Gentlemanly versus Scientific Ideals: John Burdon Sanderson, Medical Education, and the Failure of the Oxford School of Physiology

Bulletin of the History of Medicine

Volumn 71, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 224-248

  Romano, Terrie M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EDUCATION; HISTORY; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PHYSIOLOGY; UNITED KINGDOM; UNIVERSITY;

EDUCATION, MEDICAL; ENGLAND; HISTORY, 19TH CENTURY; PHYSIOLOGY; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 0031158967     PISSN: 00075140     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/bhm.1997.0054     Document Type: Article

References (116)

1. W. Moxon to John Burdon Sanderson, 13 November 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fol. 47, typescript copy in MS ADD 179/112, Burdon Sanderson Collection, The Library, University College London (henceforth BSC-UCL).
2. John Servos has defined a research school as "an institution that flourished in the universities and research institutes of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, an institution that depends on patrons, regular infusions of students, a ready supply of problems solvable in limited time by predictable methods, reliable means of reaching readers, and leaders capable of directing efforts along profitable lines" (John Servos, "Research Schools and Their Histories," in Research Schools: Historical Reappraisals, ed. F. L. Holmes and Gerald L. Geison, Osiris, 2d ser., 1993, 8: 10). Servos drew this definition from J. B. Morrell's classic article, "The Chemist Breeders: The Research Schools of Liebig and Thomson," Ambix, 1972, 19: 1-46. Geison has tabulated the features that Morrell attributed to an ideal research school: "'Charismatic' leader(s); leader with research reputation; 'informal' setting and leadership style; leader with institutional power; social cohesion, loyalty, esprit de corps, 'discipleship'; focused research program; simple and rapidly exploitable experimental techniques; invasion of a new field of research; pool of potential recruits (graduate students); access to or control of publication outlets; students publish early under their own names; produced and 'placed' significant numbers of students; institutionalization in a university setting; adequate financial support" (Gerald L. Geison, "Scientific Change, Emerging Specialties and Research Schools," Hist. Sci., 1981, 19: chart 2, p. 24).
3. John Servos has defined a research school as "an institution that flourished in the universities and research institutes of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, an institution that depends on patrons, regular infusions of students, a ready supply of problems solvable in limited time by predictable methods, reliable means of reaching readers, and leaders capable of directing efforts along profitable lines" (John Servos, "Research Schools and Their Histories," in Research Schools: Historical Reappraisals, ed. F. L. Holmes and Gerald L. Geison, Osiris, 2d ser., 1993, 8: 10). Servos drew this definition from J. B. Morrell's classic article, "The Chemist Breeders: The Research Schools of Liebig and Thomson," Ambix, 1972, 19: 1-46. Geison has tabulated the features that Morrell attributed to an ideal research school: "'Charismatic' leader(s); leader with research reputation; 'informal' setting and leadership style; leader with institutional power; social cohesion, loyalty, esprit de corps, 'discipleship'; focused research program; simple and rapidly exploitable experimental techniques; invasion of a new field of research; pool of potential recruits (graduate students); access to or control of publication outlets; students publish early under their own names; produced and 'placed' significant numbers of students; institutionalization in a university setting; adequate financial support" (Gerald L. Geison, "Scientific Change, Emerging Specialties and Research Schools," Hist. Sci., 1981, 19: chart 2, p. 24).
