There were thus two institutions doing identical work and with similar objects, except so far as one of them sought the power to grant to its alumni degrees, or as it was forcibly if inelegantly styled at a later period "to brand their own herrings". It was clear that this could not be allowed, and the Government (Lord Melbourne's) settled the difficulty by granting, on 28th November, 1836, to the self-called "University of London" a charter under the designation of "London University College," recognising it as a place of academic education and also undertaking to grant similar charters to other institutions of the same kind which might be hereafter established; and on the same day incorporating under the style and title of the University of London a "body of persons eminent in literature and science, to act as a Board of Examiners and to perform all the functions of the examiners in the Senate House of Cambridge".

In this way, then, was constituted the University of London, primarily with examination and degree granting powers in Arts, Laws and Medicine, which were to be exercised only in respect to candidates presenting themselves from the two London Colleges, King's and University, "or from such other institution corporate or unincorporated as now is or hereafter shall be established for the purposes of education whether in the metropolis or elsewhere within our United Kingdom" (First charter). Among these were included such medical institutions and schools as the Chancellor, ViceChancellor and Fellows might from time to time consider fit.*

tinguished persons, some of whom were unconnected with the " University". Strenuous efforts were also made by the celebrated Dr. Arnold, who was one of the members of the first Senate of the University of London when incorporated, to require from every candidate for a degree in Arts, though not in Laws or Medicine, an acquaintance with some part of the New Testament in the original and with Scripture history; but he was unable to carry the majority of his colleagues with him, and his failure led to his withdrawal. (See articles in Quarterly Review, January, 1887 and 1892, by Sir Joshua Fitch, to which the writer is indebted for some of the information contained in these pages.)

*"The Colleges and Medical Schools in connection with the University" were, according to the first published Calendar (1844), separated into "Insti

THE ABOLITION OF THE COLLEGIATE SYSTEM.

But although the University was from the outset an examining Board for students from certain colleges or schools in connection with it, it remained in great measure a thing apart, exercising no direct influence on the educational institutions, except by the curricula of study imposed on candidates for degrees and fulfilling none of the other and higher functions of a University such as the encouragement of learning for its own sake and the prosecution of research. In this way did it tutions empowered to issue certificates to candidates for degrees in Arts and Laws,” including among others, University, King's, St. Cuthberts, Stonyhurst, Bristol, Manchester New, Highbury, St. Kyrans Kilkenny, and Carlow Colleges, and Recognised Medical Institutions, Schools and Teachers". The London schools enumerated were University and King's Colleges, The London Hospital, The Middlesex Hospital, The Aldersgate School of Medicine, The School of Anatomy adjoining St. George's Hospital, Sydenham College, The Medical School at the Charing Cross Hospital, The Medical School at St. Thomas's Hospital, The Hunterian School of Medicine, The Medical School at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, The School of Webb Street, Southwark, The Medical School of the Westminster Hospital, Guy's Hospital, The Medical School at St. George's Hospital; G. D. Dermott, Esq., Lecturer on Anatomy and Surgery, Charlotte Street, Bloomsbury; The Physicians of the St. Marylebone Infirmary. The varying styles of the different institutions is curious and the recognition of individual teachers is interesting in view of the present position, There were also recognised the Schools at Birmingham, Bristol, Hull, Leeds Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Sheffield and York; the University of Edinburgh, the Andersonian Institution, Glasgow, and a number of individual teachers connected with the College of Surgeons or Extraacademical Schools, among whom were Drs. Allen Thomson, Fyfe, Lizars, Maclagan and J. W. Balfour. Ireland was represented by the Apothecaries' Hall of Ireland, The Richmond Hospital School of Anatomy, Medicine and Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, Mercer's Hospital, The Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland, as well as others in Dublin, Belfast, Cork and Maryborough. And the list concluded with The University of Malta and The Military Hospital in the Island of Ceylon. Most of the above mentioned, together with others not included, had made application to the Senate of the University for recognition, and on their recommendation had been approved by Lord John Russell (Secretary of State) in the years 1837-9. The first examination for the degrees of M.B. and M.D. took place in July and August, 1839, and the list of successful candidates included students from University and King's Colleges Westminster Hospital Medical School, Birmingham School, Webb Street School, Sydenham College, Aldersgate School, St. Thomas's Medical School and University of Edinburgh (v. Minutes of the Senate, 17th July, 1839).

