COLLEGE HISTORIES.*
CoaPus CHRISTI, which has a precedence in respect of antiquity of seventy-nine years over Lincoln—the dates are 1350 and 1429—owes its origin to the unusual zeal or prudence of a couple of trade guilds in Cambridge town. The guild of Corpus Christi, in its commercial aspect, con- sisted of dealers in live-stock, grain, wine (of English growth), garden-produce, &c.; about the guild of St. Mary we have no information. The two, however, combined about the middle of the fourteenth century, for the purpose, apparently, of providing a perpetual supply of persons who should be qualified to pray for the souls of members of the fraternity. Medimval wills made copious provision for this posthumous benefit, and this plan of the Cambridge tradesfolk for having mass - priests of their own was as economical as it was pions. Still, it would be unfair to let it be understood that the guild had no academical ambition. The new foundation was not to be a mere chantry ; it was to be a College. Its scholars were to be priests who had lectured in arts or philosophy, or had been students of law,'and intended to devote themselves to theology or canon law. A consider- able number of benefactions were received, and the College prospered. But there was trouble ahead. The foundation of a College by an association of townsfolk looks like a strange exception to the usual relations between town and gown. Anyhow, in 1381 things were altogether changed. The College owned several houses in Cambridge, and a multitude of candle rents. There was the usual "ignorant impatience of taxation," showing itself with the vigour characteristic of the time (it was the Wat Tyler year). The bailiffs and commonalty of Cambridge broke into the College and carried off its charters, muniments, and property gener- ally. In the end the College recovered 280 by way of damages, and obtained leave to sell their house property in the town. For the next hundred and forty years there was nothing very notable in the history of the College. But in September, 1521, there was entered on its books the name of its most distinguished alumnus, Matthew Parker. Six months after- wards he was elected to a Bible clerkship ; in 1527 he became a Fellow ; and in 1544 he was recommended for election as Master. He was then Dean of Lincoln, and we have from his own hand an interesting statement of the value of the two benefices. The headship was "a living of twenty nobles at the moat," the Deanery was "two hundred at the least." (Translating into modern values, we may say 21,000 a year and Z100.) Parker soon rose to higher place, but he never forgot his humble beginning. "One of his lifelong characteristics," says Dr. Stokes, "was to be affectionately and generously attached to all the places where his lot was cast." St. Mary's Hostel, where he " kept" as a Pensioner, his Bible-clerk's room, his chamber as a Fellow, and finally the Master's lodge, were (1.) University of Cambridge : Corpus Christi. By H. P. Stokes, LL.D. Y. I. Rebilazon.—(2.) Ilaiseraity of Oal.rd : Lincoln. By Rev. A. Clerk. Same Publishes', all beautified by his loving care. His benefactions, most of them made in his lifetime, were large and varied. His gave money, plate, and, most splendid gift of all, books and manuacripta. This last benefaction has given the library of Corpus a distinction in which it has very few rivals. Of Archbishops, Corpus has had a disproportionate share. Teniaon (1695-1716) and Herring (1747-1758) were members of the Society. The latter is connected with what may be described as the most important event in the late history of the College, the rebuilding, a work commenced in 1823 and finished in 1827. The Archbishop left 21,000, which was to accumulate for this purpose. Twelve years later Bishop Maws= left 23,000 for the same purpose. It must be allowed that the College showed no undue haste in getting to work. Yet one cannot but wish that the delay had been a little longer ; 18'23 was not a happy time for good architecture ; and the new Corpus buildings are not an exception to the general mediocrity of the work of that time. A few years later the architect would not have found it necessary to demolish the old chapel and Master's lodge, with its curious gallery. The rebuilding cost more than £70,000, the contracts having been for 245,438.
Lincoln owed its origin to the reactionary zeal of Richard Fleming, Bishop of Lincoln. Mr. Clark says that "as an Oxford student he had learnt the leading tenets of the school of Wycliffe." It has always been said that he not only learnt but favoured them. As early, however, as 1396 he had changed his opinions, and he must then have been still a young man. His Wycliffism, if it ever existed, was an early effervescence. Anyhow, he conceived the design of founding a College which was to act as a bulwark against the new opinions. Dying suddenly in 1431, he had done very little towards carrying out his scheme. He had given a site, begun some buildings, and given the revenues of two Oxford churches, revenues which left little or no balance when the chaplains had been paid. The first Rector (the College was to consist of a Rector, seven Scholars or Fellows, and two chap- lains) died in 1431. His successor was one of the chaplains. A life-interest was thus cleared out of the way. Benefactions came in under the energetic action of the new Rector. Ecclesiastics who had been promoted by the Founder, testators anxious for their souls' welfare, and executors who had the distribution of funds left for pious pur- poses, were approached with success. An imminent danger was avoided. The Charter of foundation had been granted by Henry VI., and when the Yorkist dynasty was established on the throne, some zealous partisan, with an eye to personal profit, suggested that the foundation was illegal, and that its property might well be applied to the royal needs, with some pickings left for himself. Bishop Neville of Exeter came to the rescue of the College, and obtained a grant which confirmed it in its possession. But the zealous loyalist was not yet beaten. The word sue- cessoribus had been omitted from the grant. Mr. Clark charitably suggests that it was an accident, due to the similar termination of the immediately preceding word Scholaribus, but cannot help remarking on the fact that, when the Nevilles had fallen, the omission was made the ground of a fresh attack. The spoiler, however, was