Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

duties attached to his stipend have not increased; indeed, they have diminished. He is no longer bound to go through a long course of study; he is not yet bound to reside at the University, or, if resident, to teach. Though study and a monastic life are no longer synonymous, the college fellow, whether an Oxford tutor or a London barrister, is, or was till lately, of necessity a celibate. It is the very success of the legislation of 1854, partial and tentative as that legislation was, which has brought into strong relief the anomalies which it left untouched.

Against clerical fellowships it is not necessary to argue here at length. They have been condemned by implication in the Act of last year, and a Government which has abolished denominational tests cannot possibly defend the retention of denominational fellowships. Whilst they are retained, it is a mockery to say that the benefits of the University have been thrown open freely and impartially to the nation at large. But the denominational inequality which is produced by clerical fellowships is far from being the only, though it is by itself a fatal objection to their continuance. From the point of view of the interests of the Established Church, of the interests of the fellows themselves, of the interests of University education, they are open to serious objections. If the Established Church is disposed to think that it cannot get on without this artificial bounty on enlistment into the ranks of its clergy, surely it must have had its eyes opened by this time to the scandal and evils which result from the system of inducing a young man, by a heavy pecuniary bribe, to pledge himself to a profession, the adoption of which ought pre-eminently to be uninfluenced by pecuniary motives, and the relinquish ment of which is in all cases difficult, and, in the eyes of some, impossible. Moreover, the monopoly which is so jealously guarded, has results which are injurious not merely to the popularity, but to the reputation, of the Establishment.

The natural result of a com

petition between prizes which are open. to all without restriction, and prizes which are fettered by conditions limiting them to a particular class, is that the latter are sought for and obtained by men of an inferior calibre. This inequality between the two kinds of fellowships, lay and clerical, was less apparent some twenty or thirty years ago; but of late years, during which the proportion of candidates for orders among those who take the highest honours at the University has, for whatever reason, been steadily declining,. its effects have become very striking. It is a well-recognized fact that men who would have no chance whatever of obtaining a lay fellowship have a very fair chance of being elected to a clerical fellowship. The inference that clerical fellows are below par is scarcely correct, because many who ultimately take orders prefer to stand for a fellowship which leaves their choice of a vocation free, but it is a very natural one to draw, and does not improve the position of the class. And the fact that the field of candidates is so much narrowed in the case of clerical fellowships, makes them extremely unpopular with the more active colleges, whose aim it is to secure the ablest possible men for their teaching staff, irrespectively of their being or not being in orders, and who find themselves heavily weighted in their competition with other colleges, if a large proportion of their fellowships happen to be confined to clergymen. It should not, however, be assumed that the object of those who wish to abolish clerical fellowships is to eliminate the clerical element from the Universities. It would be mere folly to shut one's eyes to the fact that clergymen no longer have the monopoly of education which they once had, but on the other hand experience has shown that the quiet and regular habits of the teacher, whether he be a schoolmaster or a college tutor, and the necessity which he is under of giving advice and counsel as well as intellectual food to his pupils, and of leading a life which is not incongruous with the discipline which he has

to maintain, in many cases induce him naturally and without compulsion to adopt formally a profession with the duties and liabilities of which his own have so much in common. So long as human nature remains the same, and until theology insists on an open breach with learning, this natural tendency of tutors and schoolmasters to join the ranks of the clergy will continue; and the attempt to strengthen it artificially by such institutions as clerical fellowships is not only unnecessary, but harmful.