4. John Servos has defined a research school as "an institution that flourished in the universities and research institutes of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, an institution that depends on patrons, regular infusions of students, a ready supply of problems solvable in limited time by predictable methods, reliable means of reaching readers, and leaders capable of directing efforts along profitable lines" (John Servos, "Research Schools and Their Histories," in Research Schools: Historical Reappraisals, ed. F. L. Holmes and Gerald L. Geison, Osiris, 2d ser., 1993, 8: 10). Servos drew this definition from J. B. Morrell's classic article, "The Chemist Breeders: The Research Schools of Liebig and Thomson," Ambix, 1972, 19: 1-46. Geison has tabulated the features that Morrell attributed to an ideal research school: "'Charismatic' leader(s); leader with research reputation; 'informal' setting and leadership style; leader with institutional power; social cohesion, loyalty, esprit de corps, 'discipleship'; focused research program; simple and rapidly exploitable experimental techniques; invasion of a new field of research; pool of potential recruits (graduate students); access to or control of publication outlets; students publish early under their own names; produced and 'placed' significant numbers of students; institutionalization in a university setting; adequate financial support" (Gerald L. Geison, "Scientific Change, Emerging Specialties and Research Schools," Hist. Sci., 1981, 19: chart 2, p. 24).
5. For a discussion of how disputes within the biology departments contributed to the failure of the physiology school at Oxford see Terrie M. Romano, "Making Medicine Scientific: John Burdon Sanderson and the Culture of Victorian Science" (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1993), chaps. 3 and 4. Chap. 3 also contains a discussion of the intellectual reasons for the failure of the school.
6. See M. Jeanne Peterson, The Medical Profession in Mid-Victorian London (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 3-39; and Charles Newman, The Evolution of Medical Education in the Nineteenth Century (London: Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 227.
7. See M. Jeanne Peterson, The Medical Profession in Mid-Victorian London (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 3-39; and Charles Newman, The Evolution of Medical Education in the Nineteenth Century (London: Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 227.
8. For a recent account of changes in medical education in this period, see Thomas Neville Bonner, Becoming a Physician: Medical Education in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States, 1750-1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 195. See also his discussion of the General Medical Council, p. 259.
9. Ibid., p. 194.
10. Ibid., pp. 184-85.
11. For an overview of the literature on this subject see John Harley Warner, "Science in Medicine," Osiris, 2d ser., 1985, 1: 37-58; and W. F. Bynum, Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
12. For an overview of the literature on this subject see John Harley Warner, "Science in Medicine," Osiris, 2d ser., 1985, 1: 37-58; and W. F. Bynum, Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
13. Gerald L. Geison, "Divided We Stand: Physiologists and Clinicians in the American Context," in The Therapeutic Revolution: Essays in the Social History of American Medicine, ed. Charles Rosenberg and Morris J. Vogel (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979), p. 68.
14. S. E. D. Shortt, "Physicians, Science and Status: Issues in the Professionalization of Anglo-American Medicine in the Nineteenth Century," Med. Hist., 1983, 27: 51-68.
15. See, for example, Warner, "Science in Medicine" (n. 8), esp. p. 45; John Harley Warner, "Ideals of Science and Their Discontents in Late Nineteenth-Century American Medicine," Isis, 1991, 82: 454-78; and Steve Sturdy, "The Political Economy of Scientific Medicine: Science, Education and the Transformation of Medical Practice in Sheffield, 1890-1922," Med. Hist., 1992, 36: 125-59.
16. See, for example, Warner, "Science in Medicine" (n. 8), esp. p. 45; John Harley Warner, "Ideals of Science and Their Discontents in Late Nineteenth-Century American Medicine," Isis, 1991, 82: 454-78; and Steve Sturdy, "The Political Economy of Scientific Medicine: Science, Education and the Transformation of Medical Practice in Sheffield, 1890-1922," Med. Hist., 1992, 36: 125-59.
17. See, for example, Warner, "Science in Medicine" (n. 8), esp. p. 45; John Harley Warner, "Ideals of Science and Their Discontents in Late Nineteenth-Century American Medicine," Isis, 1991, 82: 454-78; and Steve Sturdy, "The Political Economy of Scientific Medicine: Science, Education and the Transformation of Medical Practice in Sheffield, 1890-1922," Med. Hist., 1992, 36: 125-59.
18. John Harley Warner, "Science, Healing, and the Physician's Identity: A Problem of Professional Character in Nineteenth-Century America," in Essays in the History of Therapeutics, ed. W. F. Bynum and V. Nutton, special issue of Clio Medica, 1991, 22: 65-88, esp. pp. 67-68; Warner, "Science in Medicine" (n. 8), p. 45.
