. I wish Parliament to be liberal in the matter of compensation where any professor has a right to complain, and I think we may say that whether by express language or not a professor in a Scotch University has a right to be the sole authorized teacher of his subject within his University. Therefore, I think that if we appoint a new professor to work alongside the present professor, it would be legitimate ground for compensation. But when we come to the question whether a professor has an absolute right to compel students to attend his class, merely in order that he may teach them, we stand on different ground. I do not think there is anything in the history of the Scottish Universities that would justify the granting of compensation to a professor merely because by a change affecting the curriculum the number of persons attending his class might possibly be diminished. Then, I understand, compensation is to be given in advance on an estimate of what the injury may be. I doubt whether there will be a diminution in the attendance at classes. At all events, the fact cannot be ascertained until after compensation is given; therefore Commissioners would be in this difficulty—they would be giving compensation in anticipation of an evil which might not arise. If the Government accept the words I suggest, they will not narrow the power of compensation too much.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 10, line 13, Sub section (c), after "Act," insert, But no compensation shall be paid merely because in consequence of new regulations affecting bursaries or degrees the number of students attending a professor's class may be diminished."—(Mr. Hunter.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

This is a somewhat important question, because it is very desirable that the Committee should remember that one of the chief impediments in the way of University reform would be aggravated if we told the Commissioners that every step they take up the direction of improving or modifying the curriculum is to be attended with this, that they may do immense pecuniary damage to the professors. I strongly deprecate the Committee taking such a course. The effect would be to paralyze the reforming action of the Commissioners. The endowments in the case of the classes we want chiefly to reform are infinitesimal, but the really substantial part of the income of the professors is derived from fees. A man appointed to a Chair holds his office for life, or until an egregious fault. He knows that every man who takes a particular degree, must take his Chair. Does he or does he not accept the position upon the footing that his income is to be looked to in the probable number of students who attend his class? Clearly he does, and it would be most unfair to whittle away the income upon which the professor has alone to depend. Take the possible case of a man who has given up some rich appointment in England, in order to take a Chair in a Scotch University. Would it not be grossly unfair if you were to take from this man a prize, which his learning and eminence have fitted him to obtain, and give him no compensation? Again, if you struck a Chair out of the compulsory course of study, you would have the same thing. Now, I think these men are entitled to compensation, but I do not say how much compensation, or whether it is to occur in all cases. I think the hon. Gentleman rather exaggerated the difficulty of fixing the compensation. Lawyers know that very often tribunals have to determine beforehand the compensation to be paid for the probable result of future occurrences. You do it more or less in the dark, and I firmly hope as the hon. Gentleman does that in many cases, the compensation awarded ought not to be so much, and I say will not be so much, because, in the first place, on the one hand you abstract the necessity of students resorting to a particular class, and in the other hand it is very likely the effect of your reforms generally will be such that the number of students at the classes will be kept up. Every competent arbitrator will have all that before him, and I earnestly hope the Committee will exercise great caution in not accepting one side of the account, but will very carefully scrutinize how far they are going on the solid ground of reasonable expectation in giving compensation. It is not merely the attendance of students by reason of necessity that fills a man's class. His own merits and mental vigour bring students to his class. A man for one reason or another, gets lazy, or old, and his power of attracting students fails. That, of course, will be taken into account. I hope the Committee has observed I am not anxious to raise too high the hopes of the professors, or to fix too stringently the duty of the Commissioners in regard to the Compensation Clause. They are to take into account all the circumstances of the case, both those which tend to show that injury is done to the professor, and also those which tend to show that the injury is comparatively light, or may be compensated for from other sources.

* MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

I am not able to go by any means the whole length the Lord Advocate goes on this subject. I do not feel to the full extent he does the strength of his argument from the point of view of the absolute vested interest, as it were, of the professor, but there are two considerations that weigh considerably with me in the matter. In the first place, if we provide no means of giving any compensation at all to one of these professors whose income is materially reduced by the operations of the Commissioners, then we should set that professor and his friends in diametrical opposition to the smooth working of the Act, and our object ought to be to secure that the great changes we hope will follow from this Bill will be easily and readily and smoothly accepted. There is also a danger of this, that if there is no means of compensating in cases such as we have been speaking of, the Commissioners themselves, from a delicacy of conscience and kindly feeling, may be adverse to proposing changes which otherwise they would be ready to introduce. My learned Friend proposes that no compensation at all should be granted, merely because of the reduction in the number of students, and at first sight I think that is a perfectly fair stipulation; but, at the same time, it must be remembered there are professors whose emoluments are almost en- tirely derived from the fees of the students, the salary itself being a small matter. Therefore the professors would be immediately brought under the operation of the considerations I have been speaking of. Under these circumstances I ask the Lord Advocate whether the words of the sub-section cannot be in some way modified so as to make the sub-section have a little less of an imperative appearance. If the Lord Advocate can in any way modify the words so as to imply those very considerations he has himself recited as certain to affect the action of the Commissioners, then that would very materially affect our view of the question, but to leave the words as they stand may open the door to an amount of greed for compensation beyond what Parliament would be disposed to allow.

MR. HUNTER

The situation has changed considerably since the statement of the Lord Advocate, but I hope that before the Report stage he may consider whether some words may not be introduced somewhat limiting the terms, which, at present, seem to me to be rather dangerously wide. I have another reason for withdrawing the Amendment—namely, that I observed that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer uttered the words, "hear, hear," when the Lord Advocate made his observations. This is a question in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is chiefly concerned, and, if he takes that liberal view, I hope when we come to the question of the sum to be given to the Scottish Universities, he will remember that these Universities require money to carry the schemes into practical effect.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I rise for the purpose of saying that I shall undertake before the Report stage to consider the question of terms. It is possible that we may find some such flexible terms as will meet the views of hon. Members, whilst at the same time adhering to the views we have expressed.

SIR G. CAMPBELL

I do not think the promise that has been made is sufficient. I think the Lord Advocate still maintains the high and dry doctrine that as far as a man is injuriously affected he is entitled to receive compensation, whether his present emoluments are legitimate or not. I understand the case to be that in many cases a professor receives fees for classes which he cannot possibly teach, and he employs a number of curates to do the work for which he is paid. I think the Amendment of my hon. Friend is not sufficiently radical. They say dog will not eat dog, and apparently professor will not eat professor.

Mr. FINLAY (Inverness, &c.)

This clause is certainly open to the criticism that the power given to regulate the compensation to be paid to existing professors seems to imply that there is a right to compensation. I would suggest that words should be added at the end of the sub-section to this effect:— "If the Commissioners think such compensation ought to be given."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I am obliged for the suggestion, and will carefully consider it.

DR. CLARK (Caithness)

I do not think the Committee should agree to the principle of the clause as it stands now, because if we do every professor will require to be compensated. Any reform will mean competition with the men who are now in some cases occupying Chairs which a dozen years ago they ought to have retired from, and the amount that would be needed for compensation would be twice as much as the Chancellor of the Exchequer intends to give us.

* MR. J. A. CAMPBELL (Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities)

May I express a hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will give particular attention to what has been said on this subject to-day? I must say that anything that has to be paid in compensation ought to be altogether outside the annual grant given to the Universities.

MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)

In connection with the Chairs of Greek and English Literature, very serious questions of compensation may arise. I would ask the Government to take care that new appointments should not be made before the passing of the Bill so as in any way to transfer the Commissioners in regard to men who have only held office for a few weeks.

* THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. MOIR T. STORMONTH DARLING,) Edinburgh and St. Andrew's 1212 Universities

Special clauses have been inserted in the commissions of all Professors appointed by the Crown for some years past. The Greek Chair-in Glasgow is not in the gift of the Crown, and therefore the Crown has no power over the appointment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. HUNTER

I now beg to move-the insertion after "degrees" of the words— and the Commissioners shall provide, in respect of the degree of M.A., that due regard shall be had to modern languages and science. It may be said that the Amendment is superfluous as it is impossible to conceive that any 15 men of intellectual sanity would meet round a table and approve of the present restricted course of the Arts' curriculum in the Scotch, Universities. No doubt also the Commissioners would not overlook the fact that the Royal Commission of 1878 reported in favour of options in the M.A. degree. Still this is a question of such vital importance to the students that I feel bound to omit nothing that will secure the attainment of the great object I have in view. I feel that if the result of the work of: this Commission is that, as before, Greek and Latin take the place of everything else, and no regard be paid to French, or German, or chemistry, or botany, or biology, the Commission will be a disaster to the Scottish Universities. I would remind the Committee that generous founders have left large sums for the education of youth, but those who avail themselves of them are not allowed to take up subjects which are of interest or value to them, but are compelled to go through a certain hidebound curriculum, with the result that certain professors make large fees which, perhaps, otherwise they would not obtain.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I am entirely in sympathy with the general object of the hon. and learned Gentleman, but I am bound to say that I am doubtful whether his Amendment would, not break the symmetry of the Act as far as the latitude afforded to the Commissioners is concerned. I can hardly suppose that the Commissioners would do otherwise than give due and great, regard to modern languages and science in framing the alternatives which we fully expect at their hands for the Arts degree. If, however, we inserted this Amendment we should say that due regard must be paid to two subjects whilst other subjects to which we also wish regard to be paid will be left out, and I am afraid this would tend to some lop-sided arrangement which would not be as rational or liberal as the arrangement they would otherwise make. It is on this ground alone that I deprecate the the introduction of the Amendment.

MR. HUNTER

After what has been stated, I do not think I need press the Amendment to a division.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

* MR. J. A. CAMPBELL

I beg to propose after "degrees," to insert "and the institution of new degrees."

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page, 11, line 14, after "degrees" insert "and the institution of new degrees."— (Mr. J. A. Campbell.)

Question put, and agreed to.

* MR. WALLACE (Edinburgh, East)

I may be under a wrong impression, but I certainly have the impression that the Amendment I am about to propose is one of considerable importance. At all events, if I may judge from the nature of the communications that have come to me from different parts of the country, I feel that in moving my Amendment I am not representing my own opinion merely, but am speaking for a large constituency. The Amendment is in these terms. After the word "degrees" I propose to insert— And the terms and conditions under which, without discouraging attendance on University or recognized extra-mural teaching, such degrees may be granted to all persons resident in Scotland applying for the same, and proving themselves possessed of the requisite knowledge or skill under whatever circumstances such knowledge or skill may have been obtained. Now, I do venture to think that the presumption in this case is in my favour, and the burden of proof upon those who oppose my proposal. I ask in the first place why should not this be done? Why should not persons who are possessed of the necessary knowledge or skill be recognized by those authorities who have been commissioned for the very purpose of fostering and certifying learning? I think this is the natural view of the matter; that is how it strikes an unsophisticated mind. The early founders of Universities certainly took this view—for instance, the Bulls issued by the Pope to the two Beatons, Archbishop and Cardinal, in favour of the seat of learning they were creating at St. Andrew's contained powers expressly designed for the purpose of enabling them to recognize and grant degrees to all comers who could prove themselves of sufficient ability, character, and learning; and I believe that in many of the mediæval Universities—I will not say all—the same rule obtained. I may be told that this is a matter of 300 years ago, but I must say that seems to me rather an anile objection. The things that belong to these centuries ago are not necessarily absurd, and all average students of history know that some of the greatest reforms have simply consisted of a return to the early condition of things, in clearing away the superstructural rubbish piled up by human foolishness and stupidity, in order to get at the original foundation. In the University of Dublin, which I may, I believe, safely call a comparatively ancient University, the proposal I am now making to the Committee in connection with scotch Universities has all along been and is now recognized. Now, from mediæval Popes and ancient Universities it is no doubt a considerable step to this year's deliverance of the Convention of Scotch Royal and Parliamentary Burghs; but I am gratified that I can claim the utterances of this body as an important and impressive deliverance in my favour. I will take the liberty of referring to this deliverance of the Convention of Scotch Parliamentary Burghs and their petition to Parliament on this subject. They "regret extremely there is no recognition in the Bill of extra mural teaching as a qualification for the University degree; they consider that such a recognition would tend greatly to the advancement of education. It is really immaterial, they say, in what particular quarter knowledge is gained if it is possessed; for the academical degree only certifies the possession of this knowledge; it does not confer it." I quote this as a reliable expression of the view taken of this matter by the practical common-sense of the country and along side of this expression of opinion stands the success of such bodies as the Royal University of Ireland, and the University of London, which, notwithstanding its severe test—and some think it is too severe—still there were 400 graduates at its last public presentation in May, many of them, I may say the bulk of them, depending on their power to pass the test on private study, while others acquired their knowledge at seminaries of a more or less public character; all that to my mind is evidence to show that the plan I venture to propose is one that is desired and approved by people whose intelligence and opinions are entitled to respect. Then I venture to think I am justified in saying that the presumption is in my favour, and that I am entitled to ask why should this not be the case? I call on those who make objection to show their reasons. It is said, no doubt, that it is completely opposed to the Scotch conception of graduation, which is based on a prescribed system of professional teaching. Well, I am inclined for the moment, for the purpose of argument, to admit all that, but what then? If a tree is known by its fruit, I ask how does the University teaching system come out as compared with the non-teaching system? The Scotch advocate has to attend, I believe, four University sessions, to give four years of attendance at the University to his law studies. The English barrister picks up his law where he can and where he likes. But I venture to ask is the average English barrister an inferior creature to the average Scotch advocate? Is the Lord President a superior being to the Lord Chancellor? Then as to whether the general Scotch professorial system is superior to the English tutorial system, if any of my colleagues are going to maintain that the finished English University product is inferior to the same Scotch University product, I, for my part, will not take the trouble to argue with them. I will leave them to discuss the numerous gentlemen of English University education to be met in the Lobby in the course of the next division. I am asked is teaching to be abolished in connection with graduation, and I say not at all; that necessity does not arise at all, the only change will be that the locality of the teaching will be somewhat altered. The demand will always evoke the necessary supply. The English barrister to whom I have alluded is directed in the way to the Law degree by a person who has himself found the way to the Law degree and has taken it. I do not see how this proposal would lead in any degree to the abolition of teaching. It is argued by those in favour of our Scotch University system that it brings together the youth of the country, and by personal contact one improves the other. It is true iron sharpens iron, but that property of the metal is not confined to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and St. Andrew's; it obtains in Inverness, Dundee, Dumfries, Perth, and anywhere else if you only give it the same chance. But I am told the teachers will not be of the best quality. I am not afraid of that consequence if you have a good examination system, and if you have not a good examination system you had better not give degrees under any circumstances. I am entitled to assume that you have such a good system, and given that, I say you will have good teachers, for the most successful teacher will be he who succeeds best in passing his men, and these teachers will be found out by those who really desire to pass. Much is made of professorial inspiration, and I do not deny its existence or value, although mainly in connection with metaphysics and ethics and the classes of speculation. I have never found professors of pure mathematics and practical chemistry to be very inspiring persons. After all the subjects can inspire as well as the professors, and departed genius as well as living mediocrity. If a man can for himself read and reproduce Plato, then I am under the impression that he is just as much obliged to Plato for any enlargement of mind that has accrued to him as he is to Professor Brown, Jones, or Robinson, who may have introduced him to the sage. I think the idea that what I may call graduating knowledge can only be got at by residence in the University has a considerable element of fetichism in it, and owes a good deal of its force to mere custom. The original University type, many of our ancient Universities, it must be remembered, were in existence long before the invention of printing, and as a necessary consequence in that period of the world's history if men wanted to learn anything they resorted in considerable bodies to the teaching of living teachers in local centres. But surely the invention of printing has very considerably modified the machinery of learning. Yet, notwithstanding these modifications, we still find the idea that wherever knowledge and the existence and possession of knowledge has got to be certified by means of a combination of certain alphabetical characters, then this knowledge can only be got at certain places, and from the lips of certain individuals. That idea still lives on very much in my opinion, in virtue of that same force of custom that still perpetuates the hideous and cruel anomaly of horse-hair wigs in Courts of Justice and other habitats of unreflective conservatism. But after all I am not arguing for the substitution of the London University system for the Scotch University system. My Amendment is carefully guarded by these words: "Without discouraging attendance on University or recognized extra-mural teaching." I do not propose to withdraw a single student who has any fees in him from attendance at professorial classes, or at the instruction given by that somewhat select body of extra-mural teachers whom it is in contemplation to admit to a share in the professorial monopoly; but I do plead for a large class of intellectual men who have no fees in them, who cannot afford residence at the University centres, but whom I still think, both on public and private grounds, it is undesirable to exclude from those learned avocations in which nature has fitted them to he happiest and most useful. I said before on the Second Reading of this Bill, but I ask leave to say it briefly again, that it is to me a very lamentable fact that, not only in England but in Scotland also, the learned professions with their gains and opportunities of happiness and usefulness are practically shut to the poor scholar. The profession of the law where, in virtue of those arrangements by which, for the sake of enriching a few members of a strictly exclusive Trades Union, justice, which is the right of the poor, is practically converted into the luxury of the rich, is closed to the poor student. Medicine, too, though not to the same degree, is to a considerable extent in the same position, and the only learned profession that is open to the poor, and even then only to the upper classes of the poor, is the Church into which accordingly many men drift, in their youth, without due reflection or warning, committing themselves to certain forms and creeds, with which, afterwards, when intelligence and information have grown within them, they discover they are not in intellectual harmony, and are face to face with the temptation to continue a career of deception in regard to subjects in which mankind have the deepest interest. In these very discussions we have seen how access to the learned professions is to be made more difficult by the increase of fees in certain classes, if not all. I desire to amend what I consider a calamitous state of things so far as access to University degree is concerned. I desire if possible to make these; which are the portals to the higher and learned callings, more accessible to the poor, and I think this can be done without trenching on the prerogative of the professoriate in respect to teaching, by the simple device of making the non-residential student wait a longer time for his degree than the residential student. This arrangement you can in a way defend by saying that the residential student may be presumed to have the highest class of teaching, and so far, therefore, may be presumed to get faster to the goal than the non-residential student, who, if you like, you can say has to depend entirely on himself or on what you may call a second or third rate system of teaching. The men to whom money is no object, or comparatively no object, will still attend the University, so that they may get their degree more quickly or get through their classes more quickly; but the men to whom money is an object, because they do not have much of it, may wait a little while in patience and study, and will only obtain the degree when they have proved themselves worthy by ability and information to receive it. That seems to me to be a just and wise arrangement in view of the interests of all classes concerned in this matter, and as such I venture to put it before the Committee.

