Sitting of 3 May 1877

MINUTES.
— SELECT COMMITTEE — Cattle Plague and Importation of Live Stock, nominated.
PUBLIC BILLS—Committee—Universities of Oxford and Cambridge (re-comm.) [113]—R.P.; Customs, Inland Revenue, and Savings Banks [142]—R.P.
Committee—Report—Reservoirs [132].
Third Reading—Law of Evidence Amendment [113], and passed.

QUESTIONS.
  RUSSIA AND TURKEY—THE WAR—MR. GLADSTONE'S RESOLUTIONS.

    NOTICES.
    MR. O'CLERY: I beg to give Notice that, in the event of the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich being carried, I shall move that Resolutions 2 and 3, rebuking and admonishing Her Majesty's Ally the Sultan of Turkey for the misgovernment of the Christian Provinces and States under his control, be applied in like manner to Her Majesty's Ally the Czar of All the Russias respecting the Russian subjects of Poland—another Christian State—whose oppression, persecution, and torture have notoriously been the opprobrium of European history and the grief and scandal of humanity and civilisation during several generations.
    LORD ELCHOalso gave Notice that he would move—
    "That this House, while anxious to promote the well-being of the Christian subjects of the Sultan and of all races under his rule, condemns the interference of a foreign Power by force of arms in the internal administration of the Ottoman Empire; and this House is satisfied that Her Majesty's Government, while maintaining neutrality so long as our interests are not affected by the war which Russia is waging against Turkey, will not fail to take such steps as would enable them, should occasion arise, promptly to protect our interests and maintain our Empire in the East."

  ARMY—NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICERS.—QUESTION.
  CAPTAIN O'BEIRNEasked the Secretary of State for War, If he will consider the expediency of permitting a portion of the service in the ranks of non-Commissioned Officers, on being promoted to the rank of Officer to count towards the extra shilling a-day to which subalterns become entitled, after serving ten years in that grade, in order to obviate the great difficulty in connection with the promotion of non-Commissioned Officers to the rank of Officer?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDY,in reply, said, that the matter was under consideration, and he hoped that an alteration might be made so as to effect the object the hon. and gallant Member had in view.

  METROPOLIS—CITY IMPROVEMENTS—CHANCERY LANE AND FLEET STREET.

    QUESTION.
    MR. ALDERMAN COTTONasked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether the following statement, which appeared in the "City Press," March 19th, is a fact:—
    "We understand that the Government have decided to purchase the block of houses between Bell Yard and Chancery Lane as far as the Law Fire Office for the purpose of the New Law Courts, and to widen Fleet Street by twelve feet?"
    MR. GERARD NOEL: Sir, in answer to the Question of my hon. Friend, I have to state that it is not in contemplation to purchase the block of buildings between Bell Yard and Chancery Lane, as far as the Law Fire Office, for the purpose of the new Law Courts; nor have the Government any intention of widening Fleet Street.

  THE CATTLE PLAGUE — COMPENSATION FOR COMPULSORY SLAUGHTER—LEGISLATION.—QUESTION.
  MR. PAGETasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether, seeing the national importance of early information of an outbreak of Cattle Plague and with a view to afford reasonable inducement to owners of stock to declare the existence of this disease immediately on its outbreak, he will endeavour to provide by statute that compensation for compulsory slaughter of affected animals shall be awarded on a scale at least as liberal as that now in force in case of pleuro-pneumonia under the Animals Order, 1875?
  VISCOUNT SANDON: Sir, I have referred the Question of my hon. Friend to the Lord President, and I hope, I need not assure him, that we fully appreciate the importance of the matter to which he has called attention. Considering, however, that these matters will shortly be investigated by the Committee, which we hope will be soon at work, we think we should not be justified in giving any opinion, and still less in proposing any legislation, respecting any part of the subject, until the Report of the Select Committee has been received.
  MR. PAGETgave Notice that he would take an early opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the subject.

  RUSSIA AND TURKEY — THE WAR — THE SUEZ CANAL.—QUESTION.
  MR. MUNTZasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If, in view of the complications which may arise from the war between Russia and Turkey, it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take such steps, in concert with the other great Powers, as would secure the neutralization of the Suez Canal?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: If by the expression "neutralization" is meant an arrangement which would prevent, in time of war, the ships of war of any nation from passing through the Canal, that would be an arrangement which would prevent Her Majesty's Government from making use of the Canal for the purpose of sending the ordinary reliefs to and from India, and to such an arrangement Her Majesty's Govern-
  260
  ment was not disposed to lend any aid. But Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to take steps for the protection of the navigation of the Canal.

  RUSSIA AND TURKEY—THE WAR—CONTRABAND OF WAR.—QUESTIONS.
  MR. COLLINSasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government, in view of the magnitude of British interests affected by the question, will propose to the Governments of Russia and of Turkey to specify what articles or merchandise on board ships of neutral nations they will empower Prize Courts in their respective States to adjudge as contraband of war?
  MR. BOURKE: Sir, as there is another Question upon the Paper on the same subject by the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Gourley), if the House will permit me, I will answer both at the same time. I need hardly remind the House that the question as to what is and what is not contraband of war has at all times given rise to much discussion. I need hardly also remind the House that there are certain things which are always called contraband of war, such as arms, military stores, gun-powder, and things of that kind. There are also other things which have been held to be contraband of war, according to their destination, and according to other circumstances, decided by the Prize Courts. It has never been usual for any Government, and certainly not for this Government, nor do I think it would be possible, to define what, under all circumstances, should be considered contraband of war; and I do not think that it would be in the interest of English merchants to call on belligerents to define what they consider to be contraband of war, because the effect of that might be that certain goods which have not hitherto been held to be contraband of war by a Prize Court might be declared by a belligerent Government to be contraband of war. Under these circumstances it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to call on the belligerent Powers to define what they consider to be the articles which ought to be included under the term contraband of war. At the same time Her Majesty's Government will watch very narrowly the proceedings of the

  261
  Prize Courts with the view of seeing whether any articles are declared to be contraband of war which have not hitherto been included in that category. I may mention that I have been asked privately by several hon. Members within the last few days whether certain articles are contraband of war. I do not mean to name the articles in detail, because I do not think it would be judicious. I may, however, mention one thing which is down in these Questions—namely, coal. That is one of the articles held by some Prize Courts to be contraband of war according to the destination, and also according to other circumstances which are to be adjudicated upon by the Prize Court. With regard to other articles mentioned by some hon. Members, I can only give the same answer, and I may add that until they have been declared by a Prize Court to be contraband of war it is impossible to give any definite answer on the subject. The Question of the hon. Member for Sunderland also proceeded to inquire whether we have received any official notification of the nature of the blockade and regulations intended to be established by the Turkish Government in the Black Sea, Bosphorus, and Dardanelles, and whether the Russian Government has forwarded official notice and regulations relative to the mining of harbours other than that of Odessa? We have not received any more information about the blockade of the Black Sea than that which I communicated to the House the other night. The regulations which we were told at that time were going to be issued by the Turkish Government have not reached Her Majesty's Government, and when they do reach us we shall not lose a moment in publishing them. In regard to mining operations carried on in certain ports belonging to Russia, I have not heard that any ports in the Black Sea have been mined except that of Odessa. Another question asked is as to the alleged destruction of a British vessel by striking a torpedo on entering Kertch. No information of that destruction has reached Her Majesty's Government, but we have sent a telegram to our Consul to inquire what has taken place. When the reply has been received, I shall be very happy to communicate it to the House. I think this answer will cover the whole of the subjects contained in the Ques-
  262
  tions put by the two hon. Gentlemen opposite.
  MR. GOURLEY: The answer of the hon. Gentleman is scarcely explicit. I should like to read the second paragraph of my Question—
  "Whether any international arrangement exists defining contraband goods; if not, if he will take such steps as Her Majesty's Government may deem necessary to procure an international schedule of contraband merchandise."
  By way of explanation, I may tell the hon. Gentleman that the reason why I ask this is that at the present moment a large number of vessels are bound with cargoes to Russian ports in the Black Sea, and that those vessels, with their cargoes, are bound to proceed until official notice is given of the blockade of those ports. Many of those vessels have coal on board, and during the American War coal was declared to be contraband of war by our own Government. What I want the Government to do is this—to inform the shipowners and merchants of this country whether they consider coal to be a contraband of war or otherwise, and also to endeavour to bring about an arrangement with other Governments as to what is to be looked upon as contraband of war during the existence of hostilities between Russia and Turkey.
  MR. BOURKE: I am sorry that my answer was not as explicit as the hon. Member would wish, but I think I have answered the Question so far as I possibly can. If the hon. Gentleman wishes for further information on the subject, which is one of vast importance, not merely to the Government, but to all the merchants of this country, and if he will be kind enough to give me Notice, I shall be very happy to answer his Question.
  MR. GOURLEY: My Notice is already on the Paper. What I want to learn is this ["Order!"]
  MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Member proposes to put a new Question, he is bound to give Notice of it.
  MR. GOURLEY: It is the same Question. With your permission, I will read the second paragraph of it again—
  "Whether any international arrangement exists defining contraband goods; if not, if he will take such steps as Her Majesty's Government may deem necessary to procure an international schedule of contraband merchandise."
  MR. BOURKE: I thought I answered that Question. No international arrangement does exist, and I think I said that in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government it would not be expedient for a neutral Government to ask a belligerent Government what they consider contraband of war.

  TURKEY—MILITARY CONTRIBUTIONS OF EGYPT.—QUESTION.
  MR. STACPOOLEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he could state what is the amount of Force, Egypt is by Treaty obliged to supply on the demand of Turkey; and, whether Egypt is obliged to supply Troops on the demand of Turkey in addition to the Tribute she pays, or does the payment of Tribute cease when Troops are furnished?
  MR. BOURKE: When the hon. Gentleman uses the word "Treaty" in the Question, I conclude that he means Firman. According to the Firman—or rather Firmans, for there are three of them, I believe—issued by the Porte to the Khedive, the latter is bound to send 30,000 troops to the Porto in time of peace, and that number may be increased in time of war according to what the Porte considers to be reasonable. The payment of the Tribute from the Khedive to the Porte has nothing at all to do with the furnishing of troops.

  REGISTRY OF DEEDS (IRELAND).

    QUESTION.
    SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA (for Mr. MELDON)asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether any representations have been made to the Treasury by the late or present Registrar of Deeds in Ireland on the subject of uncompared documents, and what reply or replies have been made thereto; whether a special report was at any time made on this, amongst other subjects, relating to the office in the year 1865; and, whether a consolidated Dictionary Index on paper from the year 1870 to the present has not been compiled and is now in official use, and what steps the Treasury have taken to have such Index placed in the hands of the public, and how much of the surplus earnings of the office, amounting to £42,000 in the year 1867 and upwards, has been applied to render
    264
    the office more useful and convenient to the public?
    MR. W. H. SMITH: Sir, it is true that representations have been made to the Treasury from the Registry of Deeds in Ireland on the subject of uncompared documents. This matter was reported upon, among others, by a Departmental Committee in 1865. I am not prepared to lay their Report, which is a confidential document, on the Table of the House. A consolidated Dictionary Index has been prepared, and is in official use, but at present it is not intended to place it in the hands of the public. I am aware that the office claims that up to 1867 its surplus earnings amounted to the sum stated—namely, £42,000—but during the last 10 years the total annual cost of the office has largely increased, and, instead of a surplus, there has been a deficiency, amounting in the 10 years to about £26,500. The deficiency is annually increasing.

