The grant of a charter to the Victoria University in 1880 marked the beginning of a new era in English education. Not to speak of Scotland and Wales, there are in England to-day six Universities which bring the new learning and the old to the very doors of the vast populations which surround their seats. Birmingham claims the Midlands; Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, and Sheffield instruct the manufacturing and commercial centres of the North; while the University of London, full of new aspirations, does its best for the huge and somewhat apathetic population of the capital. The calculated prodigality of the State endowments of Germany, the individual generosity of the citizens of the United States, the vigour of the young Universities of Canada, have smitten the national conscience, if not with shame, at least with fear. But, while so powerful a lever as the dread of industrial decay may have been necessary to overcome the intellectual inertia of the country, the consequent impetus given to the study of science and (it may be hoped) of letters is not dying away, but rather taking permanent shape; and it is now impossible to say, as was said in 1903 by one of the members of the Mosely Educational Commission, that ‘in this country ... we seem to be doing nothing for its own sake, and least of all in education.’

The new edition of the ‘Endowments of the University of Cambridge’ suggests other, though kindred, reflections. The book has for its basis a series of documents, beginning with the year 1293, and ending with the year 1904. The learned Registrary has prefaced the account of each bequest with an explanation, and, by his discriminating comment, has invested his material with something of that charm which characterizes all his work. In one aspect his book serves, and is intended to serve, as a history of the progress of education in Cambridge; and the large amount of new matter which has been incorporated since the previous edition of the ‘Endowments’ in 1876 is, in this aspect, highly satisfactory. Yet, though it is a mistake to suppose that the flow of benefactions to the ancient Universities has entirely ceased, the fact remains that Cambridge has twice appealed—once in 1898, and once again in the spring of 1904—for help, without which she cannot meet her national responsibilities. Oxford has at last been constrained to confess that she is in a similar, if not yet so dire, a strait; and it is easy to understand the effort which it has cost her, as well as her sister University, to sue in form pauperis.

In truth, the neglect, almost absolute, of Oxford and Cambridge, while the new Universities are finding generous benefactors, either leads to the conclusion that the old Universities are condemned and found wanting, or has its origin in a profound misconception of their efforts and resources. It may be urged that neither alternative is true; that the needs of the new Universities are more urgent, and that the needs of Oxford and Cambridge will in turn receive attention. But a delay of a few years may in these days involve damage which will not be repaired for more than one generation. Of Cambridge, at any rate, it is asserted that she is at the end of her means, that in the last forty years she has, in her efforts at development, strained her resources to the utmost, and that without assistance, which, to be effectual, must be both prompt and generous, no further advance is possible. Science has emptied the University chest, yet, as the late master of Trinity Hall said, ‘Science is still hungry and aggressive.’ As the result of her straitened resources Cambridge can no longer satisfy the just demands either of science or of letters. When we compare this state of things with that in Germany, where the University of Berlin enjoys a State endowment of £170,000 per annum, or in the United States, whose Universities have received from private benefactors alone £42,000,000 sterling in the last thirty years, apart from large funds provided by the State, we are forced to recognize that much yet remains to be done in England.

It is not difficult to suggest some reasons for the comparative neglect of the older Universities in the matter of benefactions. In the first place, neither of them can appeal to local patriotism; and an appeal on the wider ground of national efficiency is not so easily nor so effectively pushed home. Next, it is hard to imagine that a University whose colleges enjoy a corporate income of something like £300,000 a year can be in serious want of funds. Moreover, if this deficiency really exists, it is generally regarded as the result of the squandering of revenue on an extravagant system of ‘prize fellowships’—that is, fellowships given as the reward merely for a high place in examination, and held by barristers, doctors, and civil servants, professors and lecturers in other Universities, and even successful men of business—persons who do not contribute in any way to the efficiency of the University as a teaching or as an investigating body.

We propose briefly to examine the University balance-sheet, the college system, and the question of the fellowships, and to endeavour to give the candid inquirer some ground for a judgment on the claims of Cambridge. But we must first discuss what is perhaps the most serious obstacle to the satisfaction of her needs. This obstacle is the belief, apparently ineradicable, that the older Universities teach and care for nothing but the ancient languages, theology, and mathematics. For the persistence of this belief the daily press and public speakers are in a great measure to blame. Scarcely a week passes without an allusion which betrays, if not a culpable levity, a most unfortunate ignorance. Cambridge men have listened with amazement to the covert attacks on Cambridge science, and have wondered how long it may be before Cambridge letters are also disparaged. Of late, too, another note has been heard; and, notwithstanding the just aspiration of the new Universities to a many-sided activity, alike in the literary and scientific fields, an attempt, which must be stigmatized as ungenerous and illiberal, has been made in the press and on the public platform to limit the functions of the ancient Universities, and to drive them back into the grooves of the thirties and forties, from which Cambridge, to say nothing of Oxford, has so completely escaped. Whatever the reason may be, it is at least certain that Cambridge is frequently written and spoken of as if she were still the Cambridge of 1850.

It has been suggested, even in responsible journals, that Oxford and Cambridge would do well to keep to the older lines of education, and to leave newer studies to their younger rivals. The obsession of men’s minds by an ideal which passed away half a century ago can alone account for the impression that the policy of restriction to the ancient learning is in any way possible, or has been possible for these fifty years. Those who know Cambridge may well be astonished that responsible persons should gravely speak of the University of Newton and Charles Darwin, of Maxwell and Rayleigh, as still shrouded in medieval shadow.