Assuming clerical fellowships to be injurious, can they not be left to be dealt with by the colleges themselves? The answer to this is, that a similar course was proposed some few years ago in Parliament with regard to University tests, and was then decisively rejected on both sides of the House as unsatisfactory. No more delusive or exasperating mode of dealing with the difficulty could be devised. It would refer the solution of the question to bodies in which the clerical element is, ex hypothesi, strongly represented; and it would involve each college in a long and acrimonious theological war. The expedient of shortening a denominational difficulty by relegating it to local bodies has been recently tried in the case of School Boards, and it cannot be said that the result is encouraging. Moreover, clerical fellowships form part of a complex and delicately interwoven college system, and their abolition would involve the revision of many other points in that system. For instance, in the case of some fellowships, the obligation to take orders after a certain period of years, has, in the case of fellows who never intended to become clergymen, the indirect effect of limiting the tenure of those fellowships to that period, and it would be far from an unmixed boon suddenly to convert all such fellowships into fellowships tenable for life. Again, it would be necessary to consider the best mode of keeping up religious worship in the different colleges, and of making provision for the chaplains, the subject of college livings, and the desirability of providing a retiring pension

for lay teachers analogous to that which such livings provided for clerical teachers (an arrangement more satisfactory perhaps to the colleges than to the parishes); all of them difficult and complicated subjects, which ought to be dealt with, not according to the whim of each college, but on broad, uniform, and statesmanlike principles.

A witty and ingenious apology for non-resident fellowships has recently appeared in these columns.1 The writer, while admitting that they have been condemned by public opinion, appears to think that they perform an eminently useful function in fostering the "academic spirit"—a phrase which seems to indicate the frame of mind which, when it comes across an assertion or an institution, does not ask the vulgar question, Is it true! or, Is it useful? but contents itself with asking, Is it pretty? That this frame of mind, which some coarse folk would stigmatize as dilettantism, has a tendency to be produced and fostered by the enjoyment of a comfortable income with nothing to do, cannot be denied. Whether it is worth producing at so great a cost, and whether genuine culture would not flourish in this country even if sinecure fellowships were abolished, is another question. With the general position of the apologist, that wanton hands should not be laid on any part of such great and venerable institutions as the Universities and their colleges, the present writer fully concurs; nor would he deny that sinecure fellowships, strangely as they have been diverted from their original functions, indirectly serve several useful purposes.

Their value as endowments for study, as distinguished from teaching, has been dwelt on with great force by the Rector of Lincoln in his "Suggestions on Academical Organization ;" and though their value is there probably exaggerated, yet this-the original purpose of fellowships -should certainly not be lost sight of in any re-distribution of the fund. Nor would it be right to ignore the very material assistance which they have,

1 "Strike, but Hear," Macmillan's Magazine, February 1872.

afforded and still constantly afford to men of small means who are anxious to combine the lengthy and costly education supplied by the Universities with an expensive profession, such as, for instance, the bar. There is many a father who, intending his son for such a profession, would never send him to Oxford or Cambridge were it not for a reasonable chance of a fellowship rendering him independent of further assistance after he had taken his degree; and there is many a young graduate who would hesitate to plunge into the unknown sea of London life if he had not this raft of a competence to cling to. Yet even here it may be doubted whether in the majority of cases energy and parsimony would not find themselves able to fight their way even without such help. The true way of making a University degree more compatible with a profession or occupation which requires a long and expensive special training, is probably to be found in such a modification of the University course as would on the other hand shorten it, and on the other hand, without forgetting that the object of the University is to impart general culture and not technical training, would yet bring that culture into somewhat closer relation to the practical needs of life.

But it is not desirable that any of the purposes which fellowships directly or indirectly serve should be ignored; all that is wanted is that security should be given against their abuse. There are, in fact, three main views which may be taken of the fellowship fund. It may be regarded as a prize fund for industry and ability, as an endowment for study, or as a fund for paying or augmenting teachers' fees. The existing system hesitates between these several views, and carries out none effectually. So far as fellowships are mere prizes, they should be diminished in number and value, and be bestowed, not by the colleges, but by the University; so far as they constitute an endowment for study, security should be given that they be held by bona fide students; so far as they are a fund for the payment of No. 150.-VOL. XXV.

teachers, that fund should be applied in such a way as to secure the services of the most efficient teachers that can be obtained.

