§ MR. HARWOODSir, the Amendment I have now to propose is on section 3, clause 2, page 2, line 21, to leave out "three" and insert "five." According to the Bill, three Commissioners are to be empowered to carry out the work, but it seems to me that if the House refuses to enlarge the Commission we will be reduced to an absurdity. The great consideration is to inspire confidence in the university. We all know quite well that where three prsons are brought together—even the three most 1186 perfect persons—they have each a peculiar characteristic, and we do say that the public has a right to have a proper safeguard, and I do not think there should be any objection to five forming a quorum. I beg to move that "five" be substituted for "three," on the ground that "five" is quite a small enough number to inspire confidence.
§ SIR J. GORSTI think the House will see that three members are not enough; It would be inconvenient to have a small quorum having regard to the amount of formal and routine work that must be done by the Commissioners. I 1187 think, therefore, that three is not quite adequate.
§ MR. BRIGGI really think it would be desirable that a larger quorum than three should be named. I support the Amendment of the honourable Member who moved that "five" should be substituted for "three."
§ *SIR J. LUBBOCKI admit that three is undoubtedly a small quorum, but I think we may fairly assume that the names of the Commissioners is a guarantee that important questions will be properly considered.
MR. GRIFFITHIt seems to me that three is too small a number for a quorum, because it is an actual minority of the Commissioners, whereas if it was four we would have a majority of the Commissioners present.
§ Question put and Division challenged.
§ Mr. SPEAKERput the question the second time after Members had returned, and at this point the Amendment was negatived without a Division.
§
Amendment proposed—
Page 2, line 33, leave out 'five,' and insert 'six.'"—(Mr. Brigg.)
§ MR. BRIGGSir, I think the Amendment standing in my name is a very much more important one than the one just under consideration. Sir, seeing the importance of the work that these commissioners have in hand, and especially at the commencement of their work, and that the Statutes and regulations made for the government of the university are likely to endure for a long time, it does seem to me of the highest importance that we should have the full authority of every one of these eminent gentlemen whose names we have down; and we have endeavoured in this House to-night to increase the number of these people, and to increase the variety of the information which ought to be brought to bear in the formation of a university of this kind. Each one of these gentlemen are proposed to represent some very important branch, and in the discharge of their duty, some important function bearing upon their work, it seems to me 1188 a very undesirable thing that they should be reduced down to five, and still that their work should be valid. The Amendment I move is that there should be not less than six of these commissioners at the same time. I have had a little experience in a matter of this kind, and I can assure the House, as well as the right honourable Gentleman, that the rule worked exceedingly well; that is, on a very large trust having to deal with a very large amount of money. One rule is that no act of any kind whatever shall be confirmed or passed by those trustees until the full number are elected. The consequence is that when death occurs, or a vacancy arises, then immediately steps are taken to fill up the number. I think there should be the same number in this case; and I feel that, having regard to the considerable importance of the functions of these gentlemen, each of whom represents a separate function and a separate constituency, it would be undesirable that they should be allowed to dwindle down as low as five. There seems to be no special clause, as far as I have been able to ascertain, for increasing the number, and it seems that they may stand at the number five for an indefinite length of time. That seems a very undesirable condition of things. I may have overlooked a clause in the Bill providing that whenever the number is below seven they shall be increased, but I am not aware of it. At the present moment I merely suggest that there should be not less than six of the commissioners for the work they have in hand.
§ *SIR A. ROLLITMany of us feel with my honourable Friend opposite that six would be quite few enough for this Commission, upon which there is no direct representation of the external students, against which I have strongly, though in vain, protested; but we are bound to remember that the subject was fully discussed in Committee, and, if I remember rightly, we proposed to take a Division upon it. My right honourable Friend the Vice-President of the Council, however, met us by way of compromise, and five, I think, was generally assented to. I still retain the opinion I held on the subject, but in view of the Committee compromise I should suggest to my honourable Friend that he should withdraw his Amendment.
§ *SIR. J. LUBBOCKAs the number five was a compromise in Committee which I myself suggested, and my right honourable Friend the Vice-President of the Council was good enough to accept it, I feel I am bound to support it. I would, therefore, support my honourable Friend the Member for Islington in expressing a hope that my honourable Friend opposite will not press the matter to a Division.
§ MR. BRIGGUnder the circumstances, and having regard to what the two honourable Gentlemen have just said, I will ask leave to withdraw the Amendment
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.