^{page 5 note 1} See Report of Committee appointed by the Treasury (and presided over by Lord Reay) to consider the organization of Oriental Studies in London, with & Appendices, 1909 (Cd. 4560). Price Is. 4d. The Report is hereinafter referred to as the “Reay Report”. The evidence was published as a separate volume (Cd. 4561), price 2s. 8d.

Professor Arnold's memorandum on previous efforts to create an Oriental School is printed as Appendix III (b) to the Report, pp. 45–8. The first schools for Oriental languages in the British Empire appear to have been the College at Fort William (1800–1854), of which Gilchrist was the first principal, and the East India College at Haileybury (1806–1857), a secondary school with seven teachers for Oriental languages, also established by the East India Company.

^{page 5 note 2} See articles in the Dictionary of National Biography on Gilchrist and Morrison.

^{page 5 note 3} See Appendix V to Reay Report, pp. 65–6, Memorandum by Dr. (now Sir) Gregory Foster and Dr. A. C. Headlam. For information in regard to the teaching carried on up to the date of foundation of the School of Oriental Studies see the annual Calendars of University College and of King's College.

^{page 6 note 1} See Appendices III (b) and XVI to Reuy Report, pp. 45, 154.

^{page 6 note 2} See Appendix III (b) to Reay Report, p. 45.

^{page 7 note 1} See Appendix XVI to Reay Report, pp. 153–6, on the History of the School of Oriental Studies founded in connexion with the Imperial Institute, by Professor Wyndham R. Dunstan, F.R.S. See also Appendix V (b) to Report, p. 66.

^{page 8 note 1} Gresham University Commission, 1894: Minutes of Evidence (C.—7425) and Report (C.—7259), pp. xxxv–vi.

^{page 9 note 1} Speech by Lord Reay, May 8, 1894 (JRAS., 1894, p. 591).

^{page 9 note 2} I have given the motion, not in its original form, but as amended in accordance with a suggestion by Lord Stanmore and Sir Raymond West, accepted by the mover. Apart from the action taken directly by the Society Professor Salmoné's paper led to the bequest by Major-General J. G. R. Forlong of a sum of £5,000, of which the interest was to be spent by the Royal Asiatic Society on Lectures on the Religions, History, Character, Language, and Customs of Eastern races at the School proposed. Two courses of lectures have already been delivered under this trust at our School.

^{page 10 note 1} The Committee co-opted Mr. Sidney Humphreys, on the nomination of the City of London College, and Mr. J. H. Polak and Dr. H. J. Spenser on the nomination of the London Chamber of Commerce.

^{page 11 note 1} Read on February 24, 1904.

^{page 11 note 2} For report of the proceedings see the Times of December 5, 1906.

^{page 11 note 3} Died August 17, 1916.

^{page 11 note 4} Died April 10, 1911.

^{page 11 note 5} The witnesses included M. Paul Boyer, Professor in, and now Director of, the École Spéciale des langues orientales vivantes, Paris; M. Svlvain Lévi, Professor of Sanskrit at the Collége de France, Paris; and Dr. E. C. Sachau, Professor of Semitic Languages in the University of Berlin and Director of the Seminar für Orientalische Sprachen, Berlin.

^{page 12 note 1} For report of the proceedings see the Times of September 28, 1909.

^{page 12 note 2} Lord Cromer died on January 29, 1917.

^{page 13 note 1} Sir Thomas Crosby died on April 7, 1916.

^{page 13 note 2} Sir Charles Wiikefield's term of office ended on November 9, 1916, and he was not re-placed on the Committee.

^{page 15 note 1} See Appendix to First Report of Royal Commission on University Education in London, 1910 (Cd. 5166, price 2s. 3d.), pp. 118–19, 230–3.

^{page 15 note 2} Interim Report of (East India) Oriental Studies Committee (Cd. 5967, price 4d.). The Report is accompanied by Appendices relating to the site and buildings, library, legal constitution, and financial position of the London Institution. It also contains a note on the Berlin School of Oriental Languages.

^{page 16 note 1} Lord Aldenham and twenty-four other Proprietors, including Sir Homewood Crawford, the City Solicitor, and Dr. Edwin Freshfield, the two Proprietors who were chiefly responsible for the movement for retaining the Institution in the City of London, generously handed the sums received by them under the Act (amounting in all to £625) to Lord Cromer and Lord Curzon, for the purposes of the School when founded. The donees formed a trust and transferred the fund to the School shortly after its foundation.

^{page 16 note 2} I have not quoted the exact words of the Act.

^{page 17 note 1} After negotiation, the Office of Works as from December, 1916, vested the whole of this property other than real property in the Governing Body, subject to the condition that the Governing Body should not sell or lend any of the books of the Library without the consent of the “Continuing Members”, or failing such consent, of the Office of Works, who are to be the final arbiters in case of disagreement on this matter between the Governing Body and the Continuing Members.

^{page 18 note 1} Mr. H. R. Beasley acted for a considerable time as Secretary of this Committee and of the larger Appeal Committee referred to below.

^{page 19 note 1} Final Report of Royal Commission on University Education in London (Cd. 6717, price 2s.), 1913, pp. 262–3 and passim. For the views officially expressed on behalf of the Government in regard to the question of incorporation see (1) speech by Lord Morley on September 27, 1909, in the House of Lords; (2) replies to questions by Mr. G. Lloyd and Sir W. J. Collins on March 10, 1910, in the House of Commons.