19. John Harley Warner, "Science, Healing, and the Physician's Identity: A Problem of Professional Character in Nineteenth-Century America," in Essays in the History of Therapeutics, ed. W. F. Bynum and V. Nutton, special issue of Clio Medica, 1991, 22: 65-88, esp. pp. 67-68; Warner, "Science in Medicine" (n. 8), p. 45.
20. Chris Lawrence, "Incommunicable Knowledge: Science, Technology and the Clinical Art in Britain, 1850-1914," J. Contemp. Hist., 1985, 20: 503-4.
21. Lawrence makes a similar point in "Incommunicable Knowledge" (n. 13). See also Christopher Lawrence, Medicine in the Making of Modern Britain, 1700-1920 (London: Routledge, 1994), esp. pp. 68-72.
22. Lawrence makes a similar point in "Incommunicable Knowledge" (n. 13). See also Christopher Lawrence, Medicine in the Making of Modern Britain, 1700-1920 (London: Routledge, 1994), esp. pp. 68-72.
23. Thomas Bonner wrote of the mid-nineteenth century, "Leading physicians in Britain and America continued to insist on the importance of a classical education, good manners, and the ability to relate to the privileged classes for those who sought eminence in their work" (Bonner, Becoming a Physician [n. 5], p. 205). See also Gert H. Brieger, "Classics and Character: Medicine and Gentility," Bull. Hist. Med., 1991, 65: 88-109, esp. pp. 100-105; and Rebecca Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance, Industry: The Definition and Uses of Professional Character among Nineteenth-Century American Physicians," J. Hist. Med. Allied Sci., 1994, 49 (2): 251-83. For a discussion of the professional ideal more generally in this period, see Harold Perkin, The Rise of Professional Society: England since 1880 (London: Routledge, 1989).
24. Thomas Bonner wrote of the mid-nineteenth century, "Leading physicians in Britain and America continued to insist on the importance of a classical education, good manners, and the ability to relate to the privileged classes for those who sought eminence in their work" (Bonner, Becoming a Physician [n. 5], p. 205). See also Gert H. Brieger, "Classics and Character: Medicine and Gentility," Bull. Hist. Med., 1991, 65: 88-109, esp. pp. 100-105; and Rebecca Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance, Industry: The Definition and Uses of Professional Character among Nineteenth-Century American Physicians," J. Hist. Med. Allied Sci., 1994, 49 (2): 251-83. For a discussion of the professional ideal more generally in this period, see Harold Perkin, The Rise of Professional Society: England since 1880 (London: Routledge, 1989).
25. Thomas Bonner wrote of the mid-nineteenth century, "Leading physicians in Britain and America continued to insist on the importance of a classical education, good manners, and the ability to relate to the privileged classes for those who sought eminence in their work" (Bonner, Becoming a Physician [n. 5], p. 205). See also Gert H. Brieger, "Classics and Character: Medicine and Gentility," Bull. Hist. Med., 1991, 65: 88-109, esp. pp. 100-105; and Rebecca Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance, Industry: The Definition and Uses of Professional Character among Nineteenth-Century American Physicians," J. Hist. Med. Allied Sci., 1994, 49 (2): 251-83. For a discussion of the professional ideal more generally in this period, see Harold Perkin, The Rise of Professional Society: England since 1880 (London: Routledge, 1989).
26. Thomas Bonner wrote of the mid-nineteenth century, "Leading physicians in Britain and America continued to insist on the importance of a classical education, good manners, and the ability to relate to the privileged classes for those who sought eminence in their work" (Bonner, Becoming a Physician [n. 5], p. 205). See also Gert H. Brieger, "Classics and Character: Medicine and Gentility," Bull. Hist. Med., 1991, 65: 88-109, esp. pp. 100-105; and Rebecca Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance, Industry: The Definition and Uses of Professional Character among Nineteenth-Century American Physicians," J. Hist. Med. Allied Sci., 1994, 49 (2): 251-83. For a discussion of the professional ideal more generally in this period, see Harold Perkin, The Rise of Professional Society: England since 1880 (London: Routledge, 1989).
