Lords Sitting of 6 April 1876

MINUTES.
Public Bills—First Reading—Partition Act (1868) Amendment* (52); Drugging of Animals* (53).
Second Reading—Supreme Court of Judicature (Ireland) (31).
Committee—University of Oxford (45–51).

CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES.
Moved that the Lord Winmarleigh be appointed to take the Chair in the Committees of the Whole House in the absence of the Lord Redesdale: Agreed to.
PRIVATE BILLS.
Ordered, That Standing Orders Nos. 91. and 92. be suspended; and that the time for depositing petitions praying to be heard against Private Bills, which would otherwise expire during the adjournment of the House at Easter, be extended to the first day on which the House shall sit after the Recess.
THE ROYAL TITLES BILL.

  QUESTION.
  EARL GRANVILLEasked the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, Whether it was his intention to propose any alteration in the Royal Titles Bill with the view of meeting the points suggested by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Selborne) on Monday night?
  The LORD CHANCELLOR: In consequence of the suggestion which my noble and learned Friend was good enough to make the other night, Her Majesty's Government have given the most careful consideration to the point. We have considered whether any Amendment is, according to our judgment, necessary in the Royal Titles Bill; and, after considering that question with the greatest care, the Government are quite of opinion that there is no difficulty whatever in giving effect to the intention of the Government to except from the operation of the Bill all commissions, writs, and similar documents operating in this country. It is not, therefore, our intention to propose any Amendment.

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (IRELAND) BILL—(No. 31.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (IRELAND) BILL—(No. 31.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  LORD O'HAGANsaid, that since the first reading the Bill had been carefully considered by those who were most competent to form an opinion on it, and he was bound to say that there appeared to be no objection to its principle, and no reason why it should not be
  1302
  read a second time. It proceeded on the lines of the English Judicature Act, which he was happy to hear had been a great success. The objections made by the profession to the Irish Bill of 1874 seemed to have met with consideration at the hands of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, and had been largely obviated in this measure. He hoped that as a whole the Bill would receive the sanction of their Lordships and would prove beneficial to Ireland. At the same time, he was bound to say that in respect of the number of the Judges a wiser view had been taken by the Commission of 1863, of which his noble and learned Friend was a Member. That Commission had reported unanimously that there was no reason for a reduction of the number; but in the Bill before their Lordships provision was made for such a reduction. This was a point on which anything he might say was not likely to lead to a reversal of the decision arrived at by the Government; but he thought that nothing had occurred since 1863 which made the Report of the Commissioners upon it less applicable now than when it was made. The fiscal provisions of the Bill, to some of which exception should be taken, were for the House of Commons. The other Amendments which the Bill required were matter for Committee.
  THE EARL OF BELMOREalso expressed his approval of the principle of the Bill, though he thought that the measure might be improved in Committee.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he had heard with great pleasure the remarks of his noble and learned Friend and of his noble Friend. Their suggestions in Committee would receive his careful attention.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 1st of May next.

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD BILL.
(Nos. 16–45).
(The Marquess of Salisbury.)

COMMITTEE ON RE-COMMITMENT.
House again in Committee (on Re-Commitment) (according to Order).
Statutes for University and Colleges.
Clause 16 (Objects of statutes for Colleges in themselves). Sub-section (1.)

