A history of university reform from 1800 A. D. to the present time

Preface

A few words of explanation may be given as to how this book came to be written. In July, 1907, Bishop Gore raised a discussion in the House of Lords on University Reform, and so brought the question prominently forward. I spent the summer of that year in thinking out and writing down my own ideas on it. In October an outline of them was published in The Cambridge Independent Press and also in the now defunct London daily paper, The Tribune. It then occurred to me that it might be of advantage if an account of the views held by those who had advocated reform in the past, and of the main changes effected by legislation, could be put into the hands of the public. The present volume is the result. I have discovered to my great satisfaction how little originality there was in my suggestions. The germs of the chief of them had been in print for many years, though at the time I did not know it.

The task of writing the book has not been easy, because two classes of persons have had to be borne in mind— those who know Oxford and Cambridge from within, and those who, though interested in education, have never been through either the one or the other. To give this latter class full explanations on every point of difficulty as it arose in connexion with two very complex institutions would have required a separate

VI PREFACE.

volume, but an effort has been made to meet their case. It is for their benefit that the introductory chapter has been compiled, and if the unacademical reader will study that carefully and then go forward in patience, he will find things falling gradually into their places, and ought to finish with a fairly good conception both of the history of the Universities and also of their present condition.

A further word of explanation may be given of my own particular standpoint. It has been my fortune ever since the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 to be associated with the public administration of Secondary Education. The question therefore which interests me most is how the ancient Universities can best be fitted into our present educational system. I have not attempted to chronicle all the many internal changes which Oxford and Cambridge have brought about by their own action, but have sought rather to trace the course which criticism, more or less detached, has taken, and to tell of the reforms which have been effected by the external action of Parliament. I may add that though I have taken a degree at Cambridge and have lived for more than forty years within the statutory mile and a half of Great St. Mary's Church, I have never held any University or College office. To that extent I have written as an outsider. As regards Oxford I am an outsider altogether. There is no possibility of concealing my consequent shortcomings from the initiated, and I crave their indulgence accordingly.

The suggestions towards a complete scheme of reform for the University of Cambridge will, I trust, not be

PREFACE. Vll

looked upon as unpardonably presumptuous, because a complete scheme seems now the one thing needful. Legislation in 1854 and in subsequent years proceeded on practical English lines, that is to say it dealt with obvious abuses and deficiencies, and avoided as far as possible decisions on questions of principle. But the obvious abuses are nearly all gone. Both the University and the Colleges are trying to do their best, and if the result is not all that could be desired, it is because they are struggling with a bad system. If Parliament is prepared only to deal with abuses, it is questionable whether it is worth its while interfering. What is wanted is that reformers should have an ideal and see how far Oxford and Cambridge can be brought up to it. Are there not still, in Mark Pattison's words, some " University men who betray rather an impression that something should be done, than a reasoned conviction as to what that something is " ? If my suggestions do no more than provoke criticism and so help to clarify opinion, they will not have been put forward in vain.

A. I. TILLYARD.

Fordfield, Cambridge, June 23rd, 1913.

Chapter I. Introductory'

Legal definition of the Universities— Their earliest form— Origin of— Mullinger's picture of in 1150 A. D.— Youthful undergraduates—Arts and Faculties— Degrees— Latin and Greek — Teaching and Examinations — The Professoriate — Regents and Non- Regents— The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor— The Proctors — A picture of Convocation— The foundation of the Colleges- New College and King's College— The idea of a College- Scholars— Fellows— Masters— College Statutes — The rule of study— The rule of life -Visitors — Growth of the Collegiate system— The Elizabethan Revolution — The Caput Senatus — Action of James the First— The Laudian Statutes — Their result — Goldwin Smith's statement— Vicissitudes of fortune — Effects of the Reformation— The Restoration and after- Cambridge in 1800— Oxford in 1800 ----- Pages 1-18

CHAPTER II. The Beginnings of Criticism

Cardinal Newman's account — -First attack by the Edinburgh Review — Espriella's " Letters from England " — Review of La Place's "Mecanique Celeste" — Review of Strabo — Review of Edgeworth's "Essays on Professional Education" — Copleston's Reply— Mr. T. E. Kebbel's views — Criticism thereof — Copleston's account of the Oxford Examinations — Dr. Jebb's account of the Cambridge Examinations - - 19-36