It cannot be too often repeated that since the Commission of 1850, or rather since the promulgation of the new statutes in 1856, the University has advanced without pause to claim as her own the whole field of modern knowledge; and that it is the rapidity of her advance which has depleted her treasury. The state of things before 1850 need here be referred to only for purposes of contrast. The only avenue to an honours degree was then the Mathematical Tripos, or, for students of classics, the Mathematical combined with the Classical Tripos. Science formed no part of the regular course of instruction. Adam Sedgwick himself, pre-eminent geologist as he afterwards became, knew nothing of geology when admitted to his professorship. When he was appointed to his chair, classics, mathematics, and, in a less degree, theology and law, were well endowed; but effective provision for modern studies or for science there was none. In 1851 was founded the Disney professorship of archÆology, and the creation of this chair may fairly be considered to be the first step towards the recognition of the sciences of ethnology and anthropology. The imperial value of ethnological and anthropological research is incontestable, and to this research no more important contribution has been made than by the bands of Cambridge travellers and students.

Mention has been made in the first place of the studies more closely related to the ‘humanities,’ because it does not seem generally to be realized how thoroughly even the ancient learning is to-day imbued by the scientific spirit. But, so early as the year 1851,[16] new avenues to an honours degree were opened by way of the Moral Sciences Tripos (embracing at present psychology, logic and methodology, political economy, ethics, metaphysical and moral philosophy and psychophysics), and the Natural Sciences Tripos (embracing chemistry, physics, mineralogy, geology, botany, zoology, human anatomy, and physiology). In 1857 the Sadlerian professorship of pure mathematics was founded by the consolidation of an old endowment; and Cayley was the first occupant of the chair. In 1863 the block of buildings known as ‘The Museums’ was commenced, with a view to providing accommodation for the professors of the natural sciences; additions were made to the original buildings in 1877, 1880, 1882, 1884, and 1890, as new branches of science became important. In 1858 the ‘Civil Law Classes’ were replaced by the Law Tripos; the professor of civil law and the Downing professor of the laws of England were given a colleague by the creation of the Whewell professorship of international law in 1867; and the Law School has since 1904 possessed a worthy habitation, built partly at the expense of the University, partly by the help of eminent Cambridge lawyers, and completed by the generous donation of the law library by Miss Squire. In 1866 the professorship of zoology was founded.

The School of Medicine has grown continuously; and its progress is associated with the great names, to mention no others, of Sir George Humphry, Sir George Paget, and Sir Michael Foster. In 1883 were founded the professorships of surgery, physiology, and pathology. The diploma of public health was instituted in 1875, and the diploma in tropical medicine—the first of its kind in the kingdom—in 1904. The latter diploma is destined to a brilliant future in Cambridge; and the University, together with the schools of tropical medicine in London and Liverpool, is doing much to raise the scientific standard of research in a study so vitally important to the teeming populations of our tropical possessions. The students attending the School of Medicine in Cambridge number nearly four hundred, despite the high standard of the attainments necessary for qualification. In 1904 important new buildings, with provision for bacteriology, pathology, and public health, were opened by the King.

The year 1869 was marked by the foundation of the Slade professorship of fine art, and the professorship of Latin. The endowment of the latter chair is but £300 a year, half provided by the University and half by the friends of the late Dr. Kennedy, the famous headmaster of Shrewsbury School. That the University should have had to wait till 1869 for the foundation of a chair of Latin, and that the parsimonious contribution of £150 a year was all that could be spared towards the stipend of the professor, scarcely lends colour to the prevailing belief that the University, kindly and naturally as she may be disposed towards the old learning, squanders on the teaching of ancient languages resources which ought to be otherwise employed. In 1875 the Historical Tripos was founded; and the School of History, starting under the influence of Seeley, has become one of the most popular avenues to an honours degree. A professorship of ancient history was founded in 1898.

The Historical Tripos already provided in some measure for the study of political science and political economy as component parts of a liberal education. But latterly the need for a more thorough study of economic conditions has been felt to be imperative for those who look forward to a career in the higher branches of business or in public life; while, as regards the professional economist, it has been realized that his work as a student must be carried much farther than has hitherto been customary, if he is to attack with success those problems which bring his science close to reality and to the needs of the practical man. A Tripos in Economics has therefore been established, the first examination for which was held in 1905. The advanced portion of it includes such subjects as modern methods of production, transport and marketing, trusts, the recent development of joint-stock companies, railway and shipping organization and rates, banking systems, stock exchanges, investment markets, international aspects of credit and currency, tariffs and bounties; and it is expected that, as in the second parts of most other triposes, a mass of new work, the result of current research, not yet available in text-books, will be placed before the students.

The Medieval and Modern Languages Tripos dates from 1886. It provides for the study of English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, and Russian. A colloquial test has recently been added. The Semitic Languages Tripos was established in 1878; the Indian Languages Tripos was founded in 1879, and merged in the Oriental Languages Tripos in 1895. The University founded a professorship of Sanskrit in 1867; and a chair of Chinese has existed since 1888. The University possesses the finest Chinese library in the world outside of China, the gift of Sir Thomas Wade. Provision is made for the teaching of Arabic, Persian, Turkish, Hausa, Burmese, and the Indian vernaculars of Bengali, Hindustani, Marathi, and Tamil. The teaching of living Oriental languages for the benefit of practical students is carefully co-ordinated under a recently appointed director of studies; and not only are the most necessary languages taught in their living forms by competent scholars, but these latter are assisted by a staff of carefully selected native rÉpÉtiteurs. Towards the expenses of this work the University contributes about £2,800 a year. A professorship of Anglo-Saxon was founded in 1878.