How far can colleges carry out these objects by their own independent legislation? It has been seen that what is required is not the mere suppression of non-resident fellowships; and that thus the problem is more complex than it appears on a superficial view. But the difficulty which is really fatal to any effectual reform of fellowships by the individual colleges arises from the attitude of rivalry and competition in which they stand to one another. The success of every college depends on the efficiency of its teaching staff, and that teaching staff is composed mainly of its fellows. It is therefore its great object to make its fellowships as valuable and attractive as possible. It cannot, with safety to itself, hand over a portion of its funds to the University, or to any other teaching body. It cannot diminish the value of its fellowships, or limit their tenure to a fixed number of years, or annex to them onerous conditions as to residence, study, or college duties; for if it did so, it would be handicapping itself in its race with its rivals. This difficulty extends not merely to permanent or general, but to temporary or exceptional. modifications of the conditions attached to fellowships, and is illustrated every day. It constantly happens that a college, having a fellowship vacant, is in immediate want of an addition to its working staff Yet it very rarely ventures to advertise that the fellowship will be open ouly to those who will pledge themselves to reside; for it knows that if it did so, the probable result would be to frighten away the most promising candidates. What has been already said as to clerical fellowships applies here also: when a young man is at liberty to choose between two fellowships, one of which is subject to, and the other free from, onerous conditions, he would be a great fool, cæteris paribus, not to choose the latter. And even if colleges could with. safety to themselves require all their fellows to reside, it would be very doubt

H H

ful whether, so long as the present mode of election to fellowships remains, they would be wise in doing so. A competitive examination is undoubtedly the best and fairest way of awarding a prize, but it is far from certain that it is the best mode of filling up an educational office. It by no means follows that because a young man passes a brilliant examination, therefore he possesses the qualities which fit him to be an efficient lecturer or tutor. So long as fellowships are obtained by competition, colleges must trust to a subsequent process of sifting, for the purpose of ascertaining which of their fellows are best adapted to become tutors and lecturers. If a young fellow shows himself both willing and competent to undertake work in the college, he is sure to get as much as he wants: and if he does not, he will generally have tact enough to discover before long that the vocation for which he is suited is not that of a college tutor, and in the majority of cases he will pass into the ranks of the non-resident fellows. To compel him to reside would be injurious to himself and useless to the college. Thus, under the present system, the possibility of non-residence supplies an easy and natural corrective for the inherent defects of the competitive system, and a safety-valve through which persons whose abilities are sufficient to gain fellowships, but whose tastes or qualifications do not adapt them for University work, pass into the outer world.

Hitherto we have dwelt mainly on the popular aspect of fellowships, and have tried to show that clerical fellowships and sinecure fellowships, however unsatisfactory they may be, cannot be so simply dealt with as has been supposed. We now propose to call attention to certain changes which have been recently passing over the Universities, especially over Oxford, and which, even more than the existence of such institutions as clerical or sinecure fellowships, render a revision of the college system imperatively necessary. Among these changes there are two, above others, the effect of

which cannot be described as anything less than revolutionary. The first is the introduction of married fellowships, and the second is the system of intercollegiate lectures. The one goes to the root of collegiate social life, and the other to the root of collegiate teaching.

The first of these topics is one which it is impossible to approach without fear and trembling. It wounds so many tender susceptibilities, it involves so many delicate considerations, it raises so many difficult moral and social problems, a bachelor is so constantly reminded of his necessary ignorance of the subject, that it requires some hardihood to allude to it, much more to discuss it. It is not unnatural that old Oxonians should view with dislike and alarm the feminine invasion which is so completely revolu tionizing the external appearance of the old University town. They complain, with much justice, that it has a tendency to empty common-rooms at the legiti mate dining hour, and to flood them at irregular luncheon hours; that married life destroys the easy intercourse which is such a valuable element in the rela tion of tutor and pupil, for that it is one thing to stroll casually into Mr. Smith's room at any hour of the evening and ask his opinion on a difficult passage of Thucydides, and quite another thing to call at Mr. Smith's house, with the prospect of facing Mrs. Smith and all the Miss Smiths; that the young married tutor is never to be found inside the college walls when he is wanted, and that as he grows old there is reason to fear that he will be thinking too much about his wife and children and too little about his pupils. As to one of the complaints which is most fre quently brought against the intrusion of marriage into the Universities, namely that it tends to destroy the charm of