1303
"For altering the conditions of eligibility to any emolument or office, other than the headship, held in the College, and the mode of election thereto, the length and conditions of tenure thereof, and the powers appertaining thereto, and for providing a pension for a holder thereof, or any of those matters."
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN moved to omit the words "and the powers appertaining there to. "He did not see why the Commissioners should have authority to deprive non-resident Fellows of the power of taking a part in the Government of the College.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that on the other side they had had constant denunciation against Convocation as the Governing Body of the University, on account of the number of non-resident Fellows it comprised. It was rather inconsistent of those who joined in those denunciations to wish to hand over the government of the Colleges to non-resident Fellows. The non-resident Fellows of Colleges, as compared with the resident Fellows, bore a larger proportion than did the non-resident to the resident Members of Convocation. One part of the scheme to which this Bill was to give effect consisted of a provision that non-resident Fellows should hold office for a shorter duration and with smaller amounts. The consequence would be an increased number of Fellowships. If Fellowships were to be held for only three or five years the result would be that a large number of the Fellowships would be held by very young men. If they were to be allowed to take part in governing the Colleges, the government of the Colleges would be handed over not only to younger men, but to a body which would change more frequently. It was on this ground that it was proposed to give the Commission authority to alter those powers.
LORD CARLINGFORDthought that the proposition contained in the sub-section, the effect of which was to exclude Fellows from the government of their Colleges, was a serious and novel one, and required more argument than that which had been adduced in its favour by the noble Marquess.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYthought that all the Fellows should have a share in the government of their Colleges. It was feared that the young Fellows would have too great a share in the government; but young Fellows in course of time became old Follows. With a
1304
view to prevent government by a clique it would be wise to preserve to the non-resident Fellows the right of taking a share in the government of the Colleges.
THE EARL OF MORLEY AND LORD COLCHESTER were understood to support the Amendment.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that as there were batteries on the right and on the left and in front of him, there was nothing for him but a retreat, and he would therefore assent to the Amendment.
Amendment agreed to; words struck out accordingly.
THE EARL OF AIRLIE proposed in page 5, line 14, after ("them") to insert—
"Provided that it shall not be lawful for the Commissioners to annex to the headship of a College or to a Fellowship or other emolument, the holder of which is not now required to subscribe any religious test, any office which is restricted to persons in Holy Orders, or the holder of which is required to subscribe any article or formulary of faith, or to make any declaration or take any oath respecting his religious belief or profession, or to conform to any religious observance, or to attend or abstain from attending any form of public worship, or to belong to any specified Church, sect, or denomination."
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, there was no objection to the Proviso.
Amendment agreed to; words added accordingly.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYproposed an Amendment to give the Commissioners power to make provision for diminishing the expense of education in the College by assigning salaries to College tutors, lecturers, or otherwise. Some of the Colleges which possessed the largest revenues did not educate any large number of students; and he thought that a College which had an income of £20,000 or £30,000 a-year was not fulfilling the intentions of the Founders when they made education an expensive luxury. The object of his Proviso was to enable the Commissioners to make provision out of the estates of the Colleges for certain expenses, and so to enable the Colleges to reduce the payments required from students. If this were done, it would enable many persons of moderate means who were now shut out to avail themselves of the advantages of a University education, not only as unattached students, but also as members of Colleges. It seemed reasonable that the general expenses of

1305
the Colleges, including all payments for the benefit of Fellows, resident and non resident, should be borne by the estates of the Colleges rather than from the fees of students.
Amendment moved, after sub-section (6) to insert the following sub-section:—
"For diminishing the expense of education in the College by assigning salaries to College tutors and lecturers, or otherwise."—(The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.)
LORD BLACHFORDsaid, he was quite in favour of putting academic training and University education more within the reach of persons of moderate means than they now were. He thought an important step in this direction would have been taken if the time of academic instruction falling within the year were extended and the vacations diminished.
LORD CARLINGFORD, with great respect for the most rev. Prelate, doubted whether his Proviso would be a wise one. There were at present exhibitions and scholarships for students not attached to any class, so that persons of moderate means already had facilities for obtaining a University education at Oxford. Whether it would be wise to go further, and diminish the revenues of the Colleges by paying the teachers out of the estates, was open to very grave question. He thought it was diverting money that could be more beneficially applied to other purposes. He was not prepared to support the Proviso.
VISCOUNT CARDWELLthought that if the Amendment were agreed to, there ought to be some provision for making the remuneration of the teacher in a great degree dependent upon fees, or else his efficiency would become a secondary consideration, and there would be a danger of the teaching power being deteriorated.
THE BISHOP OF LONDONsaid, he did not share in that apprehension.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, the object of the Amendment was to enable those who were at present deterred from entering the Colleges by reason of the expense to do so.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEasked if there was any evidence tending to show that the charges at present made by the Colleges were so high that the majority of students were unable to meet them?
THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, the operation of the Amendment would be
1306
to enable the poor to have the advantage of a University education on account of their poverty, and not by reason of their merit. Poor students might very naturally desire University education, but he thought it would be better to provide it for promising young men of that class by foundations than to put it within the reach of the whole class by paying the teaching expenses of the Colleges out of funds which, under the Bill, would be required for objects of learning and research.
THE DUKE OF CLEVELANDconcurred with those noble Lords who thought that they ought to hesitate before sanctioning a proposal to give up revenue.
THE LORD CHANCELLORcalled attention to the fact that the word giving power to the Commissioners to do the things set out in Clause 16 was "may," and not "shall."
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDwas surprised to hear the noble Duke opposite rather impute blame to poor people because they desired a University education. The existing Scholarships were not attainable by very poor men, who could not afford the expense of such a previous education as would ensure success in the competition for them.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, no one objected to give to the poor the advantages of education, but he thought the present proposal would be advantageous to the rich rather than the poor; it would, moreover, take from the tutors the best stimulus to do their best.
Amendment agreed to; words added accordingly.
THE EARL OF MORLEY THE EARL OF MORLEY moved an Amendment—
In page 4, line 25, at end of clause, add as a fresh pgraph—
"The Commissioners may also on the application of any two or more Colleges make provision for their complete or partial union; such application shall be made by at least two thirds of the Governing Bodies of the said Colleges; they may also in the case of any headship to which any ecclesiastical duties, office, or emoluments are annexed by Act of Parliament, or otherwise, make provision for septing such duties, office, or emoluments from the headships, and for substituting other emoluments."
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that his impression was that the Amendment would enable the Commissioners to repeal Acts of Parliament, which was scarcely within the purpose of the Bill. Besides, the Heads of Colleges were

