tion that it will remain under an intermediate or provisional constitution until it reaches the year 1885, when its constitution will assume its permanent form. The composition of the Council will be made complete from the first. But I have not yet fully described the mode of its appointment. There will be the twenty-eight ordinary members to be named in the statute, as I have already mentioned. During the ten years from 1875 to 1885-the provisional period-there will be, probably no great number, but still a certain number of vacancies in the Body which it will be necessary for us to make provision to fill up. For that limited period we propose that the vacancies should be filled alternately by the Crown and by co-optation on the part of the Council itself. At the expiration of the ten years it will come to its permanent constitution, and I will describe what that, as we propose it, is to be; and then the Committee will be able to judge of the meaning of what I said when I stated that our desire was that the University of Dublin should be founded, as far as possible, on principles of academic freedom. After ten years, we propose that service on the Council shall be divided into four terms of seven years each, four members retiring in each successive year. There will therefore be four vacancies among the twenty-eight ordinary members to be filled up every year, and these four vacancies we propose shall be filled in rotation -first, by the Crown; secondly by the Council itself; thirdly, by the Professors of the University; and fourthly, by the Senate of the University. There is a separate provision with regard to casual vacancies in the Council, to which I need not now more particularly refer. The ordinary members will constitute, according to the proposal of the Government, the main stock or material of the Council or Governing Body of the University; but we have been very desirous to see in what way that which we aim at may meet the general wants and wishes of the people of Ireland; and, considering how desirable it is to prevent the action of too strong an unitarian principle-I have, I believe, ample authority for using that word, which is familiar in the present politics of Germanywe have been very anxious to discover in what manner it might be possible to give to those bodies, which I have described as Colleges of the University, a fair opportunity, not of governing the action of the Council by any exertion of influence or combination among themselves, but of being heard in the Council, so that all views and desires with respect to education might be fairly brought into open discussion, and that right might have the best chance of prevailing. It is evident we could not adopt the system under which any one College should be allowed to send to the Council a large number of members. It is also evident that it would not be safe to adopt a system under which Colleges, insignificant in magnitude, should be permitted to claim a representation in the Council. What we wish is this-that considerable Colleges, which represent a large section of the community and of its educating force, should have a fair opportunity of making their voice heard in the Council. With

regard to all those dangers which would be likely to arise from too great a rigour of unity in the examinations, or too narrow a choice in their subjects and tone, though we introduce several other provisions on the point into the Bill, it is to the freedom and elasticity of the Council itself, I think, that we should look as the main security against anything either inequitable or unwise. We propose, then, that there shall be in the Council from the outset-that is to say, from the 1st of January, 1875-a certain number of what we call collegiate members, the basis of whose position in the Council will be that any College of the University which has fifty of its matriculated students, those students being in statu pupillari matriculated also as members of the University, may send one member to the Council, and if such College have 150 students, then it may send two members. That would be the maximum; and this element, so far as we can judge, while it ought to be and will be secondary in point of numbers, would become very valuable and necessary for the purpose to which I have just adverted. The Senate of the University of Dublin, as it now exists, does not, I may observe, discharge one of the living and standing duties which a University is called upon to perform. I mean the election of representatives to be sent to Parliament. The election of representatives for the Dublin University is mainly conducted by gentlemen who, except for that purpose, do not belong to the University at all-that is to say, who have ceased to belong to it, and who are empowered to exercise with regard to it no other function. What we propose is that henceforward the Senate shall elect the representatives of the University. The Senate will, of course, consist of all those who are now in it, and of all the doctors and masters who may hereafter have their names kept on it according to the rules which may be in force. I need not add that care will be taken that all those individuals who are now entrusted with the privilege of the franchise will have their rights preserved; but for the future we shall lay down the principle that the members for the University ought to be elected by the Senate as they now are by the Senate of Cambridge and the Convocation of Oxford, and by them alone."