27. For a discussion of medical character and gender mainly in the American context see Brieger, "Classics and Character" (n. 15), p. 94; and Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance" (n. 15), pp. 262-70, 276-82. For a comparison with the legal profession see also Michael Grossberg, "Institutionalizing Masculinity: The Law as a Masculine Profession," in Meanings for Manhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America, ed. Mark C. Carnes and Clyde Griffen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 133-51, esp. p. 149. Also relevant is Peterson, Medical Profession (n. 4), pp. 179-86, where she discusses how issues of class and expertise contributed to a dispute between nurses and physicians at Guy's Hospital.
28. For a discussion of medical character and gender mainly in the American context see Brieger, "Classics and Character" (n. 15), p. 94; and Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance" (n. 15), pp. 262-70, 276-82. For a comparison with the legal profession see also Michael Grossberg, "Institutionalizing Masculinity: The Law as a Masculine Profession," in Meanings for Manhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America, ed. Mark C. Carnes and Clyde Griffen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 133-51, esp. p. 149. Also relevant is Peterson, Medical Profession (n. 4), pp. 179-86, where she discusses how issues of class and expertise contributed to a dispute between nurses and physicians at Guy's Hospital.
29. For a discussion of medical character and gender mainly in the American context see Brieger, "Classics and Character" (n. 15), p. 94; and Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance" (n. 15), pp. 262-70, 276-82. For a comparison with the legal profession see also Michael Grossberg, "Institutionalizing Masculinity: The Law as a Masculine Profession," in Meanings for Manhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America, ed. Mark C. Carnes and Clyde Griffen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 133-51, esp. p. 149. Also relevant is Peterson, Medical Profession (n. 4), pp. 179-86, where she discusses how issues of class and expertise contributed to a dispute between nurses and physicians at Guy's Hospital.
30. For a discussion of medical character and gender mainly in the American context see Brieger, "Classics and Character" (n. 15), p. 94; and Tannenbaum, "Earnestness, Temperance" (n. 15), pp. 262-70, 276-82. For a comparison with the legal profession see also Michael Grossberg, "Institutionalizing Masculinity: The Law as a Masculine Profession," in Meanings for Manhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America, ed. Mark C. Carnes and Clyde Griffen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 133-51, esp. p. 149. Also relevant is Peterson, Medical Profession (n. 4), pp. 179-86, where she discusses how issues of class and expertise contributed to a dispute between nurses and physicians at Guy's Hospital.
31. John Harley Warner, "The Fall and Rise of Professional Mystery: Epistemology, Authority and the Emergence of Laboratory Medicine in Nineteenth-Century America," in The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine, ed. Andrew Cunningham and Perry Williams (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. 112.
32. John Burdon Sanderson (JBS) to Jane Burdon Sanderson (his sister), Good Friday, 1882, Extracts of Letters, Diaries made by Ghetal Burdon Sanderson, bk. 2, p. 170, Burdon Sanderson Collection, Charles Woodward Memorial Room, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. (henceforth Extracts).
33. This appointment had been a small component of reforms at Oxford that had been undertaken since mid-century. See Margaret Pelling, "The Refoundation of the Linacre Lectureships in the Nineteenth Century," in Linacre Studies: Essays on the Life and Work of Thomas Linacre, 1460-1524, ed. Francis R. Maddison, Margaret Pelling, and Charles Webster (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), pp. 266-67.
