This Institution had been founded in 1843 with a threefold aim:—(1) To afford temporary relief in cases of great suffering, (2) To cultivate provident habits in those who could afford to save; (3) To raise annuities for those past work. This programme seemed to distinguish governesses as a class specially in need of pity and relief. To attempt to help them by increasing their competency, and thus indirectly their wage-earning capacity, was a bold new departure. The first proposal was to hold examinations for a teacher’s diploma, but it soon appeared that an attempt to examine the untaught was a useless inversion of the natural order. To make the undertaking really helpful it became necessary to institute a system of classes. This scheme was first discussed in 1846, and a sum of money collected by Miss Murray, one of the Queen’s Maids of Honour, handed over to the Institution for this purpose. In 1847 the first certificates were conferred, and arrangements made for opening classes. Here some of the most distinguished professors of King’s College stepped in with help. Among them were Maurice, Trench, and Kingsley, and others no less noted. It was a new and astounding departure for men of their standing to be willing to lecture to women. They began with evening classes, but soon added others in the day for ladies of no special occupation. This led to the taking of 67 Harley Street, for the purpose of holding classes in ‘all branches of female learning,’ and permission was received to name the new institution Queen’s College.
On March 29, 1848, Professor F. D. Maurice, who has been called the ‘parent and founder of the College,’ delivered an inaugural address on ‘Queen’s College, London, its objects and methods.’ After apologising for the word ‘college’ as somewhat too ambitious for the project in hand, he thought well to answer in advance the objections of those who might use Pope’s hackneyed line about ‘a little learning’ as a means of discrediting the new classes. Even he did not anticipate very deep draughts from the spring of knowledge. ‘We are aware that our pupils are not likely to advance far in mathematics, but we believe that if they learn really what they do learn, they will not have got what is dangerous but what is safe.... I cannot conceive that a young lady can feel her mind in a more dangerous state than it was, because she has gained a truer glimpse into the conditions under which the world in which it has pleased God to place her actually exists.’
Each of the first courses was preceded by a preliminary lecture, in which the professor introduced, and almost apologised for his subject. Latin was to win toleration as ‘one road, and perhaps the shortest, to a thorough study of English’; in each case it was shown that the evils anticipated from that particular subject were fanciful. These explanations strike us quaintly now; it is hard to realise how great was the terror of learned ladies which in those days it was fashionable to assume.
Still, in spite of prejudice, the College flourished. There were no less than two hundred entries the first term. In 1853 it had grown sufficiently independent to stand on its own feet, and breaking away from the parent institution, it was incorporated by Royal Charter. Its objects were declared to be the general education of ladies, and the granting of certificates of knowledge. Professor Maurice became Chairman of Committee and Principal; and Queen’s, which loves its old traditions, has continued the practice of appointing a male Principal, therein differing from every other women’s college in the United Kingdom. It feels so keenly the debt it owes its founders, that it cherishes the idea—mistaken surely—that it can best do them honour by maintaining the college such as it was in their day. Thus the fate of many a pioneer has overtaken Queen’s. The vanguard have become the laggards, and useful and admirable as is its work, it has been outstripped by younger institutions, and no longer stands in the forefront of the battle. This is the common fate; it is easier to improve than to originate, but the debt of gratitude we all owe to Queen’s is none the less because so many others have harvested where she sowed.
Since Queen’s takes pride in its conservatism and adherence to its original methods, the latest calendar gives a very fair idea of its work even in early days. It states that ‘the College provides for the higher education of women, in the first place by a liberal school training, and, subsequently, by a four years’ course of College education. The College education leads to the grade of Associate ... and after a further course of study to the higher grade of Fellow of the College.’ The school was not part of the original scheme, but became necessary when the first generation of students, thoughtful women who had already been trying to improve themselves, and eagerly welcomed the advantages then for the first time offered them, gave way to a younger generation. Among the applicants for admission were mere schoolgirls, and instead of turning them away to seek inefficient preparation elsewhere, it was resolved to start a preparatory department for their benefit. This developed into a small school for girls under fourteen, the age at which pupils are admitted into the College. Here the students belong to two categories: those who follow a prescribed course laid down by the authorities, and those who enter for single classes, and arrange their work themselves. The former class are known as ‘compounders,’ and pay a composition fee of £8 to £10 per term. They must attend eighteen hours a week of regular class teaching. The regulations fix the subjects for twelve hours; parents or guardians for the other six. The prescribed work includes—(a) two languages: English, two hours, and French, German, Latin, or Greek, two hours; (b) two sciences: Mathematics and Arithmetic, four hours; Geography, one hour, Natural Philosophy, one hour, when exemption is granted in Mathematics; (c) English History, one hour, Ancient or Modern History, one hour; (d) Holy Scripture, one hour.
