« AnteriorContinuar »
any prayer, though he may teach thus early; but by the pupils who attend the junior classes. A service, if it can be so called, necessarily confined to a few minutes, and to one division of students, would certainly not satisfy those who require the performance of public worship according to the liturgy of the Establish
ed Church. Indeed it would satisfy no one who deems public worship necessary in a course of education. We therefore think that the London University did wisely, in rather having none at all, than being content with the only substitute for it which could by possibility be had, in an institution avowedly formed for day scholars alone, And we think it equally clear, that the able and respectable persons at the head of King's College, will find it much better to do as their immediate predecessors bave done, and leave all day scholars to attepd religious worship at home, or in the churches and chapels frequented by their parents. For nearly the same arguments are applicable to any compulsory attendance upon divine service on the Sundays. It would tend little to promote the purposes which those have in view who conscientiously support the principle of combining religion with general education, that going to the College Chapel once a week should be made a condition, sine qua non, of being permitted to attend any given course of lectures. How far such compulsory observances, whether daily or weekly, are caloulated to further the cause of religion, and strengthen the affection towards the Church, even in resident students, has, we know, been doubted by those who have discussed the system adopted at the Universities; and there is perhaps little difference of opinion, that at any rate some better møde of enforcing this part of discipline might be devised. But with that inquiry we do not for the present meddle. If King's College, London, shall have inmates within its walls, like its namesake at Cambridge, it will come within the same rule as to religious discipline; and there will be no more difficulty in the one case than in the other upon this head. Nor does it seem to us that there can be any great objection on the score of dissenters, always supposing, what we may assume to be unquestionable, that the children of churchmen will in London be quite numerous enough to require all the accommodation which both the new seminaries can afford them. It may be urged, indeed, that the benefit of being educated within the walls will be confined to those who are in communion with the Established Church. But we have already answered this objection ; if any considerable body of churchmen conceive that attendance on the religious ordinances of the establishment is an essential part of education, they have just as good a right to provide a college where this plan is pursued, as a body of dissenters would
have to found a seminary where pupils were at once taught the various branches of knowledge, and obliged to attend the worship of the sect. The exclusion from the new College only affects those dissenters who are not satisfied with the tuition of day scholars. This they may have, either at the London University or the King's College; and if they require to be received as resident students, they must form some seminary connected with one or other of these institutions, so that they may be lodged and boarded without the walls, and there taught the religion, and attend on the worship, of their own communion; while within the walls they attend the various courses of lectures as day scholars-a plan already adopted by persons connected with the London University, as we shall presently have occasion to observe.' ,
The residence of pupils, therefore, appears to be almost the only material distinction between the two institutions. In every thing that regards the day scholars, they must be of necessity conducted upon nearly the same principles. Of course, there is an end of all the senseless clamour raised against having a College in London, and investing a jointstock .company with the government of a seminary of learning. The King's College is to be planted in London; and half the money raised is by shares, yielding, like those of the London University, an interest not
exceeding four per cent.' The government, too, is vested in a council of the subscribers and shareholders, together with certain official governors,--a slight alteration upon the plan of the University. Nominees of donors and shareholders are to be preferred as students; and the work is not to be commenced until a certain sum is subscribed. These and other arrangements are exactly the same with the plan of the University; which differs in the one essential particular, of having no resident pupils or tutors. This, together with the variety of religious classes, which have contributed to the promotion of the plan, has prevented religious instruction and observances from being made any part of the course of education and discipline,--the young men who live at home being left to the domestic instruction and discipline of their parents or private teachers; and in case any difficulty should be experienced on this score, and to provide for those students who may gather round the University, their families residing elsewhere, a very obvious, but most effectual and unexceptionable arrangement appears to have been made with the sanction of the council. Two of the professors, being clergymen of the Established Church, have announced, that 'an Episcopal chapel has been obtained contiguous to the • University, where accommodation will be afforded to the stu• dents for attendance on Divine service; and where a course of • Divinity Lectures will be regularly delivered during the aca
demical session.' It is well known, that this measure has been promoted and aided by a number of highly respectable individuals, chiefly belonging to the University, eminent for their piety, and warm friends of the Established Church, and of great name in the country. Although the Council cannot, as a body, take any part in the execution of the plan, which must, from the nature of the thing, take place without the walls, they have nevertheless expressed their decided approval of it; and upon the same principle, they have likewise sanctioned a similar plan of two Protestant Dissenting ministers, (one of them holding the office of Librarian to the University,) who have undertaken 'to • deliver lectures in the immediate neighbourhood, during the 6 academic session, on the Evidences and General Principles of • Revelation, the Elements of Biblical Literature, and the lead• ing facts of Ecclesiastical History. Nor can it be doubted, that if any ministers of the Roman Catholic Church were to open a school in the neighbourhood, for teaching theology upon their principles, their project would meet with the like approbation. The University is to teach those things which churchmen and diesenters alike require, and heartily agree in. Those things on which they differ, must be learnt out of the University; but it is most fit that religion should be taught, and taught to all descrip tions of believers, at the same time that they are going through the course of academical education. Far from discouraging such religious tuition, while many members of the University have individually favoured it, by their authority and their contributions, at least in the instance of the lectures and worship connected with the Established Church, the Council has expressed its approbation of the plan as often as it has been consulted, and has shown every desire to see the means of worship and theological instruction provided for those who, living apart from their families, may require such help.