The new University would be a teaching as well as a governing body, and in describing the securities for conscience which would be taken, Mr. Gladstone said there would be no chairs in theology, in moral philosophy, or in modern history.

"We do not think it necessary," said Mr. Gladstone, "to exclude these subjects from the examination, provided the submission to examination in them is voluntary. As I have said already, the University is to be a teaching University; but we propose to extend the voluntary principle still further, and to provide that, as a rule, no attendance upon the lectures of the University professors shall be compulsorily required from the students. We intend to trust to the excellence of the instruction which will be given, and to the vast advantages the University will enjoy from being placed in the metropolis of Ireland for the attraction of students to it; but we

propose to make the attendance upon the lectures of its professors voluntary. We propose, also, to exclude the two subjects I have lately named from the examinations for the emoluments of the University. From the examinations for honours we do not propose to exclude them, and for this reason. It is perfectly practicable to adopt the system of a positive standard as regards examinations even for honours, and you may bring up to that standard any number of men who show themselves competent to reach it; but as regards emoluments, the competition must be between man and man; what one gains the other must lose, and therefore we think it the best and safest method of managing these emoluments to provide that these men should meet upon a common ground upon which all can equally consent to be examined. There are some other provisions of the same kind in the Bill, because I need not say that these securities for conscience are among the most important safeguards of the Bill, and unless they are effective we cannot expect the Bill to work, neither should we desire it to be accepted by the House. Among these, we have provided a clause somewhat analogous to one which appears in the Education Act with reference to the punishment of masters who persistently offend against the conscientious scruples of the children whose education they conduct. We provide that a teacher in the University may be punished or reprimanded if he wilfully offends the conscientious scruples of those whom he instructs in the exercise of his office. But I am bound to say that the main security for the rights of conscience on which we rely is such a representation of all parties, within moderate and safe limits, in the body of the Council, as can be usefully and beneficially introduced into its constitution."

Into the financial part of the scheme Mr. Gladstone went with great minuteness, the general result of which is that from the present revenues of Trinity College will be taken the cost of providing for vested interests, and a contribution of 12,000l. a year to the new University. This, he said, will still leave Trinity the richest College in Christendom; and for its consolation he added that in all probability it would be necessary to apply the same treatment to some of the Colleges of Oxford and Cambridge when the Commission now prosecuting its inquiries had reported. The expenses of the extended University Mr. Gladstone estimated at 50,000Z.viz., 25,000l. for the encouragement of learning, thus divided :Ten Fellowships annually of 2007., each tenable for five years; twenty-five Exhibitions annually of 507., and 100 Bursaries annually of 257., each tenable for four years; 20,000l. a year for the staff of professors, and 50007. for examinations, buildings, and general expenses. This sum is to be thus provided:-12,000%. by Trinity College, 10,000l. from the Consolidated Fund, 50007. from fees, and the remainder from the surplus of the Ecclesiastical property of Ireland. Finally, Mr. Gladstone mentioned that powers would be given to Trinity College to form a scheme for its own self-government. So, also, the other Colleges would have the same powers; and as to the

preponderance of lay or ecclesiastical influence in them, each, he said, must settle for itself; all the Legislature could do was to give them an open career and fair play. Mr. Gladstone, having spoken just three hours, concluded by claiming for the scheme that it was no mere innovation, but an attempt to build on the ancient historical lines.

