drawn the Church must fall. He should | right hon. Friend, nor in that House, be sorry to think so; he thought very but elsewhere, the principle which he differently; but even if he did not think had the honour to advocate was the obdifferently, he would say this measure ject of much misrepresentation and abuse was a just one, and justice must be done. of the most unusual kind, so unusual as In this case, however, they could do to be a little disturbing. It was a pity justice without self-destruction, and he that the defenders of existing institubelieved justice was the most magnani- tions, especially those defenders who mous policy as well as the wisest for took up their position on Christianity, those who had the courage to pursue it. should forget one of the elementary docHe did not expect to hear much to-night trines of Christianity, and make misreabout this Bill being an attack on pro- presentations as to other men's arguperty. At any rate, his right hon. Friend ments and honesty. The Government the Member for the University of Cam- had no other desire than to be conciliabridge (Mr. Spencer Walpole), or his tory; they had not introduced the bittertwo right hon. Friends the Members for ness into this controversy. It might, the University of Oxford (Mr. Gathorne perhaps, be foolish to recollect what had Hardy and Mr. Mowbray) were too well been said by foolish people. He must instructed in the history of this country express his opinion that if this was a not to know that such an argument just measure there could be no better on such a matter was utterly unten- moment than the present for persons in able. They knew well that Parliament the position of the Government to press from the earliest times had asserted with it on the attention of the House. If they unmistakable emphasis its right to deal felt grateful, as a great many of them. with property held in mortmain. They did, for the inestimable advantages they knew that the Parliament of England had received from the Colleges and Unihad not contented itself with the asser-versities of this country, it was not untion, but had acted on that assertion over and over again. They knew that in the case of that very property Parliament so acted at the Reformation. For himself he must say that a term of 600 or 700 years, or even 300 or 400 years, was a sufficiently long time to give force to a founder's will. It was a sufficiently long time to allow a dead man to affect the opinions of the living. No one had ever held that such a thing could be perpetual, and no one had ever attempted to draw a line and say at which side of that line it would be wrong to interfere. The House must, therefore, come to the question of expediency, equity, and wisdom. This being so, he hoped it would be possible to conduct this discussion without temper, and without imputations of bad motives on the one side or the other. He should be very sorry if anything he might say were not in that spirit. His right hon. Friend the Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gathorne Hardy) had accused him of having put aside the language of conciliation, and spoken in rougher language when introducing this Bill. No doubt, everything ought to be done much better than it really was done; but he could assure the House that when moving for leave to bring in this Bill, he only wished to be distinct and plain. Not by his

reasonable or discreditable of them to wish to extend to others benefits which they had themselves enjoyed. In the spirit of what they believed to be just and right, the Government must oppose any interference with the freedom and discretion of those who might wish to found educational institutions hereafter. As he had said before, men would if they pleased found exclusive institutions. If these were to be founded, it was better they should be founded openly and without any breach of the law; but the House would recollect that before any College could be incorporated with the University, a charter of incorporation must be granted by the Crown. That was the course with regard to Colleges founded since the Reformation-Downing College at Cambridge, founded in the last century, and Worcester and Pembroke Colleges at Oxford, founded, Worcester in the reigns of Anne and George I., and Pembroke in the reign. of James I. In the present day, when the Crown acted on the advice of Ministers, and when Ministers were directly responsible to the people as represented in that House, it was not at all likely that any charter would be granted which ran much counter to the public opinion of the country. Such was the opinion of the Government, at all events. For

Established Church of this country does not seem to be so far off, in the minds of some persons, as the world at large may suppose it to be. However that may be, I shall endeavour to discuss the Bill in a calm and conciliatory spirit; but let me remind my hon. and learned Friend that the course we took last year was anything but one which should have induced the Government to imagine that this could be received as a conciliatory measure. Will the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government permit me

himself, though he could not sympathize ever has framed them-and partly from with an exclusive system in the Uni- the language of my hon. and learned versities, neither could he sympathize Friend, the disestablishment of the with any attempt to limit men in the choice of the education they might choose to pay for when it was not immoral. The sub-section by which it was provided that nothing in this Bill should apply to the headship of any College was the result of what his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government considered to be an understanding between himself and a deputation from the Universities in a small and unimportant matter. He asked the House to read this Bill a second time, because he earnestly hoped and felt convinced that if Parliament only to remind him that last autumn the passed it into law we should see new life breathed into those old but vigorous institutions, and satisfy the just and reasonable expectations of many men, who were now artificially and, as he thought, unrighteously kept out of advantages which they claimed, and which hitherto had been denied to them without any corresponding advantage to religion, but with great and increasing mischief to the State.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Solicitor General.)

