CHAPTER XVII.

OXFORD STUDIES AND EXAMINATIONS IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.

[Sidenote: Examination Statute of 1800 and later amendments]

‘The studies of the University were first raised from their abject state by a statute passed in 1800.’ Such is the testimony of the Oxford University Commissioners appointed in 1850, and it is amply confirmed by University records. The Laudian system was doomed to failure from the first, inasmuch as it provided no security for the capacity of examiners or against their collusion with the candidates, while these were animated by little fear of rejection and no hope whatever of distinction. The statute of 1800, for which the credit is mainly due to Dr. Eveleigh, then Provost of Oriel, was directed to cure these defects. That it was regarded as a vigorous attempt to raise the standard of degree examinations is proved by the fact that in 1801, the last year of the ‘old system,’ the number of B.A. degrees suddenly rose to 250, largely exceeding the average of degrees and even of matriculations in several preceding years. The new statute was deliberately based on the Laudian system, in so far as it presupposed an inherent supremacy in the faculty of Arts, and it was unconsciously based on the old mediæval curriculum of Trivials and Quadrivials, in so far as it specified grammar, rhetoric, logic, moral philosophy, and the elements of mathematics—with the important addition of Latin and Greek literature—as the essential subjects of examination. But it effected a grand reform in the method of examination. Candidates were to offer themselves either for what has since been known as a ‘pass,’ or for Honours, and the Honour-list was to be divided into two classes, in which the names were to be arranged in order of merit. There was also to be a further examination for the M.A. degree, comprising higher mathematical subjects, history, and Hebrew; while candidates for the B.C.L. degree were to be examined in history and jurisprudence, besides the subjects required for the B.A. degree. Moreover, the examiners were thenceforth to be paid by salary, and chosen by responsible officers to serve for considerable periods. They were solemnly charged to deliberate maturely and secretly on the merits of the candidates, _sepositis omnino amicitiâ et odio, timore ac spe_. Material changes were introduced into this system by statutes of 1807, modified again in 1809, 1825, 1826, and 1830. The general effect of these changes was to substitute, in the main, written papers for oral questions, to establish two stated times in the year for examination, to subdivide the list of honours into three classes, to relegate mathematics to a ‘School’ by itself, to abrogate the examination for the M.A. degree, and to make the Greek and Latin languages, philosophy, and history, the staple of examination in what now came to be called the _Literæ Humaniores_ School, though permission was given to illustrate the ancient by modern authors. Meanwhile, the old scholastic exercise of Responsions _in Parviso_ was replaced by an elementary examination, bearing the same name, to be passed in the second year.

[Sidenote: Examination Statute of 1850 and later amendments]

Such was the Oxford examination-system when it was transformed afresh in 1850, by a statute which has been amended and extended by many supplementary measures. A ‘First Public Examination,’ popularly known as ‘Moderations,’ was interposed between Responsions and the final examination for the B.A. degree, thenceforth officially designated the ‘Second Public Examination.’ This intermediate examination, in which honours are awarded, was specially designed to encourage and test a scholarlike knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, ancient history, philosophy, and logic being mainly reserved for the Final Classical, or _Literæ Humaniores_, School. The Honour School of Mathematics was retained, and two new Schools were established, the one for Natural Science, the other for Law and Modern History. This last School was afterwards divided into two schools, of Jurisprudence and of Modern History, respectively, while a sixth Honour School was added for Theology. Until the year 1883, two examinations were held annually in each of the six Honour Schools, but in and since that year one only has been held, and that in Trinity Term. Two examinations, however, continued to be held annually for candidates seeking an ordinary degree, and these ‘pass examinations’ were subdivided into several branches, for the purpose of securing a tolerable degree of proficiency in more than one subject of study.