  EPPING FOREST COMMISSION—THE EVIDENCE.—QUESTION.
  MR. J. HOLMSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill this Session to give effect to the recommendations of the Commissioners on Epping Forest; and, if so, when?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON,in reply, said, the Home Secretary had already stated that he could not undertake to fix a time for the introduction of a Bill until the voluminous evidence had been printed. When it was it would be considered with a view to the bringing in of a Bill, although the present state of the Public Business was not very promising as to its passing. No difficulty could arise from the suspension of the powers of the Commissioners, as they would be alive until the end of next year.

  CLOSING OF BURIAL GROUNDS.

    QUESTION.
    MR. GREENEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether there are any practical difficulties in the way of closing overcrowded churchyards or other burial grounds?
    SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON,in reply, said, there were no actual

    265
    difficulties in the way of closing burial grounds, but from the fact that the Home Office was not in connection with the officers who looked after the sanitary arrangements of the country. There were some difficulties, which would be overcome by the transfer of the authority to the Local Government Board. The present practice was for a complaint to be made, for an inquiry to be made into that complaint, and for an order being made in Council following on that inquiry for closing the churchyard.

  NAVY—NAVAL OFFICERS ON THE RETIRED LIST.—QUESTION.
  CAPTAIN PIMasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, If he will state on what authority officers on the Retired List can be called on for active service, and in what respect they differ from officers on the Reserved List or on half-pay in their liability for active service; whether the liability of retired officers to be called on for active service is regulated by Order in Council or by the Statute Law; and, if he will inform the House the authority by which
  "The Admiralty has power to remove from the list of the Royal Navy any officer whatever, whether on full-pay, half-pay, or on the Retired List, and this without reason assigned?"
  MR. A. F. EGERTON (for the First Lord of the Admiralty)said: Sir, I have to inform the hon. and gallant Member that officers on the Reserved or Retired List can be called upon for active service by Order in Council, according to the Queen's Regulations, cap. 7, sec. 3, art. 1. The power of the Admiralty to remove the names of officers from the list of the Royal Navy rests on immemorial usage, and is an exercise of the prerogative of the Crown.

  MERCHANT SEAMEN'S BILL—LEGISLATION.—QUESTION.
  MR. BURTasked the President of the Board of Trade, If he can state when the Government will introduce their promised Bill to amend the Law relating to breaches of contract of seamen?
  SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY: Sir, I have a Bill entitled the Merchant Seamen's Bill, already drafted, dealing with both breach of contract and discipline of
  266
  seamen, and I am only waiting the earliest opportunity to ask leave of the House to introduce it.

  LICENSING ACT, 1872—SALE OF LICENSED PREMISES.

    QUESTION.
    SIR GEORGE JENKINSONasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been directed to the frequent and increasing practice of the purchase by brewers of licensed premises when sold after the death of a former owner—thus creating a new claim for vested interest and an encouragement to drinking, and thereby neutralising the intentions and efforts of the legislature; also the practice of single justices (not acting in public or in Court) of granting an extension of hours for drinking; and, whether he will take any steps, by legislation, or the issue of a circular and other means, to endeavour to check the evils arising from the prevalence of the practices above described?
    MR ASSHETON CROSS,in reply, said, the Secretary of State could have no knowledge of the purchase by brewers of licensed premises after the death of the former owner, and he could not prevent the purchase of such premises by brewers. As to the second part of his Question, he had to inform the hon. Baronet that a single justice had no power to grant an extension of the hours for public-houses to be kept open on special occasions; that could only be done by two justices of the peace in petty sessions assembled. He was, however, of opinion that the merits of each application for an extension of the hours should be carefully considered, and, if possible, a uniform system be adopted, so as to prevent different rules being laid down in different parts of the country. There were difficulties, no doubt, in the way; but the magistrates, when they assembled at quarter sessions, might consider and discuss the whole question.

  POOR LAW GUARDIANS — ABUSES AT ELECTIONS.—QUESTION.
  MR. HIBBERTasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been directed to the abuses which have occurred in many places during the last few years in the

  267
  election of the guardians of the poor; whether in consequence of the dissatisfaction caused thereby he is prepared to recommend such an alteration of the Law as would permit the votes to be taken by ballot instead of by voting papers; and, whether the tenure of office for which guardians are elected might not be advantageously extended from one to three years?
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTH,in reply, said, that the number of contested elections for Guardians of the Poor in 1874 was 630, and in 1875 it was 720. Complaints had been made of malpractices, but many of them had not been well founded, and in 1874 it had only been found necessary to hold an official inquiry into two cases. Under these circumstances, he did not feel it necessary to recommend such an alteration of the law as would permit the votes to be taken by Ballot. Apart from the advantages of the use of the voting paper, the substitution of the Ballot would lead to increased expense. With regard to the tenure of office by Guardians being extended from one to three years, the subject had been frequently brought before him by Boards of Guardians themselves, but he was not prepared to make any general alteration on the subject. He should, however be very glad to try the experiment in places where the feeling for the change prevailed. That feeling he believed existed to a great extent in Lancashire and some parts of London.

  RUSSIA AND TURKEY—MAPS OF THE SCENE OF WAR.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYstated that he proposed to place in the Library of the House, for the inspection of hon. Members, maps of the scene of war, marked from time to time by an officer of the Intelligence Department, which would afford assistance to those Members who wished to follow the progress of the war.
  NAVY—NAVAL COLLEGE—THE SITE.

    QUESTION.
    MR. A. F. EGERTON (for the First Lord of the Admiralty)asked the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight to postpone the Motion of which he had given Notice for to-morrow night in reference to the proposed site for a Naval College. He was sorry to say it was
    268
    very doubtful whether his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty could be in his place to-morrow, and, even if the Motion were brought on it would be impossible for the First Lord to state what decision the Admiralty had arrived at, because the right hon. Gentleman was still waiting for some sanitary Reports as to other sites that had not yet been received.
    MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, he was anxious to meet the wishes of the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty. The question had been postponed three or four times, and it would be of great convenience to hon. Members interested in it if the right hon. Gentleman would assist him by giving him a day to bring it forward, or give him a promise that the Admiralty would not act on the Report in favour of Dartmouth until the matter had been fully discussed.
    MR. A. F. EGERTONsaid, he thought his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty would allow him to give that pledge—that no decision would be arrived at until after the subject had been discussed in that House. As to securing a day for the discussion that was not within his province.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE BILL.— [BILL 113.]
  (Mr. Gathorne Hardy, Mr. Assheton Cross, Mr. Walpole.)
  COMMITTEE. [Progress April 30th.]
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clause 16, (Objects of statutes for University).
  MR. COURTNEYmoved, in page 6, line 1, to leave out "either at any College or Hall within the University." His object was to provide that the appointments to Scholarships created by the action of the Commissioners to be appointed under the provisions of the Bill should be confined to unattached students.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, the question had been fully considered, and he did not think any hardship could be inflicted upon unattached students by the provisions of the Bill as it stood. The Commissioners would have power

  269
  to make special rules with regard to the Scholarships in question. He could not, therefore, accept the Amendment.
  Amendment negatived.
  MR. LOWEmoved an Amendment on the clause with the object of securing an "examination by the University of all persons seeking to be matriculated." He understood that in the existing course of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge there was no examination before students were admitted. The person seeking admission might be in the most lamentable state of ignorance, and yet be admitted to the Universities. There was an examination in several of the Colleges, he did not know of what sort; but he thought the present was an unsatisfactory state of things, as without such examination as he proposed a great deal of time, which otherwise might be turned to better account, must be wasted on elementary instruction. The Universities ought not to be occupied in mere teaching, that belonged to public schools. Mr. Pattison, Rector of Lincoln, a scholar, and a gentleman who had paid great attention to the subject, while pointing out in a work of his the existing unsatisfactory state of things, argued that, though the Universities had no examination, the Colleges had, and that beyond that put forward in the Responsions, the University examination would be of no use at all. But from the fact that a great many persons were plucked at the outset, the inference was rather in favour of the value of such examinations. The University examinations would be more strict than those of the Colleges; and if the thing was worth doing at all it was worth doing well. It would tend greatly to raise the standard of instruction at the Universities if such examinations were granted, and it would also have the important collateral effect of keeping schools up to the mark. The principle of the proposal was already admitted in some of our best Colleges and Universities, and he hoped it would be adopted in this Bill.
  Amendment proposed,
  In page 6, line 5, after sub-section 8, to insert the words "For the examination by the University of all persons seeking to be matriculated."—(Mr. Lowe.)
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, the Amendment seemed at first sight to promise great advantage, but on study-
  270
  ing it carefully he was not prepared to admit it into the Bill. His right hon. Friend wished to have such an examination that nobody who was not perfectly qualified should be admitted into the University; and he supposed, which was contrary to the view that he had generally taken, that the University was the teaching power, and not the Colleges. At present the Responsion was the first University examination, but the Universities had so many examinations now to conduct, that he (Mr. Hardy) could not think it was advisable to add another. Many of the College examinations were as hard as the Responsion, and a question had been raised whether the Colleges were not straining out men too much by their examinations. The object of the Committee should be, not to make the Universities exclusively for honour men; pass-men gained many advantages by their connection with the University, learning a good deal, and being brought into contact with men of great ability. As to plucking, he could point out to the right hon. Gentleman at least one in a very remarkable list connected with this Bill who had been plucked in the Responsion, and if he had been excluded from his future career in the University, the world would have lost a great deal. Under the circumstances, he thought there was no ground for altering the present system. The University had already the power in its own hands. It could at any time lay down a rule that no one could be a member of the University, unless he passed a certain examination; and, therefore, there was no use empowering the University to do what it could do now.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he was glad to hear the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, and thought the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Lowe) had this great fault—that it really amounted to an arbitrary dictation to the Commissioners that they should insist upon the Universities reforming themselves after one exclusive model and no other. The present system could be so extended as to provide that no one without a reasonable amount of knowledge should enter a University. ["No!"] Trinity, as well as some other Colleges, he believed, at Cambridge had an entrance examination which answered to the Responsions at Oxford. The exami-