Amendment proposed, page 11, line 14, after "degrees" insert, And the terms and conditions under which, without discouraging attendance on University or recognized extra-mural teaching, such degrees may be granted to all persons resident in Scotland applying for the same, and proving themselves possessed of the requisite knowledge or skill, under whatever circumstances such knowledge or skill may have been obtained."—(Mr. Wallace.)

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR (Clackmannan, &c.)

I am sure everyone present must sympathize with the object which my hon. and learned Friend desires to attain, but I must say that it does appear to me—and I speak from much familiarity with the Scotch University system, both as regards its history and its present condition—that it would be hardly possible to give effect to what my hon. and learned Friend proposes without disadvantage to the persons whom he wishes to benefit, and without detriment to these ancient and admirable institutions. I rather think that my hon. and learned Friend must himself have had some feeling of this kind, for in advocating his Amendment, he not only puts forward the proposal that the Scotch Universities should become examining bodies, but that if they become examining bodies it shall not be without respect to the functions they have so well discharged in times past. He desires to maintain the teaching along with the examining system. I do not see how it is possible to dispense with a certain amount of University or extra mural attendance as a condition of graduation. 11 you make the acquisition of the degree free and open without any such condition, the effect must inevitably be to diminish University attendance. I am sure all who have had the advantage of being educated at Scotch Universities, must allow that not the least valuable part of the University career is the mingling in the academic halls with other students, and coming under the general influences which prevail in these ancient seats of learning. It is quite impossible, I think, to turn the University into a mere examining body without decreasing attendance. My hon. and learned Friend sets himself to perform an impossibility by his Amendment. At present we invite students from all parts of the world, and there are few parts of the world from which we do not get them; but my hon. and learned Friend shows mistrust of his proposal when he limits the purely examining functions of the University dispensing with attendance, to persons resident in Scotland. He must have felt the difficulty of introducing an alternative foreign to the ancient character of these institutions when he hedges round his proposal with limitations and restrictions. One great question ought not to be left out of consideration. I do not want to raise a long argument, but I may mention a fact which is very clearly brought out in a work by my right hon. Friend near me (Sir Lyon Playfair)—namely, mere examining Universities have not usually been successful. They have been tried in Belgium with results the reverse of successful. Trinity College, Dublin, has not been successful as an examining body. I believe there has been a measure of success in England in the case of the London University which is not a teaching body. It does appear to me that a combination of the two systems in the manner proposed would probably damage these institutions for both purposes. My hon. and learned Friend says the presumption is in favour of his view, and if the matter were an absolutely open one, and we were begining to conceive the idea of a University without experience, I do not say that his plan might not have much to recommend it; but we are dealing with institutions hundreds of years old, and I rather think that we have found an answer to my hon. and learned Friend's presumption in the fact that these Universities are, and always have been eminently the Universities of the people, the Universities of the poor; and notwithstanding what my hon. and learned Friend has said, there is no country in the world that offers so many examples of men from the very humblest ranks having reached to the very highest positions in the service of the State through academic study which they were enabled to pursue by the aid of bursaries and other means. Surely it would be a somewhat rash proceeding while we are by this Bill giving quite enough work to the Commission in reforming the Universities of Scotland to add a proposal to turn these institutions into something entirely different from what they have hitherto been, and which I cannot help feeling would damage their teaching power and lower the educational standard throughout the country. My hon. and learned Friend says there is no monopoly of the academic spirit in those centres where the Universities are seated, that it exists at Inverness, Perth, Dumfries, and elsewhere. True, and if we were now going to set up a University system we should fully recognize this, but here are the ancient University Seats with all the equipments attaching to them; and without going into a long discussion that would be inappropriate at this stage, I do submit that to introduce this very serious change would endanger the success that we hope may attend the legislation upon which we are now engaged.

* SIR W. FOSTER (Derbyshire, Ilkeston)

The Amendment moved by my hon. Friend—

Notice taken that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being present,

