Reconstitution of the University of London

Abstract

THE Government has redeemed its pledge to introduce legislation “to make further provision for the University of London.” The University of London Bill, which, on the motion of the Earl of Balfour, was accorded its second reading in the House of Lords on June 29, proposes to appoint eight commissioners with plenary powers to draft statutes for the University “in general accordance” with the recommendations contained in the Report of the Departmental Committee of the Board of Education appointed by Mr. Trevelyan in 1924, subject to any modifications which may appear to them to be expedient. Thus the procedure is assimilated to that adopted in the recent reconstitution of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. There are, however, important differences between the two cases. Whereas the reconstitution of the ancient universities was based on the recommendations of a Royal Commission of great authority, presided over by Mr. Asquith (now Lord Oxford)—recommendations which were unanimous save for some relatively unimportant reservations by individual members—the proposed reconstitution of the University of London is to be based, not on the recommendations of the Royal Commission, generally known as the Haldane Commission, which reported in 1913, but on the recommendations of a Departmental Committee of the Board of Education. Conditions, it is true, have changed since the Haldane Commission reported. The reception accorded to the Departmental Committee's report has been comparatively friendly, but it cannot be overlooked that the constitution proposed by the Committee differs essentially from that suggested by the Royal Commission.