« PreviousContinue »
“exist, perhaps to a greater extent than they now do. It is “hard to see how professional studies, or any of those which “have been lately brought into notice, are to take root, unless "under the shelter of some particular foundation.” (Considerations, &c. p. 23.) But in his further discussion of this question, in its bearings upon the Commissioners' proposal for throwing fellowships open, Mr. Latham undervalues the attraction which a good body of professional lecturers would possess. Believing that this would be very considerable, I would have several colleges, not entirely but in great part, given up to special branches of science, bearing on regular professions. Why should not Caius preserve its ancient speciality of medicine in a more decisive way than it does at present? Why should there not be a competent body of medical lectureships as well as a considerable number of fellowships and scholarships appropriated to the study ?* Medicine should be treated, not as a merely professional pursuit, but as a branch of science; the education ought to be such as is worthy of a University, and not limited to what is immediately available for practice. Natural science would be more fully dwelt on than I fancy it is in extra-academical schools; and we should thus be eventually giving a still higher value to those which are now the only genuine tests of study amongst our higher degrees, the Bachelor and Doctor of Medicine.
Trinity Hall has been always regarded as a law college; but lately it has, I fear, somewhat sacrificed its legal eminence to the desire of entering into the general race of honours. Here, as in the case of Caius, we want not merely the appropriation of fellowships, but the appropriation of scholarships and lectures. I cannot set that exclusive value
Classics and Mathematics which some do: it would be most serviceable to the University if the other Triposes were taken up vigorously by some of the smaller colleges and made their special field; and law, more than other things, cries ont for a more scientific education, before the practice is entered on. The Universities are the fittest places to supply the want;* and the want will not be supplied, unless it be specially taken up by some college.
* Compare the evidence of Dr. Bond, in Report of Cambridge University Commission, Evidence, p. 84.
Again, why does not some college take up practical mechanics and engineering ? Highly
Highly as I value the services which might be rendered by a professor, and necessary as they are for the high cultivation of sciences, yet for all the lower and more exact training, especially in the fields of practice, a set of college lecturers would be infinitely better. If the University is to be made really worthy of its position in England, it should offer teaching in all important sections of knowledge: and in no way can this be properly secured, unless some distribution of labour between the colleges be effected.
But there is another set of studies which to my mind deserve and require help under present circumstances, more than any others. If I called them Moral Sciences, I might be understood to refer to those embraced in the Tripos known by that name, whereas that only contains one of them. The studies I mean are Logic, Psychology, Ethics, and Politics; studies, to our great disgrace, unrecognised in Cambridge except by the one professorship of Moral Philosophy, which however is strictly a professorship of Casuistry, and by the share which Ethics can claim in the lecturer on the Moral Sciences at St. John's College. I desire very earnestly to express a hope that the present opportunity will not be allowed to pass without some adequate provision being made for their encouragement. There was a time when they were too exclusively regarded, and Physical Science struggled hard under their predominance. The case is now more than reversed: Philosophy has been crushed, not merely here but in England generally. While renewed attention is drawn to
* See the remarks of Mr. Justice Coleridge appended to the “Report of Oxford Board of Heads of Houses and Proctors,” p. 499; and of Mr. S. C. Denison in the Oxford Commission Report, Evidence, p. 197—200.
it in other places, we ought not to loiter behind. There is no class of studies which would now confer greater benefit on the higher English education; and Physical Science would find in them a necessary counterpoise, but no longer an opponent. The best way to effect their revival is by devoting some fellowships and scholarships specially to them, and this would be done to the most advantage if accompanied by special lectureships at some one of the small colleges.
I believe this devotion to specialities is a most worthy field for the smaller foundations to occupy, and in no way can they be doing greater good to our common University, or making more use of their endowments. Other studies might be singled out besides those I have mentioned; Political Economy and Modern History, Sanscrit and Oriental languages, Magnetism and Electricity, are especially noticeable.