* SIR WALTER FOSTER

The Amendment moved by my hon. Friend contains words which give it a somewhat narrow limit, and I confess that I should have liked it better without the limitation. It is always difficult to define what domicile is, and it might be that, as in the case of marriage, a definition would be made in which a 24 hours' residence would constitute domicile. But I wish to say that I regard this Amendment as conceived in a broad and liberal spirit, and I am sorry that so broad and liberal a spirit is not generally infused into the University system, as I think the Universities would do much better were they to display that spirit in their mode of conferring degrees. I am sorry that any right hon. Gentleman sitting on the front Opposition Bench should have employed, as the right hon. Gentleman the member for Clackmannan (Mr. J. B. Balfour) has done, what I cannot but regard as the narrowest academical arguments against the proposed extension of privilege here sought to be conferred; and it is to me a matter of all the more surprise that such arguments should have been used by one who sits there as a leader of Scotch radicals. I hope it will not turn out that we shall see, as we did in the last Parliament, the right hon. and learned Gentleman entering into a treaty with the learned Lord Advocate in regard to this Bill in the same way as the Lord Advocate entered into one with him in relation to the Crofters' Act. I trust that we shall witness no repetition of that sort of alliance, because it would be one that would not be at all satisfactory to the Liberal party. With reference to this Amendment, the great argument used by my right hon. Friend on the front Opposition Bench was that the danger of this Amendment would consist in the effect it would have on the influence of the Universities on the students—that is to say that what the students obtain after a certain number of years' curriculum, would be lost to many of them if this Amendment were passed, and the Universities would be converted into mere examining Boards. Now, there is no necessity for their being converted into mere examining Boards, for if the right hon. Gentleman has any faith in his own principle he ought to believe that the University principle will live of itself. If University residence be a good thing, it will surely survive any alteration or widening of the regulations for the conferring of degrees. I may point out that in the Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen Universities there is nothing to compare with what is seen at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge in the shape of residential discipline. All that the students get at Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen—I will not venture to include St. Andrew's here—they can equally obtain in any properly conducted college in the United Kingdom; and if they can also ensure what they require in the way of information, I do not see why they should be debarred from graduating at the Universities which now have a monopoly of giving degrees. The Universities are very good in their influence, and the diffusion of their degrees is an object we are all desirous of obtaining. The degrees need not be lowered in any way, because more go up to receive them; they can be kept at the same high standard as at present, while their diffusion would have a wonderful influence on the general diffusion of education among the people. There are thousands of persons who now leave both public and private schools who have no incentive to go on with their studies because they have no object of ambition before them, such as would be attainable if the principle of this Amendment were conceded. I hold that these Scotch Universities ought to be looked at, not merely from a narrow point of view as Scottish institutions; but rather from a broader point of view as national institutions; because, as they are supported out of the national funds, the whole kingdom ought to have the right of access to their examining Boards and degrees. Taking one particular faculty, that of medicine, with which I myself am more familiar, what is the operation of the present system in the Scotch Universities? They have what is a monopoly in comparison with the provincial colleges in the granting of degrees, and they receive a public grant, which hitherto the English provincial colleges have not received, and thus they are enabled to provide a curriculum with which England cannot compete. They thereby withdraw English students from this country, they turn round and exclude our students from access to the degrees they give to their own students. It will hardly be believed that at the present moment if any one in England—say a member of this House—were to send his son for education in medicine to the best institution in London, in which men of the greatest eminence are maintained on the hospital staff—such, for example, as St. Bartholomew's, where, probably, the staff hold a higher scientific position than the staff of any similar institution in this country—the very fact that he selects the best institution debars his son from the right of obtaining a degree at St. Andrew's, because the curriculum is not recognised there, and yet the University of St. Andrew's, which grants degrees in medicine, is unable to completely educate a single doctor, and has not the means of so doing. That University, which confers degrees in medicine, will not admit men educated at the best medical school in London, unless they reside in a Scotch University.

An Hon. MEMRER

There are ten admitted each year.

* Sir W. FOSTER

I am aware of that. I have not been sending students from my own class for the last 30 years, and writing certificates for them year after year, without knowing what I am talking about. There are ten admitted every year; but if ten can be admitted every year, why not 100, or why not—should there be a sufficient number of candidates—one thousand? If a degree be a good thing for the medical profession, why should the number be limited to ten per annum? The reason for this limitation is that years ago St. Andrew's abused its privilege and admitted shiploads of candidates to the degree of Doctor of Medicine. But these ten men are admitted only after they have been a certain number of years in practice; and because they want to get a little social distinction which they have not been able to obtain as plain "misters." This is not the sort of inducement that should be held out for men to go up for their degrees. The incentive should be something more in the nature of scientific ambition, and that love of learning which young men should be encouraged to develop. If a young man has the requisite knowledge, he ought to be admitted as well as men of 40 or 45 years of age, whose only virtue in the eyes of the University is that they have been so long in practice. On these grounds, I think, the privilege now yielded by the St. Andrew's University, ought to be extended so that we might have hundreds going up for degrees instead of only ten every year; or, at any rate, a very much larger number than at present. If this result were brought about, it would be a good thing, both for the University itself, and for the people generally. The Amendment before the Committee is directed principally against what is a local monopoly. Men can obtain the necessary learning fitting them for medical degrees as well in Dundee as in St. Andrew's—as well at Stornoway or in the Western Islands as at Edinburgh or Glasgow. What is wanted is not to interfere with the teaching excellence of the Universities. The adoption of this Amendment would open the doors of the Universities as widely as possible, and it would be found that they would still draw to their classes the same sort of students as now, by virtue of the excellence of their teaching, while the desire for instruction elsewhere would be largely stimulated by the widening of the access. The professors, also, would be incited to extra exertions; they would endeavour to make their lectures more attractive, instead of relying on a monopoly to force a certain number of students into their classes. Another point I should like to touch upon is this: I think the Amendment of my hon. Friend might be improved if he would allow words to be introduced, which, I hope, the Lord Advocate will accept, indicating that those who are admitted to degrees, irre- spective of residence, should in some cases, be obliged to go through some curriculum in a recognised teaching institution. I should be glad to see the Bill so modified, while the liberalizing Amendment of my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Wallace) is adopted in the widest sense. By the incorporation in this Bill of a wide extension of the powers of the Universities to confer degrees, those institutions can, I am convinced, be not only strengthened in their position of usefulness, but a great and lasting impulse be given to higher education throughout the United Kingdom.

MR. CALDWELL

I regret that I am not able to support this Amendment, nor do I take this position on the grounds stated by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Clackmannan. The right hon. and learned Gentleman seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in the fact of students being connected with the Universities, and that degrees should only be granted to those who have gone through the full curriculum at one or other of the Universities. I quite agree with what has been said by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, as to the necessity and advantage in Scotland of having teachers in various parts of the country whose teaching should be recognized by the granting of degrees. I also concur in what was said by the last speaker (Sir W. Foster) as to why the Scotch Universities should go the length of recognizing efficient teaching of schools in England for the purpose of granting degrees, but I would point out that all this is provided for in the Bill, because in the concluding portion of sub-section 8 of this Clause, which has already passed the Committee it is provided that the Commissioners may if they think proper, determine the extent to which, and the conditions under which University Courts may grant recognition to the teaching of any college or individual teacher for the purposes of graduation. Therefore almost all that has been contended for is contained here, though not entirely. However, it is not, and will not be necessary that the students should attend any one of the four Universities in order to obtain their degrees. This is the important point in the Bill, that practically, for the first time, power is given to the Com- missioners and the University Court to authorize the recognition of teaching outside the Universities for the purpose of graduation. I admit that this does not go as far as the Amendment of the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr.. Wallace), but I think we ought to be satisfied to get the recognition of extramural teaching. The conferring of a University degree is not merely a mark of possession of knowledge; it is a recognition of the fact that that knowledge has been obtained in a particular way, and under a certain kind of training, it being the University training which enters materially into the elements of a degree. We have abolished the disqualifications which formerly existed against men being allowed to obtain employment as medical officers in the Army or Navy by passing a certain examination, and without being obliged to obtain a degree; the object of a degree being that it shall be evidence not only of the requisite knowledge, but that that knowledge was obtained at a University, I trust that the extension of extra-mural teaching will be promoted by this Bill, and that we may obtain in all parts of Scotland teachers qualified. in one or another department of education to diffuse some sound knowledge throughout the different portions of the community.

Dr. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeen, W.)