"This is an important-I would almost say, considering the many classes it concerns and the many topics it involves, it is almost a solemn-subject; solemn from the issues which depend upon it. We have approached it with the desire to soothe, and not exasperate. I hope that in the lengthened address I have delivered to the House I have not said anything that can offend. If I have been so unfortunate, it is entirely contrary to my intention and my honest wish. We, sir, have done our best. We have not spared labour and application in the preparation of this certainly complicated, and, I venture to hope, also comprehensive, plan. We have sought to provide a complete remedy for what we thought, and for what we have long marked and held up to public attention as a palpable grievance- —a grievance of conscience. But we have not thought that, in removing that grievance, we were discharging either the whole or the main part of our duty. It is one thing to clear away obstructions from the ground; it is another to raise the fabric. And the fabric which we seek to raise is a substantive, organized system, under which all the sons of Ireland, be their professions, be their opinions what they may, may freely meet in their own ancient, noble, historic University for the advancement of learning in that country. The removal of grievance is the negative portion of the project; the substantive and positive part of it, academic reform. We do not ask the House to embark upon a scheme which can be described as one of mere innovation. We ask you now to give to Ireland that which has been long desired, which has been often attempted, but which has never been attained; and we ask you to give it to Ireland, in founding yourselves upon the principles on which you have already acted in the Universities of England. We commit the plan to the prudence and the patriotism of this House, which we have so often experienced, and in which the country places, as we well know, an entire confidence. I will not lay stress upon the evils which will flow from its failure, from its rejection, in prolonging and embittering the controversies which have for many, for too many, years been suffered to exist. I would rather dwell upon a more pleasing prospect upon my hope, even upon my belief, that this plan in its essential features may meet with the approval of the House and of the country. At any rate, I am convinced that if it be your pleasure to adopt it, you will by its means enable Irishmen to raise their country to a height in the sphere of human culture such as will be worthy of the genius of the people, and such as may, perhaps, emulate those oldest, and possibly best, traditions of her history upon which Ireland still so fondly dwells."

The first feeling created by the Bill was admiration of the in

genuity it displayed; the second was a suspicion that it violated the prejudices or the professed opinions of nearly all religious and political parties. Its least unfriendly critics were the Irish Hierarchy and Conservatives, who were ably represented by Dr. Ball. Trinity College might think itself fortunate in escaping with the sacrifice of a fifth or sixth part of its annual revenue, especially as the Theological Faculty was to be transferred to the Disestablished Church, and to be endowed from its surplus funds. There was nothing in the indireet benefit which might accrue to Roman Catholic institutions through the establishment of the University which could shock the advocates of denominational education; and perhaps the Protestants of the Irish Church appreciated more justly than political and sectarian factions the nature and amount of the discontent which existed among Roman Catholics. The Liberals in general, and especially the Dissenters, formed a more unfavourable judgment of the Bill. It was suspected that the suppression of the Galway College had been proposed to gratify the Roman Catholic clergy, and it was shown by plausible calculation that within a dozen or fifteen years the majority of the governing Council might be appointed under the influence of the Roman Catholic bishops. The provision for the exclusion of mental and moral science from the course of study was naturally regarded as a blot on the Bill, while it evidently implied a stigma on the good sense of the Irish nation. Mr. Gladstone had even thought it necessary to provide by special enactment for the punishment of any professor who should enunciate opinions which might be unpalatable to any section of the University; and it was stipulated that no student should be subject to disadvantage on the ground of his preference or rejection of any theory. It was easy to suggest the explanation that the Council and its officers would not fix an absurd interpretation even to the most paradoxical restrictions on freedom of education; but, as one of the movers of the Address to the Throne happily remarked on the first day of the session, the promoters of a scheme for disseminating learning without offence to religious feeling seemed to have thought far more of religion, or of religious prejudice, than of the interests of learning. No enlightened Governing Body would have been seriously encumbered by the cautious limitations of the Bill; but bigoted sectarians might have found in its provisions sufficient authority for the most perverse and vexatious interference. Secular patriotism in Ireland can scarcely have been gratified by the gagged and bandaged condition in which their national University was to commence its career; but the more independent Irish members were strongly disposed to accept, under protest, the Ministerial offer. The Roman Catholic bishops, in accordance with the recent policy of their Church, unwisely refused concessions which ought to have been recommended to their acceptance by the disapproval of their bitterest adversaries. Instead of waiting for the chance of manipulating to their own advantage the constitution of the Council, the bishops bitterly denounced every