authorities of both the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, made representations to him, not merely on the part of those who were desirous of supporting this Bill, but also on the part of those who had hitherto felt it to be their duty to oppose such a measure - to the effect, that they were anxious to put an end to this controversy by a fair and reasonable settlement of the question, if they were met in a frank and the result of the deliberations with reconsiderate spirit. But what has been ference to this Bill? Well, that every suggestion offered on the one side has MR. SPENCER WALPOLE said: Sir, been adopted, while those offered by the I own I had expected, when the Govern- other have been entirely disregarded. ment undertook to introduce a measure In my opinion there is one way alone in on this subject, that they would have which the question could be satisfactorily endeavoured to frame it as to its most settled, and that is that, while everyimportant provisions in such a manner thing is done to enable the Nonconforas not to provoke unnecessary and in- mists to enjoy the full benefit of Univercreased opposition to it. I had further sity education, on the other hand, every indulged the hope that they would so safeguard should be provided that the frame it as not to render it absolutely religious character of the Colleges should impossible for the Universities to accept not be impaired. The fault I find with it. But the measure itself, and the the Bill is that, while it concedes all the speech of my hon. and learned Friend demands of the Nonconformists, and (the Solicitor General) conciliatory more than satisfies their demands, it though that speech was in its tone will actually weaken the existing safeshow that the question now being dis- guards for maintaining the religious chacussed is not one turning on the removal racter of the Colleges. Another objecof tests to enable young and ardent tion to the Bill is that now, for the first minds not belonging to the Church time, it mixes up the two different parts of England to obtain the benefits of a of the subject-that which relates to the University education. The Bill itself, Universities and that which relates to and the language of my hon. and learned the Colleges-in such a manner that it Friend, seem to me to point to a direct is impossible to separate the one from disruption of the connection which now the other so that each part may receive subsists between the established religion a separate and distinct examination. of this country and our great Univer- These two parts of the Bill depend upon sities. Not only that, but, judging very different considerations, and in the partly from the clauses of the Bill-who- measure which was introduced last year

The Solicitor General

the distinction between them was care- The case with regard to the Colleges is, fully preserved. Under those circum- however, entirely different. The Colstances, while it was possible to consent leges are private and not public instito the second reading of last year's tutions in their formation. They are Bill, with the view of altering in Com- private and not public in the endowments mittee that portion of it to which we they received. I am aware that it is said objected, it is utterly out of the ques- in a famous 50-guinea Prize Essay which tion that we should treat the present has been printed by the Liberation SoBill otherwise than as a whole, or that ciety, and to which gentle allusion has we should do anything but seek to been made to-night by the learned Solireject it altogether. I am aware that citor General, that the Colleges are, in there are some who say that the dis- fact, the creation of the State. When I tinction between the Universities and saw that statement I thought it worth the Colleges with reference to this while to inquire a little into the facts of legislation is not one that ought to be the case, and I found that of the 25 regarded; and, indeed, in all the Pe- Colleges and Halls at Oxford, and of the titions that have been presented in favour 17 Colleges and Halls at Cambridge, of the Bill that distinction appears to there were not more than four at Oxford have been altogether ignored; while and three at Cambridge that ever rethey seem to assume that the Dissenters ceived anything from Royal founders or are not now permitted to enjoy the ad- from Royal bounty, all the rest being vantages of University education. The the creations and endowments of private assumption upon this latter point is persons. Under these circumstances it founded upon a complete misconception is impossible to say that the Universities of the facts of the case, because, under and the Colleges stand upon the same the existing law, there is nothing what- footing with respect to Parliament. I ever to prevent the Nonconformists en- now come to consider what are the conjoying University education, although ditions upon which these endowments they cannot become Members of the are held, and what is the law that should Senate at Cambridge or of Convocation be made applicable to them in the event at Oxford. At Cambridge every sizar- of any change in the existing law being ship, every exhibition, and every scho- suggested with regard to them. But larship, is open to the Dissenter. The before I enter upon this part of the substatement in the Petitions, therefore,ject I should wish to refer to a further that the advantages of University edu- statement in the Prize Essay to which I cation are withheld from the Nonconfor- have already alluded. It is stated in mists is simply untrue. There is a most that Essayimportant distinction between the law which relates to the Universities, and that which governs the Colleges, which Parliament is bound to recognize. The Universities were incorporated by Act of Parliament, and may, therefore, be said to be partly the creation of the Legislature. Parliament used to make grants in former times to the Universities, and therefore Parliament was justly entitled to lay down the conditions upon which those grants should be made. The Universities have also been empowered by Parliament to send representatives to admission of Dissenters to the Universities which this House, and I am willing to concede I think is much more encumbered with doubt, but that, therefore, Parliament has a right the expediency and the justice of admitting perto require that the constituencies of the sons not belonging to the Established Church to Universities should be constituted upon all the privileges consequent upon their attendas large a basis as any other constituency ance at the Universities, besides the right to And here I particularly allude, in the kingdom, and to require that Dis- obtain degrees. not to their acquiring any share in the governsenters should be admitted to University ment of the Universities-that is a matter which degrees by which they may become members of the Senate and obtain votes.