1307
never away more than three months in the year.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he must oppose the second part of the Amendment—all after the word "colleges."
THE EARL OF AIRLIEsaid, it appeared to him that the 14th clause of the Bill enabled the Commissioners to interfere with Acts of Parliament.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDpointed out that there was a feeling at Oxford that the Heads of Colleges should be relieved of those duties which, to a certain extent, conflicted with those duties which were attached to the headships. Many would be extremely glad if the dual position were got rid of.
THE LORD CHANCELLORcontended that there was no power in the Bill to enable the Commissioners to repeal any Act of Parliament.
THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he would not press the second part of this Amendment at present, but would reconsider the course which he would pursue.
Amendment amended; words struck out accordingly.
Amendment further amended, by adding after the word ("Colleges,") the words ("with the consent of the visitors thereof.")
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 17 (Objects of statutes for Colleges in relation to University).
LORD COLCHESTERproposed to insert words limiting the portion of the revenues of the College devoted to instruction in Art or Science to one-fourth of such revenues. He thought this would be a wholesome restraint on the Commissioners. He hoped the Commissioners would be very careful in attempting to make any redistribution of property.
Amendment moved, line 34, after ("portion") insert ("not exceeding one-fourth").—(The Lord Colchester.)
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYdeclined to accept the Amendment. He would refer his noble Friend to the 13th clause, from which he would see that the Commissioners in making statutes were to have regard to the designs of the Founders, except where the same had ceased to be observed before the passing of the Act. It was, in fact, pro-
1308
posed to deal only with property which had already been dealt with by Parliament. As regarded the Amendment, the principle laid down by the noble Lord was not one to which he could demur; he should be very much surprised indeed if the Commissioners went beyond the limit proposed. But the laying down of any hard-and-fast line might have the contrary effect to that at which the noble Lord was aiming. Supposing the property to be dealt with amounted to £500,000; if it were provided that no more than one-fourth of that sum should be applied to instruction in Arts and Sciences, &c., the whole fourth—that was to say, £125,000—might be devoted to Professorships. In other words, the maximum fixed by the noble Lord might practically become the minimum. In this matter, it seemed to him the better course would be to trust to the good judgment of the Commissioners.
Amendment negatived.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 18 (Increase of or additional income to be regarded), agreed to.
Clause 19 (Power to allow continuance of voluntary payments).
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYasked for an explanation of the clause, especially of the words, "voluntary payments."
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, it was well known to their Lordships that the owners of landed estates had to meet many claims which were morally but not legally binding on them, such as those for subscriptions to schools, to poor livings, and matters of that kind. The Colleges were in a somewhat analogous position, and therefore it was necessary that there should be in the Bill a provision of that kind, otherwise the Commissioners might feel themselves bound to disallow voluntary payments which the Colleges had been in the habit of making, whether to augment the incomes of the poorer livings or for other purposes in connection with the College property. He thought it would be unfortunate if the Commissioners should be compelled to disallow such payments.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNpointed out that under that clause, unless great care was taken, voluntary payments out of College revenues to increase livings or for other purposes in connection with College property might