  271
  nation for the degree used to be taken at the end of the career of a non-honour man; now it was divided into two, the earlier part being taken in about two years, after which he had at his own option to go up for a second examination in some special subject. Thus, for a Trinity non-honour man, there were in all four examinations, varying in character—entrance, little-go, general and special, besides the intermediate College examinations. He was astonished at the financial argument of his right hon. Friend the Member for the University of London, who said the Colleges wished to let in men easily in order to fill their rooms, &c. So far from the Colleges going into the highways and byways to tout for men, there was a tendency to raise the examination standard almost to a degree which some old-fashioned persons might think not desirable with the view of meeting the pressure of so many men coming in. The difficulty of the University, on the other hand, was a want of resources. But the object of the Bill was to take money from the rich Colleges in order to enrich the poor University, and the experiment, such as it was, had best be tried without the interference of his right hon. Friend's suggestion. He trusted that the Committee would not accept the Amendment.
  MR. OSBORNE MORGANsaid, it might be true that there was a preliminary examination at Cambridge. [An hon. MEMBER: There is not.] He left Cambridge men to speak on that, but certainly that was not the case at Oxford. Every College there had an examination of its own, or dispensed with an examination altogether. There were 14 or 16 different standards of examination. At his College, Balliol, the standard which those entering the College as fresh men had to satisfy was exceedingly high — almost an honour standard. He remembered that when he was at Oxford there was one Hall which was called a back door of the University, because men could slip into the University by that door without examination at all. Was that a proper state of things? There should be a general matriculation examination, so as to exclude those who could never be taught anything, and went to the University merely to waste their time. The clause of his right hon. Friend was
  272
  merely an enabling clause—it left the subject to the judgment of the Commissioners, and, therefore, he would support his right hon. Friend if he went to a division.
  MR. GORSTsaid, in most of the Colleges at Cambridge there was no entrance examination at all. It would be unfair to allow students at Colleges to enter upon easier terms than the poorer unattached students. He should support the Amendment. It did not propose to legislate for the University, but merely suggested to the University in what direction it should legislate for itself.
  MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSENsaid, that there was more in the Amendment than at first appeared, and that if adopted it would change the whole character of our English Universities; and although it was true enough as regarded most of the points raised, that this was only an enabling clause and it might be left to the discretion of the Commissioners to deal with them or not, yet it was different in the present case, which was whether or not to give a quasi direction to the Commissioners to introduce a new principle into the Universities. The real point was not whether there should be a preliminary examination, but whether it should be uniform and conducted by the University instead of by the Colleges. It was a mistake to suppose that the Colleges at Oxford admitted students without examination. Some, no doubt, were more lax than others, but upon this point as upon some others, he could not help saying that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Lowe) seemed to speak of the University as he knew it 30 years ago, since which time great changes had been effected. In Balliol, University, and some other Colleges the standard of matriculation was high, and the result secured an aggregation of clever and reading men in those Colleges. In most of the other Colleges young men were required to pass an examination, showing them to be fit to pass their Responsions, and the unattached students were subjected to a similar examination before they were allowed to enter the schools for their Responsions. This Amendment would be changing the existing system altogether. No doubt the standard differed in different Colleges; but did they want all men to go in for honours, or did they want or-

  273
  dinary men as well as extraordinary, to go to the University? He did not think it desirable to have a uniform examination conducted by the University. If they did so, the standard must either be high; in which case, many men would be kept from the University who under the present system, went there with great advantage to themselves; or it must be low, which would prevent the aggregation of talent in Colleges which now obtained that result by strict examinations. He held strongly the opinion that the first entrance to the University should not be made too difficult, and that the subsequent and regular University examinations should be the real tests of proficiency.
  MR. A. MILLSsaid, that in some Colleges the entrance examination was too high, and in others it was too low, and in others there was no examination whatever; for that reason he should like to see the matter in the hands of the University. The Amendment would put an end to such an unsatisfactory state of things. He should therefore support it.
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTthought that, as by matriculation a man became a member of the University and not a member of a College only, the University as a whole should determine what wore the conditions on which students should be admitted to that body. The greatest curse to the University was a class of Colleges which would notoriously admit anybody upon any terms. He should support the Amendment, inasmuch as it would exclude the dunces and idlers who went to the Universities without ever intending to take a degree, but merely for pleasure, just as some men went into the Guards, and whose presence there was injurious to the discipline of the place. Surely the University ought to be able to say it would not admit a man to come to a place of study unless he knew something and intended to learn something more.
  MR. MOWBRAYopposed the Amendment as unnecessary. He believed that at Oxford every College had a preliminary examination for students. There were between 250 and 300 unattached students who were examined by delegates appointed by the University. Within the last few years the University had appointed a body of delegates to conduct examinations at public
  274
  schools, and there were many of the boys now at school who had passed the examinations conducted by the delegates appointed by the University. The present system was an elastic one which was adapting itself to existing requirements, and would do all that could be desired if time were allowed.
  MR. WALTERsaid, there were some words wanting to his right hon. Friend's (Mr. Lowe's) Amendment, which, if they were inserted, might induce him to vote for it; otherwise he regretted that he could not do so. The words he would suggest were "in lieu of the present college matriculation examinations;" because there could be nothing more cruel to young men entering the University than that they should have first to pass through a University matriculation examination and then have to undergo a second examination to get into a particular College. In the case of unattached students, a University examination might be a very proper thing, because those students did not belong to a particular College. But the proposed University examination, if it was to be good for anything at all, ought to be good for the Colleges as well as for the University. He doubted whether the idea of making certain Colleges corps d'élite was good either for the young men or for the Colleges. The attempt to maintain such a standard as that of Balliol would require them to drive away at once two-thirds of the undergraduates. That would be a bad thing. No University could do anything of that kind, and it would be ridiculous to attempt it. If they were to have a University examination, it must be a more moderate one than the examination which now existed in certain Colleges; but, on the other hand, a second examination ought not to be insisted on for admission to a particular College. He, therefore, hoped that his right hon. Friend would accept the words he had suggested as an addition to the Amendment.
  THE CHAIRMANasked whether the hon. Member moved the insertion of the words?
  MR. WALTERsaid, he was willing to do so if the right hon. Gentleman agreed to that course.
  MR. LOWEagreed with the view of his hon. Friend who had last spoken, but thought that by his suggestion they

  275
  might, perhaps, be going too far in the way of interference. It would be wrong in his opinion to limit the powers of the University without a full discussion of the question. It was quite conceivable that there might be some better mode of dealing with the matter than even the one which his hon. Friend proposed.
  MR. FORSYTHadmitted that his opinion had been somewhat changed in the course of the discussion, and he was now disposed to vote for the Amendment of the right hon. Member for the University of London. It was rather preposterous that there should be no general rule among the Colleges on that subject.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEobserved that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe) having always argued that the Colleges were the teaching bodies and the University was the examining body, was perfectly consistent in now proposing that the examination should be conducted by the University, and not by the Colleges. The right hon. Member opposite (Mr. Mowbray) urged that the University had appointed an Examining Board which was now practically carrying on a matriculation examination. But that was an argument for the present Amendment, and not one against it.
  MR. J. G. TALBOTopposed the Amendment because it would introduce an uninteresting uniformity in the Universities, and might operate unjustly towards the dull men. If Mr. Carlyle's description of the great body of the people of this country was true, the majority of the students must be below the high standard advocated by some right hon. Gentlemen. He hoped that a standard would not be adopted which would keep out ordinary men.
  STAVELEY HILLcontended that Balliol College, for instance, would not accept an ordinary University standard for a matriculation examination. He opposed the Amendment, not because it was not a very desirable Amendment in itself, but there were so many difficulties in the way of carrying it into practice that it would cause greater evils than those it was intended to remedy. He believed he was correct in stating that there was no entrance examination in the Scotch Universities.
  MR. GRANT DUFFsaid, the statement of the hon. and learned Gentleman was perfectly correct. There was no en-
  276
  trance examination in the Scotch Universities, and Scotch educational reformers deeply regretted it. But why was there no entrance examination at the Scotch Universities? Simply because a good many of their students were so miserably poor that they could not obtain adequate preparation. Was that the case at the English Universities? Surely not. Why the only people for whom there was a University entrance examination at Oxford and Cambridge were the unattached students—that was, the poorest students.
  MR. HENLEYbelieved that the Amendment would shut the door to that large class of persons called "unattached students." They were an important element of our University system, and nothing should be done to deprive them of the advantages they now received from a University training. He regarded the Amendment as a very retrograde step.
  MR. MOWBRAYexplained that the examination of unattached students was not a University education.
  Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 180; Noes 239: Majority 59.—(Div. List, No. 111.)
  MR. GREGORYmoved to insert in page 6, after line 5, the following words:
  "For regulating the resinence of undergraduates and the duration thereof, and the number of terms to be kept by them as qualification for a degree."
  He said, under the present system young men had practically to reside three years at a University before taking their degree, and it seemed to him that it was a great hardship to require so long a residence from many who might be perfectly able, if they applied themselves to work, to take their degree in a shorter time. He did not think, generally speaking, that young men were qualified to enter a University before 18 or 19, three years' residence brought them to 21 or 22, and if they had to go to the Bar or to medicine they would require two or three years' additional study before they would be able to practice at their Profession. That would bring them to 24 or 25 before they could earn a shilling for themselves. In addition to this, the fact of having more time to prepare for his degree than was necessary tended to demoralize a young man rather than

  277
  otherwise. There was also another consideration. The expenses at the University were not much less than from £200 to £250 a-year, which to a large number of persons was a considerable sum, and to many parents was a question of capital rather than of income. Now, if we could save the young men a third of the expense and enable them to go to a profession a year earlier than at present, it would be conferring on them a great benefit, without, as he believed, any injury to the University.
  Amendment proposed,
  In page 6, after line 5, to insert the words "For regulating the residence of undergraduates and the duration thereof, and the number of terms to be kept by them as a qualification for a degree."—(Mr. Gregory.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
  MR. RATHBONEsupported the Amendment, on the ground that to oblige young men in all cases to spread their University education over so many years neither tended to raise the tone of University education, nor did good to the young men themselves. He had spoken to many men who had not only been at the University, but distinguished themselves there, and they told him that the first year they did very little work, the second year they put on more steam, and they made a spurt at the end. Therefore, there was much useful time wasted under the present system. It might fairly be said that the tone of Oxford was too sceptical and critical, and not sufficiently practical. A very distinguished man had even told him that he considered an upper fourth form boy in some respects better fitted for practical life. The degree of Bachelor of Arts, at all events, should be allowed to be taken at the end of two years if a man passed the necessary examination, and that of Master of Arts might be reserved for longer residence. Two years would certainly enable a student to go through a very sufficient course at the University, to give him a foundation which, followed up by reading afterwards, would render him a very useful member of society. At present, a boy stayed in the sixth form of our public schools, under very admirable discipline, until he was 18 years old, and adding to that four years at the University, and two or three years for learning a busi-
  278
  ness or profession, he would be 25 before he began the practical work of life. In these days there was often no time for an education so prolonged which would be practically unavailable except to those who had a profession not only ready for them, but which would be kept waiting for them. He hoped that power would be given to the Universities to include men who were anxious to add culture to their business qualifications, and he was confident that this could be done without diminishing the significance of the University degrees.
  SIR WILLIAM FRASERsaid, as one of those who by privilege, though with the same examination as others, had taken his degree in two years, that in his own day the feeling was that three years was too long a time to spend in reading for an ordinary degree. There was nothing objectionable or revolutionary in the proposal that the Commissioners should have power to consider whether an alteration should not be made in the present system. He considered, too, that the Long Vacation ought to be shortened.
  MR. GOSCHENwished to point out that there were two separate branches of the question; first, the actual time, or the number of terms, spent by undergraduates at Oxford; and, secondly, the length of those terms. The time, then, might evidently be curtailed in two ways. He would suggest the addition of the words "for regulating the residence of undergraduates and the duration thereof and the number of terms to be kept," an addition which would not involve the cutting down of the terms. The time spent at the University might be the same as at present, but put into a smaller number of years. Certainly the arguments for a shorter time were very strong; but, in his opinion, it would be better to lengthen the terms than to shorten the time required for study. Those who were in favour of the Amendment did not wish to diminish the aggregate standard of work necessary for obtaining a degree, or to lay down any definite rules, their object being to direct the attention of the Commissioners to this important subject and to give them powers to deal with it.
  MR. OSBORNE MORGANconsidered the Amendment valuable, and remarked that it had always been his opinion that men went up to the Universities too late and stayed too long. He had been very