I am sorry I cannot support the Amendment, because I fear it would greatly injure, and perhaps ruin, the Scotch Universities. I feel bound to say that the most effective criticism of the Amendment came from the hon. Gentleman who seconded it, and who in the first instance entirely threw over the limitation of the advantage derived exclusively by the inhabitants of Edinburgh; and, secondly, made out a strong claim, in which I entirely concur, for the establishment of a regular curriculum for the study of medicine. But the proposal of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh amounts to this—that anyone sitting at home and studying certain text books, or attending certain lectures in any school he may think proper, may, if he desire it, come up for examination, and, if he has had a grinder clever enough, be passed through for his degree. The system of grinding has been so developed that almost any qualified grinder can put a student through almost any examination within a certain period; but the knowledge which a young man so obtains is as quickly lost as it is acquired. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Clackmannan has been severely animadverted on for the remarks he has offered on the subject of the Scotch Universities. I may say that I was brought up in the University of Edinburgh, where I obtained my degree. and I look back with affection and regard to the influences brought to bear on me by University life, carried on as it is even in the Scotch Universities, which are not so well regulated as the Universities of England. I cannot forget the friendships and acquaintanceships derived from sitting with the same students on the same benches, in the different classes, year after year listening to the same professors; nor can I but appreciate the loyalty of feeling and honourable pride which were stimulated by the association then begun with so many eminent men. No such advantages can be obtained from attendance at the smaller and less elaborately regulated places of instruction. For the reasons I have given I cannot support the Amendment.

* SIR LYON PLAYFAIR (Leeds, S.)

This Amendment mixes up two subjects, one of which I sympathize with, while I am unable to sympathize with the other. I would say, in the first place, that I sympathize with the encouragement of extra-mural teaching as a part of the curriculum for a degree, and I would point out that this is recognised by the Universities in regard to medical degrees. There is always a certain amount of attendance required for obtaining the degree, but the other portion of the curriculum may be followed in schools outside the Universities. If the hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh had meant that recognition of extra-mural teaching should be allowed in regard to arts as well as medicine I should have sympathized with that, but the Commissioners have already the necessary powers under the Bill. I attach much value to a certain residence of one or two years at a University. This gives an academic spirit and infuses a love for the Alma Mater.

MR. FIRTH (Dundee)

If a degree be taken by a man it is the signification of the possession of certain know- ledge, which, I apprehend, is the true definition of it. Whether that knowledge is given inter or extra-mural is surely not a matter of serious importance. Now. I speak with considerable knowledge of a University where extra-mural teaching does qualify for degrees—namely, in the University of London, and in that case the results have been abundantly successful. I think that by giving a University degree to a poor man on the lines proposed in the Amendment, you are enabling him to take the fullest advantage of the talent he possesses. As to insisting on a certain curriculum, I have great reverence for curriculums, but, after all, what does it matter as to the method by which you arrive at a given result: if you can attain it by reading one book in preference to another, what is the objection to doing so? After all, the result is what you have to look to, and as to the suggestion regarding what has occurred in Belgium, I can only say that the examiners there must be of a very different type to those we have in Scotland. I hope the Amendment of my hon. Friend will receive support.

Dr. CLARK

There is one aspect of this question which has not been laid before the House, and that is, the injury done to the teachers under the present system in Scotland. I am not prepared exactly to support the Amendment of my hon. Friend, because it is contrary to the existing law. But while teachers possessing a University degree get 10s. per head for all passes, other teachers only get 4s. per head. I think this is an injustice to poor teachers in Scotland which ought to be abolished. There is the old story that St. Andrew's got rich by certain degrees. I do not think that any University would attempt to do that now. Indeed I believe that no examiners for any degrees would pass men now, unless they were thoroughly qualified, and I am sure that the examining Board of St. Andrew's is equal, if not superior, to any examining board of the other three Universities. There is less favouritism and a man has a better chance of passing on his own merits. This argument applies equally to Germany. German degrees at one time were got very cheaply, but no one would dare to say that within the last 20 years a German degree could be obtained by any other method than hard work. In regard to the Faculty of Divinity, I think we want a change; we want something more liberal, and therefore I have put down my Amendment in the hope that the Government will see their way to agree to some modification. Are they prepared to concede anything to free teaching where there is no compulsion in regard to the curriculum?

MR. WALLACE

I must say I am rather disappointed to find that, although I endeavoured to make it plain that my great object was to secure the privilege of University distinction for those who, through poverty, are unable to achieve it at the present moment, without doing any injury to the existing system, that object has been overlooked by the whole body of my critics who have come from this side of the House, and have kindly spared the Lord Advocate the trouble of taking notice of my observations. Now, the objection to my Amendment is to the insertion of the words, "resident in Scotland," and in regard to that I must say that I simply put them in for the sake of the timid Conservatism with which I have to deal. I have no particular faith in them, but I thought it not unworthy to cultivate the wisdom of the serpent to that extent in order to secure support for the Amendment. I am, however, now willing to drop anything serpentine in my proposal. I think that the observations which have come from the hon. Member for Caithness and from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds with respect to the question of the curriculum arise entirely from their not having done me the honour to look at the terms of my Amendment. There is nothing in my Amendment hostile to the laying down of a regular curriculum in any branch of study. I have great respect for the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds in his didactic but not in his prophetic capacity. I have done all I can to show that not the slighest injury will he done to the existing constitution and system of the Scottish Universities, and I must complain that my right hon. Friends have taken no notice whatever of the place I have suggested. As to non-residential students, on the roll of Edinburgh University appears the name of Thomas Carlyle, who passed through the University as a non-residential student, and I would ask can it be contended if Carlyle's opinions had taken a different direction that his moral teaching would have been any the worse for his having been a non-residential student? I do not believe in the danger of the grinder which is insisted on by the hon. Member for the St. Rollox Division of Glasgow. The grinder is quite as active with his pupils who attend University classes as he can possibly be with students outside. The right hon Gentleman has spoken of the love of Alma Mater. I am the last man who would oppose the development of filial instincts, but I think the right hon. Gentleman gave way to unnecessary emotion, for I do not see how his remarks bore on the deeply practical question before the House.

MR. J. MACDONALD CAMERON, (Wick, &c.)

I believe the crammer is a very important factor in University examiners, and I am of opinion that University classes furnish many students for the crammers than are furnished by outside teachers. Before an examination comes on the crammer examiners look over the examination papers of preceding years in order to find out the particular fads of the professors; having done that, they coach their pupils accordingly. Now, I would press the Lord Advocate to accept this Amendment; I do not think its acceptance would give rise to the slightest difficulty.

DR. CAMERON (Glasgow, College)

I think that before we go to a Division we ought to have some expression of opinion on the general question to which this Amendment relates. When I read the Amendment I came to the conclusion that there could not be a question about supporting it, but when my hon. Friend behind me had exhausted his arguments in support of it, I found it a more difficult matter to vote for the proposal. I am entirely in favour of a University degree being considered as a certificate of so much knowledge, no matter how obtained. I do not care whether a man has been resident in Scotland or not, as my hon. Friend, in the superfluity of the guile of the serpent, wishes to propose. I do not wish a poor man to be kept back because of his poverty from an University degree, to be placed in a position of still further disadvantage to the student who can pay to attend the professional classes. The word curriculum, as far as I understand it, means the payment of so many fees. You have to take out so many course of lectures at so many guineas per course, so many more at so many more guineas, and so many more at so many more guineas. I cannot see how that makes a man a better scholar than if he acquired his knowledge in any other fashion. I understand that fees are necessary in an University, and we need not fear that they will be overthrown by this Amendment. The Universities will go on being fee-extracting institutions if you engraft the University of London system on to the Scotch University system, and I do not think there will be any deterioration in the quality of the degrees, for you may be sure that the examiners, if they are connected with the Universities, will take care that those who do not pay fees do not pass unless their knowledge is up to the standard of those who do. I hope the Government will give us some indication of the general principle to which they intend to adhere in this matter.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I think the general sense of the Committee is in favour of terminating the discussion. While the debate has been extremely interesting, I must say that if we are to have any regard to proportion and the number of questions which remain to be considered, we ought to come to a decision. The Committee will remember that it has already made most liberal provisions for extra-mural teaching for individuals as well as bodies. All that the Government propose to do is to resist an Amendment which will have the effect of introducing a system entirely at variance with that of the Scotch Universities, and of turning them into mere examining bodies. We have abstained hitherto from taking part in the discussion, not from any disrespect for the ability of those who have brought forward the subject, but rather because the ground has been so completely traversed by previous speakers.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 67; Noes 140.—(Div. List, No. 165.)