As the Council could not interfere with the conduct of the students beyond the walls of the University, so it was manifestly impossible to exercise any direct control over the boarding-houses which might be opened for their reception. Nevertheless, for the convenience of parents and guardians, and to assist them in ascertaining the fitness of persons keeping such establishments, the bookseller of the University has been authorized to keep a register, in which he may enter the names of housekeepers o willing to receive boarders ;' and he has announced the conditions upon which those names will be retained upon the list ; as that the party shall produce ample testimonials of character ;
that he shall require his boarders to keep regular hours; that he shall allow no gaming or other licentious conduct in his house; that his boarders shall attend some place of worship; that he shall report any irregular behaviour or serious illness to the parents, and receive none but students of the University, &c. It is also stated, that upon the rules not being complied with, the housekeeper's name shall be erased from the register, and notice of the erasure sent to the families of the boarders.. . ! + These precautions appear to be all that the Council could take to assist those residing at a distance, and desirous of sending their sons to the University, in finding a safe residence for them, and procuring the means of religious instruction. The students of this class, however, must necessarily form a very small proportion of those attending the University. The main object of its foundation was to afford the means of a complete education, upon reasonable terms, to the sons of those who reside in London, and are desirous of giving them that best of all tuition, instruction at college while they live under their parents' roof. Nam' (we avail ourselves of the truly felicitous quotation prefixed to the Second Statement of the Council) · Nam vehementer intererat • vestra qui patres estis, liberos vestros hic potissimum discere. • Ubi enim aut jucundius morarentur, quam in patria ? aut pu• dicius continerentur, quam sub oculis parentum ? aut minore • sumptu, quam domi ?'—Plin. Epist.
We have mentioned the residence of students within the walls of King's College, as almost the only circumstance in which it differs from the London University ; for it is plain, as we have proved, that the religious discipline can only be adopted in respect to residents. Religious instruction, as a compulsory part of education, is only to be exacted of those who are disposed to go through the routine of the seminary, with a view to advantages of a very limited nature, and not defined with any precision; and it is generally understood, that all tests, whether consisting in subscription to articles, or in any other manifestation of conformity, are given up, even as regards regular residents, certainly as regards occasional pupils. It appears, however, extremely doubtful, whether or not this remaining difference as to residence will continue to distinguish the two Institutions. First of all, the expense must be enormously increased by it-to a much greater extent than the authors of the measure probably contemplated at the outset. For they state L.100,000 as the sum to be subscribed, before any beginning shall be made. The London University made L.150,000 their minimum; and we find them now admitting that it is insufficient to erect their whole building, and furnish the library and museum. Near L.200,000
will probably be wanted for this purpose ; certainly L. 180,000; and this without any provision for residence. To afford accommodation for 200 students, that is, 200 sets of chambers for them, and additional sets for the tutors, and other resident officers, with chapel, dining-hall, combination rooms, kitchens, servants'-hall and lodgings, and all the other incidents to such an establishment, must require a very large building, perhaps half as much more as the building devoted to the lecture-rooms, library and museums. These must be as extensive in King's College as in the London University; consequently, there must be added to the L.180,000 or L.200,000 required by that Institution, at least L.50,000 or L.60,000 more, to provide for a system of resident tuition upon any scale which can be considered as real and effective. Indeed, 200 students living within the walls, could hardly be deemed the complement of a London College; and it may be fairly assumed, that either there will be no residents at all, or more than double that number. But it by no means follows, that because L.100,000 has been raised with great and most praiseworthy alacrity, in the course of less than three months, L. 150,000 or L.200,000 more will be obtained in as many years; and if there is a deficiency of funds, there can be no doubt that the promoters of the design, when obliged to elect between completing the College as a day school, and leaving the means of public instruction half finished, in order to provide accommodation for resident pupils, would, without hesitation, prefer the former. In truth, little consideration is required to show, that, from the nature of the thing, day teaching must always be the principal object in any such seminary, The great use of it is to educate the children of parents living in London, Those at a distance, if obliged to pay for sending their sons from home, will have a natural leaving to prefer paying the same sums, or even a little more, and sending them to the ancient seats of learning. Persons desirous of professional education, no doubt, will prefer the London University or King's College, as Medical and Law students. But these are quite certain also to prefer living out of the college; and would assuredly refuse to frequent any lectures, on the condition of residence and discipline. It seems very likely, therefore, that in the end the College, as well as the University, will be a seminary where day scholars are taught the various branches of learning; that the only difference will be, the permission enjoyed by the students of the former to at tend theological lectures within its walls, while those of the latter receive the same course of tuition in the private seminaries hard by; and that, for the accommodation of such pupils as come from a distance, some arrangement resembling that descri