R,CHARD MONCKTON MILNES was born in the year - OUDL Home

Cambridge in the 'Seventies 265was impossible. But internal debate had proved to acertainty that without external pressure nothing effectualwould be done. For any move to strengthen the Universitylarge sums of money would be required. The Statutesof 1860 had empowered Colleges to make voluntarycontributions to the University funds, but of this naivepermission the Colleges had not made use, and did notseem likely to do so. Public opinion therefore had to findexpression in Parliament if the necessary compulsion wasto be applied. It is worth noting that the Inquiry Commissionof 1872 was appointed by a Liberal Government,but its Report in 1874 had to be dealt with by a Conservativeone. I conjecture that the sagacity of Disraeliknew better than to impair the fortunes of his party byshelving an inevitable reform merely to gratify a fewacademic Die-hards of doubtful merit and undoubtedappetite for preferments. The Executive Commission of1877 was the result. The Act provided for compulsion.Passive resistance on the part of a College would onlyinvolve the imposition of new Statutes framed by theCommissioners without regard to the wishes of theFellows.At the end of 1877 we had to set to work discussing ourpolicy; that is, what changes we were ready to proposeourselves, and how we could persuade the Commissionersto be content with so much. On this latter aim a gooddeal of ingenuity was vainly spent in some Colleges. TheCommissioners stood firm, particularly on points offinance, and the scheme for College contributions to theUniversity was not modified in deference to College protests.Nor was due allowance made for a possible fall inCollege incomes, which was already in sight and haddisastrous effects after 1879. But for the moment it wasthe dreadful waste of time and energy in College meetingsthat was most deplorable. In these wearisome debates