[Sidenote: University Commission of 1850]

The important examination statutes of 1850 were in contemplation, but not yet in operation, when a Royal Commission was issued, on August 31, in that year, ‘for the purpose of inquiring into the state, discipline, studies, and revenues’ of the University and colleges. The report of this Commission is the most comprehensive review of the whole University system which has ever been published. It recommended various important reforms, of which some were effected by an Act of Parliament enacted in 1854, and others through Ordinances framed by executive commissioners, therein appointed, for the several colleges. In 1850, the sole initiative power in University legislation, and by far the largest share of University administration, was still vested in the ‘Hebdomadal Board,’ consisting solely of heads of colleges with the two proctors, and described by no unfriendly critic of Oxford institutions as ‘an organised torpor.’ The assembly of resident and ‘regent’ Masters of Arts, known as the ‘House of Congregation,’ still existed for the purpose of granting degrees, but its other business had dwindled to mere formalities. The University Convocation included, as ever, all Masters of Arts, resident or non-resident, and had the right of debating, but this right was virtually annulled by the necessity of speaking in Latin—all but a lost art—and Convocation could only accept or reject without amendment measures proposed by the Hebdomadal Board. No student could be a member of the University without belonging to a college or hall, while every member of a college or hall was compelled to sleep within its walls, until after his third year of residence. Persons unable to sign the Thirty-nine Articles were absolutely excluded, not merely from degrees, but from all access to the University, inasmuch as the test of subscription was enforced at matriculation. Nevertheless, college fellowships were further protected against the intrusion of dissenters by the declaration of conformity to the liturgy required to be made under the Act of Uniformity. If professorial lectures were not at so low an ebb as in the days of Gibbon, they were lamentably scarce and ineffective. The educational function of the University had, in fact, been almost wholly merged in college tuition, but the scholarships, as well as the fellowships, of the colleges were fettered by all manner of restrictions, which marred their value as incentives to industry. The great majority of fellows were bound to take Holy Orders, and the whole University was dominated by a clerical spirit, which directly tended to make it, as it had so long been, a focus of theological controversy.

[Sidenote: Act of 1854 and new College Ordinances]

Though several of the wise and liberal measures recommended by the Commission of 1850 were postponed to a more convenient season, a profound and most beneficial reform was wrought in the whole spirit and working of the University system by the Act of 1854, and the College Ordinances framed under its provisions. The Hebdomadal Board was replaced by an elective Council, on which Heads of colleges, professors, and resident Masters of Arts were equally represented. A new ‘Congregation’ was created, embracing all resident members of Convocation, and soon became a vigorous deliberative assembly, with the right of speaking in English. The monopoly of colleges was broken down, and an opening made for ulterior extension by the revival of private halls. The professoriate was considerably increased, reorganised, and re-endowed, by means of contributions from colleges. The colleges were emancipated from their mediæval statutes, were invested with new constitutions, and acquired new legislative powers. The fellowships were almost universally thrown open to merit, and the effect of this was not merely to provide ample rewards for the highest academical attainments, but to place the governing power within colleges in the hands of able men, likely to promote further improvements. The number and value of scholarships was largely augmented, and many, though not all, of the restrictions upon them were abolished. The great mass of vexatious and obsolete oaths was swept away, and though candidates for the M.A. degree and persons elected to fellowships were still required to make the old subscriptions and declarations, it was enacted that no religious test should be imposed at matriculation, or on taking a bachelor’s degree. The University itself had supplemented the extension of its curriculum and examination system by the foundation of a new museum specially consecrated to natural science. The permanence of this extension was, however, additionally secured by a clause introduced into the College Ordinances, whereby it was directed that fellowships should be appropriated, from time to time, for the encouragement of all the studies recognised by the University.

[Sidenote: Effect of these reforms]

Other salutary changes naturally grew out of this comprehensive reform, and far greater progress was made by the University during the thirty years immediately following it than in any previous century of its history. The impulse given to education reacted upon learning and research; Oxford science began once more to command the respect of Europe; the professoriate received an accession of illustrious names; and college tuition, instead of being the mere temporary vocation of fellows waiting for livings, gradually placed itself on the footing of a regular profession. Instead of drying up the bounty of founders, as had been confidently predicted, the reforms of 1854 apparently caused the stream of benefactions to flow with renewed abundance. Nearly all the older colleges have extended their buildings, mostly by the aid of private munificence, a new college has been erected, bearing the name of the Rev. John Keble, and Magdalen Hall has been refounded, under its original name of Hertford College, with a large new endowment, provided by Mr. C. Baring. Meanwhile, a new class of ‘unattached’ or ‘non-collegiate’ students has been created, the number of which rose to 284 in the year 1880, though it has since manifested a tendency to fall. The aggregate strength of the University has been doubled within the same period of thirty-two years, and the net total of undergraduates in residence has been swelled from about 1,300 to upwards of 2,500, and the annual matriculations have increased in a like proportion.

