HC Deb 04 August 1877 vol 236 cc427-33

Lords Amendments considered.

Lords Amendments agreed to as far as the Amendment in page 5, line 38.

Amendment in page 5, lines 38 and 39, to leave out the words "and purposes of such college as a place of education," in order to insert the words " of the college or hall for those purposes," the next Amendment, read a second time.

MR. DODSON

moved to disagree with the Lords' Amendment. As the Bill left the House the clause provided that the Commissioners, in making a statute for a College, should have regard, in the first instance, to the maintenance and purpose of such College as a place of education. The clause, as amended by the Lords, provided that the Commissioners in making statutes for the University should have regard to the interests of education, religion, learning, and research; and in the case of a statute for a College should have regard, in the first instance, to the maintenance of the College for these purposes. He contended that the clause, as amended, did not give the first place to the interests of education.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth disagree with The Lords in the said Amendment."— (Mr. Dodson.)

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

thought the Amendment in the clause was almost identical with it when it left the House of Commons. He hoped hon. Members would not consider it necessary to divide on the Amendment. It merely provided that religious instruction should also be given in the Colleges, and surely there was no occasion to disagree with their Lordships on that.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

, in supporting the Lords' Amendments, thanked the Government for its procedure. He trusted hon. Members did not want to make the Colleges merely boarding schools. The sustentation of Research, religious and secular, had always been and would, he trusted, always continue a reason of their existence.

MR. GOSCHEN

was of opinion that the Lords' Amendments meant more than the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War expressed. For his (Mr. Goschen's) part he should oppose the Amendment on the grounds that the Commons' Committee had decided that regard should be had, in the first instance, to education.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 27; Noes 62: Majority 35.—(Div. List, No. 300.)

Amendments agreed to, as far as the Amendment in page 6, line 21.

Amendment in page 6, line 21, to leave out the words "sub-section 6," the next Amendment, read a second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with. The Lords in the said Amendment."—(Mr. Secretary Hardy.)

MR. DODSON

proposed to disagree with another Amendment. The Commons had inserted among the other powers a power to abolish Professorships and Lectureships, and by the Lords' Amendment, with which he proposed that the House should disagree, that power was omitted. The power was of some importance, and he hoped the Government would insist on its retention in the Bill. It was simply an enabling power.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, he thought it was hardly worth while coming to a difference with the Lords upon this matter. They had unanimously struck out the words, because it was felt that it might discourage future endowments. The powers of the Commissioners were quite large enough without these words.

MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN

contended that it was preferable that this power should be given in an open and direct manner, and that its existence should not be left in doubt. There might be a Professorship which failed to attract students, and for which it might be desired to substitute another. Upon going into Committee upon the Bill, they had a long debate which related mainly to the proposed extension of the Professorial system, which was much condemned on the other side of the House. If the power to abolish Professorships, once having being inserted in the Bill, were now struck out, an erroneous interpretation might be put upon the views and intentions of Parliament.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, he personally preferred the words to remain; but he thought it scarcely necessary to differ with the Lords on the matter, especially as they were not essential. He would, however, in deference to what had been urged, move to disagree with the Lords' Amendment.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment disagreed to.

Amendment agreed to, as far as Amendment to leave out Clause 60, and insert Clause E.

Leave out Clause 60, and insert Clause E, the next Amendment, read a second time.