CHAPTER III. The Second Attack by the EDINBURGH REVIEW

Sir William Hamilton at Oxford — His Articles and Appendix — Encounter with Whewell— Analysis of Hamilton's Article of June, 1831 — Employment of the historical method — The University of Oxford — The Colleges — The Oxford System de jure — The Professors — The Tutorial System — The System de facto — The transition from the legal to the illegal system — Effected by the Colleges— The action of Laud— The Remedy— Reply and Counter-reply — Admission of Dissenters— The Appendix— Oxford as it is — Oxford as it might be— The ends of a University — Things primary— Things secondary — Action in the House of Lords— Action in the House of Commons — Mark Pattison's criticism of Hamilton — Goldwin Smith's views — Hamilton's charge of illegality — Dean Peacock's account — Hamilton's merits — He is the Father of University Reform — First hint of the University Extension movement - - - 37-68

X TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTEE IV.

University v. Colleges (Cambridge).

Cardinal Newman on the controversy — Sir Charles Lyell— His " Travels in North America " — Incidental attack on the College system— Science exiled from the Universities — Criticism of Whewell — Whewell replies to Lyell— Opposes a Royal Commission — A Cambridge pamphlet, "The Next Step" — Co-operation between Colleges and University desirable — Wratislaw's "Observations on the Cambridge system" — Suggestion of the Common University Fund — College system corrupt and exclusive — Donaldson upholds Hamilton and Wratislaw — Condemns subordination of University to Colleges — Higher standard for admission necessary .... 69-82

Chapter V

University v. Colleges (Oxford).

Professorial Lecture v. Tutorial Class— Copleston's view — Hamilton's view — Pusey and H. H. Vaughan— Bonamy Price's first pamphlet — Excessive labour imposed on Tutors — Best men leave the University — No provision for learning — A scheme propounded — Bonamy Price's second pamphlet — What are University requirements ? — The best men still leaving — The promotion of Research — Unsatisfactory position of the Professors — And of College Tutors— University education in the hands of young men — Teaching and fees should belong to the University — A Graduated Professoriate — Tutorial functions to be left to the Colleges — Newman's verdict — University has no jurisdiction over the Colleges — Want of Entrance Examinations— Goldwin Smith's view — Mark Pattison's view - - 83-99

Chapter VI

Results of fifty years agitation — Spread of Competitive Examinations — Their origin — Mr. Christie's motions in 1844 and 1845 — Mr. Hey wood's motion in 1850 — Prime Minister announces issue of Royal Commission— Opposition by Cambridge Residents — Action by New College and King's College — The Oxford Commissioners — Their reception — Recommendations on University Teaching — Restoration of the Professorial system — Fellowships — University Government — Matriculation — The Cambridge Commissioners — University Government — Division of Tuition — General Council of Studies— Special Boards of Studies — New Professorships — College Contributions — Salaries of Professors — Appointment of Professors — Recommendations as to the Colleges — An Executive Commission — Cost of a University Course — Non-Collegiate System rejected — Affiliated Halls — Religious Tests — University Library— Concluding remarks — Difference between Oxford and Cambridge Reports — Far-reaching nature of Cambridge Report 100-132

TABLE OF CONTENTS. XI

CHAPTER VII. The University Acts of 1854 and 1856

Change of Government— Lord Palmerston's Letter— Appointment of Syndicate at Cambridge— Mr. Gladstone frames the Oxford Bill— The idea of an Executive Commission— Lord John Russell introduces the Bill— His Speech— Disappointment of the Nonconformists— The Second Reading— Proceedings in Committee — Amendments carried against the Government — The Bill in the House of Lords— Preamble of Act— Hebdomadal Council— Congregation — Mark Pattison on the Heathcote Amendment— Private Halls— Their failure— Colleges to frame new Statutes— And to contribute to the University— Partial Abolition of Tests— The Cambridge University Bill— Introduced by Mr. Bouverie— His Speech — Bill in Committee — House of Lords Stage— Royal Assent — The Executive Commission- Chief Clauses of the Act— Results of the two Acts— Mark Pattison's criticisms — Their comparative failure— Change in the character of the agitation 138-161