  279
  glad to hear the hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Rathbone) express his views on the matter. Those views bore out what he had himself heard in Manchester lately. He asked some friends there if they considered the expense of a University education too high, and if they would send their sons to the Universities if the expenses were lower. Their answers were—"No; we are not influenced not to semd our sons to the Universities by the consideration of the expense. Money we can spare for the object; but we are influenced by the too long time necessary for them to obtain their degrees; and we are anxious to bring our sons into business earlier than a University education will admit." Persons who intended to go into business as solicitors, merchant, &c. were now in the habit of going to the Universities, and he thought they ought to be enabled to curtail the period of study by one year.
  MR. GOSCHENsuggested to amend the Amendment by inserting the words "and length."
  MR. GREGORYexpressed his willingness to add the words suggested by the right hon. Gentleman to his Amendment.
  MR. J. G. TALBOT,though sympathizing with a great deal which had been said, felt bound to oppose the Amendment, as he did not believe it possible to crowd into two years what now required three years. It, moreover, interfered with the internal arrangements of the Universities, which had far better be left in their own hands.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEsaid, he was strongly in favour of the Amendment.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEagreed that it was desirable that the members of artistic and other professions should enjoy the advantage of a short University career; but this was a matter relating to internal studies, with which this Bill—very properly, as he thought—did not propose to interfere. The Amendment had much good in it, and he did not see why there should not be a class of undergraduates who should recognizedly go to Oxford or Cambridge, not for the purpose of taking the Arts degree, but to pass creditably their Little Go, or Moderations. Still, this was a matter of internal regulation which ought to be considered by the Universities themselves.
  MR. JAMESwas of opinion that a reform in the direction indicated by the Amendment would never be effected if it were left entirely to the internal administration of the University. The Fellows themselves were the greatest opponents of any curtailment of the period.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, be did not think the Amendment was very appropriate to the clause upon which it was submitted. That clause began "with a view to the advancement of art, science, and other branches of learning," and he could hardly see how the Amendment would tend to advance art, science, or other branches of learning. The Amendment, on the contrary, was intended for the benefit of certain classes in the country. He would not take objection to it, however, on that ground, because he had a strong impression that a University education was desirable for the professional classes. His reason for opposing the Amendment was, that he did not wish by this Bill to interfere with the internal administration of the Universities. The object of the Bill was to give the Universities power to improve themselves, which they did not at present possess. They, however, at the present time, possessed the power to shorten the term of residence, and he had heard that preparations were being made at Cambridge to try an experiment upon the subject. Personally, he should be very glad to see a shorter period of residence allowed to persons who chose to qualify themselves for a degree.
  MR. GOSCHENsaid, he could not quite accept the position of the right hon. Gentleman in reference to the interference of Parliament in this matter. The interests of the Governing Bodies of the Universities might not be in conformity with the wishes of Parliament. The academical terms had been in existence for a very long period, and there had been no movement on the part of either University to curtail the period of residence. This, he thought, was a matter which ought not to be withdrawn entirely from the cognizance of the House.
  LORD FRANCIS HERVEYregretted that the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill had not accepted this most reasonable Amendment. He would prefer that the Amendment should be carried rather than the whole of the Bill. He would not dwell upon the economical

  281
  advantage of the Amendment, but urged its adoption mainly on the ground that it would contribute most materially to "the advancement of art, science, and learning." It was a scandal, which was being more and more felt, that the Universities should practically be lying idle for more than half the year, and he, therefore, begged to move to amend the proposed Amendment by the insertion, after the word "number," of the words "and length," so that the Commissioners might have power to prolong a term if they thought fit.
  Amendment amended, by adding, after the word "number," the words "and length."
  Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 135; Noes 143: Majority 8.—(Div. List, No. 112.)
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEmoved, in page 6, to leave out sub-section 11, and to insert (as one of the purposes for which the Commissioners might from time to time make pro-vision)—
  "For erecting and founding any office connected with any special educational work done out of the University under the control of the University, and for remunerating any secretary, officer, or officers employed in the management of such educational work: Provided always, That the performance of such educational work shall not entitle a person to hold a Fellowship in any College for a longer term than seven years."
  The noble Lord said the University of Cambridge had recently established a syndicate to promote teaching of a higher character in the large towns. The work of this syndicate had been very successful. It employed men of the highest distinction, who taught very large classes. The salaries and other expenses of the teachers were paid by the large towns. The University at the same time had appointed another syndicate on University teaching in the University. This syndicate had recommended a large increase in the number of University teachers. It was believed by many persons that the two systems might be brought into connection—the system inside and that outside the University—and that the teachers in the large towns should hold their appointments direct from the University, and
  282
  have the position and status of University teachers, while continuing to be paid, as at present, by the votes of the large towns for University teaching. If that were done, they would come within the terms of' those clauses which in several Colleges it had been proposed to confer, under new statutes, upon University teachers—that was to say, they would be able to retain their Fellowships for the performance of such work. In order, however, to prevent too large a number of Fellowships being held in this manner, he proposed to limit their tenure to seven years, more especially as he was informed by Professor Stuart, that there was a wish to treat these University Lectureships away from the University as probationary posts, from which the occupant would be promoted to posts within the University after a certain length of service. A clause similar to that he was proposing was among the revised Trinity statutes, and he had received strong evidence of support from many influential members of both Universities. The Amendment also proposed to enable the University to pay the secretary and inspectors for the work done in the large towns, but not the teachers. On this latter point he did not understand there was much difference of opinion between himself and the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEthought that the proposal of the Government and that of the noble Lord were in effect the same, both being to enable the Commissioners to make provision for carrying on the same good work of University extension, not by means of confiscation of College revenues, but by sending teachers to the large towns. He feared, however, that the Amendment was so drawn as to admit of the appropriation of University funds to the payment of secretaries and so on who would be located out of the University, and would be as much municipal officers as a town clerk.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEassured the Committee that nothing was further from his intention, and he believed the clause was framed to carry it out.
  MR. MUNDELLA,as one connected with towns in which the University Extension scheme was being worked with great success, wished to say, on the part of those towns, that they desired to pay

  283
  for all the teaching they received. The relations of those towns with the University Staff were characterized by mutual regard and appreciation, and the towns were only anxious that the members of the staff should lose no advantages. The object of the Amendment was to authorize the payment of an organizing Staff, such as a secretary to the syndicate and an inspector to examine and report upon the work done in the towns, which supervision would be undertaken on account of the University. For all besides that the towns were willing and anxious to provide, regarding University extension as the greatest educational movement of the time after the development of elementary education. The towns could not go to the University, and they found the University coming to them. In Sheffield there were 1,500 and in Nottingham 1,000 students of all positions in life, who received the same instruction in the same classes. A bookseller had told him that, in consequence of this movement, he had sold in one year more books on political economy and constitutional history than he had sold in many years previously; and it was one of the most hopeful signs of the times that these .subjects were being studied by the trades unionists, who carried their textbooks about with them, and had their proficiency tested by examination and recognized by certificates. A pleasing result was the development of voluntary effort in all forms, up to the munificence which prompted an anonymous donation of £10,000 to Nottingham, and a gift of £20,000 from Mr. Mark Firth to Sheffield for the erection of University buildings, which would be an ornament to each town. It was thus the towns were doing their part, and Parliament would be glad to do anything in could to encourage the work.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, there was really very little difference between the noble Lord and himself, and apparently it arose from some misunderstanding of the Amendment. They agreed as to the advantages of the educational work commenced by Cambridge outside the University; that the management of it ought to be within the University, and that somebody ought to be paid for managing it. The difficulty in the way of creating an office within the University might not be insuperable,
  284
  and it was absolutely essential that work done out of the University should not be paid for by the University, which had no superfluous funds. He would suggest to the noble Lord that he should not press the last provision of his Amendment, and that he should accept two Amendments to make it clear that no payment should be made out of University or College funds, and that any officer appointed should be resident in the University.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEsaid, he had great pleasure in accepting the proposal of the right hon Gentleman.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEwas also quite satisfied with the proposal.
  THE CHAIRMANsaid, that the most convenient course would be for the noble Lord to withdraw his Amendment, and then for the Committee to agree to the clause as amended by the right hon. Gentleman.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE,in opposing the Amendment, said, the noble Lord proposed to omit the sub-section, which was already open to objection, and to make it worse. The noble Lord's new sub-section represented the views of Professor Goldwin Smith and of Dr. Jowett in favour of paying Examiners in the great provincial towns. If the Universities were rolling in wealth, it might be wise to adopt his scheme, but the Universities were poor, and the great towns were rich, and if they wanted to be lectured and examined, they ought to pay for the luxury themselves. The proper function of an University was not to teach school all over the country, and to examine all its adult inhabitants, but to give, by residence and by consort with the best minds, the highest training to the picked youth of England.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, that the lecturers who went to the towns would be paid by them; but the University would be ready to pay the secretary, because he would remain in the University, and because the Bill set up an office that was a University office. No change would be made as to any part of the money of the University.
  Amendment (Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice), by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment (Mr. Gathorne Hardy) agreed to.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE,in moving to add, in page 6, the words—
  "For altering the qualifications required for membership of congregation at Oxford, and for admission to the electoral roll of the University of Cambridge: and for limiting or abrogating the power of the convocation of the University of Oxford and of the senate of the University of Cambridge respectively to regulate matters relating to the studies of the University, and to the education given in it,"
  said, there were two Bodies at Oxford and two Bodies at Cambridge, which were dealt with by this Amendment. A Body consisting of all who had taken their Master's degree, and numbering some thousands in each case, called Convocation at Oxford, and Senate at Cambridge, and a Body consisting of resident Masters called Congregation at Oxford and Electoral Roll at Cambridge. Roughly speaking, and without going into small details, it might be said that the larger Bodies, Convocation and Senate, had the following powers:—They elected the Members for the University, the Chancellors and the High Stewards, powers which the reformers would not touch; they interfered by veto with schemes for the reform of the studies of the Universities, a power which he believed they were not competent to exercise, and of which he would at least enable the Commissioners to deprive them if they thought fit. The smaller Bodies, Congregation at Oxford and Electoral Roll at Cambridge, elected the governing oligarchies, and consisted of some hundreds in each case. The majority of the members of these smaller Bodies were the persons most fit to exercise the powers at present entrusted to them; but in each there was a minority consisting of persons most unfit. Let him state the case of his own University, with which he was best acquainted. There were about 280 names upon the Electoral Roll of the University of Cambridge. About 200 of them were persons engaged in the government of the University or of Colleges, or in the educational work of the University. The remainder consisted chiefly of two classes, the parochial clergy and the sons of tradesmen and others resident in the town of Cambridge, who happened to have taken a Master's degree without ever having held any University or College office. It was a mere accident that these persons had their names placed upon the Electoral Roll, and he wished to remove them from a position in which it was
  286
  never intended that they should be placed. This question of the government of the University was one doubtless which would have to be settled by a compromise, but he wished to point out to the House that it was in fact a compromise which he suggested. The Liberals did not like to see the country clergy brought up in hundreds to Oxford to vote against a Broad Church clergyman, whose name had been proposed as one of the University preachers for the year; but, although that was the case, they did not suggest that Convocation should be deprived of such a power. On the other hand, they did emphatically protest against the 30 or 40 curates at Oxford, who were locally known, he believed, as "the black dragoons," being even potentially a controlling element in the direction of the studies of the University. It was not only of the curates that they complained; but why, he asked, should the ordinary residents of an ordinary provincial town, who happened to have taken their ordinary degrees, the doctors, the solicitors, and the chief constable, able and estimable persons though they might be, have a voice in the administration of affairs for which special qualifications and attention were needed? Now, when the Board of Studies at Oxford had agreed on some much needed reform, and had even succeeded in pushing it through Congregation in the teeth of the opposition of the local clergy, through the unanimity of the residents really engaged in educational work, Conservatives and Liberals alike, it had also to pass Convocation, for which the local clergy then whipped up their allies, and the country clergy then succeeded in throwing out the scheme at the trouble only of that which they were known greatly to enjoy—a jaunt to Oxford to beat the Radicals, a name applied by them to University Conservatives as much as to University Liberals. Such a day's pleasuring was an agreeable variety and relief from a dull country parish, while the men, perhaps a majority of Convocation, who would support the other side, were busily engaged at the Bar, in schools, or in public life, and could not come. An Amendment such as that which he proposed, which would give the Commissioners power to remove from the province of Convocation questions of University discipline and education, would probably do more than any