Of course such schemes could only come gradually to their full development, but the first steps ought to be taken at the present favourable opportunity. One caution should be carefully observed: that in assigning fellowships in the way I have mentioned, the qualifications required should, at any rate for some time to come, not be a general knowledge of several sciences, but a thorough knowledge of one. A minimum of the cognate branches might possibly be demanded from the candidates, but the election should turn mainly on single or at most double proficiency. The ill-success of the Moral and Natural Sciences Triposes is partly due to this; though principally no doubt to the want of encouragement by fellowships in the University and by profitable situations elsewhere. An undergraduate of ability is not likely to give himself to hard study of a kind which offers no certainty of pecuniary reward, when there are other kinds which do.
But besides such special colleges, there might be some which should preserve for those who wished it the combination of lecturers and private tutors which at present exist. I think many persons prefer the comparative quiet and closer tutorial relations which a small college can offer; and if the fellows and lecturers were selected from the University instead of the college only, the advantages would probably be increased so far as the staff of instructors were concerned.
Again, other colleges might give up all attempt at lectures, and consider themselves merely houses of residence: and here I should wish to see placed those fellows who were thought worthy of a more extended tenure than the ordinary mass, on the two grounds which I have mentioned, viz.: 1st, proved devotion to scientific and literary pursuits, and 2nd, clergymen working in large parishes on insufficient stipends. It would be difficult to find a really independent board to decide on the continuance of a fellow on the same foundation as themselves. But if one college (or more) received fellows almost entirely on these two classes, electing them from amongst the fellows of other colleges, no more independent board could be found. Perhaps the restriction of celibacy should be kept up as regards the former class, in order to ensure vacancies, and test the sincerity of the devotion. But in the latter class the restriction would have a tendency to impede their usefulness. Both these classes might have fellowships of a higher value than others.*
The undergraduates attached to such colleges would read exclusively with private tutors. There are many men who would much prefer being left entirely to their own selection of instructors, even though the expense were more considerable, and the instructors not of so experienced an order as those employed as college lecturers. In such cases the tuition fee would not need to be so high, and the scholarships might be given by open competition before residence.
The general tenure of lectureships and ordinary fellowships at the smaller colleges should be the same as I have proposed
* It is only in such cases that a mere fellowship ought to exceed the ordinary amount. The present practice of many colleges of giving a larger share of the dividend to those fellows who have been longer on the list seems quite indefensible. Why should a sinecure be increased because it has been enjoyed for a longer period ? If senior fellows have duties put upon them it may be reasonable, in most cases, to pay them for the discharge of those duties: but any attempt to apply this principle to a justification of our present system will break down at once.
for the larger ones. The principles upon which I have gone will suggest any alterations which the difference of circumstances may render necessary.
Numerous combinations may be made of the different classes of fellowships which I have recommended : fellowships with lectureships and unrestricted to celibacy, fellowships without lectureships* of limited tenure, restricted or unrestricted, elected for proficiency in Classics or Mathematics, or the hitherto neglected sciences, fellowships of higher value and longer or permanent tenure for scientific men quietly prosecuting their researches, or for clergymen in large parishes. It would be out of place for me to propose a precise scheme when I have no power to carry it into effect: I can but throw out suggestions for others' consideration. But three kinds of colleges might very well exist : colleges with ample staffs of lecturers for general studies; colleges with lecturers for special studies; and (probably) colleges of mere residence under tutorial supervision.
The last class of colleges Mr. Latham would, I suppose, consider to be colleges injured, ruined, destroyed. And yet it is not easy to say in what important point they would differ from the original position of all the earlier colleges. I can fully sympathise with one who has been on a college foundation and contracted a love for its walls, its name, its members: I can understand the sorrow he would feel if his college were rendered useless, merged, or suppressed. But that the essence of a college lies in two or three of the fellows giving lectures; and that the fellows cannot be useful unless they are dubbed assistant-tutors; and that scholars cannot be grateful for the bounty of a founder unless pensioners are looking on at them, are propositions of which I am unable to see the truth.
The present state of things, by which all the colleges attempt just the same work so far as their means allow,
* I think £200. a-year, besides dinner in hall and a small allowance (say £15.) for rooms, would be a sufficient stipend for an ordinary fellow.