again baffled. Meanwhile, the College had become better worth robbing. In 1474 Thomas Rotherham, Bishop of Lincoln, held his primary visitation at Oxford (which was then in Lincoln diocese). Dr. Tristropp, the third Rector, preached before him on the text, "Behold, and visit this vine" (Ps. lxxx. 15), and so moved him that he promised to com- plete its buildings. (The vine is still locally honoured, and its fruit duly appears at the College Gaudy.) He largely increased its endowments, giving it, among other things, the great tithes of Twyford, which go to aug- ment the Rector's stipend. He is associated in the College formulas with Richard Fleming as "fundatores nostri." The first half of the next century was fertile in benefactions, William Smyth, Bishop of Lincoln, gave the College more than five hundred acres. The further bounty which be in- tended was hindered by the refusal of the College to open their Fellowships to Lancashire, of which county he was a. native, and to the diocese of Lichfield, over which he had presided before he was translated to Lincoln. His gifts were consequently diverted to Brasenose. The College was still poor. In 1534 its revenue was returned at 2101. (Magdalen,
the richest foundation, had £1,066.) The Rectorship was worth £20, which may be compared with the twenty nobles, or £6 13s. 4d , of Corpus Christi. There is little pleasant to record of it for the next century. Party feeling ran high within its walls, while the great quarrel between King and Par- liament was gathering strength, and showed itself in unseemly personal conflicts. A redeeming feature is the liberality of Bishop Williams, of Lincoln, who finished the inner quadrangle, building the eastern side and fitting the southern with a new chapel. (His only tie to the College was his office of Visitor.) This is a handsome building, with finely carved panelling of cedar, noticed in 1749 as "very sweet "and still fragrant, and some very fine painted glass. (Bishop Williams's portrait, looking very nnepiscopal, hangs between the two Founders in the Hall.) Things did not mend either when the King came to Oxford, which, indeed, practically ceased to be a seat of learning, or when the Puritan party had its turn of power. But again we have a gleam of light. In 1652 Nathaniel Crewe was enrolled on the books. Crewe was not an ideal character. "Mean, vain, and cowardly" are the epithets which Macaulay applies to him. But he was a steadfast and munificent friend to Lincoln. In 1668 he was elected Rector on the death of Paul Hood, who had contrived to hold on through all vicissitudes for forty-seven years. (The Master of Corpus was equally tenacious though not equally long- lived.) Three years later he was consecrated Bishop of Oxford, and in 1672 he resigned the Rectorship. "He had come to the College, had entertained the Fellows in the handsomest and most generous manner that was possible," and then, as he stepped into the street, turned and "gave his resignation, thinking it proper to continue Governor of the College as long as he was in it." Forty-five years afterwards he paid the College a visit, bringing in his hand the splendid gift of an income of £474 6s. 8d. This was in 1717. Two years afterwards the Rectorship was vacant, and Crewe, by
request, nominated a candidate, whom, however, the
College did not elect. This hurt him much, but he forgave the slight. He died in 1722, just seventy years after his matriculation.
In the eighteenth century, strictly speaking, in the last year of the seventeenth, the fund for buying advowsons was started. The most valuable benefice in the gift of the College, Great Leighs, with a tithe-rent charge of £890 and 113 acres of glebe, was purchased in 1726 for £800. Forty years afterwards Cublington, with a tithe-rent charge of £31 and 200 acres, cost £1,000. As Mr. Clark judiciously observes, other Colleges were spoiling the market. This purchase of advowsons doubtless served its purpose, the quickening of promotion. But it had its seamy side. Great Leighs in particular had something to do with the Rectorial Elec- tion in 1852. The story is too long to tell, even were it worth the telling. But it is alleged that the deciding vote was largely influenced by the desire to clear the way to this eligible preferment.
It is unavoidable that scandals should have a more than proportionate space in histories of this kind. Years of quiet work pass by without comment, while a few stormy weeks or days leave records more or leas minute and unseemly. Curiously enough, the one thing for which a College exists- education—gets but the scantiest mention. Nor can this be helped. There is, however, one incident in the academical history of Lincoln which points a moral with such force that it may be briefly recorded. It enjoyed a flourishing period of University distinction between the years 1839 and 1849 (standing second only to Balliol in its number of Classical Firsts), and it enjoyed it because, nearly but not quite alone among the Colleges, it gave its scholarships without limita- tions of birth or personal considerations. (One must not forget the work of a very able tutor, Richard Michel.) Its wealthier rivals were reformed against their will, and it lost the pride of place to which a liberal policy had raised it in spite of smallness and its poverty.
Mr. Clark has done his work well, but we could have dis- pensed with one of his chapters. We may venture, too, to doubt the story, which "an old Lincoln parson was reputed to 1 ave told," how Mark Pattison received a theme from one of his pupils, looked at it, crumpled up the paper in his hand, and threw it in the man's face. It is altogether unlike Pattison's demeanour, though it may be confessed that it would have been more tolerable to have had a paper, or even a book, thrown in one's face than to endure his cold, disconcerting stare.
Mr. Clark thinks that the custom of "the loving cup," which prescribes that the guest who has drunk, the guest who drinks, and the guest who is about to drink should be standing at the same time, and that the words poculurn caritatis should be spoken as the cup is handed, may be a survival of the agape. Dr. Stokes, on the other hand, gives the popular explanation that the drinker has a fellow-guest standing on either side of him to protect him from being stabbed in the back. These are strangely divergent theories. Which is the right F
Previous page