depart considerably from the intentions of its founders who had loyally accepted in University College a position less comprehensive than they had originally sought, confining themselves to teaching and the promotion of learning, content to leave to others the conferring of degrees. The affiliation between the University and its associated schools was, moreover, most imperfect, no mutual representation on the governing bodies existed, nor could exist by the conditions of their foundation, and such an arrangement is almost an essential to the idea of affiliation. For twenty years until 1858 did. this system continue, until it became clearly evident that the fundamental object aimed at by restricting the University examinations to the students of a few recognised places of instruction, viz., that the degree granted should be the evidence, not only of a successful examination test, but also some assurance of systematic training and education, was in great danger of complete failure. The standard and conditions of the training were very different at the several affiliated institutions, and offered in reality but an indifferent guarantee of sound education; and what was more to the point the Senate of the University could exercise no control over the courses or methods of instruction, had no powers of visitation nor inspection, nor call in question the certificates granted by the schools to their students as a requisite for examination. The arrangement of affiliated colleges in effect broke down; but this is not to be taken as evidence of the inherent impossibility or undesirability of such a plan, but rather of the extremely imperfect and unsatisfactory way in which that particular attempt was carried out. From these defects in the

working of a teaching University scheme, the degrees in medicine were in great measure exempt. Until 1854 these degrees conferred no licence to practise, and were in reality

higher qualifications" only, but the holders of them were obliged to have complied with the conditions imposed by the licensing bodies, and in consequence they were actually in receipt of collegiate or academic training. Thus the degree did in their case imply systematic education as well as an examinational success.

In 1858* the pretence that the University was in any sense other than a simple examining Board was given up, the charter was revoked and a new one granted, in which all restrictions as to place of education were abolished, except in the case of Medicine, and the doors to a degree in Arts and Laws were thrown open to all who could satisfy the University examiners, irrespective of how or where they obtained their knowledge. Even in respect to the subjects comprised within the Faculty of Medicine the regulations were less exacting than those imposed by the Royal College of Surgeons or the Apothecaries' Hall, which were and so remained for many years the licensing bodies from which the greater number of London medical students obtained qualifications to practise. The same year it may be noted witnessed the establishment of the General Medical Council. The new charter further introduced another element into the constitution of the University, and one destined in after years to exercise a very considerable influence on the conduct of the institution. Hitherto the

body corporate of the University had consisted solely of the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and Fellows or members of the Senate; professors, teachers, graduates and students had no part nor lot therein. Now for the first time after a recital of the names of Chancellor and Fellows the charter (clause 3) proceeded to include as a part of the " body politic and corporate" the existing Doctors and Bachelors of Laws and Medicine, and Masters and Bachelors of Arts and all those on whom these degrees might hereafter be conferred. It was further ordained (clause 15) that all Doctors of Law and of Medicine and Masters of Arts, all Bachelors of Law and of Medicine of two years' standing and Bachelors of Arts of three years' standing should constitute " the Convocation of the University," with certain well-defined powers. These as defined in clause 21 gave the right to Convocation to fill every fourth vacancy in the Senate by a Fellow of their own

* The first charter of 1836 was formally renewed at the commencement of the present reign, when certain changes were made in the personnel of the Senate, and in 1850 a supplemental charter was granted affiliating certain. additional colleges.

selection : the power of discussing any matter whatsoever relating to the University, and of declaring the opinion of Convocation in any such matter:-The power of accepting any new Charter for the University, or consenting to the surrender of this our Charter or of any new Charter; provided nevertheless, that the consent of the Senate shall be also requisite for the acceptance of any new Charter or the surrender of this our Charter." The grant of these very extensive privileges-more extensive than the graduates of the older Universities possessed--was largely due to the efforts of a committee of graduates which had been at work for ten years to secure a voice in the management of the University affairs. How wisely, or how far in the best interests of the University, Convocation exercised these very considerable powers will presently become apparent.

These fundamental alterations in the character of the University, viz., the throwing open of the examinations to all and sundry, irrespective of place of education, the abolition of the collegiate principle in fact, as well as the incorporation of the graduates within the University with the powers just enumerated, were effected not without much strenuous effort, and in face of considerable opposition. Looking back at the situation in the light of present-day experience, it is not difficult to see that the nominal affiliation of educational establishments might be, as it proved, a very insufficient evidence of their fitness for the privilege. Reference to the minutes of the Senate in the first few years of its existence would seem to show that little or no inquiry was made as to the status and character of the institutions seeking affiliation, and that they were recommended to the approval of the Secretary of State very much upon their own statement of their merits; and with no power of inspection or control it was obvious that no direct influence could be exerted by the Senate, even if they possessed the desire or a sufficient knowledge of the working of the schools. But when the inefficiency of this imperfectly carried out system became increasingly apparent, and institutions of still lower academic grade applied to be recognised as constituent schools, it was clear some