[Sidenote: Abolition of University Tests]

The relaxation of the ‘classical monopoly’ and the opening of scholarships was supplemented, in 1871, by a still more important reform—the complete abolition of University Tests, already reduced by the Act of 1854. This great concession to religious liberty was brought about by a persistent movement chiefly emanating from the Universities themselves. In the year 1862 a petition was presented from 74 resident fellows of colleges at Cambridge, praying for a repeal of the clause applicable to fellowships in the Act of Uniformity. In the year 1863, a petition was presented from 106 Heads, professors, fellows, ex-fellows, and college tutors at Oxford, praying for the removal of all theological restrictions on degrees. In the year 1868, a petition against all religious tests, except for degrees in theology, was signed by 80 Heads, professors, lecturers, and resident fellows at Oxford, while a similar petition was signed by 123 non-resident fellows and ex-fellows. In the same year a petition to the same effect was signed by 227 heads and present or former office-holders and fellows of Cambridge. Separate petitions, specially directed against the declaration of conformity, were presented by Trinity and Christ’s Colleges at Cambridge. Supported by the whole Nonconformist body and by the Liberal party in Parliament, these efforts were ultimately successful. The contest in Parliament lasted no less than nine years, and one Bill after another was defeated or withdrawn, but in 1871 the abolition of University Tests was adopted as a government measure and accepted by the House of Lords. Experience has not justified the fears of its opponents, and neither the religious character nor the social peace of the University has been in the slightest degree impaired by the admission of Nonconformists to its degrees and endowments.

[Sidenote: Local examinations, and board for examination of public schools]

But the impulse given to academical education by the legislation of 1854 is not to be measured solely by the internal growth of the University, now accessible to every class in the nation. Since that period it has initiated and carried out two educational movements of national importance, the one in concert, the other in friendly rivalry, with the University of Cambridge. The first of these was the scheme of local examinations for pupils of middle-class schools, established by a statute passed at Oxford in 1857, afterwards adopted by Cambridge, and now exercising a regulative influence on middle-class education throughout England. The examination of public schools by a joint-board representing the two Universities was originated in 1873, and was doubtless facilitated by the fear, then prevalent, of State-inspection being applied to endowed schools. At these examinations certificates are granted, which, under certain limitations, carry with them an exemption from Responsions at Oxford, as well as from a part of the ‘previous examinations’ at Cambridge, and of the military examinations. Such certificates may be regarded as supplying the rudiments of a missing link not only between secondary and University education, but also between secondary and professional education.

[Sidenote: Commission of inquiry (1872) and Act of 1876]

In the meantime, a new wave of democratic sentiment in Parliament impelled Mr. Gladstone to issue, in January 1872, a commission to inquire into academical property and revenues, as a preliminary step to further legislation. The functions of this commission were strictly limited to investigation and to matters of finance, no power being entrusted to it either of passing judgment on the actual application of University and college funds, or of suggesting a better application of them—much less of entering on general questions of University reform. These questions were destined to be reopened, and a fresh appropriation of academical endowments to be made, by the Conservative Government which came into office in the spring of 1874. At this period the system established by the Oxford Reform Act of 1854, and the executive commission thereby appointed, had barely taken root, but a vigorous agitation was already in progress against it, mainly on the ground that it had done too much for educational competition and too little for learning or research. The principle upon which a fresh commission was now demanded was not so much the expediency of redistributing college revenues for the benefit of the colleges themselves, as the expediency of diverting them from the colleges to the University, especially in the interests of Natural Science. The Marquis of Salisbury, as Chancellor of the University and an important member of the government, heartily espoused these claims, and introduced a Bill expressly designed to enrich the University at the expense of the colleges.