In 1871 the chair of experimental physics was founded, a chair held in succession by Clerk Maxwell, Lord Rayleigh, and J. J. Thomson; and in 1874 the famous Cavendish laboratory, the munificent gift of its late chancellor to the University, was opened. The laboratory was designed by Maxwell; and the chancellor himself, soon after its completion, provided all the instruments which were immediately required. In 1894 the area of the laboratory was increased, the cost being defrayed, in part, by a sum of £2,000 saved by Professor Thomson out of fees received from students; but the constant pressure on the available space by research students coming from all quarters of the globe rendered further extension urgently necessary, an extension which Lord Rayleigh’s generous gift of the Nobel Prize has now enabled the University to undertake. Astronomy has a traditional home in Cambridge; and the observatory, which in 1706 found a strange temporary site over the gateway of Trinity College, began to be built on its present site in 1822. The observatory, which takes its regular share of the work mapped out for the observatories of Europe, has received important additions in the shape of both building and equipment in recent years.

In 1875 the professorship of mechanism and applied science was established; and in 1878 the first engineering workshops were built in the University, and fitted with machine tools and other necessary equipment. In 1894 the new engineering laboratories were opened during the tenure of the professorship by Dr. Ewing, now director of naval education. In 1894, also, the first examination for the Mechanical Sciences Tripos, which gives a degree in honours to students of engineering, was held. In 1899 the generosity of Mrs. Hopkinson and her family made possible the addition of a much needed new wing to the laboratory. The buildings of the department now contain lecture-room accommodation which seats about 360 students simultaneously, a drawing-office for a class of ninety, two rooms for elementary heat and mechanics, a boiler-room, an engine-room with ten heat-engines of different types, arranged so that the measurement of all quantities concerned may be systematically made by the students, a large room for dealing with strength of materials and with hydraulics, a dynamo-room fitted with various kinds of dynamos, a motor-room fitted with motors of all the usual types, and several other rooms for special purposes. The greater part of the staff have had practical engineering experience of some kind; and it is usual during the long vacation for one or two members of the staff, as well as a number of the students, to go into a drawing-office or into works in order to keep in touch with practice. The school numbers at present more than 250 students, and supplies young engineers with a scientific training to various public services, as well as to mechanical and electrical firms.

The University chemical laboratory was built in 1887; and, while planning it, the professor of chemistry spent some months in visiting the newest laboratories on the Continent and in America. The importance of botany has of late years so greatly increased that its study is represented in Cambridge by a professor, a reader, and two University lecturers, besides demonstrators, assistant demonstrators, and attendants. In 1904 botany was housed in a separate building of its own, the finest devoted to that science in the United Kingdom, and one of the finest in Europe. The physiology of plants, bacteriological research, and the cultivation of hybrids and seedlings, are completely provided for. The extensive botanic garden belonging to the Senate is at the disposal of the staff and the students, the more distinguished of whom, after completing their degree course in Cambridge, start on a course of research in this country or abroad. The importance of the department as touching agriculture on its scientific side can hardly be overestimated.

The professorship of agriculture was founded in 1899, and endowed for a term of years by the munificence of the Worshipful Company of Drapers, a body which, with commendable breadth of view, recognizes alike the importance of applied scientific instruction for the artisan and of scientific investigation in all forms of the national activity. The department of agriculture is conducted on the most practical and progressive lines. It provides instruction in the principles of agriculture for the sons of landowners, farmers, and others. It conducts experiments on crops and live stock, making every effort to secure the intelligent co-operation of farmers. The University experimental farm, for the use of which the department is indebted to the generosity of a member of Clare College, has an area of 140 acres. The County Councils of Cambridgeshire and nine neighbouring counties co-operate in the work and assist it by subsidies. The field experiments of the department extend over ten counties. Parties of farmers visit the experimental plots every season in order to see the results of the experiments and to discuss them with members of the staff; and reports which summarize these results are widely distributed in the districts concerned. Of the suitability of Cambridge as a site for a school of agriculture, and of the importance of the work undertaken by the school, it may be well to leave the late professor to speak for himself.

In considering the development of all these departments, and the foundation of the chairs and other teaching posts made necessary by them, it must be remembered that the professorships already existing before 1850 included, among others, those of chemistry, anatomy, botany, geology, mineralogy, medicine, physic, political economy, moral philosophy, modern history, Arabic, and music; that these chairs had, before the Commission of 1850, no very important duties attached to them; and that in the last fifty years each has been adapted to its place in the University system, and each has in turn become a new centre of activity round which, to use a convenient term unfamiliar in Cambridge, a ‘faculty’ has crystallized. To many important developments it has been possible to allude only in the most cursory manner. The merest mention must suffice for the diploma in geography; the diploma in mining engineering, with its provision for practical experience in mines in this country or abroad; the diploma in forestry, which is a logical outcome of the development of the botanical and agricultural schools; the provision for military studies, and the Day Training College for teachers. The latter has both a primary and a secondary department, and the certificate given by the University in the theory, history, and practice of education, and for practical efficiency, attracts teachers in great numbers from all parts of the country.