MR. GOSCHEN

stated that the House of Lords had omitted Clause 18, relating to religious instruction, and had combined it in part with Clause 59. In the Bill, as it left the Commons, Clauses 18 and 60 were as follows:— 18. The Commissioners, in statutes made by them, shall make provision, as far as may appear to them requisite, for the due fulfilment of the requisitions of sections five and six of The Universities Tests Act, 1871 (relating to religious instruction and to morning and evening prayer in Colleges); but they shall not make directly or indirectly through the consolidation or combination of any office or emolument with any other office or emolument, whether in the University or in a College, the entry into holy orders or the taking of any test a condition of the holding of any office, or emolument to which that condition is not at the passing of this Act attached. 60. Nothing in this Act shall authorize the Commissioners, by a statute made by them, to endow, wholly or in part, an office of an ecclesiastical or theological character by means of any portion of the revenues or property of the University or College not forming, when the statute comes into operation, the endowment or part of the endowment of an office of that character. As amended by their Lordships, these clauses were now combined in a single clause, which stood as follows:— 59. The Commissioners, in statutes made by them, shall make provision, as far as may appear to them requisite, for the due fulfilment of the requisitions of sections five and six of The Universities Tests Act, 1871 (relating to religious instruction and to morning and evening prayer in Colleges); but, except for that purpose, they shall not, by a statute made by them, endow wholly or in part an office of an ecclesiastical or theological character by means of any portion of the revenues or property of the University or a College not forming, when the statute comes into operation, the endowment, or part of the endowment, of an office of that character, and in any statute made by them, shall not make directly or indirectly through the consolidation or combination of any office or emolument with any other office or emolument, whether in the University or in a College or Hall, the entering into holy orders or the taking of any test a condition of the holding of any office or emolument existing at the passing of this Act to which that condition is not at the passing of this Act attached. He maintained that the clause, as it now stood, would override the general spirit of the Bill, and the principle for which the Government had all along contended. The Lords' Amendment would give the Commissioners power to apply funds not hitherto used for ecclesiastical purposes towards the endowment of certain Colleges, and establishing chaplaincies and religious teaching.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, he hoped his right hon. Friend would not press the objection. The clause as it stood involved no departure from the spirit of the Act, or from what he undertook in the passage of the Bill through the House. He had not then, however, been aware that there was one College at Oxford—Merton—which had no religious endowment, although under the University Tests Act it was bound to provide religious instruction to all its members; and it was to meet this difficulty that the Amendment in question had been introduced. There was no intention whatever to go back upon the spirit of what he had proposed; but it was found necessary in the case of Merton College to make provision for some religious instruction and morning and evening service.

MR. DODSON

said, he did not think the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman sufficient to justify the House in accepting the Amendment made upon the clause in the House of Lords. If the difficulty had not arisen during the years that had elapsed since the passing of the Tests Act, why was it necessary now to provide for it? Besides, the clause was far too sweeping to meet merely the exceptional case of a single College.

MR. OSBORNE MORGAN

concurred in thinking that the clause was far too sweeping to meet an isolated case.

MR. MOWBRAY

pointed out that the clause was of a limited nature.

MR. GOSOHEN

moved to amend the Amendment by omitting the words "except for that purpose."

Amendment proposed in Clause E, line 5, to leave out the words "or except for that purpose."—(Mr. Goschen.)

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, he would suspend his Motion to agree to the Lords' Amendment until the House had had an opportunity of pronouncing upon the Motion just made by the right hon. Gentleman.

MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN

urged that it would be enough to provide for the exceptional case of Merton College. If that was really the only College on behalf of which the Amendment had been introduced, there might have been no intention at the present moment to apply the powers given to any other College, but they were no doubt of general application, and money heretofore devoted solely to secular purposes might thus be applied to theological endowment. The Bill had been throughout discussed in a friendly spirit, and he deprecated the introduction of theological controversy at this final stage of the measure. He urged the Government either to withdraw the words which had been inserted by the other House, or to confine their application to Merton College.

Question put, "That the words 'or except for that purpose,' stand part of the Clause."

The House divided:—Ayes 61; Noes 45: Majority 16.—(Div. List, No. 301.)

MR. MONK

said, that as the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hardy) said the power given to the Commissioners was only caused by the position of the College of Merton, it was not necessary to carry it farther than was required. He therefore begged to move to insert in the clause the words, " so far as relates to the College of Merton."

MR. OSBORNE MORGAN

seconded the Motion.

Amendment proposed, in Clause E, line 6, after the word "purpose," to insert the words "so far as relates to the College of Merton."—(Mr. Monk.)

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

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, that the words proposed would not make sense, and irrespective of that he was not prepared to accept them. He was informed there were other Colleges in the same position.

MR. GOSCHEN

observed that that appeared inconsistent with what the right horn Gentleman had already stated.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY

said, he had been since informed that there were other Colleges in the same position as Merton.

MR. GOSCHEN

said, that the Lords' Amendment would mar much that would be done by the Bill, and urged that as the discussions had been conducted in a conciliatory spirit, the right hon. Gentleman should not insist on that Amendment.

Question put, and negatived.

Question put, "That this House doth agree with The Lords in the said Amendment."

The House divided:—Ayes 61; Noes 44: Majority 17.—(Div. List, No. 302.)

Subsequent Amendments agreed to.

Committee appointed, "to draw up Reasons to be assigned to The Lords for disagreeing to one of their Amendments to the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge Bill: "—Mr. Secretary HARDY, Mr. Secretary CROSS, Mr. WALPOLE, Mr. MOWBRAY, Mr. WILLIAM EDWARD FORSTER, Mr. DODSON, Mr. GOSCHEN, Mr. KNATCHBITLL-HUGESSEN, Mr. BOURKE, and Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND:—To withdraw immediately:—Three to he the quorum.