^{page 356 note a} For these fourteen months the University is happy in having no history. Wood finds no materials for any; and the Register is silent. The latter is accounted for by the dissolution of the Committee of Parliament, which was appointed in 1647, and the doubt which was entertained whether the Visitors couldact without it. The University now agitates for an improved Board of Visitors to complete the work of reformation, “the advancement of piety, the improvement of learning, and the good government of this place; in regard the Statutes of the University and Houses have not yet been fully examined, the several powers given by the local Statutes of most Colleges to their Visitors yet unsettled, nor yet any course established for determining of particular emergencies,” &c. They desire that the Visitors should be fewer in number than before, so that the same persons might always act, and that they should consist of none but resident members of the University. These improvements were adopted by the new Committee of Parliament on June 15, 1652; and afresh body of ten were temporarily appointed, including some of the former body. They did not however sit till June 20, 1653. Their names were as follows:—The Vice-Chancellor ex officio; Mr. John Owen, Dean of Christchurch (who was the Vice-Chancellor); Mr. Thomas Goodwyn, President of Magdalen; Mr. Peter French, Prebendary of Christchurch; Dr. Jonathan Goddard, Warden of Merton; Mr. John Conant, Rector of Exeter; Dr. Edmund Stanton, President of Corpus; Mr. Thankful Owen, President of St. John's; Mr, Samuel Basnett, Fellow of All Souls; and Mr. Francis Howell, Fellow of Exeter.

The stage of expulsions and changes had been passed, and the Visitors have now only to see that the late regulations are effectively executed, and that abuses do not again spring up.

^{page 357 note a} This very business-like Order was indeed wholly abnormal, but justifiable under the circumstances. The condition of many Colleges was still unsettled, and the “reform” was not to be played with. If the University was to be protected it must be placed in military order, so as to be proof against attack from their many enemies. Thus, and thus only, should the Colleges be allowed to regain their liberty by degrees, as they did.

^{page 358 note a} The hour of meeting fixed on this occasion was that appointed by Statute for the meetings of the Hebdomadal Board. It has only been within the last two or three years that an innovation so serious as the extension of the time of the meeting of the Hebdomadal Council to 2 p.m. has been permitted.

^{page 358 note b} Wood remarks that this method of religious training “was disused and accounted ridiculous by the Prelatical party” after 1660. But he also observes that this, and the following Order of July 4, “wholly tended to religion, good manners, and strict discipline.” (Annals.) His judgment was strongly against a system which might be expected to issue in cant and formalism, but his information led him to form a high opinion of its actual results, and he is candid enough to say so.

^{page 360 note a} We see from this Order that the tutors are supposed to be men of considerable standing, and most carefully selected; their relations to their pupils absolutely paternal; the Bachelors of Arts are not to be left to their own devices; “persons of what quality soever” included servants; there was to be no exemption from the obligations of the religious life as understood by the Visitors; the College was one family. Everything depended upon the spirit and good sense in which such a method was worked; under a Conant it certainly worked well. Wood, as we have seen, gives a general verdict in its favour.

^{page 363 note a} New College and All Souls, being founded by great statesmen, provided for a University education in those Colleges for lawyers. In both Colleges difficulties arose, both from the gradual secularization of the legal faculty, and from the final establishment of all branches of law in the Metropolis, thus drawing after it more or less of non-residence for legal Fellows. In both Colleges the system of receiving Commoners for education, which became almost universal elsewhere at, and even before, the Reformation, was resolutely declined. In both the practice of Corrupt Resignations flourished to an extent, and for a period, unknown to any other Colleges. See W. of All Souls, chaps, xiv. and xv. As might have been expected, both were the plague of the clerical Visitors of the Commonwealth period; for they continued to be not only Royalist strongholds, but, though the lawyers' wings were clipped, semi-legal foundations.

^{page 363 note b} Dr. Vivian occupies a great deal of the Register. He had held an important place as Delegate during the earlier days of the Visitation, had accused two of his brother Fellows of Royalist proclivities without being able to prove his words, and had lately been absent on service with General Fleetwood in Ireland. During his absence he complains of having been unjustly deprived of his dues, and is supported by the Visitors; but, upon examination of his case, the Visitors find him guilty of “many misdemeanours and miscarriages,” and order his expulsion. Not receiving the balance of dues he believes to be his right he appeals to the Vice-Chancellor's Court for the same, and we hear no more of him.

