THE POSITION OF THE QUESTION IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FIRST ROYAL COMMISSION. By the middle of the year 1887 the long-debated question of the reform of the University of London appeared to be approaching within measurable distance of settlement; and although, as events proved, this result was still to be deferred for more than a decade, even if it can now be regarded as obtained, a very definite step in the progress of the subject was reached by the appointment in May, 1888, of a Royal Commission "to inquire whether any and what kind of new University or powers is or are required for the advancement of higher education in London". Marking, as this does, the first stage in the course of the proceedings, it may be convenient to record in brief summary the circumstances that led up to action being taken, and how matters stood when the Royal Commission began its sittingsall which it has been the object of the writer to set forth in fuller detail in the previous pages. For this purpose free use will be made of an interesting memorandum drawn up by Lord Justice Fry, and circulated amongst the members of the Senate in March, 1886, and handed in by him to the Royal Commission presided over by Lord Selborne. "The agitation in favour of changes in the University had several distinct sources, and was assisted by men of different and often discordant views. First in point of time was probably the dissatisfaction felt by the medical teachers of London at the very small number of degrees obtained by their pupils in proportion to the very large number of students and the opportunities for clinical teaching." One of the earliest expressions of this feeling was manifested in a letter from Dr. Bristowe to the Chancellor in December, 1879 (p. 28), and this was soon followed by action on the part of the Royal College of Physicians (p. 36), and of the Metropolitan Counties Branch of the British Medical Association (p. 40) on the same lines. "Another motive which influenced the movement was the opinion that no University fulfils its end which has not the means of promoting original research and giving instruction to students of the most advanced kind." This with the growing feeling in various educational quarters that teachers should have a distinct voice in the management of the University with which their schools were connected, and that these schools should be in some degree affiliated to the University, formed the basis of a report to the Senate of the University from Convocation in 1878 (p. 25). The same views were emphasised during the sittings of the Educational Conference in the International Health Exhibition in August, 1884. Amongst the papers then read was one by Prof. H. Morley (p. 67), in which he pointed out the co-existence in London of two things, one "the presence of many and varied aids towards the higher education," the other, the existence of "a University which examines but does not teach," the want of all direct relationship between these bodies and the great gain which might be reasonably expected to result "from the right combination of existing conditions".* The first practical step towards a reconstitution of the University in the direction desired was to be found in the formation in May, 1884, of the Association for Promoting a Teaching University for London (p. 63), and it is not too much to say that it was owing to the action of this body, and more especially to the ability and energy of Sir George Young, that any real progress was made. Although the plan that the Association supported, and at one time was all but given effect to, did * In December, 1887, Prof. Morley delivered two lectures at the London Institution on "The Future University of London". His scheme was "that the present work of the University should remain untouched, and that a 'University Chamber' should be constituted by a proportionate representation from the Collegiate bodies in London; that the Matriculation Examination might remain common to both branches of the University; but that two parallel sets of degrees should exist, the one to be granted by the existing examining branch of the University, the other by the teaching branch". Prof. Morley's idea was to bring within the sphere of the University all parts of the great body of education-the board schools, the grammar schools and such intermediate bodies as Toynbee Hall and the Birkbeck Institution-though leaving each element free to discharge its own functions. The main constitution of the University, however, should be formed by University and King's Colleges, the Inns of Court, the Medical Schools, Cooper's Hill College, the South Kensington Schools and the Royal Academy of Music. not in the end prevail, it still remains a question in the minds of many most competent authorities whether the higher education of London would not have fared better had the scheme come into actual working. In any case, besides being almost directly responsible for the most complete alternative proposed to the then existing University, it may indirectly claim a large share of the credit of rousing the then Senate to consider its position and mend its ways, and so after many checks and much compromise to have assisted materially in bringing about the reconstitution of the University. Lastly," as Sir Edward Fry significantly observed, “it can hardly be doubted that a certain body of graduates desired a change in the University, not so much to promote any of the objects of the Association