DR. CLARK

Mr. Chairman, I rise to a point of order. The Tellers left the door of the Aye Lobby before all the Members had passed through the door, and several Members were uncounted.

* THE CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member should have called attention to it before the Tellers left the Table.

MR. MACDONALD CAMERON

I beg to move the insertion after "degrees" of the words— Provided always, that they shall make ordinances and regulations for granting degrees in natural science. I believe that in the Universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow arrangements have been made for the granting of such degrees, but that in the other two Scottish Universities no such arrangements at present exist. I desire that it should be made compulsory for the Commissioners to make such orders and regulations as may be necessary to ensure the establishment of such degrees. I think myself that the tendency even in modern times to ignore the teaching of science is too great. Here we are in the age of steam and telegraphy, and the development of natural science in almost every branch, and yet facilities have not been granted by the Universities for the acquiring of degrees by men of equal standing to those who acquire knowledge in kindred branches of science.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 14, after "degrees" insert— Provided always, that they shall make ordinances and regulations for granting degrees in natural science.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

* MR. MOIR T. STORMONTH DARLING

It seems rather unnecessary to give specific directions to the Commissioners of this sort, particularly when we have regard to the fact that it is now a long time since degrees in natural science were instituted at Edinburgh, Glasgow, and St. Andrew's Universities. I am not at this moment aware whether the same course has been taken at Aberdeen, but even if that is not so, the Commissioners have ample powers in the matter. I think we may very well leave this to the Commissioners.

Question put, and negatived.

* MR. J. A. CAMPBELL

The object of the Amendment I have now to move is that, so far as is practicable there shall be uniformity in the four Universities as to the manner of examination, and the conditions under which degrees are conferred. I am not sure it is absolutely necessary to have a provision of this kind, but the words I propose to insert are taken from the Act of 1858. It may appear there is less desire for uniformity if we do not insert these words.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 18, after "examinations," insert— Provided always, that, in so far as it shall be practicable, and, in the opinion of the Commissioners, conducive to the well-being of the Universities, and to the advancement of learning, the course of study, the manner of examination, and the conditions under which degrees are to be conferred, shall be uniform in all the Universities of Scotland."—(Mr. J. A. Campbell.)

Question proposed, "That these words be inserted."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I am sorry that I cannot accept the Amendment of my hon. Friend. I entirely agree there is a necessity that the action of the University should to a large extent bear reference to and be in harmony with the development of others, but there are already provisions in the Bill to secure that object. I am, moreover, prepared to accept a subsequent Amendment of the right hon. Member for Leeds (Sir L. Playfair), for the establishment of a general University Court of the four Universities to review the general interests of the Universities, especially in regard to degrees and examinations.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made.

Clause 14, page 11, line 19, leave out "any," and insert "each." —(Dr. Clark.)

Clause 14, page 11, line 19, leave out "that may find it expedient."—(Dr. Clark.)

Clause 14, page 11, line 22, after "professors," insert "lecturers."—(Mr. Buchanan.)

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 26, after "new," insert, "and subject to compensation as herein provided to abolish existing." — (Mr. Hunter.)

Question proposed, "That these words be there inserted."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I think the hon. Gentleman will find his primary object in this Amendment can be more easily accomplished at another part of the Bill. He wants to abolish professorships, and as I said in answer to the right hon. Gentleman (Sir L. Playfair) a short time ago, I am quite prepared to be a party to carrying that out, but I think the better plan would be upon Report to insert in page 10, line 32, the words "to abolish offices including professorships." Then I do not think the words "subject to compensation" are required, because the general rule as to compensation is stated in the part of the Bill which we have been recently considering, and that has universal application to all offices.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 27, leave out all after "desirable" to "otherwise" in line 29. —(Mr. Hunter.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

We do not exact endowment in the case of all the establishments here referred to. The words are "endowment and support." It is necessary the Commissioners should have regard to the element of durability in the institutions they found.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

DR. CLARK

The object of the next Amendment is to make it compulsory on the Commissioners to enable the Universities to have extra-mural teaching. This is a matter upon which we should speak with no uncertain sound, indeed the Act will be worthless for all practical purposes unless there is a system of extra-mural teaching.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 32, leave out "if they think it expedient."—(Dr. Clark.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

The hon. Gentleman has very fairly discussed his Amendment as it appear on the Paper, but in order to appreciate the full force and stringency of the provision he has suggested I will ask the Committee to remember that the hon. Member proposes to delete the words "if they think it expedient," and the effect would be to compel the commission to increase extra-mural teaching. But the Committee have already decided that the matter of teaching power should be left to the Commission, and it is for the Commission to find the best method of dealing with it. Let the hon. Member be assured that by the provisions in the Bill the Commissioners are in no way discouraged, but are encouraged to greater recognition of extra-mural teaching; but I must strongly deprecate this method of inviting the Commission to increase this particular branch of teaching, irrespective of the teaching power inside the University.

DR. CLARK

I intend to take a Division on this point. Two things this Bill can do. It can make the Scotch Universities useful by abolishing them as close corporations, and especially the monopoly of the teachers, and the other thing is to give them a sum of money to enable them to still further develop their system. Now, under the present system the University professors have practically the monopoly of teaching, and not only that, they have the monopoly of examining. Now, I can speak from half a dozen years of University experience, and I will tell the Committee my experience in Glasgow and in Edinburgh. I had the honour of being a student under a very distinguished man at Glasgow University, who is now dead. He was a very able man in his day, and had distinguished himself in the high position he occupied. I was compelled to attend his lectures, and, because I was compelled to do so, I continued to attend these lectures, although, sitting on the front bench, I could not hear a word the learned professor uttered. I went there fully prepared to get all the advantage I could from the lectures. I had no objection to paying for the course, but I had to attend lectures where a man was always talking to himself, and not a single student heard a word he said. I could not attend any extra-mural teaching in Glasgow, because extra-mural teaching was not recognized at Glasgow Uni- versity. In my opinion, the reason why Edinburgh cuts out Glasgow as a medical school is because of the extra-mural teaching being recognized in the latter University. At Edinburgh I had experience under a professor of medicine, a splendid orator, with whom from the first I was delighted. I thought his first lectures charming. But I found, when the course was finished, that although I had heard most eloquent discourses on almost every subject under heaven, there was nothing of any practical advantage to the student of medicine. I can say this of the professor at Glasgow that he gave me the highest honours in physiology, though I never heard a word of his lectures thereon. My brother, who had passed through the class before me with a similar experience to mine, told me the professor gave honours to those who wrote essays carrying out his ideas. I knew his special theories, and adopted them, and so I obtained what as a test was practically worthless. Now, I say we want competition in teaching, and we want no favours in examination, not having the professor as examiner with his friend as assistant. The first means of attaining this end is by extramural lectures in all the faculties. The Government should not leave this as merely a permissive point to be determined by the Commissioners. It is a case in which we should give our decision.

* SIR WALTER FOSTER

I can confirm, to a large extent, the argument of my hon. Friend. The fact that in the most renowned University of Edinburgh the system of extramural teaching is encouraged more than elsewhere, supports the statement that the principle of competition is of greatest value in University matters. If you have competition between a number of colleges as at Oxford and Cambridge, you do not need any other competition, but in Scotland you have not that collegiate competition. To do away with the close corporation character of the teaching, and create competition between the teachers would give an incentive to excellence that would, I am sure, be to the advantage of the Scotch Universities.