^{page 364 note a} It would be interesting to know what ground was assigned for this leave of absence. It was from Brasenose that Petty was given a similar permission, the consent of the other Fellows being required in each case, and it is possible that Bruen went to the assistance of Petty. Like Petty, he was a leading man in his College, both having been Vice-Principals. Brnen held that office before and after the period of absence here mentioned, and was Senior Proctor in 1655. He was originally at Pembroke, and a Delegate of the Visitors at that College before he was transferred to a Senior Fellowship at Brasenose.

^{page 365 note a} The only Colleges mentioned in the Register as those to which the above privileges had been restored, are Exeter, Christchurch, Merton, Wadham, and Trinity. This Order seems to infer that the London Committee had restored them to others, perhaps during the quarrel with the former Visitors. Oriel had acted as if it had been so favoured.

^{page 365 note b} These seem to be rough memoranda made by the Registrar.

^{page 365 note c} Cromwell had only parted with his power of hearing Appeals in College differences for six months, which had now expired; not that it is certain this was one of the cases contemplated.

^{page 366 note a} Abuses connected with exemptions granted to Gentlemen Commoners were only eradicated of late years by the practical suppression of the distinction. The military completeness with which every member of a College is swept into the educational net is of a piece with the previous Order as to their religions training.

^{page 367 note a} The old system in Colleges of a small governing body of senior Fellows receiving (generally through the division of fines on renewals) larger emoluments than the rest, was abolished by the Royal Commission of 17 and 18 Vict.

^{page 369 note a} This plan of requiring a Testimonial of “godliness, studiousness, and good proficiency in learning,” of all candidates for Fellowships was the subject of much ridicule. It was a compromise between the naked appointment by Visitors, as at first practised, and the absolutely free election which was to come. Under the circumstances it was not a bad expedient; and after all it was only the same system as is now applied under other names in the case of boys competing for Scholarships. It marks a great change in the government of the University.

^{page 369 note b} November 2 was All Souls Day, and the examination had already begun. Hence the haste with which an imperfect form of Testimonial was admitted. As it was, Wren only obtained his Fellowship by the Warden's exercise of his Veto on the election of a Mr. Heron, who probably found favour with the Fellows of All Souls because he had not condescended to apply to the Visitors for permission to stand; or it may have been an instance of “corrupt resignation.” See W. of All Souls, 207, 229, &c. for remarks on this Order and on the great Sir Christopher Wren.

^{page 372 note a} In consequence of this Order “the Heads of those Colleges that had most Divines appointed preaching to be performed on Sunday mornings between the hours of 7 and 9. And in Jesus College (which had stood out so long in opposition against them in the time of Visitation in 164S and 1649) they settled a sermon to be preached in full Term every other week. Merton College had no sermon settled there, because they had a Divinity Lecture every Saturday in Term time, that had been settled in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, which yet continues.” (Annals.)

^{page 374 note a} An Order characteristic of the “Independent” government now in power.

^{page 376 note a} Hooper had been a Fellow of Magdalen, but his intellect becoming disordered, he was pensioned off in 1646, and lived for many years in the precincts of the College. Dr. Bloxam (who does not however give these Orders from the Visitors' Register) quotes an interesting notice of Hooper by Hearn, who tells us “he planted the elms [an, 1660] in the gravel walk by Magdalen College.” (Demies of Magdalen, p. 152.)