1309
amount to a very serious abuse; and he instanced a case in which a very large portion of the income of a College had been thus applied.
THE LORD CHANCELLORthought that there were voluntary payments which were proper and others which might be improper; but their Lordships should not reject the clause altogether because of the bad. It would be better to let the Commissioners decide between those two classes of payments, instead of tying their hands. The clause did not bind the Commissioners to do anything, but only authorized them.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYadmitted that there were voluntary payments arising out of the connection of the Colleges with landed estates of which no one would disapprove; but the Colleges were strictly for educational purposes; and he thought that in some way or other the Colleges should be distinctly prevented from hereafter alienating any of the funds given to them, whether as tithes or in other forms, from those purposes—except, perhaps, for the augmentation, within certain limits, of small livings. He therefore reserved to himself the right of moving some Amendment on the Report with a view to guard against abuse.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDobserved that there were livings which did serve an educational purpose by providing for the retirement of College tutors after a sufficient length of service. There were some poor livings which now received payments, or endowments, of no large amount; but made in perfect good faith without any reference to the interests of the Fellows; and it was feared that this Bill would deprive the parishes of those benefits.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 20 (Communication of proposed statutes for University, &c., to Hebdomadal Council).
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY moved to insert "or the visitor" after Hebdomadal Council."
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, further amended, and agreed to.
Clause 21 (Publication of proposed statutes for Colleges);
Clause 22 (Suspension of Elections);
Clause 23 (Saving for existing interest), severally agreed to.
Clause 24 (Production of documents, &c.).
THE DUKE OF SOMERSET THE DUKE OF SOMERSET moved an Amendment in page 6, line 39, after ("Commissioners") to insert—
("may take evidence upon matters relating to the constitution of the University and Colleges, and the proper mode of applying the revenues in dealing with the emoluments thereof, and shall publish the same from time to time, and")
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that the clause as it stood gave the Commissioners power to take evidence; but he could not agree to an Amendment requiring them to publish the same. If they were to make a general preliminary inquiry, such as this Amendment implied, it would impose such duties upon the Commissioners as would vastly extend and delay their operations.
VISCOUNT CARDWELLsupported the Amendment, on the ground that it would insure publicity being given to the acts of the Commissioners, and so give a further security to the Colleges.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the question raised by the Amendment of the noble Duke was one which, if raised at all, should have been brought forward on the second reading, and not at the Committee stage of the Bill. He certainly objected to giving the Commissioners power to commence a roving inquiry. The clause as it stood gave them authority to take evidence.
EARL GRANVILLEthought that, as it would be necessary for the Commissioners to take evidence before preparing their schemes, there should be no objection to such evidence being received publicly and afterwards made known to the world. It would be unfortunate for any suspicion of secrecy to attach to the proceedings of the Commission.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, there was no objection to power being given to the Commissioners to take evidence, but it was not thought desirable that the evidence should be published. He would assent to the insertion of words that would confer upon the Commissioners power simply to receive evidence.
After some further discussion,
On Question? The Committee divided:—Contents 24; Not-Contents 39: Majority 15.

CONTENTS.

Somerset, D. [Teller.]

Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]

Lansdowne, M.

Carlingford, L.

Airlie, E.

Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.)

Camperdown, E.

Ettrick, L. (L. Napier.)

Granville, E.

Foley, L.

Ilchester, E.

Hammond, L.

Kimberley, E.

Monson, L.

Minto, E.

Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

Morley, E.

Strafford, L. (V. Enfield.)

Cardwell, V.

Waveney, L.

Belper, L.

Wentworth, L.

Blachford, L.

Wolverton, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Cairns, L. (L. Chancellor.)

London, Bp.

Bagot, L.

Clanbrassill, L. (E. Roden.)

Richmond, D.

Denman, L.

Bath, M.

de Ros, L.

Exeter, M.

Dunmore, L. (E. Dunmore.)

Hertford, M.

Salisbury, M.

Dunsany, L.

Elphinstone, L.

Beauchamp, E.

Forbes, L.

Cadogan, E.

Foxford, L. (E. Limerick.)

Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

Hampton, L.

Harlech, L.

Hardwicke, E.

Headley, L.

Jersey, E.

Howard de Walden, L.

Malmesbury, E.

Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

Shrewsbury, E.

Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

Stanhope, E.

Rayleigh, L.

Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

Saltoun, L.

Skelmersdale, L. [Teller.]

Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)

Chester, Bp.