Development so wide and so rapid as that which we have sketched has been of necessity costly. The expenditure since 1862 on buildings devoted to science alone must have considerably exceeded £300,000, the greater part having taken place in the latter years of the period; and it must be remembered that the University has had also to equip and maintain the observatory, the cost of which is not included in the amount just mentioned, and to spend large sums on the University library. Except in one or two cases, in which a special benefaction fund had been appropriated to adornment by the desire of the benefactor, these buildings have been erected with the strictest regard to economy. The amount expended cannot be said to be an inordinate sum for a modern University to have spent on scientific buildings and equipment. Yet even this expenditure would have been impossible without external help.

The cost of the maintenance of the buildings erected and of the very inadequately paid staffs, now presses on the limits of the available income; and it is contended that but little more can be attempted for many years, if ever, without external aid. We will proceed, then, to a rough analysis of the resources of the University and colleges, and of the allotment of these resources. Before doing so, however, it may be well to state that the colleges provide adequately, but not extravagantly, for the teaching of classics and mathematics, for elementary teaching in many other subjects, and for individual assistance to the student and supervision of his work in the subjects taught in the University. The collegiate system also ensures a close contact and intercourse between teacher and student not otherwise or elsewhere attainable. The University, in its teaching aspect, may be regarded as an organization for providing instruction in all those branches of knowledge the teaching of which cannot be economically undertaken by the colleges. Thus, for the teaching of science, and for the provision of costly laboratories, the University is responsible; and the higher and more specialized teaching in most other departments is also provided by the University. The ancient endowments are, in the main, college endowments; but the history of the development of modern subjects is also the history of the development of the University; and it is the University rather than the colleges which is at present in need of substantial financial help. But to suppose that the colleges do not heartily co-operate in the University teaching would be erroneous; at the present time one college may be better organized than another for this particular purpose, but the colleges may safely be trusted soon to come into line.

The corporate income of the seventeen colleges is, roughly, £310,000 per annum. This, with a sum of about £52,000 (called the Tuition Fund), received annually from the lecture and laboratory fees of the 3,200 students, and £30,000 received annually by the University for degree and other fees, constitutes the whole available income for college as well as University purposes, if we except certain Trust Funds for the endowment of some professorships, and those funds of the nature of charities of which the colleges are merely administrators.

The corporate income of the colleges consists of (1) endowments, usually in the form of estates, which bring in £220,000 a year; (2) fees, rent of rooms, profits on kitchens, and so forth, which bring in £90,000. But the colleges are great landowners and have the outgoings of landowners. Though the expenses of the estate management are only about 7 per cent. of the revenues arising from the estates, yet £130,000 a year are spent on management, repairs, and improvements on the estates, rates and taxes,[17] interest on loans, and the maintenance of the costly college buildings in Cambridge. Many of the latter are national monuments of surpassing interest, the proper care of which is a duty to the nation. When allowance has been made for the inevitable expenditure under these heads, there is left only £180,000 for all other purposes. The fellowships and the stipends of the heads of houses absorb £78,000; and the contributions of the colleges towards scholarships, as determined in the main by statute, and as distinct from any separate endowment, account for £32,000.

An analysis of the distribution of the fellowship money may conveniently be deferred for the moment; but it may be stated that the sum spent on scholarships finds, inside the University at least, many critics. The expenditure on scholarships is undoubtedly, however, in the main, a fulfilment of the intentions of their founders, and, if we may judge by the recent expenditure of County Councils, is in accordance with public feeling. After deduction of fellowships and scholarships, there is left of the corporate income a sum of £70,000. Of this sum, £32,000,[18] or nearly one-half, is paid as a direct contribution to the University; but, as will be seen immediately, the colleges contribute to the University in many other ways. Of the £38,000 remaining, £4,000 goes to supplement the Tuition Fund of £52,000 received from the students as fees; the sum of £56,000 so obtained is applied to the provision of college and University lecturers. A large proportion of these fees is paid to the scientific departments of the University; and of the fees so paid the greater part is assigned as a contribution to the maintenance of the several departments, and not, directly at least, to the payment of lecturers.

Deducting the sum of £4,000, contributed by the colleges to the Tuition Fund, we have left over of the corporate income a sum of £34,000, or about £2,000 per college, available for the payment of college officers and servants, the expenses of the college libraries, printing, and other expenses. If, then, it can be shown that the £78,000 spent on the fellowships is not extravagantly allotted—and of this more below—it is clear that the colleges can contribute but little more than they do at present to the University teaching.

An idea of the serious effect of the fall of agricultural rent on the college incomes may be gathered from the fact that one of the larger colleges has in the last thirty years suffered a loss of revenue amounting to £10,000 a year.

We now turn to the question of the fellowships. The sum of £78,000 was in 1904 divided among seventeen heads of houses and about 315 ordinary fellows. Of this sum the heads of houses received among them, as far as can be ascertained, the not excessive amount of £15,000, very unequally divided. The average stipend of a fellow is thus about £200 per annum. When the last Commission sat, the maximum stipend of a fellow was fixed at £250; and it was thought that this sum would usually be reached. But, except in the case of one or two colleges, which are the fortunate possessors of town property, the maximum is now never reached; and in certain cases the value of a fellowship has fallen to less than £100 per annum. Of the 315 fellows, some 245 were in 1904 resident and some 70 non-resident. Of the residents, about 225 were holding some University or college office, educational or administrative. Of the non-residents, and of the residents who were holding no office, the greater number had earned their fellowships by holding some qualifying position, such as a lectureship for a given number of years, usually twenty. Among the non-residents, in addition to fellows who hold their fellowships as a pension, were to be found students who are prosecuting research away from Cambridge; such students are, as a rule, liable to be summoned to reside, as college exigencies may demand. Several other non-residents are fellows who have but recently received appointments away from Cambridge; their fellowships will, under the new statutes, lapse in a year or two.

