These Triposes are carefully regulated by Boards of Studies, and it is through them that the University directs the reading of the Undergraduates: they are held in the highest credit, not only on account of the ability and integrity with which they are conducted, but also because the candidates are very numerous and able. But if men did not depend on their place in the Tripos for their Fellowship, they would not concentrate, as they now do, their energies on the Degree; they would look to another Examination of a different character as the all-important one, and the Degree would take only a secondary place in their estimation.

Men who felt a little disheartened about the time of their Degree-a case far from uncommon-would be apt to excuse themselves from going in for Honours. This we can infer from what little experience on the point we possess. And if it once came to be thought that our Tri poses did not comprise all the ablest men or represent their utmost efforts, the value of our distinctions would soon be gone.

The proposed system would bear particularly hard on men going to the bar, or indeed into any profession; they would constantly be haunted by misgivings as to whether their chance of a Fellowship was worth the time they were sacrificing for it; many would linger on in a most unsettled state of mind from one Examination to another; and those who failed, who would of course be the majority, would bitterly regret the time they had thus wasted. When a man has gone on reading for a Fellowship until he is twentysix, and then thinks of turning to professional studies, it appears to him as if he were never to have done with learning, never were to get to the real business of his life; and if he be also disheartened by failure, he, in most cases, abandons his proposed active career for a much less ambitious one. Under these circumstances it would frequently happen that men destined for the bar—if a good connexion awaited them-would determine not to risk their three years for the chance of a Fellowship; and if the Fellowship were a terminable one, of course they would be much less disposed to make the venture. When Fellowships are given by Examination, we do find, in practice, that these results follow. Sometimes Scholars of Trinity, of high Degree, never sit for a Fellowship at all. The existence of such cases shows how unwilling men are to leave their College; for such men knew all along what they had to

expect, and they might have migrated and obtained a Fellowship elsewhere.

Another very weighty objection to the suggestion of the Commissioners is, that it would give a great advantage to those who had sufficient means to maintain themselves without taking Pupils. It must make a great difference whether a man can give his whole time to his own reading; whether, for instance, a Mathematician can give a couple of years quietly to the study of Classics, or whether he only gets two hours in the evening to himself after a harassing day's work. This is no objection to the plan of an open Examination as long as it is confined to a few Colleges, because those who go thither can take this into consideration in forming their original plans, or they can migrate as Undergraduates but if this system were made universal, cases of great injustice would arise.

Again: a College, having a Fellowship vacant, and being in want of a Tutor or Lecturer, selects the fittest man it can find; very often they thus elect a man from another College, having previously satisfied themselves by testimonials and personal inquiries that he has the qualifications of temper, address, and interest in teaching, which are essential for Tutorial Offices; but, under the proposed plan, they would be driven to take the man who did best in an Examination, and we know that very often such a person would be entirely unfit for the purpose. Moreover, under the proposed plan, a College would have no interest in having Fellowships to bestow; now they look on vacancies as their capital, and hold out inducements to their Fellows to vacate, by augmenting Livings and the like. New Fellowships have also been founded from this motive; but if they had to elect by an open Examination, they would not care to have vacancies at all, and their whole policy in this respect would be changed. Finally, to put an objection of a different kind, this plan would weaken the warm and friendly interest which College Tutors and Lecturers take in the promising young men whom they expect shortly to have in their own body as their associates, and probably their assistants. Their Tutorial exertions, of course, they would not slacken; but the close relation which rests on the anticipation of their future tie would be broken; and thus the able and leading man, in whom all the College takes some pride, and whose influence may be

exerted so much for good, would not be the valuable link he now is between the Tutor and the rest of his Pupils.

When, to these objections, we add the consideration that there is now no complaint of deserving men not getting rewarded, or undeserving men being made Fellows; and thus that with all this change the same men would, with very few exceptions, be Fellows under either system, our case seems sufficiently made out.

SECTION III.

WE next have to consider the proposed limitation of the duration of tenure of Fellowships, and some questions which arise out of it bearing on the provisions for maintaining a tutorial staff for the College.

The suggestions submitted to us are as follows:

The Commissioners incline to the opinion that all Fellowships, without distinction of lay or clerical, should be tenable only for a limited period, (say ten years from the time of taking the M.A. degree): but with an exception enabling Fellows (with the consent of two-thirds of the whole body of the Master and Fellows) to retain their Fellowships beyond this period (and in such case without the obligation of celibacy) if holding any University Professorship or Public Lectureship, or the Office of Tutor, Assistant Tutor, Lecturer, or Bursar within the College. Provided that there should be a limit fixed by the Statutes of each College to the number of Fellows that may enjoy this privilege at one and the same time.

