Abstract
ONE of the most valuable addresses at the Social Science Congress at Liverpool was that by the Rev, Mark Pattison, last Friday, on the subject of Education. He confined his remarks mainly to Lord Sandon's Bill and the Oxford and Cambridge Bills. In passing, however, he spoke in the strongest terms of the miserable state of the middle-class schools, “the wretched destitution of all intellectual nourishment in which the middle classes of England grow up.” With regard to the Education Bill, Mr. Pattison showed that elementary education was in anything but a satisfactory condition, that as yet we have only the beginning of a school system. He then spoke at considerable length on the Oxford and Cambridge Bills, which our readers will remember were withdrawn last session on the distinct understanding that they should be introduced next session. Mr. Pattison referred to the scheme for endowing the University at the expense of the Colleges, and to Lord Salisbury's declaration that one purpose of the measure was “to promote science and learning.” Mr. Pattison went on to say:—“When the Oxford Bill got down into the Commons the member of the Cabinet who had the charge of it there hastened to disavow any such intentions on the part of his Government. Lord Salisbury's declaration had been made in the House of Lords, and in the Upper House it did not seem altogether absurd to speak of science and learning in connection with a University. But such flimsy and. unpractical notions are not for the atmosphere of the Lower House. Members of the Government in the Lower House vied with each other in eagerly repudiating any intention of making the University a seat of learning and science. This had been an unauthorised escapade of their impulsive colleague in the Lords. This disavowal was well received in the House. Antagonism was half disarmed. The member of the teamed University of Oxford received the congratulations of the member of the learned University of London in having done with all that nonsense. The Bill that has been dropped was a Bill empowering certain commissioners to take funds now devoted to College purposes and devote them to university purposes. What these university purposes are is not stated—is not known—not known even to the promoters of the Bill. All that is known is that among those purposes is not the promotion of science and learning. This purpose, which was announced by Lord Salisbury, has been anxiously disavowed by Lord Salisbury's colleagues. In these circumstances it cannot be any great matter for regret that the Universities Bill should have been laid aside.”
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rev. Mark Pattison on University Reform . Nature 14, 550–552 (1876). https://doi.org/10.1038/014550a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/014550a0