* SIR G. TREVELYAN

The subject on which we are now engaged is considered, by many, to be the very heart and core of the Bill. This proposal is one that is supported by those whose disinterested desire it is to open out the teaching of the University. So far as I can gather among those who have been foremost in promoting this legislation there is great dissatisfaction with the working of this present system, and they think that this clause is exceedingly lax and wants stiffening. I have looked at the Amendment of my hon. Friend, and I have compared them with my own which would come in on the next sentence, and I cannot say that I see any distinction in principle between them and the method in which we endeavour to carry it into action. There may be in one of the Universities an excess of teaching power as compared with the number of students, but I do not think that some slight inconvenience to St. Andrew's should be a reason for setting at nought this demand. My own opinion is the Lord Advocate would do well to consider his duty in regard to this point, for by making a concession he will gratify that great body of men, who, more than others, have the reform of the Universities at heart.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

It must be remembered that the part of the clause is correlative with the powers of the University Court, and I may say that in regard to those powers I did my best to meet the views of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. I took his own words. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will bear in mind that the proposal is not merely to strike out the words if they think expedient, but by the series of Amendments it will be incumbent on the Commissioners to strengthen the University, if it requires to be strengthened, by extra-mural teaching, and by extra-mural teaching alone. In the case of what has been called "bloated professorships," any considerations of the kind submitted to us formerly to the effect that the emoluments may be divided among an increased staff, would have to be disregarded, and the Commissioners would have recourse to extra-mural teaching—a preposterous proposal, but that which would be the result of such an imperious restriction. We are anxious to encourage extra-mural teaching, but we have considered this matter most carefully and closely, and must adhere to the words the hon. Member proposes to omit.

DR. CLARK

The Amendment, I might say, was suggested to me by Dr. Watson, Chairman of the Council of the Edinburgh University Association, and it should be observed that I still leave the power optional with the Commissioners, inasmuch as I leave the words "or otherwise."

* MR. BUCHANAN

I with many other Members would like to know if the right hon. Gentleman proposes to admit any qualification to the subsequent part of the clause, which would meet the views of the General Council of Edinburgh University?

* Mr. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I may say here that I am quite prepared to accept both Amendments of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bridgeton, which are in complete harmony with what was settled the other night in relation to the powers of the University Court.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 202; Noes 73.—(Div. List, No. 166.)

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 34, leave out if they think proper."—(Sir George Trevelyan.)

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 34, leave out from "determine," to "conditions," in line 35, inclusive, and insert "make regulations."—(Sir George Trevelyan.)

Amendment agreed to.

SIR G. TREVELYAN

The Committee are aware that there are three classes of professors to be dealt with, namely, the old professors, appointed before 1882, those who have been appointed since then, and those who will be appointed after the passing of the Act. The first class are out of the purview of the Bill. Their position, I take it, is fixed and cannot be altered. With regard to those who have been appointed since April 6th, 1882, the Commissioners will have to lay down conditions under which they will be entitled to pensions. As to those who are appointed in the future I hope the Committee will think twice before giving them a statutory right to a pension. It has been a very serious thing in the past and has very seriously hampered the Universities, to have the pensions always thrown in their teeth when they wished to make new professorships, but it will be a much more serious thing in the future when all pensions will have to come out of the limited fund from which the other requirements of the Universities will have to be met. The Amendment I have to propose does not ask that in future it shall be forbidden to grant pensions, but that it should be left to the Commissioners to say whether they will grant them or not. The Amendment will make it quite plain that the professors appointed in the future will not have a statutory claim to pensions. It leaves the Commission with a perfectly free hand, and I must say I think that in the financial and in some respects the educational interests of the Universities it will be well to adopt it.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 40, leave out from "and," to the first "and," in line 42, inclusive.—(Sir G. Trevelyan.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

* THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN,) St. George's, Hanover Square

There is great force in the right hon. Gentleman's observations, and this question of pensions in the future requires to be treated with very great care indeed. I do not know that there are any words in this clause which absolutely declare that pensions are to be given in the future to the professors. I think the clause would leave it open to the Commissioners to act in the way they think expedient after considering the circumstances of the case. I do not think the words proposed to be inserted by the right hon. Gentleman will exactly suit, because you can hardly apply the word "abolish" to pensions not yet granted. Perhaps it would meet the case if the Lord Advocate would consider the matter before Report, and would introduce words which would guard against laying down an absolute principle that professors are to have pensions.

SIR G. TREVELYAN

Perhaps that would be the best way to deal with this complicated question.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

SIR G. CAMPBELL

The Amendment which stands in my name is intended to provide an alternative to the rigid rule of compensation. I hate the word compensation, but I think it quite reasonable that power should be given to grant pensions to those whose appointments are abolished or whose resignations may be accepted in consequence of alterations made pursuant to this Act.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 11, line 41, after "Act," add— Or whose appointments may be abolished, or whose resignations may be accepted in consequence of changes made in pursuance of this Act."—(Sir G. Campbell.)

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

The question whether compensation should be awarded is necessarily affected by the rights of the professor on the expiry of his office. I do not think the hon. Gentleman will find, however, that there will be really any obstacle to carrying out his view by leaving the words in this clause as they stand.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following Amendments were agreed to:—

Clause 14, page 12, line 11, after "Academicus," insert "and the General Council."—(Sir G. Trevelyan.)

Clause 14, page 12, line 11, leave out "its, "and insert "their."—(Sir G. Trevelyan.)

* SIR LYON PLAYFAIR

The Amendment I have to propose differs from the recommendations of the Commissions of 1878. That Commission recommended that the general University Court should be an executive body, and my Amendment recommends that the Court should be an advising body.

Amendment proposed, Clause 14, page 12, line 26, insert the following sub-section:— To establish after the first day of January One thousand eight hundred and ninety two, a General University Court of the four Universities, with a view of taking in review the general interest of the Universities, especially in regard to degrees and examinations, and with the duty of reporting to Her Majesty on new ordinances, or changes in existing ordinances, affecting all or any of the Universities, and with power to report to the Secretary for Scotland on matters connected with the Universities upon which they may deem it to be of importance to represent their views, or upon subjects which may be specially referred to them by the Secretary for Scotland."—(Sir Lyon Playfair.)

Question, "That this sub-section be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

The following Amendments were also agreed to:—

Clause 15, page 12, lines 33 and 34, leave out "and after the expiry of their powers, the University Court."—(The Lord Advocate.)

Clause 15, page 12, line 35, after "them," insert "and after the expiration of their powers, the University may make similar ordinances."—(The Lord Advocate.)

* MR. BAIRD (Glasgow, Central)

I beg to move after "parties" the insertion of the words, "Provided that such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. "I think some power should be given to see that the objections taken are, at all events, reasonable.

Amendment proposed, Clause 15, page 12, line 40, after "parties," insert "Provided that such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld." — (Mr. Baird.)

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I am afraid that these words would be entirely inoperative. They would be merely an exhortation to the University Court, and not a prohibition as to anything the Court might do. Therefore, while sympathizing with the object of my hon. Friend, I do not think we ought to encumber the Act with the words.

MR. CALDWELL

There is a great deal in what the right hon. Gentleman says, but I think it is only right that provision should be made that a college should not be deprived of the advantages of affiliation by the University Court without appeal. I hope, therefore, that before Report the right hon. Gentleman will consider the advisability of establishing some power of review on the part of the Universities' Commission in this respect.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I shall be inclined to consider that case. I am bound to say, however, I am not very hopeful on the subject, as the question of affiliation is treated in the Bill as being a question of consent on one side and the other. It will be difficult to apply compulsion to one Party and not to the other. On the other hand, I am so fully convinced of the desirability of having some control in the matter that I will look into it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 15 agreed to.