  287
  other single reform to elevate the work of the Universities. The Government proposal in 1854 was his proposal, but their Bill was mangled in Committee upon this point. It was foreseen at that time, and prophesied in the debates that then took place, that the absurdity would become evident of committing the decision as to the studies of the University to a body of several thousand gentlemen who knew their University not as it was, but as it had been, and who could not be supposed, as a body, to have given much consideration to the question of what it ought to be. The right hon. Gentleman, who was now Member for Greenwich, pointed out with great clearness in the debates of 1854, that the persons who come up to vote, upon whichever side, were the red-hot partizans, and not the quiet, judicious, impartial men able to judge dispassionately of the merits of the case. Railways, and other modern facilities for travelling, had now completely changed the government of the Universities for the worse. In old days Convocation had been only attended by the residents, and they proposed once more to make the University in this matter what it had been.
  Amendment proposed,
  In page 6, to add the words "(12.) For altering the qualifications required for membership of congregation at Oxford, and for admission to the electoral roll of the University of Cambridge; and for limiting or abrogating the power of the convocation of the University of Oxford and of the senate of the University of Cambridge respectively to regulate matters relating to the studies of the University, and to the education given in it."—(Sir Charles W. Dilke.)
  MR. DODSONsuggested that the words referring to the qualification for membership of the Congregation of Oxford and to admission to the Electoral Roll should be omitted, and that the first part of the Amendment should only be adopted.
  MR. MOWBRAYpointed out what the present state of the law was in regard to the matter, and showed that in certain instances the proposed change might work disadvantageously.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEwas willing to withdraw the first part of his Amendment, on the understanding that he would move it again.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEcontended that this was too difficult a matter to
  288
  be decided by an Amendment on the present Bill. The objection taken to the Electoral Roll that there was too much variety in its composition was, in his eyes, an advantage. He might, for instance, criticize the circumstance that they had on the Electoral Roll a certain number of men who were put on it as examiners ab extra, men who had never before seen Cambridge in their lives. Still, these persons were few and eminent, and brought in a new element, while the addition of resident M.A.'s, lay or clerical—parents, it might be, of students—not engaged in tuition was a man of the world addition which wholesomely counterbalanced the possibly too exclusively class feelings of a body containing none but teachers. He should be sorry to see the Roll revolutionized, by their names being struck off, and he trusted that for such a small objection they would not be called upon to enter into a matter which would produce great disputes in the University.
  MR. MARTENsaid, the Amendment of the hon. Member for Chelsea went entirely beyond the scope of the Bill. It would be much to be deplored if Parliament were to give the Commissioners such a power as that which the Amendment involved, and which would enable them to alter the existing Act passed in 1856 for the regulation of the University of Cambridge, whereby the composition of the Electoral Roll was determined. A body of persons more fit to be entrusted with a share of the government of a great University like Cambridge than those who formed the existing Electoral Roll could scarcely be found. If this matter was to be dealt with practically, there could not be a more convenient arrangement than that by which the working of the University was vested in those who were its actual officers for the time being, and at the same time Masters of Art, who were representatives of the liberal professions, engaged in the everyday business of the town, and well able to judge what was for the benefit of the University at large.
  MR. OSBORNE MORGANcould not conceive why a man should be thought fit to interfere in the government of the University of Cambridge because he resided within a certain number of yards of the Church of St. Mary's. Among the educating body of the University

  289
  there was but one opinion as to these extraneous elements—namely, that they were the greatest nuisance that could be conceived. He intimated that in the event of the present Amendment being rejected, he would move another one disenfranchising these members of the University directly rather than, as the present Amendment proposed, giving the power of disenfranchisement to the Commissioners.
  MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSENsaid, that if the question was to be raised at all it must be upon this clause, which determined the subjects with which the Commissioners might deal. As to curtailing the powers of Convocation to deal with matters affecting University education, he could hardly conceive a body less qualified to deal with such matters, consisting as it did of men scattered all over the country, having long lost, if they ever possessed, any knowledge of University affairs, and being occupied in various pursuits and professions elsewhere. As to the smaller Bodies, the Congregation at Oxford and the Electoral Roll at Cambridge, the proposition seemed to him incontrovertible that the people who managed the internal affairs of Oxford and Cambridge Universities should be engaged either in tuition or in the government of the Colleges. It was most undesirable to have the interference of another element consisting of people who had really no more concern in the management of the Colleges and Universities than any other members of Convocation. For his own part, he could not conceive why the Commissioners, who had already been entrusted with the exercise of most important functions, should not have the power to make alterations in the direction indicated by the Amendment, should public opinion in the University point to them as desirable.
  MR. RODWELLopposed the Amendment. It involved a far greater question than was ever contemplated when the Bill was introduced, and struck at the very constitution of the University. If that question was to be raised at all, it ought to be raised in a more prominent shape, so that those who were to be disfranchised might hove due notice of the proposal.
  MR. JAMESagreed that the question raised by the Amendment would more properly be dealt with in a sepa-
  290
  rate Bill. In the Hebdomadal Council of Oxford there were not six members who did not belong to the clerical party. Why a person living a mile and a-half from Carfax should be entitled to fill these important posts was most difficult to understand. A reformed Congregation would be much the best body for the election of certain offices now discharged by Convocation. At present there was much complaint of the appointment of improper persons, and what was going on now in the matter of canvassing with respect to the vacant offices of Public Orator and the Professorship of Poetry gave this Amendment greater importance. He trusted, therefore, that it would be generally supported by the House.
  MR. GOSCHENbelieved that in 1854, when this subject was before the House, it was debated for several nights, and if the right hon. Gentleman wished that could be done again, as hon. Members on his side of the House had plenty to say and plenty of arguments to advance against this proposal. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that hon. Members on that side of the House attached the greatest importance to this Amendment. It might be desirable to raise the question at issue upon subsequent clauses, allowing the present Amendment to be withdrawn for that purpose; but, if its withdrawal was objected to, he would support the Amendment. The addition of the resident clergy to Congregation had not worked satisfactorily. The fact of residence alone was not a sufficient qualification, to the exclusion of non-residents. It was not, however, a question between the clergy and the laity. He would prefer the opinion of the purely University body on purely University questions. The functions performed by the two bodies had not yet been discussed, and should be raised at some stage of the Bill. The exercise of patronage was liable to abuse, and no more important function could be assigned to the Commissioners than to see that these abuses were not perpetuated.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYdid not complain of fair debate, but what had been alleged against the clause went a great deal beyond what was the original purport of the Bill. The Government had no intention whatever of making this Bill a large disfranchising measure,

  291
  and the noble Lord who introduced the Bill last year in another House distinctly stated that fact. With regard to the Public Orator and Professorship of Poetry, he saw no reason why Convocation should not appoint them. The Professor of poetry should be a man known beyond the University to have a special knowledge of the subject and a critical acquaintance with it. The duties of Public Orator were not those of teaching, and therefore no real objection could be urged against the present system of election. With regard to the statutes passed by Convocation, nonresident Masters of Arts did not leave their parishes to come up and vote unless there was some important change under discussion; and unless the members on both sides were nearly equal, these gentlemen could not turn the balance. Indeed, there were no reasons why they should be all on one side. There were 364 members of Convocation at Oxford, and not 20 were resident M.A.'s not connected with the teaching of the University. It could therefore be only on very particular occasions that their vote could influence the result. They had but a small modicum of power, and there was no reason why they should vote any one particular way. It was only natural that members of either University residing at Oxford or Cambridge should take a greater interest in its management than those resident at a distance were able to do. When statutes were passed the non-resident Masters of Arts could put the necessary check on them; for although passed by one body they required to be confirmed by the other. But it was seldom that nonresident members had to interfere. Considering, then, the real scope of the Bill, he could not consent to any Amendment like this, which would interfere with the very roots of the constitution of the Universities.
  MR. GOSCHENsaid, they were all agreed that after the passing of this Bill the Universities should be left in peace for some time, and not be harassed with the immediate expectation of further legislation. Surely, then, it would be wise that the present Bill should deal with all the matters likely to arise soon or in the near future. If this question were not now fully considered, it ought to be at some future stage of the progress of the Bill.
  MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, the Amendment which the hon. Baronet has proposed is one which, if passed into law, cannot fail to have a permanent and, in the opinion of some who are very well qualified to judge, a most salutary influence upon the future of the Universities. It has absolutely nothing political, religious, or controversial about it. Its effect will be educational and educational alone. The arguments in its favour appeal exactly as much to hon. Gentlemen opposite as to hon Gentlemen on this side of the House. In fact, it will be almost unnecessary to use those arguments; because, if once fairly stated, the case is so plain that it may fairly be left to argue itself. I feel satisfied that hon. Gentlemen are of opinion that this Bill, which professes to be a Bill for making our Universities as useful as possible, should secure that the task of directing the studies of the Universities should be lodged in the hands that are best capable of discharging it. If we omit to ensure this we may just as well drop the Bill at once. Now, the process through which any scheme for altering the system of education in the University of Cambridge has to pass is as follows:—Let us suppose that there is a general feeling that enough attention is not paid to the historical side of Greek and Latin literature. In order to correct this tendency, the Board which has the supervision of classical studies comes to the conclusion that greater weight should be given to history in the final degree of examination. The first step that the Classical Board takes is to lay their proposal before the Council in a Report. The Council, in its turn, appoints an extraordinary Syndicate, which reports on the matter to the Senate, and the Senate meets in the Art Schools to discuss the Report of the Council. Up to this point there is nothing to criticize; but from this point forward the process of University legislation becomes unequalled in absurdity among all the methods of transacting public business which men have ever adopted since society became organized. The Senate, as hon. Members very well know, consists of more than 5,000 persons, of all ages and callings, scattered over the whole civilized and uncivilized world from Calcutta to the Lands End. The consequence is that the body which assembles in the Art Schools to discuss