They would further be disposed to suggest that where a Professor or Public Lecturer in the University, or a Tutor, Assistant Tutor, Lecturer, or Bursar within the College, is allowed to retain his Fellowship in the manner above proposed (in Clause 2), he should retain it for a limited period only (say five years), but with a power of renewal (once only) for a like period, with the consent of two-thirds of the Master and Fellows as before: provided that, after ten years active discharge of his duties as such Professor, Tutor, &c., he may (with the same consent as before) be permitted to retain his Fellowship for life and as before free from the obligation of celibacy. But if he avail himself of such privilege he shall not retain the right of pre-option to a College living.

I may say that, when in 1853 my attention was first called to these subjects, I advocated in my own College a limitation of tenure, and that since then, from having watched, with this idea before me, the workings of College systems, and observed how

Fellowships are regarded by parents and Undergraduates, I have entirely changed my opinion. I have already considered the effect of this suggestion on the constitution of the governing body, and will now examine their bearing on the prizes and attractions we have to offer. I believe that our emoluments are disposed of to much greater advantage in this respect under the present system. A good deal has been said on both sides as to whether our Fellowships will lose value in the eyes of the Undergraduates or not by becoming tenable only for a certain time. But the main question is not as to how the students, but as to how their parents will regard them.

The most valuable action of Fellowships as a source of life to the University is not that they spur Students to work when here, for that effect might be got at a cheaper rate, but that they induce the parents of promising youths to carry on their education to a higher point and send them to us. It is in this way that our Fellowships fill the higher forms in the Public Schools and the Honour Classes in those new Colleges and Universities which have no such emoluments of their own.

It may be true that some sanguine young men might think a ten years' Fellowship as good as one in perpetuity, fancying that before that time they would have ceased to need any assistance. But parents have no illusions of this kind; they know how quickly ten years go, and what the chances of professions are; they know the relief of feeling that their sons cannot be reduced to beggary if disabled by illness, and many of them know too how the feeling that he was resting on a support soon to be withdrawn would harass a man in his professional career, how often he would be on the point of abandoning it, and how very possible it would be for him to be left at the end of his term no better off than when he began, and without the power of betaking himself to anything else*.

Now since the average of tenure taken throughout the Uni

* The Commissioners make no positive suggestion with regard to the celibacy of Fellows, and therefore I shall not discuss this point, which has already been much before the public. I do not think that Undergraduates would value permission to marry very highly, and I am of opinion that parents would much prefer the present state of things. The temptation to an imprudent marriage which a Fellowship would then hold out, is the thing above all others to excite parental alarm.

versity is something less than ten years, at present, and since, even if we neglect the officials* and suppose these Fellowships to be vacated by marriage, on which point the Commissioners are silent, it would be little diminished under the proposed system; it follows that at present we get this advantage, that our Fellowships carry with them the attraction of being freeholds, while we get the bestowal of them as often as if they were of limited tenure. If the Fellowships are not vacated by marriage, of course what I have said will hold good to a greater extent.

The permission granted to College officers to marry and retain their Fellowships will, of course, very much diminish the number of vacancies, for it appears by the Calendar that one-third of the Fellowships are occupied by such officers. Moreover, since Tutors, &c. after twenty years' service might resign their office and retain their Fellowships for life, these persons would have to be added to the number of actual officials, and I conceive that this class would be very considerable, for many men would prefer residing at Cambridge with their family with the status and income of a Senior Fellow, to entering on a new kind of life in a country parish. Hence I think it likely that not more than half the Fellowships at any time would really be on the terminable tenure, and thus the average time of holding a Fellowship would be increased to nearly twenty years. This would cause a very serious decrease in the recurrence of vacancies.

A limitation too of tenure is sometimes urged, on the ground of its producing a more regular succession of vacancies. Now, if the system of open Examinations for Fellowships is adopted, there will be no object in this, even if it would do so; for it would be no advantage to a particular College to have vacancies, and from the number of foundations in the University the average of vacancies on the whole would probably be pretty steady.

But supposing this proposition, to which I have objected so strongly, to be abandoned, and the present system to continue; then I contend, First, That the proposed plan will not produce much more regularity than at present exists. Secondly, That a perfectly regular succession of vacancies would be of no great benefit. Thirdly, That without any such measures we shall get a sufficiently uniform succession of vacancies.

* Who would hold for life.