Ely, Bp.

Winmarleigh, L.

Resolved in the Negative.
Clause agreed to.
Representation of Colleges.
Clause 25 (Election of Commissioners by Colleges).
Amendment made, in page 7, line 9, by inserting ("and to visitor thereof").
THE EARL OF MORLEYobjected to this and the two following clauses, observing that it was desirable that uniformity in the proceedings of the Commissioners appointed under the Bill in making statutes for the several Colleges, should, as far as possible, be secured, and that that could not be effected if each College was empowered to elect three Commissioners of its own,
1312
who would have the same powers as the Commissioners themselves, so far as the framing of statutes was concerned. It was desirable that there should be some power given to the Colleges to consider and object to the statutes framed by the Commissioners before they were passed; but to give to the representative Commissioners co-ordinate powers with the official Commissioners would not tend to general uniformity, nor to promote the general purpose of the Bill. The only result could be that either the representative Commissioners would embarrass or override the other Commissioners in the interests of the College, or the latter would overrule the former in disregard of those interests.
Moved, To disagree to the said Clause.—(The Earl of Morley.)
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that only four Colleges objected to the proposal—certainly not a majority of the Colleges. He saw no other way of arresting the despotism which might be exercised by the Commissioners appointed under the Bill, than by the adoption of some such proposal as that contained in the clauses to which the noble Earl objected. The three Commissioners to be elected by the Colleges would be elected on the cumulative system, and to imagine that they would be overruled, or that they would overrule in all cases the Commissioners was chimerical.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, he shared the dislike entertained by his noble Friend to those clauses. It was, no doubt, usual and convenient that when Parliament was agreed with regard to the general principles upon which legislation was to be based, but where the details were too intricate or too numerous for advantageous settlement by their Lordships or by the other House, to delegate to Commissioners duties which properly belonged to Parliament itself. In such cases the utmost responsibility attached to those by whom the Commissioners were selected. Those Commissioners were selected for the exercise of high judicial and executive functions; and upon the ground that they were exceptionally fitted for the discharge of those functions, their names were submitted to the House, and every precaution was taken to guard against the appointment of persons not specially qualified for the work. In this case

1313
what were their Lordships invited to do? To consent to the association with these Gentlemen whom they did know, who were named in the Bill, whose tenure of office was to be continuous, and who were selected upon the grounds which he had suggested, other gentlemen whom they did not know, whose tenure of office was to be intermittent and occasional, who were to be selected, not because they had any special knowledge of the needs of the University or of the place occupied by the different Colleges in the University system, but because they were the ablest advocates whom the Colleges could discover; and whose selection was to rest, not with the Crown, not with Parliament, not with the Government, but with those very Colleges with whose finances they were to deal. It was very much as if a Judge was to say to the prisoner—"Prisoner at the bar, we desire to give you every opportunity of securing an impartial consideration of your case, and with this view we have determined not to oblige you to rely merely upon the assistance of counsel, but we shall allow you to name two or three personal friends of your own to serve upon the jury, so that you will be sure to get fair play." He viewed this part of the Bill with considerable mistrust, and he was aware that several of the Colleges, in the memorials which they had presented, had expressed an opinion of the same kind. They felt, and very properly, that where their own financial interests were concerned, they were not the best judges between themselves and the University; and they would be perfectly content if facilities were afforded them for making themselves heard by assessors or otherwise before the Commissioners named in the Bill.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that Oxford University would deeply appreciate the compliment paid it by the noble Marquess when he compared the University to a prisoner on his trial. There did not seem to be the least weight in the objection that Parliament was delegating its duties to other persons, and he could conceive nothing more likely to make a body of this kind work inefficiently and jealously than to provide that one section of it should have voting power and that the other should not—that a portion should, in fact, sit as assessors. He thought they had in the Commission two elements which it was desirable to combine—one which would
1314
look to the permanent wants of the University and not confine itself to one College alone, and the other element which would with special knowledge and information represent each College. He thought they could very well trust the Colleges to name two or three of their own members to represent their interests; and unless their Lordships were disposed to give the Commissioners despotic powers the plan proposed was the best scheme that could be devised for securing the object in view.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he did not understand his noble Friend (the Marquess of Lansdowne) to speak of a criminal, but of a civil case in illustration of his argument.
THE LORD CHANCELLORpointed out to the noble Earl the noble Marquess distinctly said "the prisoner at the bar."
EARL GRANVILLEcontended that the homogeneity of the Bill was affected by the clauses.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, there were some Colleges which might not wish to send three of their members to join in deciding a matter of this kind.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, it was not necessary that the three Commissioners should belong to any College.
On Question? Resolved in the Negative.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 26 (Notice to College of meeting);
Clause 27 (Validity of acts as regards Colleges) severally agreed to.
Schools.
Clause 28 (Notice to Governing Body of school, &c.);
Clause 29 (Provision for case of contingent right);
Clause 30 (Governing Body or corporation);
Clause 31 (Statutes for schools dissented from);
Clause 32 (Provision respecting right of preference when retained by school), severally agreed to
Universities' Committee of Privy Council.
Clause 33 (Constitution of Universities' Committee of Privy Council).
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that as questions of law might frequently come before the Committee, it was desirable to provide that, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, that one of its