1 Queen Elizabeth prohibited the residence of women in colleges, holding that "when chief governors, prebendaries, students, &c., do keep particular household with their wives, children, and nurses, no small offence groweth to the interest of the founders and the quiet and orderly profession of study and learning." (Archbishop Parker's Correspondence, quoted in Freeman's "Norman Conquest," iv. 425.)

college social life, it may be questioned whether a good deal of misconception has not been produced by the kind of legendary halo which has somehow or other been cast about common-rooms and combination rooms. There seems

was a

And as

to be a popular impression afloat that common-rooms supply an almost ideal form of social intercourse, where wit sparkles without malice, and freedom, unrestricted by petticoats, never degenerates into licence. It may be doubted whether the reality quite comes up, or ever has quite come up, to this charming description. So far as we may judge from the records of the past, such as are supplied by eighteenth-century biographies, and by the contents of old betting books which still slumber in certain cominon-room drawers, there time when Oxford common-rooms had a strong savour of the tavern. for the present, those whose memories linger affectionately round the remembrance of social gatherings in well-known old halls or common-rooms, are apt to forget that these occasions are necessarily exceptional, and that under ordinary. circumstances the complete enjoyment of a six o'clock dinner is materially impaired by the prospect of eight o'clock pupils. It is possible that there may have been a golden age intervening between the past of somewhat besotted idleness and the present of somewhat oppressive industry, during which common-room life combined the best characteristics of a Parisian salon and a London club; but that is problematical. Moreover, it has been suggested that even societies from which the feminine element has been most carefully excluded, are not altogether free from the petty jealousies and scandals and rivalries which usually disfigure small coteries. And in any case it would require stronger arguments than those which have been advanced to prove that the life which men and women lead in each other's society is not as a rule more healthy, natural, and useful, than that which they lead apart, whether shut up in colleges or in convents.

However, setting this delicate ques

tion apart, it is not to be denied that the revolution in social life to which we have referred, threatens the Universities with serious difficulties. One of them, the increased extravagance of living which ladies have been accused of causing, is, it may be hoped, though an ugly, yet a temporary phase, which will tend to disappear as soon as young married tutors have realized the fact that they must live very modestly if they wish to exist on six hundred a year. But some of the other difficulties are of a more permanent nature, and cannot be got over quite satisfactorily. Such are the impaired efficiency of married teachers in consequence of their being removed to a greater distance from their pupils, and the difficulty of allowing officers of the college to marry, and yet maintaining an efficient supervision over the discipline of the college. As to the first, while fully admitting the reality of the evil, all that can be done is to hope that some alleviation of it may be found in a modification of the hours of work, and to point to the precedent of masters at public schools, as showing that marriage is not incompatible with a teacher's both throwing his heart into his work, and seeing a great deal of his pupils. The second difficulty may be met in two ways-by allowing married fellows to live within the college walls, and by limiting the right of marriage to a favoured few. There are objections to both courses. Independently of the difficulty of adjusting collegiate buildings to the requirements of families, a witness in a recent University inquiry has dealt with amusing pathos on the inconveniences attending the invasion of quiet college precincts by nursemaids, perambulators, and similar horrors. And it must be admitted that a teething infant would probably be a more formidable neighbour to a quiet student than even an ambitious practiser on the cornet-à-piston. In the one case the hours of practice may be regulated; in the other they cannot. If, on the other hand, only a certain number of the residents are to be allowed to marry, on what principle is this deli

« VorigeDoorgaan »