Candidates for the Fellowship must have passed the examination for the Associateship at least one academical year previously to entering for the Fellowship examination. For this, one principal subject of study must be chosen, with not fewer than two additional subjects. Since only three students had, in 1897, concluded this additional course, the Associateship may be regarded as the ordinary goal of Queen’s College students. The course for this is excellent, doubtless, for girls from fourteen to eighteen; but studies of so miscellaneous a character, leading to a ‘grade’ which can be attained at the age of eighteen, belong properly to the domain of school work. Queen’s differs, however, in its organisation from the upper department of a modern High School. Most of the teaching is given in the form of lectures. This lecture-system marks a distinct stage in the progress of girls’ education. In the schools of the early part of the century the various ‘professors’ who came to lecture occupied an important place in the prospectus. They ranged freely over the sciences in a manner that amused and interested their hearers, without making any undue demand upon their intelligence or powers of thought. Hence, the lecture-system seems to have established itself as a first step towards attracting female pupils to the higher branches of knowledge. The High Schools, too, were to pass through that stage, and emerge from it. Queen’s still keeps up the tradition of lectures, and as its discipline and general arrangements differ from those of a school, without resembling those of a college, it must be regarded as an institution apart, self-contained, and unconnected. As such it is of the greatest value in supplementing the home-teaching of girls, or undertaking the complete education of those who do not desire to enter the University, or take up any distinct profession. These would probably get a better practical preparation at a good high school. Still the others are likely to remain the majority, and there will always be an important function for an institution that supplies good teaching without any compulsion to enter for outside examination. Such, at any rate, is the view of the Council, who have commemorated their Jubilee by a renewal of the lease, and the general improvement and partial reconstruction of the premises. In its old home, with unbroken traditions, gathering in the children and grandchildren of its earliest students, it is continuing the work with which, fifty years ago, it inaugurated the revival of women’s education.
Although Queen’s was the first college actually opened, other similar schemes were being projected at the same time. The foundation in 1826 of University College had given an impetus to advanced studies in London, and as a perfectly undenominational institution it served as the model for Bedford Ladies’ College. The foundress and benefactor of Bedford was Mrs. Reid. Her wish to help girls took effect in 1847 in the establishment of classes at her own house. Two years later she took a house in Bedford Square and gave £1500 towards the initial expenses. Mrs. Reid and her friends were ambitious. They meant to found a real place of higher education for women, and in doing so they did not hesitate to break with the past. Mrs. Reid felt convinced that women could best understand the needs of girls, and though a committee consisting chiefly of men might at that time have included more distinguished names, she probably kept in mind the time to come when the college would be able to invite its own old pupils on to its committee. The co-operation of ladies was in the first instance secured by the institution of lady-visitors, to be present in turn at lectures—a plan at that time considered indispensable, and adopted also at Queen’s. It was arranged that the College Board should include the forty lady-visitors and six gentlemen. This Board annually appointed the Council of Management, and the Council elected the professors and all the officers of the college. This plan seemed to answer, and the college, which was fortunate enough to secure the services of such able men as De Morgan, F. W. Newman, and Dr. Carpenter, entered on a successful career. After a while pupils came in from a distance. Provision had to be made for these, and in 1861 a second house was taken and the upper floors adapted as a residence, while the lower ones were used for class-rooms. For a few years Bedford too had to maintain a school, but this was not part of the promoters’ scheme, and they hailed the first signs of improved school teaching as a pretext for closing it. This happened in 1868, at a time when circumstances made a complete reorganisation of the college necessary with a distinct declaration of policy.
The change had been hastened by the death of Mrs. Reid. She left a considerable part of her fortune in the charge of three trustees, Miss Bostock, Miss J. Martineau, and Miss E. E. Smith, to be utilised for ‘purposes of higher education.’ This seemed a suitable moment to seek incorporation, and in 1869 Bedford College received its charter. Its objects were thus described:
‘1. To continue with an improved constitution the College for women which has been carried on since 1849 in Bedford Square, London, and has been known since the year 1860 as Bedford College.
‘2. To provide thereby a liberal education for women, such education not to extend beyond secular subjects.’