1315
Members should be a Member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he saw no objection to inserting at the end of the clause the words, "one of whom shall either be the Lord Chancellor or a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council."
Clause, amended, and agreed to
Confirmation or Disallowance of Statutes.
Clause 34 (Submission of Statutes to Queen in Council) agreed to.
Clause 35 (Petition against statute).
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsuggested that the power should be made to extend to petitioning not only against the whole of a statute, but also against any part of a statute—a rule which now applied to the analogous case of schemes framed by the Endowed Schools Commissioners.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONconcurred in this suggestion, aud thought it would be well that effect should be given to it by an addition to the clause on the Report.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 36 to 39, inclusive, agreed to.
Effect of Statutes.
Clause 40 (Statutes to be binding and effectual) agreed to.
Alteration of Statutes.
Clause 41 (Power for University to alter Statutes, &c.);
Clause 42 (Power for Colleges to alter Statutes, &c.);
Clause 43 (Confirmation or disallowance of altering Statutes) severally agreed to, with an Amendment.
LORD CARLINGFORD LORD CARLINGFORD moved to insert, after Clause 43, a new clause dealing with the constitution and composition of Congregation. His proposal was, he said, not a sweeping or disturbing one, and he thought it ought not to give rise to much opposition either at Oxford or from their Lordships. His object was simply to make Congregation a really Academic body, and merely to exclude from it those members whose only qualification was residence at or near Oxford. It might be said that those non-academic members who were mere inhabitants of Oxford seldom attended or took part in the proceedings of Congregation; but that fact told more for his argument than against it. Moreover, those members could always be brought in for some
1316
special purpose, whatever it might be. The noble Lord concluded by moving the insertion of the following clause:—
"On and after the 15th. day of Michaelmas term, 1876, the Congregation of the University of Oxford shall be composed of the following persons only, the said persons being members of Convication:—The Chancellor, the High Steward, the Heads of Colleges and Halls, the Proctors, the members of the Hebdomadal Council, the officers named in the schedule to this Act annexed, the Professors, Lecturers, and Readers of the University, the Public Examiners, Resident Fellows of Colleges, all persons who shall be certified by the head of any College or Hall to be engaged in the tuition, discipline, or administration of such College or Hall."
THE BISHOP OF OXFORD: said, the noble Lord proposed by his Amendment to disfranchise several persons who were well qualified to give an opinion on questions brought before Congregation, and gave no security that the persons included in the Amendment were particularly qualified to give an opinion on educational matters. He deprecated changes which would narrow the academical legislation, and diminish the interest taken by the great body of graduates in University affairs.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYdeclined to accept the clause.
On Question? Resolved in the Negative.
LORD COLCHESTER LORD COLCHESTER moved a new clause to follow Clause 43—("Convocation of the University").
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, the clause did not come within the purpose of the present Bill, and raised a question which was too wide to be discussed on the present occasion.
Motion (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
Tests.
Clause 44 (Saving for Tests Act) agreed to.
Clause 45 (Operation of Tests Act as regards to Theological officers).
Amendment moved, in page 11, line 6, after ("1871") to insert—
("But the Commissioners shall not use for the purpose of endowing such offices and funds other than those the holders of which are now required to subscribe a theological test").
On Question? Resolved in the Negative.
Clause agreed to.
The Report of the Amendments to be received on Tuesday the 2nd of May next; and Bill to be printed, as amended. (No. 25).
House adjourned at half-past Nine o'clock till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.