The analysis shows that the number of ‘prize fellowships’ is small; and it is believed that they are steadily vanishing. To assist the reader in obtaining a general idea of what is done with the fellowships, the combined result in the case of two colleges is here given. The two colleges in question have been chosen because the writers happen to be in a position to account for the occupant of every fellowship in each college. As will be seen, the two colleges render most valuable assistance to the University; and they have practically rid themselves of the burden of prize fellowships imposed on them by the Commission of 1856. The two colleges dispose, according to the University calendar of 1905-6, of forty fellowships between them. Of these, five are pension fellowships; five are held by professors in the University, as part of their stipend; twelve are held by University lecturers, demonstrators, or other University officers; eleven are held by college officers or lecturers; five are held by research students in Cambridge; two junior fellowships are held by non-residents. One of the latter was recently appointed to a professorship in another University, and his fellowship has just lapsed; the other holds a prize fellowship. It is unlikely that, when his fellowship lapses, another prize fellow will be elected in his place. There are in residence at each of the two colleges a number of University lecturers and officers, and of college lecturers, for whom no fellowship can be found. Speaking generally of the fellowships allotted to college teaching, it may be said that, with the help of a portion of the Tuition Fund, they enable the colleges to provide the college lecturers with stipends on which an unmarried man, occupying rooms in college, may comfortably live. When we turn to the University lectureships, there is often another tale to tell.

The University income, which has to bear almost the whole cost of modern developments, is made up of the following items: matriculation, degree, examination, and other fees, £30,000; direct contributions from colleges, £32,000; income from endowments, £2,000—£64,000 in all.

In 1904 the University, in the course of its ordinary work, expended £65,300, distributed roughly as follows:

There are forty-four professors, very few of them receive £800 or more a year (including fellowships), while the lowest limit of a professor’s stipend, unless he holds a fellowship, is about £90 a year. The average annual income of a professor is not more than £550, and of the yearly revenue of £24,000 required to produce this average, £7,000 are paid in the shape of fellowships by the colleges, and about £4,600 from the income of special trust funds and other benefactions, one payment of £800 a year being for a term of years only. One or two professors at most receive a proportion of the fees paid for lectures and laboratories in their respective departments. There are twelve University readers (or sub-professors). The new statutes contemplated for a reader the salary of £400 a year, but, owing to the inadequacy of the University income, none receives more than £300, and in several cases only £100 is paid. There are fifty-three University lecturers whose stipends range from £200 a year to £50, and it is melancholy to note how many of these receive the lower sum, without any assistance from endowments, such as fellowships or the like. There are thirteen University teachers, almost all of them appointed by the Board for Indian Civil Service studies, and occupied, in the main, in teaching eastern dialects; and there are forty-four demonstrators, curators, and superintendents of museums, whose stipends range from £200 a year to nothing at all.

The incomes of some of these gentlemen are supplemented by fellowships, of others by a share of lecture fees; a few, too, may hold two such offices as curator and lecturer simultaneously. But, when the addition from all sources (about £8,000 from fees or special funds, and £13,000 from fellowships) has been made to the annual sum (£9,100) which the University has to give, we arrive at a total of about £30,000, giving the surprisingly low average income of £250 a year for any University teacher other than a professor. A few of the older teachers may hold some college office which adds a little to their income, but these are rare exceptions. There are no resources from which these incomes may be increased according to the service of the holder, and there is practically no provision for pension, except in the case of those teachers (less than one-half of the whole number) who hold fellowships, and may expect, after many years of service, to earn the right to retain them permanently.

In these circumstances it is not surprising that the University finds a difficulty in retaining many of its abler teachers. At the beginning of 1904 it was estimated that over two hundred professors and lecturers at other Universities (as distinct from University colleges) in the United Kingdom had been educated at Cambridge, and, though that is by no means a matter for regret, yet it is not too much to say that, in supplying this demand for teachers, the University has done a great national work for which she is poorly requited by her difficulty in retaining a sufficient staff for herself. Fortunately, when all other funds are exhausted, the fund of patriotism remains inexhaustible. It is not known how many fellows, possessed of some private means, and attached to the University through sheer love of their work, return their stipends to their colleges to be employed for the general good; such men are always anxious that their names should be concealed, but the present writers know of three in the restricted circle of their immediate personal friends. The special correspondent of the Times writes, on the occasion of the royal visit in 1904:

On a consideration of the analysis just made, and of the additional facts that the Reserve Fund set aside by the University for building and equipment during the years of her development is now exhausted, and that her borrowing powers have been seriously reduced, it would appear that further progress is almost entirely dependent on an increase of endowment.

A few years ago certain of the University authorities, foreseeing the approach of a financial crisis, put away their pride, and, with the countenance of the chancellor, boldly begged for help. Their appeal resulted in the collection of about £100,000, which has been expended on the erection and equipment of various buildings devoted to science, such as the museum of geology and the botany school, the University itself contributing a large proportion of the expense incurred. In the list of contributors occur the names of no fewer than 500 Cambridge men, past and present, out of a total of 620 names. This number is a sufficient retort to the suggestion which has been made that Cambridge does not help herself. It must be remembered, too, that a sum of about £14,000 a year is contributed by members of the Senate to the funds of the University and of the colleges for the privilege of continued membership, and that these fees are often paid out of very slender incomes on grounds which are, as a rule, purely patriotic.

