Academic adventures in Bloomsbury / [Thomas Lloyd Humberstone].

  • Humberstone, Thomas Lloyd.
Date:
1951
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Academic adventures in Bloomsbury / [Thomas Lloyd Humberstone]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    11/24 page 8
    the Seriate he would withdraw the recommendations. Opposition came front numerous members of the Senate, including two ex-Vice-Chancellors and three College Principals, the debate lasting half-an-hour. Sir Edward Busk afterwards informed me that he was persuaded by the Vice-Chancellor (Sir Sydney Russell- Wells) not to carry out his undertaking, on the ground that not only was the Military Committee concerned but also the Academic Council and the Idnance Committee. Thus, whereas the Senate was informed that “ Mr. Humberstone is no longer in the service of the University,” the Vice-Chancellor ruled that not only one but three departments of the University were concerned with the matter. The Adjutant took an active part in these discussions from which he benefited financially, receiving an honorarium for the secretarial work which the Committee were able to pay, notwithstanding the statement contained in ITofessor Filon’s letter. Grants on a generous scale were paid by the War Office to provide for the training and administration of the University of London Officers Training Corps. Under the constitution of the Officers Training Corps, the University accepted responsibility for the administration of the Contingent. This responsibility the University is not properly discharging by making the Adjutant, appointed and paid and controlled by the War Office responsible for the administrative work. Under this arrangement a Regular Officer was placed, at the suggestion of the University, in the position of ” blackleg,” and much of his time was given to administrative work instead of training. The atmosphere in which these events were transacted is indicated by the following quotations :— From the Report of the Principal Officer of the University {Sir Cooper Perry) for 1922-23 ; “ Not yet — not yet, though four and fifty months have passed since the Great Armistice — has the nation at large attained the full recovery of her faculties. Impoverished, almost beyond assessment (though not, as we believe, beyond remedy for men of good-will), her entire equilibrium jarred, her horizon dark with disappointment and apprehension, her normal activities hampered and ambitions thwarted, she is as yet too faint to take up with full energy the manifold tasks laid upon her. We, her Universities, whose feet are planted upon the solid rock and whose minds are set upon the immortal values, whose breath is the breath of the ‘ shining table-lands ’ and whose province is to emphasise that nothing is adequate that falls short of the best — we are proud in the confidence that, as we were among the foremost of the public services to recover our own stride, so are we in undiminished vigour playing our part in the working out of the national redemption.” From the editorial of University College Magazine {December, 1924) : “ Why need we worry at all about giving London University more unity than it already possesses ? Surely our energies would be better spent in building up a finer College life. . . . We can therefore, with advantage, let the ‘ University ' remain an examining body and make and keep our College as the centre of our undergraduate life. Let the great boast of every member of our community be ‘ My University was University College ’.” v Nothing that has happened has given me any reason to vary my opinion as to purchase of the Standing Camp. When I met the Commanding Officer of the Univer¬ sity of London O.T.C. I asked him : “ What about the Standing Camp ? ” ” Oh ! he replied. “ Everybody cheers when the Standing Camp is mentioned.”
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3