Chapter VIII. 1856-1871

Mark Pattison's " Suggestions "—Of Legislative Interference— A State-appointed Chancellor— The Hebdomadal Council— Congregation— Convocation — The Vice-Chancellor— A Financial Board — Centralised management of College property — Costliness of University education — Scholarships and Exhibitions — Unattached Students — The true economy — Fellowships — The general education position — What University Reform is — The organisation of Science— The reformed College— The German model — The revival of the Faculties — Law — Historical Studies — Amalgamation of Colleges— The Faculty of Arts — The Graduated Professoriate — The Pass Examinations — The Honours Examinations — The existing system of Oxford Education — Division between General and Special Studies — Training of Teachers — Length of Terms— The University course in detail — Pattison's scheme not practical but ideal — Goldwin Smith's "Reorganisation of Oxford University" — Rejects Pattison's ideal — The Fellowship system — Headships — Teaching by University and Colleges combined — Division of labour between them — Revival of the Faculties — Abolition of Pass Examinations — An Entrance Examination— Congregation — The Hebdomadal Council — The Vice-Chancellor — Delegacies — Control of education by the Universities — Visitors — The State and the Universities — Points of agreement between Pattison and Goldwin Smith 162-197 xii TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IX. The Legislation of the Seventies

First attempt to abolish Tests— Subsequent attempts— Effects ot the Acts of 1954 and 1856— Lord Derby's Speech in 1854— The Bill of 1870— Lord E. Fitzmaurice's Speech— Bill of 1871— Proceedings in the Commons— In the Lords— Lord Salisbury's amendment — The Bill carried— Preamble of the Act— The Operative Clause— Royal Commission of 1872— Mr. Gladstone's Letter — The Commissioners— Cambridge Memorandum to Mr. Gladstone— The Conservatives take office— Mark Pattison's conjectural history of Lord Salisbury's Bill — Lord Salisbury's Speech on the Oxford University Bill in 1876— Dr. Tait's Speech — Proceedings in the Lords — University of Cambridge Bill in Commons— Both Bills withdrawn— The Joint Bill of 1877— Introduced in Commons— Amendments in Committee — Royal Assent — Preamble of the Act — The Executive Commissions- Clauses 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 44, 52, 53, 54— Effects of the Act— Mr. Arthur Gray's description — Abolition of Clerical Fellowships — The new Statutes— Terms — College Contributions — Common University Fund— The Financial Board — Special Boards of Studies— General Board of Studies ------ 198-232

CHAPTER X. The Latest Suggestions from Oxford and Cambridge

Lord Curzon's "Principles and Methods of University Reform" — Introductory Chapter — Nine classes of suggestions— Constitution of the University — The Council — Congregation— Convocation — The Admission of poor men — Needs of the Working- Classes— The Non-Collegiate system— Hostels— Working men's Colleges— The Poor of other classes— Cost of living in Colleges- Fees and Dues— Scholarships and Exhibitions — A Redistribution scheme — Fellowships— University Examinations — The Pass Men — A Business education — Relations of the Colleges and the University — Educational relations — Growing strength of University — Colleges still dominate University — Boards of Faculties — Proposed reforms — Executive Machinery — Vice- Chancellor — University Staff — Encouragement of Research and of Advanced Study— Summary— The latest suggestions from Cambridge— Memorial of 1909 to the Council— Reconstitution of Electoral Roll — Functions of Senate and Electoral Roll — The Council's Report — Rejection of its recommendations - - 233-263

CHAPTER XI. The Financial Resources of Oxford and Cambridge

Report of 1852 here defective — Royal Commission Report, 1874 — Origin of University and College endowments — Trusts — Lands

TABLE OF CONTENTS. xiii

— House Property — Tithe and other Rent-charges — Stocks and Shares — Other properties — Income of the Universities and the Colleges— External — Internal — Their Expenditure — Cambridge University Chest, 1883 and 1913— Common University Fund — Gross Corporate Income of Colleges, 1883 and 1913 — Fluctuations in Land, Houses and Tithe — Imperfect College returns — The corresponding Oxford statistics — The Quarterly Review — "A Plea for Cambridge " — Extension of Studies at Cambridge — Corporate Income of Colleges — Heavy Expenditure on Estates — The same at Oxford— Headships— Fellowships— Scholarships — Tuition Fund — Balance — University Income and Expenditure — Lord Curzon's Chapter VII— University Accounts partial — University Balance - sheet — Colleges Balance - sheet — The Published Accounts — College Contributions — College Financial Administration — Management of College Estates — Financial Policy of the University — Suggested Board of Finance — Statute establishing the same 264-291

Chapter XII

Suggestions for a Scheme of Reform for the University of Cambridge.