34. See, for example, Oxford Mag., 4 February 1885, pp. 49-50; "Rusticus," in a letter to the editor, also noted that the current system penalized science and mathematics students. Both Oxford and Cambridge had many quaint and, to the uninitiated, confusing titles for their various examinations-made even more confusing by the use of informal titles, which I avoid here. At Oxford the matriculation examination that a student was expected (in theory) to pass upon coming up - that is, on arrival - was "Responsions"; a year after passing Responsions came the "Moderations" examination. Science students then had to pass a general examination in the natural sciences, "Prelims," and after passing a final examination in the Natural Sciences School they would be awarded a degree. At Cambridge the matriculation examination was the Previous. Starting in 1881, the second examination for a science student was the first half of the Natural Sciences Tripos; after passing the second half, the student would be awarded a degree.
35. See Janet Howarth, "Science Education in Late-Victorian Oxford: A Curious Case of Failure?" English Hist. Rev., 1987, 102: 335, and n. 3, which compares the figures for Oxford and Cambridge science graduates: Cambridge Oxford Old examinations, 1851-81: 405 1855-79: 383 Pari I only, 1881-1904: 1,598 1880-1904: 903 Part II only, 1881-1904: 490 Women were allowed to take examinations, though not to receive degrees. At Cambridge between 1881 and 1916, 299 women took Part I only and 104 took Part II only. At Oxford one woman took a natural science examination. The figures for Cambridge quoted by Howarth were taken from Roy M. MacLeod and R. C. Moseley, The Anatomy of an Elite: The Natural Science Tripos and Its Graduate, 1850-1914 (SSRC Report, 1976).
36. See Janet Howarth, "Science Education in Late-Victorian Oxford: A Curious Case of Failure?" English Hist. Rev., 1987, 102: 335, and n. 3, which compares the figures for Oxford and Cambridge science graduates: Cambridge Oxford Old examinations, 1851-81: 405 1855-79: 383 Pari I only, 1881-1904: 1,598 1880-1904: 903 Part II only, 1881-1904: 490 Women were allowed to take examinations, though not to receive degrees. At Cambridge between 1881 and 1916, 299 women took Part I only and 104 took Part II only. At Oxford one woman took a natural science examination. The figures for Cambridge quoted by Howarth were taken from Roy M. MacLeod and R. C. Moseley, The Anatomy of an Elite: The Natural Science Tripos and Its Graduate, 1850-1914 (SSRC Report, 1976).
37. "Cambridge, after 1860, permitted candidates who had passed the Previous to proceed direct to the NST" (Howarth, "Science Education" [n. 21], p. 359).
38. G. C. Bourne, letter to the editor, "Science and Pass Mods," Oxford Mag., 18 February 1885, p. 89.
39. Ibid.
40. Howarth, "Science Education" (n. 21), p. 342, states that half of those who read the Natural Sciences Tripos between 1886 and 1914 became physicians (quoting Roy M. MacLeod and R. C. Moseley, "The 'Naturals' and Victorian Cambridge," Oxford Rev. Educ., 1980, p. 186).
41. Howarth, "Science Education" (n. 21), p. 342, states that half of those who read the Natural Sciences Tripos between 1886 and 1914 became physicians (quoting Roy M. MacLeod and R. C. Moseley, "The 'Naturals' and Victorian Cambridge," Oxford Rev. Educ., 1980, p. 186).
42. Between 1861 and 1870 there were 28 Oxford M.B. degrees awarded, and 49 at Cambridge; between 1871 and 1880, there were 45 at Oxford and 83 at Cambridge. See table 1, "Oxford and Cambridge Medical Degrees Awarded, 1801-1900," in Alastair H. T. Robb-Smith, "Medical Education in Nineteenth-Century Oxford," in Nineteenth-Century Oxford, part 1 (History of the University of Oxford, vol. 6), ed. M. G. Brock and Mark C. Curthoys (forthcoming).
43. B. Carpenter to Henry Wentworth Acland (HWA), 5 May 1885, MS Acland d. 92, fols. 49-54, Bodleian Library, Oxford University (henceforth Bodl.). I gratefully acknowledge the permission of the Bodleian Library to quote from the Acland papers.