Clause 16.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

I have to move an Amendment giving the Commissioners power to incorporate the Colleges of St. Andrew's into one body. There are two colleges in St. Andrew's University. The Universities Commission which reported in 1868 recommended that power should be given almost in terms of this Motion to incorporate the two colleges into one University. It is not an obligation, but a power. It was introduced into successive Bills, and, if I mistake not, was in the Government Bill of last year and passed the House of Lords. It seems to be a proper provision, and it is in accordance with the history of St. Andrew's and other bodies that such steps should be taken in the course of University Reform. Now that the University Court will have the duty of looking after the property and revenues of the College, these colleges will really have no corporate work to do, and accordingly the so-called Divinity College will practically be a Faculty of Divinity. These processes of incorporation wherever they have been tried have been attended with the best results, and experience has proved that where there has been friction between such collegiate bodies while they existed as separate institutions, it has been brought to an end when the process of amalgamation has taken place.

Amendment proposed, Clause 16, page 14, after line 3, insert— (1) As regards the University and Colleges of St. Andrew's, if they shall see fit, after investigation and hearing all parties interested, to incorporate them into one body under the name of the University of St. Andrew's, under such conditions as shall seem just, having due regard to vested interests.''(Mr. J. B. Balfour.)

Sir G. CAMPBELL

I hope the Government will not accept the Amendment, which seems to me to be entirely inconsistent with the affiliation scheme. I hope and trust that this system of affiliating colleges will be much more extended, and that we shall have affiliated colleges in Dundee, in Kirkcaldy, and in other places. I do not think that one college ought to be incorporated into the University whilst others have a separate existence.

* MR. MOIR T. STORMONTH DARLING

I am happy to say we are in entire agreement with the hon. Member who has just spoken. In the Bill of the late Government, as well as in the Bill of last year, there was a proposal of the kind now suggested, but the feeling now is all in favour of the multiplication of colleges, and not of their fusion, and really there is no practical good to be gained by the incorporation of the two colleges which have existed for centuries at St. Andrews.

MR. BUCHANAN

This clause was in the Bill of 1883, in all the Bills of the late Government, and in the Bills of last year. It was also all the Bill of the late Government, and recommended by the Commission of 1876. After all, it is merely an enabling clause. I was rather surprised at my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy taking up the line he did, because earlier in the evening I voted with him in favour of giving the Commissioners power to abolish theological faculties in the University of St. Andrew's, and one of these colleges is really nothing more or less than a theological faculty. Surely no adequate reason has been given why that which has been so often recommended in the past should be dropped out of the Bill of this year.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

I now beg to move an Amendment giving the Commissioners power to declare that a Chair located in Dundee shall be a Chair of the University of St. Andrew's. It would, however, by no means make incorporation compulsory on any body.

Amendment proposed, Clause 16, page 14, line 8, leave out from "having" to "trust," in line 10, inclusive, and insert— And also to declare that a Chair located in Dundee shall be a Chair of the University of St. Andrew's."—(Mr. J. B. Balfour.)

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

The language of the clause was carefully considered and adjusted in another place last year, and I should certainly scruple to strike out words which had the sanction of both parties at that time.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

I now move that the words "or any Chair or Chairs thereof" should be inserted in line 4 of the clause after the word "college." It is conceivable that some of these Chairs might desire to be allied to the University of St. Andrew's, while others might not, and I think it would be well that there should be as much latitude and flexibility about the arrangement as possible by giving power to deal with particular Chairs of a college.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I am afraid I cannot accept this Amendment. In order to affiliate a college you must have some regular organism, and I fail to see how you can say you will affiliate not a particular body but particular part of it—a Chair here and a Chair there. It seems to me that that would not, in the true sense, be a process of affiliation at all. And I would further point out that it is quite within the power of the Commissioners to make such arrangements in the terms of affiliation as would attach to a University those Chairs which are properly germane to the University.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

I do not press the Amendment after what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has stated.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

DR. FARQUHARSON

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept the next Amendment which is in my name?

MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

Yes; I have no objection to it.

Amendment proposed, Clause 16, page 14, line 7, after the word "equipped," insert the word "conjoint."

Question, "That this word be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

I now have to move my next Amendment—namely, to leave out of this clause from lines 8 to 10 the words from "having" to "trust" in order to insert these words: And also to declare that a Chair located in Dundee shall be a Chair in the University of St. Andrew's. I am told it is probable that the munificence of persons belonging to the large and wealthy city of Dundee may desire to find expression by associating their names with the foundation of particular Chairs, without making them Chairs of the University College, Dundee. For instance, there may be some who would wish to provide a Chair of Clinical Surgery, or practical Anatomy in connection with the Hospital at Dundee, associating his own name with it, and it would be desirable upon such a Chair being established, it should be within the competency of the Commissioners to declare it to be a Chair of the University of St. Andrew's, if this was desired by the parties interested.

Amendment proposed, Clause 16, page 14, line 8, leave out from "having," to "trust" in line 10, inclusive, and insert— And also to declare that a Chair located in Dundee shall be a Chair of the University of St. Andrew's.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

Either it is in the power of the Commissioners to do what is proposed, or it is not, and if not, the matter is one that ought to be dealt with by a general enactment enabling the Commissioners to accept the foundation of a Chair on condition that it be locally situated in a different place from the University. I should rather deprecate the selection of Dundee.

* MR. J. B. BALFOUR

Under the circumstances I will not press the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

DR. FARQUHARSON

I have now to move an Amendment, which I think will be very useful in strengthening the principle of development at St. Andrew's.

Amendment proposed, Clause 16, page 14, after Sub-section (1), insert the following sub-section:— To found Chairs of Anatomy and Botany at St. Andrew's, so as to enable the University of St. Andrew's to give two anni medici, the period of residence required by the Scottish Universities for medical graduation.

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I hope the hon. Gentleman will not persist in this Amendment. If we were to accept it we should step into the province of the Commissioners, and be pointing out to them specific changes which we desire to make; whereas in all other cases we leave them entirely unfettered. I ought to point out that there is a general power which would completely justify the Commissioners in founding these Chairs.

DR. FARQUHARSON

I will not press the Amendment after what has been stated by the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following Amendments were agreed to: Clause 16, page 14, line 12, after the first "to," insert "and made to form part of clause 16, page 14, line 17, leave out after "affiliation" to end of clause, and insert— And, in the event of such affiliation not taking place within such time after the passing of this Act as the Commissioners shall consider reasonable, they may regulate the time, place, and manner of such election as seems to them best

Clause 16, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 17.

SIR G. CAMPBELL

I propose to omit all reference to the Theological Board by leaving out all the words after "various" to "without the," and the clause would read— That the Commissioners have power to call before them and examine the principals and professors of the Universities and such other witnesses as they think proper. Is it intended that the Commissioners shall hold inquiries into doctrinal matters such as the attitude of the Holy Ghost, or things of that kind. I move, in Clause 17, page 14, line 21, to leave out all after "various," to "without the," in line 22, inclusive.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

* MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

I think it is very desirable that the Commissioners should deal with all the various interests, and I am not quite sure whether the hon. Gentleman might not have gone further. I have taken into consideration whether his object would not be better served by making the clause run thus—''The Commissioners shall have power to take such evidence as they think proper."

SIR G. CAMPBELL

I accept the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, to insert one word, "That the Commissioners shall have power to take such evidence as they think proper."—(The Lord Advocate.)

Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Question proposed, "That Clause 17, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

* MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

We have now reached an important point. My hon. Friend (Mr. Bryce) will raise an important debate on this clause, which he proposes to omit, and I hope we need not commence the debate so near the time of adjournment.

* MR. W. H. SMITH

I agree with the view of the right hon. Gentleman. I think it is a reasonable one. No doubt the question to be discussed is a very important one, but I hope the discussion to-morrow will be brought to a close at an early hour. The Government are desirous of meeting hon. Gentlemen as far as they possibly can, and they have made this measure not a Party one in any sense whatever, but one for the improvement of the Universities. I hope the discussion will be over to-morrow at an early hour, and that we shall be able to report the Bill to the House without further delay.

* MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

I think I fairly interpret the views of my hon. Friend when I say that the discussion will not take a very long time, so that the wishes of the right hon. Gentleman will probably be realized.

Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.