Section I

Definition of University Reform— Its three branches — A Problem in Federalism — Mark Pattison's objection examined — Anticipated resistance of the Colleges— Encouragement from the progress of events— Opinion at Oxford — Examination of the Collegiate System — Numbers and resources of the Cambridge Colleges— Disparity in size and wealth— Competition for entries —Proportion of Honours to Matriculations— Proportion of Poll Degrees to Matriculations — Mr. Venn's figures — Number of First Classes, 1898-1907— Great differences between the Colleges — Influence of Athletics — Differences in tone and temper — Fluctuations in numbers— Difficulties of a small College — Multiplicity of Offices— Co-operation between the Colleges — The essence of the College System — Lies in its Tutorial and Domestic functions — Administrative work of the Colleges — Centralisation of administration— Bursars — The Colleges as land owners— Scattered College farms— College sentiment adverse— Lord Curzon's picture — The Times on Oxford College estates — The economic facts— House property — A Central Board needed— Stewards — A like suggestion — College standards of expenditure— Provision in the Act of 1877 — Public Auditing of Accounts — Depreciation of investments — The Organisation of Teaching — The Poll men — The Honours men— Existing division of teaching between the University and the Colleges — A Lecture List analysed — Report of the Cambridge University Reform Committee on present system — Increasing co-operation between the Colleges — Additional powers for the General x iv TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Board of Studies and Special Boards of Studies— Reform of these bodies— Tutorial work of Colleges not to be touched- Grouping of the Colleges — Authorities for such a step- Clause 22 of the Act of 1877— How it might be given effect to— A Scheme of Grouping— The University point of view— Training of Teachers— A career at Oxford or Cambridge— The Fellowship system— Its cost— Its history— Effect of the Acts of 1855 and 1856— Prize Fellowships — Embody principle of emulation — Their disadvantages — Decrease in their number- Career Scholarships as a substitute— Fellowships as payment for College work— As Pensions— For Research— Examinations for Fellowships— The awarding of Fellowships— The title only to be retained — A career for Teaching — Position of Masters — Elasticity of the Federal principle— An appeal to the Colleges.

Section II

University Organisation — The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor — The Council of the Senate — Ex officio members — The Electoral Roll— Proposals of the Reform Committee and the Council — Plan for keeping the Universities in touch with national life — Limitation in numbers — Power of initiative — Anomalous relations between University and Colleges — The Senate— Difficulties of the Reform Commitee — Senate impossible as governing body — The Suspensory Veto — Solution of Women's Degrees difficulty.

Section III

The Universities and National Education — Entries from 1850 to the present time — Slow rate of progress — Increase in subjects taught — In teachers — In buildings — Expense the obstacle — Statement of the Reform Committee — Criticism of it — Scholarships and Exhibitions — The actual awards — Helping poverty — Failure of Hostels and the Non-Collegiate System — How to reduce expenses — Scholarships a necessity — How and when to award them — Probable opposition by the Colleges — Necessity for a University Entrance Examination — Previous Examination becoming an Entrance Examination — Cambridge Memorial on the subject — Action at Oxford — Examinations — Examiners not trained — Dean Merivale's views — Board of Examinations required — Defects and contradictions of present Triposes — Unrestricted competition has been modified — Overloaded Examinations— The Classical Tripos — The Law Tripos — The multiplicity of Examinations — Principles of Examination Reform — Many University graduates still uneducated — Sir Clifford Allbutt's statement — Pass Examinations — A suggestion — Degrees— Advanced Studies — The Endowment of Research — Board of Advanced Study and Research required — The Library Question — Necessity for a Royal Commission — Intentions of Parliament must be carried out 292-380

Summary of Suggestions 381-384

CORRECTIONS.

p. 87 (note), for pp. 13-14 read pp. xiii-xiv.

p. 89, line 16, after pamphlet insert entitled Oxford Reform.

p. 94 (note), for Historical Studies read Historical Sketches.

p. 145, line 32, insert quotation marks after canvas.

p. 203, last line, for Ward read Wood.

p. 228, line 30, for to, define read to define.

p. 289, line 28, for Oxford University Gazette read Oxford University Gazette.

p. 297 (note), for University Calendar read University Calendar.

p. 345, line 26, insert comma after Vice-Chancellor.

p. 362, line 29, insert comma after Classics.

p. 363, line 23, insert comma after Non-Regent House.