44. Ibid.
45. Ibid.
46. HWA to JBS, 17 July 1882, MS ADD 179/4, fols. 65-68, BSC-UCL.
47. For a detailed discussion of the Fellows in this period, see A. J. Engel, From Clergyman to Don: The Rise of the Academic Profession in Nineteenth-Century Oxford (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983). Fellows were informally called dons.
48. The Heads of the Colleges could have various titles: Principal, Warden, Master, Rector, President, or Provost. The Head of Christ Church was also Dean of the Cathedral, and thus Liddell, its Head, was known as Dean Liddell. See Richard Symonds, "Note on Oxford Terminology," in Oxford and Empire: The Last Lost Cause? (London: Macmillan, 1986), pp. xvii-xviii.
49. Engel, From Clergyman to Don (n. 31), p. 57. The election of the eighteen members of the Hebdomadal Council was restricted: six had to be heads of houses, six university professors, and six members of Convocation of five years' standing. By Oxford graduates, I mean possessors of an M.A. - a degree any B.A. holder could receive a set number of terms after graduation.
50. Ibid., pp. 60-61.
51. Ibid., pp. 27-33.
52. The impatience of this group with Acland was reflected in Benjamin Jowett's remarks to Florence Nightingale: "Dr. Acland is called 'Barnum' at Oxford. He is one of the vainest, rudest men that ever lived. He is also one of the greatest bores that ever lived. But against his boring must be set that he has got one or two good things done; & against his rudeness that he is extremely kind to some persons. I believe him to be neither a man of science nor a good practitioner. He is an intolerable ass & an unendurable bore, yet a worthy man after a fashion. What could make you waste 8 hours upon him? This shows me how you are at the call of every one" (letter of 25 July 1869, in Dear Miss Nightingale: A Selection of Benjamin Jowett's Letters to Florence Nightingale, 1860-1893, ed. Vincent Quinn and John Prest [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987], p. 173).
53. Engel, From Clergyman to Don (n. 31), pp. 199-200.
54. JBS to E. A. Schäfer, 6 August [1894], MS ADD 179/13, BSC-UCL.
55. For an account of the British antivivisection movement, see Richard D. French, Antivivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975); pp. 275-76, esp. n. 170, contain a brief account of the events at Oxford. See also E. B. Nicholson's letters to JBS: 19 October 1883, fols. 167-68, and 20 October 1883, fol. 169, MS ADD 179/4, BSC-UCL. And see n. 77 below, where JBS is worried about Freeman's opposition in the 1890s.
56. Quoted in French, Antivivisection (n. 39), p. 276, from Extracts (n. 18), bk. 3, p. 29.
57. Quoted in French, Antivivisection (n. 39), p. 276, from Extracts (n. 18), bk. 3, p. 29.
58. No changes were contemplated for theology Honours students. These preliminary examinations were informally called "prelims." Mathematics and Natural Science already had such examinations, but they had to be taken in addition to Moderations.
59. For a discussion of these issues see "Notes and News," Oxford Mag., 29 April 1885, p. 179-83; and "Moderations," Oxford Mag., 28 October 1885, pp. 322-23. See also the letter of B. Carpenter to HWA (n. 29), which stressed the literary abilities of his scientifically trained son and his attainment of "general culture."
60. For a discussion of these issues see "Notes and News," Oxford Mag., 29 April 1885, p. 179-83; and "Moderations," Oxford Mag., 28 October 1885, pp. 322-23. See also the letter of B. Carpenter to HWA (n. 29), which stressed the literary abilities of his scientifically trained son and his attainment of "general culture."
61. JBS, 6 November 1885, Extracts (n. 18), bk. 3, p. 50.
62. Acland was sincere, both in his support of the sciences and in his opposition to sweeping changes in the undergraduate curriculum. He opposed any attempts to narrow the curriculum, but supported its widening by the addition of natural sciences. In particular he believed that physicians should take their first degree in a literary, historical, or philosophical field. He totally rejected the general sentiment that students could no longer become proficient in the ever-expanding sciences in the year or two that remained in their curriculum after the mandatory classical studies.