In enumerating the needs of the various departments it is fitting that the older studies and their modern developments should be first passed in review, for, though in certain respects these studies are well equipped, and though the provision of what is necessary would not be so costly as in the case of science, yet, in the deficiency of income available for development, there is real danger that the humanities may be starved.

Theology is well endowed by the piety of former generations. Yet the present Bishop of Winchester, when Hulsean Professor of Divinity, pleaded for an increased stipend for the professors which would permit them to save enough to retire upon; and, in view of the small sum, £200 a year, which the University is able to pay to its pension fund, such an increase cannot be said to be unreasonable. In law, a new post for the teaching of jurisprudence, or of jurisprudence combined with Roman law, is the chief requirement. The teaching of Latin and Greek is largely and effectively supplemented by the provision made by the colleges, but the demand for a professorship instead of a readership in classical archÆology cannot be called extravagant, while it is little short of scandalous that the University possesses no professor, and can make no permanent provision for the study of ancient philosophy.

The teaching of Oriental languages is perhaps more dependent than that of any other subject on the self-sacrificing generosity of the staff. Though but a nominal stipend and a nominal duty attach to his chair, the Lord Almoner’s professor of Arabic voluntarily undertakes a large share of the teaching. The payment of the Talmudic reader, depending mainly on the generosity of a private person, is guaranteed only during the tenure of the present reader. The cost of the colloquial teaching of spoken Arabic, Turkish, and Persian by native instructors is guaranteed, and sometimes in part provided, by the Sir Thomas Adams professor of Arabic. The professor of Chinese has the inadequate stipend of £200; and the professorship terminates with the tenure of the present holder. Apart from the necessity of providing teaching for practical students, the proper care of the Chinese library alone renders the permanence of the professorship a necessity. There is no professorship or readership of Japanese. The stipend of the present lecturer in Persian is inadequate. Egyptology is not provided for, although there is a fine collection of mortuary objects in the Fitzwilliam Museum; and Assyriology, although the professor of Assyriology at King’s College, London, lives in Cambridge, is wholly unrepresented. No provision is made for the teaching of the Iranian dialects. Altogether some £2,000 a year could well be spent in Oriental languages alone.

There is no chair of English literature in the University. The professorship of Anglo-Saxon is a recent endowment. By the exertions of the occupant of that chair a sum of £2,100 has been collected, which yields an endowment of £60 a year for an English lectureship. To this small stipend the University adds £50 a year. It is not surprising that the distinguished student who has so long occupied the post should at last have been attracted to London by a higher stipend.

French and German are represented by two readers, who in the last twenty years have taken a large share in the development of a sound and growing school. In the provision for the teaching of modern languages, Cambridge ought not to be behind the northern Universities; and it is most desirable that professorships should be established in at least French and German. The University is indebted to a private fund for a small endowment for the lectureship in Russian and other Sclavonic tongues. This lectureship should be made permanent; and lectureships should be established in Spanish and Italian.

As in the case of classics and mathematics, the University teaching in history is largely supplemented by the colleges; but the Regius professor pleads for an additional reader and two lecturers. A central building with professors’ rooms and lecture-rooms and accommodation for the professorial library is urgently required.

The newly-established school of economics and politics is in urgent need of three or four lectureships, to which definite duties in research should be attached, in order to extend the present range of economic study, and to bring it close to the great problems of modern industry. While in the Universities of Edinburgh, London, Manchester, Leeds, North and South Wales, and Montreal, political economy is taught by economists trained at Cambridge, their alma mater is starved of the means necessary to produce their successors.

The anthropological collections are, for want of space, in a chaotic state. The University is fortunate in possessing many ardent workers; and its collections are most valuable. The existing museum of archÆology and ethnology is, however, quite inadequate for their display, or even for their storage; and a disused warehouse has been hired at Newnham to accommodate the further collections which generous donors continue to present. To such an extent has it been necessary to carry the economy practised in this department that the shelves of the warehouse have been made from old boxes. A site for a new museum has been provided by the University, and plans have been prepared; but without the help of extraneous benefactions it is impossible to build at present. An adequate building would cost perhaps £25,000. The removal of the museum to a new site would set free space greatly needed for other purposes. The Disney professor of archÆology and the curator of the archÆological museum plead also for the foundation of a chair, or at least a readership, for the comparative study of religions; and, in view of the relations of the Empire to every kind of cult, it is scarcely creditable that neither of the older Universities makes any provision for this study.

The present staff consists of the Disney professor of archÆology, and a lecturer on ethnology with a salary of £50 a year. The only accommodation for the latter is a room in the basement of the medical school, where he takes classes in practical work. Physical anthropology is associated more directly with the department of human anatomy, and is represented by another lecturer at £50 a year. The collection of skulls brought together by Professor Macalister affords unrivalled material for demonstrations; and, as two recent volumes from the pen of Dr. Duckworth show, good use is made of the material. The University has recently recognized the importance of anthropology by adopting a scheme for granting degrees for research in this subject.

The growing importance of the architect’s profession, and the widespread recognition of the fact that the young architect must have a preliminary scientific training, point to the desirability of establishing a school of architecture at Cambridge, resting on the one hand on the engineering school, and on the other on the Slade professorship of fine arts, and the school of archÆology. The school might be organized on lines similar to those of the medical school; and the young architect would pass his early years of professional study on thoroughly practical lines, in the midst of admirable examples of almost all the different styles.