Chapter I. Introductory

" The University of Cambridge," says the Report of the Royal Comniission of 1850, " is a lay corporation, possessing various privileges under Charters of the Crown and Acts of Parliament or by prescription. The earliest Royal Letters Patent which can now be traced as authentic are of the reign of King Henry the Third. 1 These, however, do not found the University, but recognise it as already existing, with an organised constitution and regular form. Other Letters and Charters were granted from time to time by subsequent monarchs, of which the most ample and the most important is the Charter granted by Queen Elizabeth in the third year of her reign (dated April 26, 1561),' 2 confirming former and conferring new privileges. In the thirteenth year of the same reign (June 7, 1571) an Act of Parliament was passed whereby it was enacted that ' the Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge ' should be incorporated with perpetual succession under that title; and that the Letters Patent of the Queen, made in the third year of her reign, and also all other Letters Patent by any of Her Majesty's progenitors or predecessors, should be good in law to all intents." 3

The Oxford Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 says of this same reign of Henry III., " At that time the University of Oxford was, we may almost say, the chief charity school of the poor, and the chief grammar-school

hooper gives the following account of the earliest documents. " It seems that at this time (a.d. 1231), the ruling powers of the University experienced considerable inconvenience from the want of authority to punish offenders against academic discipline, from the claims of disorderly persons to the character of scholars in order more safely to pursue their malpractices, and from the exorbitant sums demanded by the townspeople for the rent of the hostels in which the scholars lived. In order to remedy these grievances the King issued four several writs, all tested at Oxford, the 3rd of May in this year." — Annals of Cambridge, Vol I., p. 41.

2 The Charter is given in Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, Vol. II., pp. 165-168.

2 UNIVERSITY REFOKM.

in England, as well as the great place of education for Students of Theology, of Law and of Medicine. The oldest of the great Public Schools was not yet founded. The Inns of Court and the Schools of Medicine had no existence, and many students from foreign Universities thought their education incomplete until they had visited the most celebrated seat of English learning." Though the exact origin of Oxford and Cambridge is thus not precisely known, there is not the mystery about it which is generally imagined. "The constitution of the University of Paris formed the model on which that of Oxford and that of Cambridge were formed ; the course of study, the collegiate system, even the regulations of the Sorbonne, were imitated with scrupulous fidelity." 1 Some time then during the 12th century arose these ancient institutions whose history we have begun to trace.

Oxford and Cambridge were thus Schools and Universities in one, open to all comers. " If we picture to ourselves some few hundred students, of all ages from early youth to complete manhood, mostly of very slender means, looking forward to the monastic or the clerical life as their future avocation, lodging among the townsfolk, and receiving such accommodation as inexperienced poverty might be likely to obtain at the hands of practised extortioners, resorting to one large building, the grammar schools, or sometimes congregated in the porches of their respective Masters' houses, and there receiving such instruction in Latin as a reading from Terence, Boethius or Orosius, eked out by the more elementary rules from Priscian or Donatus, would represent— we shall probably have grasped the main features of a Cambridge course when Irnerius began to lecture at Bologna, Vacarius at Oxford, and when Peter Lombard compiled the Sentences" 2 (i.e. about 1150 A.D.).

Reference is made in this extract to the early age, it was fourteen or even under, at which undergraduates entered. 3 There was the more necessity for this because

1 Mullinger, The University of Cambridge, Vol. I., p. 67. 2 lb. Vol. I., p. 341. 3 " In the old matriculation books at Cambridge, many students have ' Imp.' i.e. Impubes written after their names, showing they were under a long course lay before them. To begin with there were "arts" to be learned to the mystical number of seven. These were divided into two courses, the Trivium of three — Grammar {i.e. Latin), Logic and Rhetoric, and the Quadrivium of four — Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy and Music. To each Art a year's study was supposed to be given, so that the seven Arts took seven years to finish. To the Arts there were added later the three Faculties properly so-called of Theology, Law and Medicine. Theology took twelve years, Law and Medicine six each, so that the whole University course occupied from thirteen to nineteen years. Certificates of proficiency were awarded at four stages, and were called Degrees, or steps, gradus, because they marked the point at which a student had arrived. At the end of three years the student could become a Bachelor of Arts, Baccalaureus Artium, at the end of seven years a Master of Arts, Magister Artium, or to give the process in more detail, "the following were the successive stages which marked the progress of the Arts student : that of the Sophister, or disputant in the Schools,— of the Bachelor of Arts, eligible in turn to give subsidiary or cursory lectures, — of the incepting Master in Arts who has received his licence to teach in any University in Europe — and of the Regent Master of Arts who lectured for a definite term as an instructor appointed by the University." ' " The possession of a Degree," the same writer also points out, " was originally nothing else than the possession of a diploma to exercise the function of teaching; a right which at a later period was equally recognised as a duty. The Bachelors expounded the Sentences (of Peter Lombard) and the Scriptures, the Doctors and Masters taught systematically in the Schools ; but all those who had gained the degree of Licentiate, Master or Doctor were held bound to devote a certain period to imparting again the learn-

