An idea of the serious effect of the fall of agricultural rent on the college incomes may be gathered from the fact that one of the larger colleges has in the last thirty years suffered a loss of revenue amounting to £10,000 a year.
We now turn to the question of the fellowships. The sum of £78,000 was in 1904 divided among seventeen heads of houses and about 315 ordinary fellows. Of this sum the heads of houses received among them, as far as can be ascertained, the not excessive amount of £15,000, very unequally divided. The average stipend of a fellow is thus about £200 per annum. When the last Commission sat, the maximum stipend of a fellow was fixed at £250; and it was thought that this sum would usually be reached. But, except in the case of one or two colleges, which are the fortunate possessors of town property, the maximum is now never reached; and in certain cases the value of a fellowship has fallen to less than £100 per annum. Of the 315 fellows, some 245 were in 1904 resident and some 70 non-resident. Of the residents, about 225 were holding some University or college office, educational or administrative. Of the non-residents, and of the residents who were holding no office, the greater number had earned their fellowships by holding some qualifying position, such as a lectureship for a given number of years, usually twenty. Among the non-residents, in addition to fellows who hold their fellowships as a pension, were to be found students who are prosecuting research away from Cambridge; such students are, as a rule, liable to be summoned to reside, as college exigencies may demand. Several other non-residents are fellows who have but recently received appointments away from Cambridge; their fellowships will, under the new statutes, lapse in a year or two.
The analysis shows that the number of ‘prize fellowships’ is small; and it is believed that they are steadily vanishing. To assist the reader in obtaining a general idea of what is done with the fellowships, the combined result in the case of two colleges is here given. The two colleges in question have been chosen because the writers happen to be in a position to account for the occupant of every fellowship in each college. As will be seen, the two colleges render most valuable assistance to the University; and they have practically rid themselves of the burden of prize fellowships imposed on them by the Commission of 1856. The two colleges dispose, according to the University calendar of 1905-6, of forty fellowships between them. Of these, five are pension fellowships; five are held by professors in the University, as part of their stipend; twelve are held by University lecturers, demonstrators, or other University officers; eleven are held by college officers or lecturers; five are held by research students in Cambridge; two junior fellowships are held by non-residents. One of the latter was recently appointed to a professorship in another University, and his fellowship has just lapsed; the other holds a prize fellowship. It is unlikely that, when his fellowship lapses, another prize fellow will be elected in his place. There are in residence at each of the two colleges a number of University lecturers and officers, and of college lecturers, for whom no fellowship can be found. Speaking generally of the fellowships allotted to college teaching, it may be said that, with the help of a portion of the Tuition Fund, they enable the colleges to provide the college lecturers with stipends on which an unmarried man, occupying rooms in college, may comfortably live. When we turn to the University lectureships, there is often another tale to tell.
The University income, which has to bear almost the whole cost of modern developments, is made up of the following items: matriculation, degree, examination, and other fees, £30,000; direct contributions from colleges, £32,000; income from endowments, £2,000—£64,000 in all.
In 1904 the University, in the course of its ordinary work, expended £65,300, distributed roughly as follows:
| £ | |
| Officers, secretaries, and servants | 4,100 |
| Maintenance of business offices, registry, senate house, and schools | 1,300 |
| Rates and taxes | 3,400 |
| Obligatory payments from income | 1,300 |
| Stipends of professors | 12,400 |
| Stipends of readers, University lecturers, demonstrators, and other teachers | 9,100 |
| Maintenance and subordinate staff of scientific departments (including the botanic garden and observatory) | 9,600 |
| University library, staff, and upkeep | 6,300 |
| Examiners’ fees, etc. | 5,900 |
| Debt on buildings, sites, sinking fund, and interest on building loans | 8,500 |
| Printing and stationery | 2,600 |
| Pension funds (professors, £200; servants, £150) | 350 |
| Miscellaneous expenses | 450 |
| £65,300 |
There are forty-four professors, very few of them receive £800 or more a year (including fellowships), while the lowest limit of a professor’s stipend, unless he holds a fellowship, is about £90 a year. The average annual income of a professor is not more than £550, and of the yearly revenue of £24,000 required to produce this average, £7,000 are paid in the shape of fellowships by the colleges, and about £4,600 from the income of special trust funds and other benefactions, one payment of £800 a year being for a term of years only. One or two professors at most receive a proportion of the fees paid for lectures and laboratories in their respective departments. There are twelve University readers (or sub-professors). The new statutes contemplated for a reader the salary of £400 a year, but, owing to the inadequacy of the University income, none receives more than £300, and in several cases only £100 is paid. There are fifty-three University lecturers whose stipends range from £200 a year to £50, and it is melancholy to note how many of these receive the lower sum, without any assistance from endowments, such as fellowships or the like. There are thirteen University teachers, almost all of them appointed by the Board for Indian Civil Service studies, and occupied, in the main, in teaching eastern dialects; and there are forty-four demonstrators, curators, and superintendents of museums, whose stipends range from £200 a year to nothing at all.
The incomes of some of these gentlemen are supplemented by fellowships, of others by a share of lecture fees; a few, too, may hold two such offices as curator and lecturer simultaneously. But, when the addition from all sources (about £8,000 from fees or special funds, and £13,000 from fellowships) has been made to the annual sum (£9,100) which the University has to give, we arrive at a total of about £30,000, giving the surprisingly low average income of £250 a year for any University teacher other than a professor. A few of the older teachers may hold some college office which adds a little to their income, but these are rare exceptions. There are no resources from which these incomes may be increased according to the service of the holder, and there is practically no provision for pension, except in the case of those teachers (less than one-half of the whole number) who hold fellowships, and may expect, after many years of service, to earn the right to retain them permanently.
In these circumstances it is not surprising that the University finds a difficulty in retaining many of its abler teachers. At the beginning of 1904 it was estimated that over two hundred professors and lecturers at other Universities (as distinct from University colleges) in the United Kingdom had been educated at Cambridge, and, though that is by no means a matter for regret, yet it is not too much to say that, in supplying this demand for teachers, the University has done a great national work for which she is poorly requited by her difficulty in retaining a sufficient staff for herself. Fortunately, when all other funds are exhausted, the fund of patriotism remains inexhaustible. It is not known how many fellows, possessed of some private means, and attached to the University through sheer love of their work, return their stipends to their colleges to be employed for the general good; such men are always anxious that their names should be concealed, but the present writers know of three in the restricted circle of their immediate personal friends. The special correspondent of the Times writes, on the occasion of the royal visit in 1904:
‘I may be permitted to say, as the result of my personal inquiries, that the amount of work done either gratuitously or for very inadequate remuneration by professors, readers, lecturers, demonstrators, and other teachers in many departments of study and instruction, really constitutes a very substantial endowment, freely contributed by men who have no worldly goods to give, but who give lavishly of their time, their energy, their intellectual capacity, their acquired knowledge, and their disinterested devotion to the advancement of learning. If this asset were evaluated in pounds, shillings, and pence, the University balance-sheet would wear a very different aspect.’