In 1877 Cambridge led the way in that difficult science called sometimes physiological psychology, sometimes experimental psychology, and sometimes psychophysics. In that year the present professor of mental philosophy and logic, and Dr. Venn, made a vigorous effort to establish a psychophysical laboratory. They unfortunately failed; had they succeeded, Cambridge would have possessed the first laboratory of this kind in the world. In 1878 Wundt opened his laboratory at Leipzig; and there are now some seven psychophysical laboratories in Germany, two in Russia, ten in the United States, one in Copenhagen, one in Paris, one in Geneva, and one in Canada. It is not that psychophysics is not studied in Cambridge, for Dr. Rivers, the lecturer on the subject, and Dr. Myers, have formed a school there which is second to none in Great Britain; this school has recently supplied a reader to Oxford. But the work is done under most discouraging circumstances. The laboratory is at present established in a dilapidated cottage in Mill Lane and in an adjacent disused granary. Further and better provision for this growing subject is urgent; and the present lectureship should be converted into a readership. The interest which is taken in the subjects under the control of the Board of Moral Science is shown by the successful launching of the Journal of Psychology, the first number of which was published by the University Press in 1904. Lecture-rooms and a departmental library are wanted; and the establishment of a readership in pedagogy should not be long delayed.

In mathematics two new professorships are needed, one in pure mathematics and one in applied mathematics; two of the present lecturers should be made readers; and the salaries of all the lecturers should be raised to £100 a year. One pressing need is that for two lecture-rooms, with an adjacent library and a museum of mathematical models. Cambridge is perhaps the most renowned mathematical school in the world; yet its provision for the accommodation of the staff is far behind that of the chief American Universities. A munificent benefactor has recently left a sum of £5,000 for repairs, etc., to the Newall telescope; but there is no stipend forthcoming for Mr. Newall, who for sixteen years has discharged the duties of observer without remuneration. The Lowndean and Plumian professors pay the salary of a demonstrator.

The Cavendish laboratory, owing to the position it has for years taken in the promotion of physical research, is overcrowded with students and researchers. Lord Rayleigh has most generously given to the University the Nobel prize gained by him in 1904. Of this benefaction, £5,000 have been assigned as a contribution towards the desired new wing; but money will be required for maintenance; and the professor estimates that a sum of £7,500 is now wanted for instruments, machinery, and laboratory fittings. The professor of chemistry asks for more apparatus and higher stipends for his teachers. He draws attention to the need for a metallurgical laboratory, the provision of which, in view of the recent establishment of a diploma in mining engineering, is urgent. Mineralogy asks only for a trained attendant and £35 a year; but for meteorology there is no real provision.

The Sedgwick museum, in which the department of geology is now housed, has involved much expense in furnishing. Although the existing furniture was all retained, there is still a demand for more cabinets; and Professor Hughes would like to spend £2,800 on these alone, while a large sum should be set apart for maintenance, wages, and the increase of stipends. The demands of botany are not yet completely satisfied. A readership to deal with the newly recognized study of scientific forestry has recently been created.

In zoology, if we leave out of account the need for higher stipends for teachers and higher wages for attendants, which runs like a thread through all the departments, there are two chief requirements. The first is for a new or, at any rate, a greatly enlarged museum. It is doubtful if the existing site is large enough to allow an adequate increase to the present structure; and to build a new building on another site would probably cost £30,000; nevertheless, with the ever-increasing collections housed in rooms already overstocked, this expenditure must soon be faced.

A branch of experimental science dealing with the study of variation and heredity in plants and animals has recently arisen, and has already attained very considerable proportions in Cambridge. It seems, indeed, that we are entering on a period when such studies will absorb the energies of most of the younger biological students. Under Mr. Bateson some twelve researchers are already at work following out Mendel’s law in many varieties of plant and animal. The extreme importance of these studies, which, if they prove a key to heredity, will place in man’s hands an instrument as powerful as Watt’s application of steam, is shown by the fact that Mr. Biffen has already discovered that susceptibility to rust in wheat is Mendelian, and is thus a property which may be eliminated by breeding. For all these studies land is required, as well as a greenhouse, outbuildings, and a trained gardener. None of these is as yet attainable.

The recent discoveries of the protozoic origin of malaria, sleeping-sickness, and other human and many other animal diseases, has directed attention both to the protozoa, with their complicated life-histories, and to the insects which convey them from one creature to another. Both protozoa and insects are highly specialized groups of animals. The establishment, by the aid of the Quick bequest, of a chair of protozoology will do something to meet the necessities of the case, so far as the protozoa are concerned; but some provision for the study of the insects is still needed.

A chair of physiological chemistry is urgently wanted. The pressing problems of the day in physiology require a chemical solution. Remarkable strides have already been made in this subject; the interaction of the various tissues of the body by means of the blood, the functions of the ductless glands, the problems of immunity, are all being worked out upon a chemical basis. In this country there are but two professors of physiological chemistry, whereas in Germany there are eleven, in Austria eight, in France six. That Great Britain is lamentably behind in this branch of learning is even more markedly shown when we consider the output of original memoirs. In 1903 over 3,000 papers, written by some 2,500 workers, were published; to this total the United Kingdom contributed no more than seventy. Cambridge has produced many brilliant physiologists; but the school cannot afford the outlay for even a necessary piece of apparatus costing £10; and the demonstrators pay, out of their pittances, part of the wages of their attendants.