[Sidenote: Commission of 1877]

This Bill was passed, with some amendments, in 1877. Its preamble recited the expediency of making larger provision out of college revenues for University purposes. It proceeded to institute an executive commission, armed with sweeping powers of revision and legislation; but, as a safeguard for the interests of colleges, it gave each college, not indeed a veto upon the statutes to be framed, but a share in framing them, by means of elected representatives, associated _pro tempore_ with the commissioners. It further enjoined that in assessing contributions on colleges, regard should first be had to the educational wants of the college itself. Accordingly, the commissioners sat for several years, and elaborated an entirely new code both for the University and for the colleges, repealing all previous college statutes or ordinances, but leaving the legislative constitution of the University untouched. They charged the colleges with an aggregate subsidy of 20,000_l._ and upwards for the endowment of professorships and readerships or lectureships, the contributions of wealthy colleges being fixed on a higher scale than those of poorer colleges. By the same process they set free a certain amount of University income for such objects as the maintenance of buildings and libraries. They regulated the payment, duties, and appointment of professors and readers, as well as the nomination of University examiners, which had been subjected to much criticism. They made some approach towards an organisation of University teaching, by grouping studies roughly under Faculties, and giving ‘Boards of Faculties’ a certain limited control over the distribution of lectures. They formulated extremely minute rules for the publication of University and college accounts. They remodelled the whole system of college fellowships, attaching the greater number of them to University or college offices, but retaining about one hundred sinecure fellowships, terminable in seven years, with an uniform stipend of 200_l._ a year, and subject to no obligations of residence or celibacy. With certain exceptions, they abolished all clerical restrictions on fellowships or headships, but regulated various details of college management and tuition which the former commissioners had left in the discretion of each governing body. They established an uniform standard of age and value for college scholarships, requiring, as a rule, that no candidate should have exceeded nineteen, and that no scholarship should be worth more than 80_l._ annually. They also provided for the appropriation of any surplus revenues which should accrue, to college or University purposes.

[Sidenote: Character of last reforms]

It is too soon to pronounce a judgment on the effect of these reforms, some of which have not yet come into full operation, and which have been supplemented by incessant changes in the examination statutes, made by the University itself. Indeed, notwithstanding the bold amendments which it has undergone, the constitution and educational system of the University must be regarded as still in a state of transition. It has ceased to be a mere aggregate of colleges, but it has not ceased to be essentially collegiate in many parts of its organisation, and the dualism of the professorial and tutorial systems has been perpetuated. Professorships have been freely created, but attendance on their lectures has not been made obligatory, and it has been found easier to provide them with salaries out of college revenues than to provide them with audiences at the expense of college lecturers. The number of necessary examinations has been increased, and many obstacles have been thrown in the way of persistent idleness; but the door of the University has not been closed against complete ignorance by an effective entrance examination, and a dunce ignorant of his letters may still matriculate and reside, if he can find a college to admit him. The student is free to choose his Final School, and, unless he chooses the Classical School, he may abandon Latin and Greek, in any case, after Moderations. But a minimum proficiency in these languages is still necessary for Responsions as well as for Moderations, several alternatives for which have been offered with an utter disregard of symmetry or equality between studies. Women have been admitted to certain University examinations, but not to all, nor on the same terms as men; and the names of those who obtain honours are published in a class-list, but not the ordinary class-list. Religious equality has been established for most purposes, but not for all, and the Faculty of Theology maintains its exclusive connection not only with the Anglican Church but with the Anglican clergy. Such are some of the anomalies which have been left to adjust themselves by successive commissions and successive groups of University legislators. They have not proved inconsistent with a vigorous internal life, but while they exist and continue to be multiplied, the University cannot be said to have attained a state of stable equilibrium, nor can a poetical unity be imparted to an historical narrative of recent University reforms.