fourteen." Venn, Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations, p. 5. This practice of early entry continued to a surprisingly late date. Vicesimus Knox in his Liberal Education published in 1781 writes, "Boys should not be sent to the University so young as they often are. It is really cruel to let a boy of fifteen be precipitated into drunkenness and debauchery." Works, Vol. IV., p. 142.

1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 358.

ing they had acquired" l The preliminary studies, the examinations, the licence to teach thus followed in a natural order. When a student had completed his Arts course, he was free to proceed to one of the Faculties, in which there were also two steps, Bachelor and Doctor.

In passing it may be remarked that Oxford from the first showed a preference for the Trivium and Cambridge for the Quadrivium, and that this distinction can be traced even to the present day. The language of instruction was Latin, the then universal tongue of science and learning, so that students coming from abroad were no strangers as far as their speech was concerned. Greek there was, broadly speaking, none. For that and for the classical education which has prevailed so long in our Public Schools and Universities, we are indirectly indebted to the Turks. As these barbaric invaders pressed more hardly upon the Eastern Empire centred at Constantinople, the Greek scholars retreated to the West carrying the literature of Greece with them. Classical learning penetrated these remote islands, took a hold of Oxford which it has never relinquished, and disputed with Mathematics the mastery of Cambridge.

The teaching in the early times was necessarily oral, as there were no printed books and manuscripts were rare and dear. It was either explanatory or dialectical, the latter method being the favourite. Every possible point was thrown into a quaestio and then discussed 2)ro. and con. Examinations were oral also, and these again took the form of disputations or discussions, the defensive and offensive parts in them being called respectively " responsions " and " opponencies." The examiner held the balance even between the disputants and controlled the arguments so they did not wander into devious paths. Hence such terms as " Responsions " and "Moderations" at Oxford and "Moderator" (or Examiner) and "Wrangler" which still survive in the Mathematical Tripos at Cambridge. This system of teaching and examination had its drawbacks. " It was undoubtedly from the prevalence of this method of teaching that disputation became the besetting vice of the age. ' They dispute,' says Vives in his celebrated treatise, ' before dinner, at dinner and after dinner ; in public and in private ; at all places, and at all times.' " x So difficult is it to hit on the best methods either of imparting or testing knowledge.

At the beginning and for some centuries, the University gave its own instruction, in its own public schools, by means of its Masters of Arts and superior Graduates. The principle of the University doing its own teaching was extended and confirmed by the establishment of the Professoriate. The earliest foundation at Cambridge was that of the Lady Margaret Professorship of Divinity which dates from 150'2. Lady Margaret, Countess of Richmond, was the mother of Henry VII., and to this munificent lady Cambridge owes not only its first Professorship but two of its Colleges, Christ's and St. John's. King Henry VIII. followed in 1540 with the five Regius Professorships, of Divinity, Civil Law, Physic, Hebrew and Greek. He endowed them with what was thejt an ample income — £40 a year, a sum which is still paid from the imperial Exchequer, less £7 2s. 8d. mysteriously intercepted on the way.

The University was originally a self-governing unity, an association of teachers united by mutual interest, divided into two Houses, that of the Regents, who were actually engaged in teaching, and of the Non-Regents, who had passed through the office of teacher. At the head was a Chancellor elected for two years by the Regents, who might on extraordinary occasions be continued in office for a third year. He summoned Convocations or Congregations of both the Houses to consult together for the common good and general interests of the University. No Graces, i.e. legislative proposals, could be proposed or passed without his assent. He was a King with a real power of veto. He was not allowed to be absent from the University for more than a month while the lectures or readings of the Masters of Arts were going on,. though a Vice-Chancellor might be appointed by the Regents from year to year to relieve him of some portion of his duties. In later times the Graces before they were submitted to the general body or Senate were