Minutes of evidence taken by the Royal Commissioners appointed to consider the draft charter for the proposed Gresham University in London ... / presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty.

Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons.

Date:: 1894

Credit: Minutes of evidence taken by the Royal Commissioners appointed to consider the draft charter for the proposed Gresham University in London ... / presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

1227/1410 (page 1221)

$independent. You have that from witness after witness, and you have it laid down by Lord Justice Frv, who, as the last word of his evidence, said that if a predominant power were given to the teachers, it would be fatal. I think, he said, we must maintain at any price perfect independence as regards our degree to outside students. The Com- mission have heard the evidence, and the strong way in which Mr. Busk, not only in his first evidence, but even more so in his second evidence, dwells upon the absolute importance of having all examinations open to students from everywhere. I would venture to dwell upon that point in reference to another con- sideration which T see has been mentioned by one or two of the Commissioners. They have said that the Senate of the University of London, and Convoca- tion, are both willing, and indeed desirous, to adopt teaching. Certainly they are, but not teaching in the sense that we mean it. They are willing to appoint professors in connexion with Burlington House, and peripatetic professors, and pick out a professor here and a professor there. But they have not expressed their willingness—Convocation has positively indicated its unwillingness—to establish a system of examina- tions which are in direct and immediate touch with teaching—with the teaching, that is, of colleges. With teaching they say, but that is another thing. They say they want to improve the connexion of teachers on the Senate with the whole system of examinations. I believe they have power under the existing Charter, and they could have a good deal of such improvement if they desired. But let them do so. It does not meet our point. We, want exa- minations to be in connexion, not merely with teaching in general, but with the particular teaching which is given in the colleges, and accordingly the reason why we in the year 1890 accepted the proposal of the first scheme of the Senate was, that, although we thought it treated us unworthily in excluding us from honour degrees, yet it did contain clauses which allowed the degrees of the University of London to be given upon the teaching in the colleges, and upon that only. Degrees in Arts and Science could be obtained under that first scheme in that way. There were some points which were still in reserve when the subsequent break came, such as the Preliminary Science exami- nation. The one consideration which induced the Councils of the two colleges, in deference to the pre- vious Commission, to come into the scheme of 1890 was that it established separate examinations from those for the open students. When the scheme of 1890 was modified afterwards in the autumn, by the introduction of the provincial colleges, what led King's College and University College to decline it was be- cause the arrangements for their representation on the Senate, and the whole organisation of the examina tious, necessitated by the introduction of the provincial colleges and the Royal Colleges, made it practically impossible to maintain genuinely separate examina- tions on the college teaching. As far as I can see, it appears that the Senate still adheres to that por- tion. You have received one or two letters from the Senate of the University of London within the last two or three months, and from those letters it might have been supposed that the Senate had some new scheme or some new idea to suggest, which might have got over the cardinal difficulty which the colleges feel. To my great surprise, what they finally sent down to you was nothing in the world but the scheme of 1891, and that scheme supported by the very same explanation, not even reprinted ; it is the old tiling. So that we must assume, and we are bound to assume, that within a few weeks of this date—almost at this moment—the Senate is back at the scheme of 1891. [Mr. Anstie explained to the Commission that the revised .scheme of 1891 does not noto represent the opinion of the Senate, and that the reference to that scheme in the letter of December \4th, 1892, was intended to have a merely historical import.] I think the discussion that has just passed has shown that I was quite justified in putting the interpretation I did upon the document that I received ; but, of Bey. H. course, I accept Mr. Anstie's statement. It leaves us, Wace, D.D. however, in the position that we have no suggestion JVIar l H»3 of a scheme from the Senate before us; and that is ar' another consideration which seems to me to be of equal importance. Here you are proposing what I think will be at least admitted—I believe the Senate does not admit it, but I think this Commission will admit it— to be an extremely difficult thing, a thing which has been tried, and in one important aspect has failed— that of combining imperial examination and general examination with the encouragement of teaching in particular colleges. And we are told on behalf of the Senate at this stage of the proceedings that they have no scheme whatever to suggest to us for doing that. 25.525. {Professor Sidgioick.) I suppose that we may say that those clauses from A to E indicate the outlines on which they would go, and the Senate have indicated nothing more than that?—No more. But the whole question stands, how are you going to pro- vide for this ? How unite these things together ? Therefore, I say, we have no scheme whatever before us. It seems to me that raises a very strong pre- sumption against it. The Senate did make proposals for that purpose, and now we have it that both those proposals are withdrawn, and not one of them repre- sents the mind of the Senate. Well, what does ? The other scheme you have before you is the scheme of Convocation. I was going to argue that you were in this position, that you had two schemes before you, one, that of Convocation, and the other, that of the Senate, and that they are mutually inconsistent, because the Senate proposes to recognise the work in the col- leges and Convocation refuses to recognise the work in the colleges. However, now we have nothing but the scheme of Convocation, and what does that pro- pose ? It says, first of all, that the Imperial character of the University is to be retained, and its examina- tions are to remain open to all candidates who have complied with the regulations, irrespective of the place or manner of their education. That excludes, I take it, absolutely, any attention whatever being paid to the courses of instruction given in the colleges. 25.526. {Mr. Anstie.) Or the Medical Schools ?— Or the Medical Schools either, in consistency ; but the Medical Schools and their necessities are too strong to be thus overridden. Then it says : The standard of attainment for matriculation and the various exa- minations in all the Faculties to be maintained at as high a level as at present. So that no alteration whatever is to be made in the style of examination. But there is also this : Restrictive regulations as to compulsory intervals of time, between Matriculation and the Preliminary Scientific Examination, and the Intermediate Examination in Medicine and M.B. Examination to be abolished. That is to say, the one guarantee that you really might have, and the one slight guarantee which you do have in the University of London, that people do not gallop over examina- tions, and on which Dr. Stoney or Dr. Ingram laid stress as one advantage of the Dublin University— namely, that you have examinations at regular intervals —is to be abolished. I think, therefore, as far as the Convocation scheme goes, I can see no possibility whal - ever of useful communication being entered into with the colleges. I gather from what the Commissioners have said, that it will not be proposed to recall the Vice-Chancellor of the University of London, to give any further evidence on this point, and if so, 1 have nothing more to say. But 1 do ask very urgently, that if the Vice-Chancellor of the University of London should be called to make any further statement of the schemes of the Senate before this Commission, Sir George Young, or I, or both of us, may be allowed to have information of it, and to have the opportunity of presenting to the Commission our views respecting it. At present we have both come here under the suppo- sition that the last word by Convocation and by the Senate has been said. Now, my Lord, I must ask leave to say a little, more about this question of collegiate examination. It is perfectly evident from$