declares himself a believer not only in the Christianity of the New Testament, but also in the doctrines of the Established Church, and by the degree is made an authorized teacher of Theologia Sacra or in English Divinity'. It would be a sad pity to destroy this distinguishing credential of the Anglican priesthood, because it inherits the tradition of the Church from men of old, who had had far more in common than we have with the principles of the founders of Christianity, and because, by its long history and even since the Test Acts, Oxford knows most about the clergy of the Established Church, and very little indeed about the qualifications of other ministers of Christianity.

2. The second object-equally good in its own way is to recognize theology in general as one of the studies of the University, pursued not only by members of the Established Church, but also by Nonconformists, and not only by Christians, but also by other students. From the time of Plato and Aristotle there has been a natural theology apart from revealed theology, and in our day there is still a universal theology, including the Christian and all other theology. It is desirable to establish a degree which would be the distinguishing credential of theological students in general, without making invidious distinction, or even that between Christian and not Christian.

The proposed statute, which comes before Convocation at Oxford on Tuesday 29th, ensures neither of these objects. It destroys the first, because it throws open the degrees of D.D. beyond the Established Church to everybody, Christian or non-Christian. This would be an irreparable loss to the Anglican priesthood, and would soon be followed by Disestablishment. On the other hand, the proposed statute does not secure the second object, because it hampers the free study of universal theo

logy by adding Christian restrictions. Such limitations could not long stand, but would be a bone of contention and agitation till they were removed. The proposed statute should therefore be rejected as doubly bad.

I venture to propose a simple way of securing both objects, by preserving the title of an authorized teacher of the Established Church, and by providing a title of an accredited investigator of theology. Let the degree of divinity (Theologia Sacra) remain as it is. But let there be a new degree, Doctor of Theology, open to all Masters of Arts, clerical or lay, Churchmen or Nonconformists, Christian or not Christian. So we shall ensure the real objects of the opponents as well as of the friends of the present confused proposal, and two of the things most valuable to mankind-tradition and freedom.

Oxford, April 24, 1913.

UNIVERSITY POWERS OVER COLLEGES This letter describes the last dynamic intervention of Case in University politics. The preamble of the innocent-looking statute would bave passed unchallenged through Congregation had Case not discovered that it was ultra vires. He had no particular objection to the intention of the statute, but he was the unfailing champion of law, and of doing things in the proper legal way.

On days when the business of Congregation is supposed to be purely formal, the number of Masters of Arts attending is small. The insignificant total of voters on May 30 proves how few people had taken any notice of the proposed statute. The successful leading of an opposition by Case caused great surprise and (when people discovered the ground of his opposition) approval.

FROM The Times, JUNE 3, 1922.

On the 30th ult. the University of Oxford in Congregation rejected by 12 votes to 11 the preamble of a statute which aimed at publishing the number of students attending courses of instruction for various Honour Schools, &c.; but in order to

R

attain this innocent end this University statute also proposed that the head of a college shall every term send to the Assistant Registrar a schedule of the number of undergraduates of his college who are attending such courses. As Aristotle said, not about little things, though from little things arise dissensions. The statute was rejected, because the University was assuming an illegal power over a college.

The University in Congregation and Convocation has long possessed the determination of matters affecting the whole body corporate of the University; but this power does not involve the determination of matters affecting the whole body corporate of any college. On the other hand, this difference does not leave the University with no legislative power over a college. The Universities Act of 1877, under which Oxford still lives, allowed to the University a limited right of altering statutes made by the Commissioners for the University under the Act and not otherwise, but subject to the proviso that, so far as such a University statute affects a college, the same shall not be alterable except with the consent of the college, and subject to the further proviso that the statute shall be submitted to the King in Council. (See Act of 1877, ss. 53, 55.)

By this process alone could the University have legally passed the rejected statute, which was indirectly an alteration by way of addition to a statute made by the Commissioners for the University under the Act of 1877 concerning Faculties, and approved by Queen Victoria in 1882. In 1912, under the Act of 1877, the University made a new statute concerning Faculties, which was approved by the King in Council in 1913, and in its section I-XII contains an alteration of the original statute of the Commissioners. Section XII is that part of the altered statute which treats of the General

Board of the Faculties and contains the following clause:

'The General Board shall have power, after consultation with 'the Board of a Faculty specially concerned, to draft and send 'to the Hebdomadal Council any proposals on matters con'nected with the studies and examinations of the University ' which require to be dealt with by Statute: and it shall be the duty of the Council to submit all such proposals, without alteration, to Congregation.'

Under this Clause the Hebdomadal Council submitted the above statute to Congregation, with a note that this form of statute is proposed at the request of the General Board of Faculties'. But, as the whole of this history of Faculty Statutes proves, the General Board as well as the Hebdomadal Council was also bound by sections 53 and 55 of the Act of 1877; and therefore the Hebdomadal Council should have appended what was appended to the Statute of 1912 (University Gazette, 1911-12, p. 558)—namely, "This statute will require the assent of the King in Council', and to that again the consent of any College affected. It was careless neglect of the Universities Act of 1877, sections 53 and 55, and of the following statutes concerning Faculties, which wrecked the statute proposed on May 30.

The test of what is right is often what is reasonable. If the University had condescended to ask any College whether it would allow its Head to send the desired information to the Assistant Registrar of the University, all would have gone well; but to tell the Head of a College to do what he need not do is neither lawful nor reasonable. The limit of the power of the University over the Colleges is that each of them, which existed before the statute of 1871 on New Foundations, is a body corporate dependent on its founder and its Royal licence, and thereby independent of the body corporate of the University. Oxford, June 1.

124

LIBERAL EDUCATION

From the first Case was aghast at the extravagance in public expenditure which the war exaggerated if it did not actually create. He set himself against the schemes for increasing expenditure on public education and wrote the following short letter. But when the comprehensive Fisher Bill was introduced in Parliament in 1917, he wrote no criticism of it.

James Clerk Maxwell (1831-79), Professor of Natural Philosophy at Aberdeen, and later Professor of Experimental Physics at Cambridge, was one of Case's favourite philosophers. Besides works of Aristotle and Bacon, Case usually kept a volume of Clerk Maxwell in his bedroom.

The letter was written from Weymouth, where Case in his later years took an annual summer holiday.

FROM The Times, AUGUST 14, 1916.

Although, having been continually told that it is our duty to devote ourselves to the war, I hardly believe that the present moment is the right time for the reform of education, which is essentially a work of peace, yet, as the Government has thought fit to undertake it, I think it would conduce to a calm and comprehensive consideration of this hard problem if those in power were to adopt as a principle the opinion of Clerk Maxwell, who was, I suppose, one of the greatest men, thinkers, and physicists of the nineteenth century. This opinion formed part of his inaugural lecture delivered, after he had been appointed the first Professor of Experimental Physics in the University of Cambridge, in October 1871, and is as follows:

'Fortunately there is no question here whether the University 'should continue to be a place of liberal education or should 'devote itself to preparing young men for particular profes'sions. Hence, though some of us may, I hope, see reason ' to make the pursuit of science the main business of our lives, ' it must be one of our most constant aims to maintain a living I connection between our work and the other liberal studies ' of Cambridge, whether literary, philological, historical, or philosophical. There is a narrow professional spirit which