Catholics; but, like all other Church property,
"The funds were originally given by Roman
they were seized by the Crown, and from the
stronghanded Protestant Pope Henry VIII. down
through all the Popelings that followed, they have
passed irrevocably into national hands."
That is certainly a most ingenious way
of turning private property into national
property. In reply to that statement I
will quote Lord Brougham, who, in deal-
ing with this question, said-

"There is another matter connected with the

still I throw it out for consideration.

I refer to

might easily be arranged-but to the right of having Fellowships and scholarships. The diffi

culty upon that point is considerable, and I have no hesitation in saying, strong advocate of the Dissenters as I ever have been, that I see opinions expressed in some of their Petitions which show that those excellent persons, in putting forward their claim, have not well weighed the reasons for which Fellowships were for the most part endowed. The Dissenters have no more right, strictly speaking, to administer to Fellowships and scholarships endowed by the founders for the benefit of the Established Church than any member of the Church of England would have a right to share in the endowments founded at Highbury or Homerton, Maynooth or Stonyhurst, or ony other Dissenting College, Catholic or Protestant. The persons out of whose private funds Fellowships and scholarships were endowed had a perfect right to prescribe what restrictions they thought proper as to the disposal of those funds, and no Dissenter has any more right to complain of being excluded from them than he has to complain of exclusion from any private charity supported by members of the Church of England."

the Public Schools Act be adopted, and the Governing Body be restricted to professors of the denomination of the founder, or, in the words of the Government-"give the education to all, but take securities that the religious teaching shall not be impaired." But I have said that this Bill goes further than this, and much further than any Bill of the kind yet introduced. I do not know who drew the Bill; certainly the Solicitor General cannot have drawn it, for it goes much further than the mere removal of those disabilities which prevent Dissenters from obtaining the only things now withheld from them, the vote in the Senate and the admission to the Fellowships. The material clauses in the Bill affecting this matter are the 2nd and the 3rd. The 2nd clause specifies the offices That, I believe, is the true state of the from which restrictions are to be recase as regards the matter of right; as moved, and in reference to which freeregards the matter of policy, I admit dom of admission is to be given. Among that must be decided upon different con- these offices are the tutors, who stand in siderations. Even the Colleges as well loco parentis to the undergraduate while as the Universities have admitted Dis- he is resident in College, the lectureships senters to scholarships on grounds of on the New Testament in divinity, and policy; they have refrained from ad- also the office of dean. The 3rd clause mitting them to Fellowships for the very provides that every person is to be elidistinct reason that the Fellowships lead gible for these offices, and that none are to the Governing Bodies, and a Dis- to be required "to conform to any relisenter could not become one of a Govern-gious observances," or to make any deing Body, because he would have to claration involving any religious test. discharge a trust for which he did not possess the proper qualification. The Fellows of Colleges and Governors of endowed schools occupy as nearly as possible the same relative position; and the principle recognized in the provisions of the Public Schools Act affecting the Governing Body of endowed schools should be the principle for regulating this Bill. The Public Schools Act provides that the Governing Body shall continue to be of the same religious denomination as that prescribed by the founder, though is is also provided, on the other hand, that persons of a different belief shall not be excluded from the school. The Colleges have thrown their doors open to every sect under the sun; Roman Catholics and Parsees-I had almost said Mahomedans-members of the Jewish persuasion, and every class of Dissenters-Independents, Baptists, and Unitarians have been educated at Cambridge, and, I believe, at Oxford also, for many years past; but, while I consent to this course being continued, I ask that the principle of

Mr. Spencer Walpole

In plain language, these two clauses together declare that any person, of whatever creed, or even of no creed, shall be eligible for any of these offices, and can on appointment carry on his instruction in the College on the system of any religion or no religion, and cannot be interfered with. Yet my hon. and learned Friend told the House that this Bill does nothing to interfere with the religious instruction now imparted in the Colleges, and does not go beyond the intention of the Bills introduced in former years on the subject. But there are two other things in the 3rd clause to which wish especially to call the Solicitor General's attention, and also the attention of the First Lord of the Treasury, because I doubt very much whether they properly appreciate the full meaning of the Bill as it stands. I am sure it must have been drawn by some one who has not pointed out to my hon. and learned Friend the sweeping nature of its provisions. After enabling all persons of any or no religion to aspire to any of those offices, it goes on to say, in line 24—

"Nor shall any person be compelled, in any of These provisions, I understand, are to the said universities or any such college as afore-be repealed. [The SOLICITOR GENERAL said, to attend the public worship of any church, sect, or denomination to which he does not belong."