  293
  the question is not, and cannot be, the Senate, but those members of the Senate who are resident at Cambridge, and who are engaged in carrying on the work of the University. These gentlemen, than whom a more competent body for the purpose could not easily be found, take the matter into consideration. Speeches are made for and against. The personal influence of the great authorities on classical questions—such men as Dr. Thompson, Mr. Munro, Dr. Lightfoot, Canon Westcott—are brought to bear. Opinions are altered and modified; and then I presume hon. Gentleman suppose that the assembly, having had the case fully laid before them, proceed in due course to a decision. But that is not the way in which matters are carried on under the existing constitution of the University. Instead of having a division upon the spot, while those present are fresh from the argument, a future day is fixed, on which a poll is taken; a poll not confined to those who have listened to the debate in the Arts Schools—not even limited to those who are practically engaged in the educational work of the place—but a poll at which every one of the 5,000 members of the Senate who will take the trouble to come up to Cambridge will have a right to vote. Then at once there begin all those proceedings with which it is the misfortune of all of us here present to be practically acquainted. One poll is very much like another, whether it is about the election of a Member of Parliament or the choice between one system of study and another. There is a canvass and a whip. Postcards and circulars go out by the thousand. Offers of hospitality are lavishly made; for there is no law against treating in questions of higher education. Men come up to vote this way or that, not because they know anything about the merits of the case, but because they have received a pressing summons from someone who, 30 years before, rowed next but one to them in their College boat. When the day comes the resident members look anxiously round them to see whether there are many strange faces; for they are only too well aware that, if such is the case, the deliberate opinion of those who, responsible for the education of the University on abstruse and delicate questions which it requires a life-time to study, may be
  294
  swamped by a multitude of persons who are no more fit to decide such questions than a country gentleman of 50 would be fit to draw up a new system of infantry tactics because between the age of 20 and 22 he had been a cornet of dragoons. Hon. Gentlemen may think that I exaggerate; but, in describing the results of a system as anomalous as this, no one can exaggerate, unless he has an imagination much more lively than mine. Some years ago—certainly not a year too soon—it was proposed to introduce a reform of a most vital nature into the final classical examination. The great majority of those concerned in conducting the classical studies of the place were in favour of the change. But, unfortunately, the poll was taken on a day when, besides the excitement of the contest, there was the additional attraction of a flower-show. Non-resident Masters of Arts trooped into the town from a circuit of 50 miles round. Their wives and daughters went to the flower-show, while they themselves crowded into the Senate House, in order to overset, by an off-hand vote, a scheme which had been drawn up with infinite care and after long consideration by a committee composed of some of the greatest scholars of Europe. Sir, it is bad enough for those who have been debating a question in this House, with full knowledge of the subject, when the bell rings, and a crowd of Gentlemen hurry to the Bar, ready to dispose, between two mouthfuls of soup, of a matter the nature of which they have perhaps heard for the first time from our worthy Doorkeeper; but what is that to the crying abuse of a system under which abstruse educational problems, on which it may depend whether the intellectual efforts of the coming generation are to be directed into the right or the wrong channel, are decided by the haphazard vote of people who actually were 100 miles away from the place when the question was discussed, and who, when the matter is once settled, will return home to their own avocations, and very likely by the end of the month will have forgotten that such a question has ever existed. That was the method in which the all-important question of whether Greek should be made a compulsory subject was settled, and, as the people who know best appear to think, wrongly settled a few years ago. It is to enable the Commissioners to apply a

  295
  remedy to this state of things that the hon. Baronet has placed his Amendment on the Paper. If the Committee thinks fit to agree to this Amendment; if the Commissioners—leaving to the Senate and to Convocation their ancient and splendid functions, the right of electing the University representatives and many of the University officials, the right of petitioning this House, and of laying addresses at the foot of the Throne—confine the duty of superintending educational arrangements to a smaller and more responsible body, then a reform will have been effected which is eagerly desired by many of those who are most actively engaged in the practical work of our Universities. The judgment of hon. Members must, I am satisfied, be in favour of this Amendment; and, on a matter which does not touch Party, the judgment of hon. Members is never appealed to in vain.
  MR. STAVELEY HILLobserved that there were other assemblies besides the Senate of the University in which it was not necessary that a member should hear all the discussion to enable him to vote. At Cambridge and Oxford the great desire was to bring the question to an end as soon as possible, so that they might know what changes were to be made. He was a member of Congregation and Convocation, and no great change was desired in either of those bodies. He had never heard any dissatisfaction with the present state of things. They could not attempt to make any alteration in this respect in the present Bill, as the subject was not within its scope.
  SIR THOMAS ACLANDcould not agree with the last speaker that there was no dissatisfaction with the Governing Bodies of the University. It was very doubtful whether the constitution of Congregation did not place too large a power in the hands of the tutorial interest, many of them being very young, acute, and subtle men, with a very moderate acquaintance with the general affairs of the world. Hastily to decide now that the Convocation should be confined to the present teaching members of the University might possibly be a leap in the dark, which might hereafter be regretted. He did not think the University would rest till the Governing Bodies were improved, but seeing no prospect of the question being thoroughly
  296
  settled by separate legislation, his only course was to support the Amendment.
  MR. C. DALRYMPLEsaid, it was only on particular occasions, as at the election of the Public Orator and the like, that non-resident Masters of Arts voted, and it was an exaggeration to say that the outside voters really overbore the opinion of the University. It appeared always to be assumed that the opinion of nonresident was adverse to that which was wise and enlightened, as well as to any change in the University system. He (Mr. Dalrymple) could remember at least one occasion, when non-residents flocked to Cambridge to support a proposal for a readership in American history, which had been strongly opposed by resident-members of the University—a proposal which, at all events, had the merit of novelty, and might have been of great use to the University. His objection to the Amendment was that the opinion of the outside world was very often of great value, and he believed that, as a rule, questions of education were left to the resident Masters of Arts.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, as to the objection that this Amendment was not within the scope of the Bill, he begged to remind the hon. Members who made it that the Committee had not passed the Preamble, and that the object of postponing the Preamble was that in case of modifying the scope of the Bill the Preamble might be modified accordingly. The Amendment had nothing whatever to do with the election of Members of that House. He would have been willing to withdraw his Amendment and then to propose it in the form suggested some time ago had he not been prevented from doing so.
  Question put, "That those words be there added."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 115; Noes 143: Majority 28.—(Div. List, No. 113.)
  MR. COURTNEY,in moving his Amendment, stated that as far back as the year 1869 there had been a College for women modelled after the organization of the Colleges, and its promoters desired that the students should be subjected to examinations like those at Oxford or Cambridge. The authorities at Cambridge were not prepared at the time to accede to this request, but they

  297
  had intimated that the Examiners, in their private capacity, might look through the papers, and this had been done from the year 1870 to the present time. In that year the Examiners of the previous examination had consented to furnish these female students with Examination papers and report on their answers, judging them by the University standard. That had been done, and the examiners had certified with respect to them, and the custom had prevailed for the last seven years, not only in the case of the previous examination, but in the case of the pass and the higher examinations for honours. He could not better explain the process than by reading a letter which had been written by one of the examiners of the Classical Tripos in 1873, in which he stated that his colleagues and himself would be happy to examine papers sent up to them, but that it must be distinctly understood that they did so in their private capacity. The whole scope of his Amendment was to give an official recognition to what had thus been done in an unofficial manner. Nothing was wanted but the recognition of the University. He would point out the extent to which this examination of women had been carried. In the year 1870 five students passed the previous examinations, two of them in honours. In 1871 two others passed in honours. In 1872 five passed, and four took honours. In 1873 two passed, and two took honours. In 1874 five passed, and two took honours. In 1875 six passed, and five took honours. In 1876 18 passed, and 12 took honours. Of late years ladies had been tested by the degree examination standards. In 1873 a lady took a position equivalent to a second-class in the Mathematical Tripos; and another, a second in the Classical Tripos. In 1874 two passed in Natural Science. In 1875 two reached the Classical Tripos standard. All these came from Girton College. There was also at Cambridge, Newnham Hall, and an arrangement by which ladies who were members neither of Girton nor of Newnham were admitted to the lectures of the University Professors, and students from Newnham had been examined like the students from Girton. It was not impossible that the ladies attending the Professorial lectures might be admitted to examination in a similar way. All that he wished to suggest was that
  298
  what was now done by favour should be done publicly and in a recognized manner. The matter was one of considerable importance, and it could not be argued that the practice which the Amendment proposed to legitimate was novel or dangerous. If a gentleman wished to send his boy to a school he could ascertain the character of the schoolmaster; but in the case of girls parents had no kind of authority to which to refer. But the voluntary organization to which he had referred had introduced such an authority, which had been found most useful. Public schools for girls, analogous to high schools for boys, had been established at Notting Hill, Chelsea, Clapham, Norwich, Manchester, and other parts of the country. He did not know, considering the strictly permissive character of this proposal, what objections would be raised to it. He must add a word or two on the second part of his Amendment. Last year an Act was passed enabling any authority which could grant degrees to men under the Medical Act to confer them on women also. It might, perhaps, be argued that under the provisions of that Statute the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge could grant medical degrees to women. But his present proposal did not relate to the granting of degrees of any kind. At present the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge granted licences to practise medicine, but only as a corollary to a medical degree. He now proposed to enable the Universities to grant such licences to practise to persons who had not graduated, provided they fulfilled the necessary conditions of knowledge. The sub-section was purely permissive, and if it were passed the probability was that Cambridge would take the matter up, and that Oxford would not. The greater liberality of Cambridge in this respect was perhaps, due to gratitude for what that University owed to women. It was a remarkable circumstance that at Cambridge six Colleges were founded by the benevolence of ladies. Considering, therefore, how much we were thus indebted to women, we ought to do what we could now to promote the education of women.
  Amendment proposed,
  In page 6, after sub-section 11, to insert the words "(12.) For enabling the University to examine female students concurrently with

  299
  male students, subject to such conditions regulating the residence and discipline of such female students as the University may from time to time approve or ordain; and for enabling the University to grant licences to practise medicine to female students who have passed the examinations and fulfilled the conditions which are necessary for obtaining degrees in medicine in the case of male students in that faculty."(Mr. Courtney.)
  MR. FORSYTHsaid, that, although no one could accuse him of being indifferent to the claims of women, he confessed he felt some difficulty with regard to this sub-section, which was rather ambiguously worded. Its first object was to enable the University "to examine female students concurrently with male students." That meant, he supposed, that they were to be in the same lecture-rooms, to sit side by side on the same benches, and that the Examiners were to walk up and down while the young gentlemen and young ladies were answering the questions. He was afraid the attentions of the young gentlemen would be paid to the young ladies, and not to the examination papers. His real objection to the clause had reference to the first part of it. If ladies were examined in classics and mathematics by University officials, and no degrees were conferred, no better results would follow than were now attainable at Girton College. If the hon. Member for Liskeard had had the courage to carry his Amendment to its logical conclusion, and had proposed that the ladies who acquitted themselves well in the examinations should be named in the Tripos list, and should afterwards have degrees conferred upon them, he would have voted for the proposal. He thought no reasonable argument could be shown why women should not be able to attain degrees, if they passed the proper examinations. As to the second part of the sub-section, he thought it right that licences should be given to female students of medicine who proved themselves fit to practise.
  MR. HOPWOODsupported what he regarded as the just demand embodied in the Amendment. He fully recognized the great services which the hon. and learned Member who had just spoken had rendered to the cause of women in this country. He regretted that his hon. and learned Friend had not the courage of his convictions, and had not suggested such an alteration in the proposal of the
  300
  hon. Member for Liskeard as would carry those convictions to their legitimate conclusion. In reference to the argument that nothing would be gained, he thought a great deal would be gained by the adoption of the proposal; he thought that the mere fact of official recognition of what was now done unofficially would be an immense gain. This Amendment was moderate and effective. It was a very just demand upon the part of those who were making great exertions to elevate those women who showed that they had talent and ability, and, therefore, he should vote for it.
  MR. GORSTconcurred in hoping that the Government would see its way to concede something at least in the direction of the hon. Member's Amendment. He reminded the House that last Session an Act was passed empowering the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge to grant medical degrees. The Amendment only asked that the Commissioners should recognize existing facts. Women were examined at the present time, and it was only sought to give the examinations official sanction, He must, however, express his concurrence in the opinion that the first part of the Amendment did not go far enough.
  MR. RATHBONEsaid, the great value of what was at present done was shown in the very superior class of school-mistresses which the system had been the means of providing in some of the schools for girls throughout the country. Female education was one of the most important works of the present day, and nothing would tend to give it such an impetus as to provide a better class of mistresses for girls' schools. The adoption of this proposal would be invaluable to those engaged in the work, and would materially strengthen their hands.
  MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he thought it was a proposal which would introduce a very great change, which ought, if made at all, to be made in a more open and direct form. Many ladies had distinguished themselves at the voluntary examinations; but this Amendment would legalize the position of these ladies as being formally entitled to the honour examinations of the Universities. It could not end there. If once ladies were admitted as a constituent part of the studying or Undergraduate body, not only would they claim to compete