The new medical schools, opened by the King in March, 1904, are but a portion of the original plan; and, until the remaining laboratories can be erected (at a probable cost of about £12,000), the various departments must necessarily be cramped. Many more teachers in special subjects are wanted, and the need of a professorship, or at least a readership, in hygiene is pressing. A new lecture-room is wanted in the department of human anatomy, which at present shares a room with physiology. A considerable sum is also needed for instruments, fittings, attendants, and libraries.

The school of engineering needs provision in metallurgy, mining subjects, and naval architecture; of the latter, in the greatest shipbuilding country of the world, but two chairs—one at Glasgow, and one at Newcastle-on-Tyne—exist. New workshops and engine-rooms are also greatly needed. The present workshops date from 1878, and are far too small for the demands on them. The provision of a sum of money which can be expended by the professor on the encouragement of research is much needed.

The department of agriculture is fairly well staffed, but at present is obliged to carry on its indoor work in four rooms in the basement of the chemical laboratory. The amount of research carried on by the staff has fully justified them in establishing the Journal of Agricultural Science, which appeared for the first time in 1904. This is the only periodical in the country devoted entirely to scientific agriculture. A laboratory for agriculture is a most pressing necessity; a site is available, but at present there is not sufficient money for the building, which, including provision for maintenance, would cost £20,000. The Drapers’ Company has generously promised a conditional £5,000 towards this sum, and some £12,000 has been collected from other sources.

Besides numerous smaller needs, there are two of primary importance which have not yet been mentioned. The first is that for the provision of examination rooms. The University examinations are at present held in the Guildhall, the Corn Exchange, and other hired rooms, often badly lighted, badly heated, and badly ventilated, and in no case well adapted to the purpose of conducting examinations. The hiring and arranging of the rooms costs the University at least £450 a year.

The other great need is some adequate provision for that priceless national treasure, the University library. Mr. J. W. Clark has himself inaugurated an appeal on its behalf. The list of donors which he is already able to print is headed by His Majesty the King; and a sum of over £18,000 has already been collected. This sum includes a donation of £5,000 from the Goldsmiths’ Company, and £2,700 assigned by Lord Rayleigh from the Nobel prize; to the remainder, resident masters of arts have largely contributed. When it has been shown by their contributions how keenly the residents feel on the subject of the library, it is hoped that some generous measure of help may be forthcoming from hands more able to give it. The library is the mainspring of University activity; and its well-being and good organization are important to all departments alike. Every member of the Senate, and every other person entitled to use the library, have access to the shelves; and no serious student, whether a member of the University or not, is refused.

But, in its restricted area, the library cannot expand further; and the result is congestion and inevitable disorder. The furniture and fitting up of the rooms recently rendered available for the library will cost some £15,000. Towards this expenditure the Financial Board has been able to grant only £5,000, spread over three years. The cost of furnishing a reading and reference-room is estimated at from £800 to £1,000. Further, an increase of the staff is urgently needed. The library grows at the rate of about 11,000 books per annum; and there are considerable arrears of cataloguing to be overtaken. The magnificent gift of Lord Acton’s library, for which the University is indebted to Mr. Carnegie and Mr. John Morley, has involved considerable outlay. The number of volumes presented is about 59,000; the binding, cataloguing, printing of titles, and the provision of bookcases will cost about £8,000, to which the University has contributed £6,900. Gifts such as these are of priceless value to Cambridge; but they entail heavy expenditure. Additional assistants, moreover, are needed to look after them; and every new room added to the library increases the cost of maintenance. Altogether, it is estimated that a sum of £21,200 is required for present use; and that £3,800 a year is required for additions to the staff, the purchase and binding of books, and for the additional expense entailed by the Acton library. This annual income, if capitalized, represents a sum of £126,700.

Modern education is a costly thing; and when, in 1904, the heads of departments in the University made an estimate of the outlay necessary to place their several provinces in a state of efficiency, their deliberate and responsible calculations showed that a sum of £270,000 was required for building and equipment, and an additional annual income of £38,000 for the increase of salaries on the very moderate scale suggested, and for maintenance; in all, say a capital sum of a million and a half. Even this estimate takes no account of the desirability of providing pensions for professors who have reached the age of seventy. As the published list of benefactions shows, Cambridge has reason to be grateful to her recent benefactors. But to raise an endowment comparable to that of £1,400,000 which the Johns Hopkins University received from private munificence seems in this country to be hardly within the bounds of possibility.

Had an appeal such as that issued by Cambridge been made in the United States, there is little doubt that it would have met with a prompt response. There is in Montreal a University, officered largely by Cambridge men, and equipped with a princely magnificence of which Cambridge dares not even dream. Dr. Ewing’s comment is pertinent. ‘It is good,’ said he, ‘to see the colonial daughter sitting down to so lavish a table; but is it well that the alma mater at home should be left looking wistfully at the crumbs?’ Nearer home, Mr. Carnegie has shown what a large-minded liberality can do for the Scottish Universities. A great benefactor who would free the University of Cambridge from a sordid struggle, in which every pound spent on development has to be laboriously begged, would earn an enduring fame in the annals of British education. It has been the earnest desire of the authors of this paper to show that the University is not unworthy of such generosity; that she has displayed great courage and great self-denial in facing modern conditions; and that her reputed wealth is a fiction, while her poverty is a grim fact.