as to give increased powers to Convocation; and they joined in the agitation for change with a view to effectuate this object." Briefly, the objects sought to be attained by these various dissentients from the conduct and action of the then existing University of London were :— A co-ordination of the teaching in the various metropolitan seats of higher instruction, and the formation of a union between the institutions and teachers, "so that the elements of a great University should no longer be as disjecta membra, but as parts of one organisation ". The establishment of "a direct relationship between those teaching bodies and the University of London," with which they were out of touch. "The consciousness that teaching and study are a larger part of real education than examining or being examined created a dissatisfaction with the University as being nothing but an examining body. The recognition of study as such by the University appeared to many persons desirable." To provide a degree for London medical students on more accessible terms than those offered by the University of London. "One of the great obstacles in the way of graduation was the high standard of general scientific knowledge required by the University and the comparative weakness of many of the schools in the purely scientific teaching. The difficulty was increased by the fact that some of the schools which possessed the highest scientific teaching possessed the smallest amount of hospital accommodation." The foundation of University chairs in advanced subjects, directed to the requirements of graduates and scholars rather than of students preparing for examinations, together with the providing facilities and encouragement for research. "Various schemes were suggested to remedy the mischiefs felt and to accomplish the objects desired." (a) Some authorities proposed the formation of an entirely independent University, it being thought that the existing University was incapable of being altered to meet what was wanted, consistent with the retention of the work it was doing, the value of which was generally though not universally admitted. In this category were the schemes of the Royal Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons and that emanating from University and King's Colleges, the lineal descendant of the plan proposed by the Association for Promoting a Teaching University in London, and known as the Albert University Scheme. (b) Others, on the contrary, conceived that it was possible to include under the same governing body the existing work of the University, running parallel with which might be formed a "Teaching side," controlled by the teachers, who should be organised into Faculties, with a matriculation examination. perhaps common to both, but with two sets of degrees conferred by the same Senate. Such, indeed, was the character of the original scheme of the Association for Promoting a Teaching University (p. 70), but it was quite recognised that this might not be feasible, and the possibility of an independent University was clearly contemplated. Prof. Morley's proposal was of a similar nature. "It is obvious," commented Sir Edward Fry, "that there are serious objections to this scheme. The two so-called departments would be really separate bodies, standing in a position if not of antagonism, at least of competition; they would be independent of each other and yet would be required to live together; and every detail, financial and administrative, of such a complex body would seem to present great practical difficulties. It may be suggested that if the dual principle be allowed to prevail in examinations, it can hardly be safe for it to obtain in the governing body." (c) A third group of objectors to the existing order of things claimed that the solution of the problem was to be found in a fundamental reconstitution of the University of such a character as to bring the London Colleges into relation with one another and with the University itself, as well as giving a direct voice in the management of the University to the teachers and teaching authorities. Such were the two schemes successively put forward by Convocation (pp. 85 and 117) and the scheme of the Senate (p. 160). A comparison of these proposals was made on page 172. Of these several suggestions two only assumed a concrete form, in the shape of Charters which were duly lodged with the Privy Council and supported by Petitions, viz., that put forward by University and King's Colleges jointly, and that presented by the Royal Colleges of Physicians and of Surgeons acting together. A petition, however, was sent in from the Association for Promoting a Teaching University for London, pointing out in general terms only what its promoters considered was desirable, without framing any detailed scheme such as the others provided. It virtually supported, though without explicit declaration, the prayer of University and King's Colleges, and as representing the body which first definitely indicated the lines on which University reform was required may be fitly set out first as follows: Petition OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR PROMOTING A TEACHING UNIVERSITY To the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty in Council. SHEWETH University for London: 1. That the Association for Promoting a Teaching University for London was formed in 1884, and has enrolled up to the present time about 250 members, each of whom was specially invited to join on the ground of |