^{page 377 note a} On December 23 the University in Convocation sent a congratulatory epistle to Cromwell, on his assuming the office of “Protector.” “He graciously received it, with promise to be favourable to the University and learning.” (Annals.) Wood gives a list in this place of writers for and against the policy of retaining the Universities, their dissolution having been vehemently advocated in the Little, or Barebones, Parliament. Though that Parliament was now itself dissolved, everything in fact depended on the decision of the Protector. It was not one of the least favourable points in Cromwell's mixed character that he had discernment enough to recognise the value of institutions which had formerly given him so much trouble. Writing of the year 1656, Wood says that the University was then as well affected to Cromwell as it was in 1653, when Convocation voted him Chancellor with only one dissentient voice; and yet there must have been a large number at both times of voters who detested his politics and principles. It seems as if both parties perceived their own best interests. Better Cromwell than dissolution. Even Wood's hostility was disarmed. He always speaks of him with respect at this period; and much lauds his “munificence” in endowing a new Divinity Reader out of the Exchequer. The following extracts from the University Address, which was passed unanimously, have a special interest. "Vestrse utique benevolentiæ acceptum doferrimus quod hodie superstites sint Academiæ eruditionis officinæ; quod inscitia et barbaries nondum Gentem polluere; quod importuni Rhetores sæva ilia eloquentia quam e publicis hisce fontibus ingrati hauserunt, nondum ingenuas artes oppresserint. Si probabile duceremus animi vestri moderatione prseconia laudis tuæ audire, eruditæ hujus et univeræ revera gentis nomine gratias ageremus quod labescentem Rempublicam etiam literariam capessiveris; quod pietatis nostræ Præfectos et Procuratores publieos, nondum famelicos ant extorres vidimus; quod te ducente militaris gloria Britanni nominis resurrexit, adeo ut si quis Civitatis (quam tu magnain effiecisti) res gestas cum annis conferat ætatem ultra putet; denique quod palmam nostram navalem ab æmula gente nobis direptam et defloratam sub auspiciis vestris reducem, atque reliquæ Lauro tuæ intertextam cernimus, et mare nostrum prædonibus et hostibus haud impune pervium usqne adeo litore nostro haud contenta virtus tua, sed in omni gente laborat.— (Reg. Conv. T.)

^{page 381 note a} “Simpliciter seniores,” i. e. the seniors without reference to the provision of the Statutes that the five “Deans,” who were to rank next after the Sub-warden, were to belong to different specified faculties.

^{page 384 note a} Goodwin seems to have gradually superseded Owen in Cromwell's confidence; which is strange, as he was a curious mixture of Independent and Arminian; and Cromwell was never supposed to have any leanings to the latter opinions. Owen was certainly Goodwin's superior in learning, ability, and dexterity.

^{page 388 note a} This should be 190l. 7s. 0d. q^a.

^{page 389 note a} See note to p. 121. Bathurst's case affords another instance of the liberal ideas of the Visitors in aid of the public service.

^{page 391 note a} Art. 3 is erased.

^{page 393 note a} The place created by the Order of June 28.

^{page 394 note a} Dr. John Wilkins.

^{page 396 note a} See note on Zanchy, p. 227. Robert King appears in the All Souls Register as a Fellow appointed in 1654 “per Collegium,” not, like the former butch appointed in 1648, “per Parliamenti Commissaries.” Perhaps the reason is, that, though appointed by Visitors equally without right, according to the view of the Royalists, it was an appointment naturally devolving upon the Visitor for the time being in consequence of a failure of election to fill Zanehy's place.

^{page 397 note a} We have no means of judging of the merits of this case, nor reason for supposing that the Visitors were wrong in acquitting the Warden; but it may be observed that shortly after this one of the proposals for the better government of the University, made by a Delegacy appointed to consider the question, is that it should be in the hands of others besides the great personages who now composed it; and the great anxiety of the Fellows of Wadham to remove their case away from the Visitors to Cromwell's Council is suggestive.

^{page 398 note a} See note to p. 363. The Visitors aimed at restoring the Statutable provision that ten of the twenty Jurists should be Canonists. This had become obsolete in consequence of the gradual secularization of the legal Faculty, and the evasion of the obligation to take Holy Orders, which was easier for mere Civilians than for Canonists. The same process had gone on at All Souls. The Visitors' measures were all taken with a view to the development of the Faculty of Divinity, and therefore of such Law only as was connected with it.

^{page 398 note b} The Visitors reported to the Committee that Wadham was “in a fitt capacity to make its owne elections” on May 28, 1651. It would seem the Committee had taken no notice to the Visitors of their Report. This was part of the quarrel between the two bodies.