  301
  with men in the degree examination, and use the degree to which that was the portal, but they would establish an equitable claim for the substantial awards to which examinations lead and demand to be candidates for Scholarships and Fellowships. If Fellows, how could they be excluded from becoming tutors, deans, and masters of Colleges? A charming and an accomplished lady dean would be sure to draw a large number of gentlemen Undergraduates to the College which she ruled; but what would Paterfamilias say? These were not extreme considerations; for the fact was the Amendment proposed to make a great change, as to which no one could see the end.
  LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHsaid, the hon. Member argued against the Amendment as being the thin end of the wedge, and, as usual, he was against all change. He would support the Amendment because it sought to recognize and to regulate the examinations now conducted by the University Examiners at Cambridge of the students of Girton and Newnham Colleges. Great efforts were now being made to improve the education of girls, especially in connection with some of the endowed schools and in public day schools; but the great difficulty was to obtain really efficient teachers. The Colleges to which he had referred were doing much to supply that want, and by means of the voluntary and gratuitous assistance of the University Examiners an independent test was applied to the attainments of their students; and it was because it was now proposed to enable the Universities to take in hand this work now done in a manner unrecognized by them that he should cordially support the Amendment.
  MR. MUNDELLApointed out that the examination of the two sexes together would not be a novelty in connection with the Universities, the present local examinations being conducted in that manner. Women had no professional career open to them. If such career could be opened to those who distinguished themselves at the University, some hope might be entertained for the better education of girls.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYunderstood the object of the proposal to be to bring women in as Undergraduates of the Universities. Practically, it was
  302
  proposed to put them under the authority of Proctors. He was not opposed by any means to female students having the opportunity of passing examinations and obtaining degrees which might enable them to fill situations and practise medicine; but what he did object to was that they should be subjected to the same conditions and pass through the same examinations concurrently with the male students, for whom originally all those conditions were devised. The hon. Member for Liskeard had spoken of the Colleges which in times past were founded at Cambridge by women, but he must remember for the education of men; and it had been overlooked that in those times the education of the women was carried on in convents, and, of course, separately. He was not aware that Girton College admitted young men. In that very case the advantages of separation seemed to be recognized. The scholars there were under the superintendence of women; they had lecturers of their own; and, he was told, that when they attended lectures away from their College, they still had lecturers for themselves. The whole system, therefore, was one, not of mixed and concurrent education for both sexes, but distinctly of separate education. He believed the success of the teaching was greatly owing to the privacy of the arrangements. Believing, as he did, that this separation was most desirable, he must oppose the Motion of the hon. Member. If the object was to overturn the whole system of male and female education in the country, this was a matter which ought to be settled by Parliament, and ought not to be delegated to Commissioners. With respect to the latter part of the Amendment, relating to the granting of licences to female medical students, it had already been pointed out that it was not needed. If the Universities wished to give medical degrees, they might do so; but he did not think it likely they would exercise that power. While recognizing the importance of giving educational facilities to women, he thought the proposal of the hon. Member for Liskeard to bring female students under the regular discipline of the Universities was not likely to meet the wishes of those whom it was intended to benefit, and that the attempt to carry on the education of both sexes together would only destroy the system of separate education for

  303
  young ladies, which was at present flourishing.
  M.R. COURTNEYexplained that he did not wish, as the right hon. Gentleman supposed, to bring the girls of Girton College under the same regulations with respect to discipline as the Undergraduates at the Universities. He observed, moreover, that it was not proposed to delegate any absolute final authority to the Commissioners, but only to invite them to frame some working plan which would in due course be submitted to the University Commission and to Parliament.
  MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he at last understood the purport of the Amendment. The Universities had been spoken of by the advanced Liberals as "monastic institutions." He was not prepared to vote for their being "conventual institutions" as well.
  Question put, "That those words be there added."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 119 Noes 239: Majority 120.—(Div. List, No. 114.)
  LORD FRANCIS HERVEYmoved, in page 6, line 23, after "the same," to insert—
  "(13) For the administration of the University Press and of the funds belonging thereto, and for the publication, not less than once in each year, of the accounts thereof; (14) For the management of the financial affairs of the University."
  He remarked that the Press at Oxford some 15 or 20 years ago brought in a net revenue of £13,000, a sum which was now considerably less; but he could not think it right that no accurate information should be given as to what became of a sum of money amounting to a quarter of the whole annual revenue of the University. Account should be rendered of so important a source of income. It was to be remembered that the Delegates of the Press enjoyed the monopoly of printing Bibles, and it might be urged that Convocation had a right to know how its servants administered their money. He could not admit the plea so often put forward, that the University Press was a trading concern. If that was the case, it would be the first occasion on which he had ever heard that a great centre of learning was a trading concern. And in that
  304
  case the Press authorities should do what other trading concerns did, and lay their accounts before Parliament, instead of shrinking from publicity. He would not charge any individual with mismanagement; he merely wanted to learn the prospective income of the University.
  MR. MOWBRAYsaid, his noble Friend had not been quite clear as to the authority to whom these accounts should be rendered; one thing, however, was quite clear, that the names of the Board of Delegates furnished an ample guarantee against maladministration. It was to be recollected, moreover, that the Clarendon Press was divided into two parts, one of which certainly was a trading concern, and the managers had their capital embarked in it; therefore the public had no right to inquire into it.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Thursday next.
  House resumed.

CATTLE PLAGUE AND IMPORTATION OF LIVE STOCK.
  NOMINATION OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE.

    FURTHER PROCEEDING RESUMED.
    VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, he was about to propose that the hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. Dease), and the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Mr. Clare Read) be Members of the Committee. The hon. and learned Member for Limerick (Mr. Butt) had already placed the name of Mr. Dease on the Paper, and he (Viscount Sandon) was informed that it would be acceptable to hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side. On further communication with the hon. Member for South Norfolk, he found that the hon. Member was still very much disinclined to serve on the Committee. All must regret if the hon. Member for South Norfolk persisted in his refusal. If the hon. Member for South Norfolk should be still unable to give the benefit of his services, he would then propose the hon. Member for Linlithgowshire (Mr. M'Lagan), who, he believed, would be acceptable to the

    305
    House. He begged, in the first place, to propose that the hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. Dease) be a Member of the Committee.
    MR. BUTTseconded the Motion.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Pease be one other Member of the Select Committee."—(Viscount Sandon.)
    MR. J. W. BARCLAYwould like to hear something more about the representation of Scotland on the Committee. It was right that the various parts of the United Kingdom should be all fairly represented. He should be unwilling to put up anybody in opposition to the hon. Member for South Norfolk, but he approved the nomination of the hon. Member for Linlithgowshire (Mr. M'Lagan).
    MR. CALLANsaid, that he had proposed the hon. Member for Meath (Mr. Parnell), but since then the hon. and learned Gentleman whom he considered his Leader had proposed Mr. Dease; he would not therefore persevere. At the same time, he must state that the hon. Member for Meath had intimated, on seeing the name of Mr. Pease proposed, that he should decline to serve on the Committee.
    MR. E. NOELsaid, that he thought that the Scotch Members should be represented. He would not, however, press his Amendment.
    MR. MARK STEWARTsaid, that Scotland would be fairly represented.
    MR. CLARE READsaid, if he wanted an additional excuse for not serving on the Committee, this short debate had furnished him with one. He was extremely indebted to the noble Lord for his courtesy in placing his name on the Paper, and he felt also the compliment which had been paid to him by Members on both sides of the House who had desired that he should be one of the Committee. He had, however, objected to serve from the first. He had told everybody so, and he still adhered to his determination. In the first place, he believed that this Committee was not wanted. In his judgment, a good debate in that House would be much more serviceable than a Committee. What was wanted was not inquiry, but action—short, sharp, and decisive. He also objected to the scope of the Committee.
    306
    If it were simply to inquire into any circumstances which might have occurred since the last Cattle Plague Committee, such as the imports of American meat, he should have been willing to serve upon it; but, having had the honour of serving on the Cattle Plague Commission, and on most of the Committees appointed to consider the subject since 1865, he had no wish to go over the whole of that evidence again, as he was quite sure would be the fate of these 27 hon. Gentlemen who would have that great pleasure during the next three months in the very warm rooms upstairs. If his opinion were of any use to the Committee, they had nothing to do but to summon him to give evidence. He was happy that his declining to serve would enable the name of his hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgowshire to be added to the Committee, on which he trusted England, Ireland, and Scotland would now be fairly represented.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERdeclined to enter into any discussion with his hon. Friend as to the scope of the Committee; but he thought he expressed the general feeling of both sides of the House when he said that they all deeply regretted his hon. Friend's refusal to serve on the Committee. In so refusing they were sure he was guided by no other than the motives which always actuated him—public spirit and a desire to do what he believed to be right.
    MR. PARNELLregretted that the same spirit which animated the Government to-night had not been displayed the other night, when the nomination of the Committee occupied six hours of the time of the House. He begged to say that he had no intention of serving on the Committee. He had no wish to serve on any Committee of that House, much less on a Committee the appointment of which was marked by such a scene as that witnessed the other night. If he had been appointed he might have had his opportunities of doing good in that House late at night diminished.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    VISCOUNT SANDONnext proposed the name of the hon. Member for Linlithgowshire (Mr. M'Lagan), and though he regretted the refusal of the hon. Member for South Norfolk to serve, he congratulated the House on having

    307
    reached the last name upon the Committee.
    MR. MORGAN LLOYDcomplained that in studying national interests nothing had been said of those of the Principality of Wales, which produced a large number of cattle. Flintshire and Denbighshire had suffered from the cattle plague, and it was quite necessary that Wales should be represented on the Committee.
    Motion agreed to.
    Power to send for persons, papers' and records; Five to be the quorum.