63. See Engel's discussion of Freeman's views in From Clergyman to Don (n. 31).
64. Oxford Mag., 6 May 1885, pp. 209-10. It was a narrow defeat: the preamble fell by one vote, 71 to 72. Although the traditionalists won, it was a small victory since the bill was defeated because of confusion over the exact meaning of the wording of the preamble.
65. See the announcement of the changes in Oxford Mag., 11 November 1885, p. 357.
66. Oxford Mag., 2 December 1885, p. 411.
67. "Notes and News," Oxford Mag., 16 June 1886, p. 252.
68. P. Willert to Poulton, 25 June 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fol. 43, BSC-UCL. I thank Mark Curthoys for identifying the writer.
69. One element was the settlements of the mid-Victorian Commissions in the statutes of 1882, which left the university at Cambridge with a larger income and a free hand to spend it without reference to the colleges. Ironically, this situation had come about because at the time of the Commissions it was the poverty of Cambridge that was most prominent; see Howarth, "Science Education" (n. 21), p. 355. This important difference allowed the university at Cambridge to create positions in the sciences, while at Oxford this responsibility was left to the colleges, which usually abdicated it. Thus by 1886 Cambridge had eighteen science professors overall, compared to Oxford's thirteen - but more important, three times as many lecturers and readers (ibid., p. 357, and see table 4).
70. See Engel, From Clergyman to Don (n. 31).
71. I thank Mark Curthoys for this point.
72. Robb-Smith, "Medical Education" (n. 26).
73. Donald MacAlister to JBS, 3 November 1884, MS ADD 179/4, fol. 217, BSC-UCL; JBS to Henry Pitman, Secretary, Royal College of Physicians, 8 November 1884, fols. 218-19, ibid.; Pitman to JBS: 11 November 1884, fols. 220-21, and 12 November 1884, fols. 222-23, ibid. Although I assume that JBS also consulted the Royal College of Surgeons, I have found no record of a reply.
74. According to MacAlister, The exemptions granted by the London Colleges on accounting our examinations are greater than you appear to think. Royal College of Physicians: Our 2nd M.B. [final medical examination] exempts from Primary Examination for membership. Our B.C. [Bachelor of Surgery] degree exempts from Surgery and Surgical Anatomy of Second Exam for Memb. Our M.B. or M.D. [degree obtained after M.B. on presentation of a thesis] exempts from both Primary & Second Examination for membership. Our 1st [first medical examination] & 2nd M.B. exempt from the corresponding subjects in the License exams. Our B.C. exempts from Surgery, surgical anatomy, & pathology in License. Royal College of Surgeons: Our B.C. & M.B exempts from a number of particulars in the course of study previous to primary M.R.C.S. & F.R.C.S. & also in regard to the Pass examinations. For details see The Medical Directory 1884 pp. 293 & 99. Our M.B. or M.D. exempts from examination in Medicine & Midwifery for M.R.C.S. & F.R.C.S. (MacAlister to JBS, 13 November 1884, MS ADD 179/4, fols. 227-28, BSC-UCL)
75. Pitman to JBS, 14 November 1884, fols. 229-30, ibid. He also indicated that MacAlister was wrong about the new scheme: "Let me remind you of one point in the conjoint Examination. This is the subjects of the First Examination only that Candidates are exempted from re-examination who have passed at a university [i.e., those with recognized medical schools] in the United Kingdom &c. The Exam on Anatomy & Physiology and the Final Subjects is to be by the Colleges only for those who desire their qualification."
76. I have here condensed the many possible paths to an Oxford or Cambridge medical degree. For fuller particulars of the requirements as they stood in 1885 see Brit. Med. J., 13 September 1884, pp. 507-8; and Robb-Smith, "Medical Education" (n. 26). I thank Mark Curthoys for identifying some of the Oxford men.