CUSTOMS, INLAND REVENUE, AND SAVINGS BANKS BILL— [BILL 143.]
(Hr. Raikes, Hr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. William Henry Smith.)
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
MR. COURTNEYwished to make some observations on the proposals made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech with regard to Savings Banks. There was a deficiency of £3,250,000 upon the Savings Banks account, and the object which the right hon. Gentleman said he had in view was to stop that leak. His proposals, however, when examined, would not really stop the present leak, but would have the effect of starting a new one. The Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt received large sums from the trustees of the old Savings Banks established about 60 years ago, and those sums were invested in the public funds. The Commissioners allowed the trustees 3¼ per cent interest, and upon those transactions the deficiency he had referred to had arisen. The Commissioners also received the monies deposited in the Post Office Savings Banks, allowing 2½ per cent interest upon them; those deposits they likewise invested in the public funds; and upon them they had obtained a certain surplus. On account of the Friendly Societies' Funds there was also a serious deficiency. The Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to place to the credit of revenue the amount of the surplus obtained from the Post Office Savings Banks. Now, suppose, by way of illustration, that
308
£94 was received from a depositor and invested in the purchase of £100 of Consols, the Commissioners would receive 3 per cent interest for the investment, and they would pay the depositor 47 s., leaving an apparent annual profit of 13 s., which they would be bound to pay into the Exchequer. But if the depositor wished to draw out his money when Consols fell below 94, say to 89 or 90, and the Commissioners had then to sell out, they would be landed in a deficiency. How did the deficiency of £3,250,000 arise? Not because the National Debt Commissioners paid more interest than they received, but because they bought stock in times of prosperity and sold it in times of depression. The gross amount of interest or dividend received by the National Debt Commissioners in respect of ordinary Savings Banks since the year 1817 was £62,112,000, while the total amount of interest paid and credited to Savings Banks by them during the same period amounted only to £54,339,000. So far as interest was concerned, therefore, they had been gainers by nearly 18,000,000. Their losses really occurred in the depreciation of Stock; and, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer made no provision for that, he would inevitably land himself in a deficiency. He contended that one-fifth of the interest received ought to be allowed as a depreciation fund. The plan he would recommend was this. There was a deficiency of £3,250,000. That was part of the National Debt; therefore, they might as well, first as well as last, hand over to the Commissioners another book-debt, to add to the National Debt, in order to make things square. That would involve no change in the finance accounts of the year; and having thus balanced the accounts, the only rational way of proceeding was to reduce the interest in order to keep the account solvent. He thought 2¾ instead of 3¼ per cent, as at the present, would be the proper rate to pay. That was the honest course, and he did not think that would be at all an unpopular proceeding.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERobserved that this subject had only a year or two ago excited considerable discussion, and therefore it was not necessary for him to go into it at any great length. He quite agreed with the hon. Gentleman that the proposal in the

309
Bill did not completely deal with the whole question of the Savings Banks accounts. They had not attempted to touch the question of the accumulated deficiency. That was rather a complicated question, with which it would be necessary one of these days to deal. They had also avoided raising the question of an alteration in the rate of interest allowed. If they were to go into the question of the rate allowed for Savings Banks' deposits, they ought to look into the whole arrangements, and consider whether any alteration should be made in the limits of deposits allowed, which was an interesting but hardly a pressing subject. There was, however, this matter of the deficiency, which year by year was continually increasing, and which it was undesirable to allow to increase. But, then, there was one kind of increase which was real, and another which was a matter of account. Suppose the Funds one day this year were 94, you made the assets of the Commissioners so much. Next year the Funds might be 96, and then the assets would be a great deal more. That was a sort of variation which was a matter of account. It should be always borne in mind that the whole national income was security for the deposits, and there was no danger to the depositors. But then there was this continually going on, there was a larger amount credited to Savings Bank depositors year by year than was earned on the amount deposited to their account. For instance, as he had shown in his Budget Statement, the income which accrued to the Savings Banks for the year ending November, 1876, amounted to £1,307,000, whereas the interest credited to the trustees was £1,380,000, showing a deficiency of £73,000. In the same way, on the Friendly Societies' account there was a deficiency of, he thought, £49,000. The rate of interest was fixed by Act of Parliament, and it was really desirable that Parliament should know that it was giving year by year, in the shape of interest, more than it was earning, and then the country would see what the cost of this system was. The deficiency was, no doubt, at present a part of the National Debt. With regard to the Amendment of the noble Lord (Lord Frederick Cavendish), to the effect that the Government should make some allowance for the depreciation in the
310
value of the securities, he was prepared to accept it.
MR. DODSONthought that a good deal might be said in favour of the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to the Savings Banks funds. It would, to use the words of the right hon. Gentleman, "stop the leak," and prevent the deficiency from growing larger. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would, at any rate, bring under the eyes of the public the annual loss, and pave the way for the proposal to reduce the rate of interest to the sum which was properly earned. He was glad that the right hon. Gentleman intended to accept the Amendment about to be proposed by the noble Lord the Member for the West Riding.
MR. MUNDELLAsuggested that the morning after the Budget Statement Members should be supplied with a printed balance-sheet, showing the estimates of receipt and expenditure of the current year, in order that they might be able to discuss the Budget proposals with advantage.
MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, that the suggestion had already been considered, and arrangements would be made for the future to supply the House with the information suggested by the lion. Gentleman.
Bill considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clauses 1 to 6, inclusive, agreed to.
Clause 7 (Provisions of Income Tax Acts to apply to duties hereby granted).
MR. HIBBERTmoved, as an Amendment, in page 2, line 35, at end to add the words—
"Provided, That in estimating the balance of the profits and gains of any trade, manufacture, adventure, or concern in the nature of trade chargeable under Schedule (D) of the said Act, or for the purpose of assessing the duty thereon, in addition to the deduction allowed from such profits or gains for the supply of repairs or alterations of any implements, utensils, or articles employed for the purpose of such trade, manufacture, adventure, or concern, a reasonable sum shall be allowed to be deducted from such profits or gains to set against the depreciation arising from the wear and tear of such implements, utensils, or articles."
He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider the injustice done to manufacturers under the existing law, by not

311
allowing them to take into account the depreciation of machinery when they made their returns of profits.
MR. ORR EWINGsaid, he cordially supported the Amendment. When the income tax was introduced by Sir Robert Peel, he was sure it was his intention that the manufacturer or mine-owner, or any person who carried on large works, should only pay upon the balance which he could divide amongst his partners; and he was also sure that if the return was made honestly the Government would not lose by agreeing to the Amendment. An honest man must keep books, and therefore must know the amount deducted for depreciation. What was done in Scotland? He did not know what was done in England, but in Scotland, if any person was doubted as having made an honest return, he was obliged to exhibit his books to the Inland Revenue authorities, who would make him add to his income tax the amount of depreciation which he honestly believed he ought to deduct before he divided his profits among his partners. He could not believe that so unjust a principle was intended ever to have been adopted. Under a Treasury Minute, issued many years ago, those who had property in ships were allowed to deduct depreciation of 10 or 15 per cent; but any person being a printer, spinner, weaver, or any other trade, was obliged to add it to the balance which he had to divide. He could not conceive a greater injustice to trade, and he did hope the Government would see their way to remedy the injustice. At the same time, he did not think these words would exactly carry out the views which he held upon the subject, but he could not see how the Government could contest the principle, and more especially when this right was granted to shipping, how they could refuse to grant it to other kinds of manufactures. There never was a time when there was a greater need for the Government to remedy this injustice to the manufacturers of Great Britain.
MR. HERMONalso supported the Amendment.
MR. ANDERSONsaid, there was no Member of the House who had ever been connected with the manufacturing interest but had felt the injustice of the mode in which the income tax was levied. He had himself known many cases of great hardship, and it was only sur-
312
prising the country had submitted to it so long. He could only account for it on the supposition that the income tax had always been deemed a sort of temporary measure that we were to get rid of some day, and in that hope people had submitted to it. The case of the mine owner was even worse than that of the manufacturer, because everything a man took out of a mine he was absolutely taking out of capital, and, therefore, to make him pay on it as profits was most unfair, for it was making him pay, not on profit, but on capital. He hoped the Amendment would be adopted.
MR. WHITWELLurged that the change proposed in the Amendment should be made as an act of justice, and not on account of the depression of trade.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that an allowance was at present made which substantially came to the same thing as was now asked—namely, the deduction allowed for repairs and other fixed charges over a period of three years; but when the hon. Member asked them to go further, and allow for depreciation, he thought the proposal was an unreasonable one; for it would, in fact, be allowing the deduction twice over. There was no standard by which depreciation could be tested; but the Government were most anxious to deal with each case that was brought before the Exchequer, and deal fairly with it. As an instance of the difficulty to be dealt with, it had been shown that in one case £20,000 had been charged for depreciation on a plant that originally cost only £10,000. At the same time, the Inland Revenue Department were quite willing to deal liberally, and even generously, with those who came under the Schedule in the matter referred to.
MR. HIBBERT,in reply, could not consider that his Amendment had so wide a scope.
Question put, "That those words be there added."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 56; Noes 91: Majority 35.—(Div. List, No. 115.)
Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.
House adjourned at Two o'clock.

MINUTES.
— Sat First in Parliament — The Lord Gormanston, after the death of his Father.
PUBLIC BILLS — First Reading — Removal of Wrecks * (59); Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (Brotton, &c.) * (60), and referred to the Examiners; Tramways Orders Confirmation (Barton, &c.) * (61), and referred to the Examiners.
Select Committee—Report—Public Record Office * (51–58).
Third Reading—Judicial Proceedings (Rating) * (37), and passed.
Withdrawn—Protection of Navigation * (53).

BLACK ROD.
The Deputy Lord Great Chamberlain acquainted the House "That Her Majesty had appointed General The Right Honourable Sir William Thomas Knollys, K.C.B., to be Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod in the room of Admiral Sir Augustus William James Clifford, Baronet, C.B., deceased, and that he was at the door ready to receive their Lordships commands," whereupon the House directed he should be called in; accordingly he was called in, and officiated in his place.
REPRESENTATIVE PEER FOR IRELAND.
Writs and Returns electing the Earl Annesley a Representative Peer for Ireland in the room of the late Earl of Bandon, deceased, with the Certificate of the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland annexed thereto—Delivered (on oath), and Certificate read.
RUSSIA AND TURKEY—THE WAR—THE SEAT OF WAR.
  OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, it might be for the convenience of their Lordships if he mentioned that it was intended to place in the Library of the House a map of the Seat of War, and that an officer from the Intelligence Department of the War Office would attend each day to mark off such changes as might occur in the positions of the contending armies.
  REMOVAL OF WRECKS BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to facilitate the removal of Wrecks and other obstructions to Navigation—Was presented by The Lord ELPHINSTONE; read 1a. (No. 59.)
  GAS AND WATER ORDERS CONFIRMATION (BROTTON, &C.) BILL [H.L.] (NO. 60.)
  A Bill for confirming certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under The Gas and Waterworks Facilities Act, 1870, relating to Brotton Gas, Guisbrough Gas, Bridport Water, Burgess Hill Water, Ruthin Water, and Pickering Gas and Water: And

  TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (BARTON, &C.) BILL [H.L.] (NO. 61.)
  A Bill for confirming certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Tramways Act, 1870, relating to Barton, Eccles, Winton, and Monton Local Board Tramways, Bristol Tramways (Extension), Hull Street Tramways (Extension), Manchester Suburban Tramways, Nottingham and District Tramways, Portsea Street Tramways, Rusholme Local Board of Health Tramways, and Wolverhampton Tramways:
  Were presented by The Lord ELPHINSTONE; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.