77. I have here condensed the many possible paths to an Oxford or Cambridge medical degree. For fuller particulars of the requirements as they stood in 1885 see Brit. Med. J., 13 September 1884, pp. 507-8; and Robb-Smith, "Medical Education" (n. 26). I thank Mark Curthoys for identifying some of the Oxford men.
78. Frances Henry Champneys to HWA, 30 January 1885, MS Acland d.92, fols. 55-58, Bodl. Champneys had matriculated in 1866 at Brasenose College; he received a B.A. in 1870, and the M.A. and M.B. in 1875.
79. Lancet, 21 February 1885, p. 357, noted the letter to the Pall Mall Gazette in order to chastise the writer and indicate its support of the reform proposal.
80. This controversy emerged from letters to JBS and HWA, and from memoranda generated by the Oxford Medical Graduates Club. See MS Acland d. 92, Bodl.: Champneys to HWA, 30 January 1885, fols. 55-58; G. Humphry to HWA, 2 February 1885, fols. 66-67. In MS ADD 179/5, BSC-UCL: J. Matthews Duncan to JBS, 30 January 1885, fols. 3-4; Samuel West to JBS, 27 February 1885, fols. 6-9; Champneys to JBS, 27 February 1885, fols. 10-11; Perry Kidd to JBS, 4 March 1885, fols. 12-13; West to JBS, 4 March 1885, fols. 14-17; Champneys to JBS, 4 March 1885, fols. 18-21.
81. Lancet, 15 March 1884, p. 487, noting the foundation of the "Oxford Medical Graduates Club" at a meeting at the invitation of Dr. A. B. Shepherd. See also Lancet, 5 April 1884, p. 637. Lancet, 31 May 1884, pp. 995-96, noted the inaugural meeting of the club, attended by Acland, Burdon Sanderson, Munro, Church, Corfield, Payne, and about fifty others, including West and John Morgan; at this meeting the Club's president stated that its objects were "to maintain association with the university and to promote good fellowship among the members of the club."
82. Lancet, 15 March 1884, p. 487, noting the foundation of the "Oxford Medical Graduates Club" at a meeting at the invitation of Dr. A. B. Shepherd. See also Lancet, 5 April 1884, p. 637. Lancet, 31 May 1884, pp. 995-96, noted the inaugural meeting of the club, attended by Acland, Burdon Sanderson, Munro, Church, Corfield, Payne, and about fifty others, including West and John Morgan; at this meeting the Club's president stated that its objects were "to maintain association with the university and to promote good fellowship among the members of the club."
83. Lancet, 15 March 1884, p. 487, noting the foundation of the "Oxford Medical Graduates Club" at a meeting at the invitation of Dr. A. B. Shepherd. See also Lancet, 5 April 1884, p. 637. Lancet, 31 May 1884, pp. 995-96, noted the inaugural meeting of the club, attended by Acland, Burdon Sanderson, Munro, Church, Corfield, Payne, and about fifty others, including West and John Morgan; at this meeting the Club's president stated that its objects were "to maintain association with the university and to promote good fellowship among the members of the club."
84. Champneys to HWA, 30 January 1885, MS Acland d.92, fols. 55-58, Bodl.
85. J. Matthews Duncan to JBS, 30 January 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fols. 3-4, BSC-UCL.
86. Humphry to HWA, 2 February 1885, MS Acland d.92, fols. 66-67, Bodl.
87. Champneys to JBS, 27 February 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fols. 10-11, BSC-UCL (the letter is incomplete).
88. Samuel West to JBS, 27 February 1885, ibid., fols. 6-9, West had matriculated at Christ Church in 1867; he was granted a B.A. in 1871, the M.A. and M.B. in 1875, and the M.D. in 1882.
89. West to HWA, 6 March [1885], MS Acland d.92, fols. 114-16, Bodl.
90. "The Oxford Medical School," Brit. Med. J., 20 February 1886, p. 357.
91. Champneys to JBS, 4 March 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fols. 18-21, BSC-UCL.
92. The motion was roundly carried with 412 placets, 244 non-placets: "The 'Vivisection' Grant," Oxford Mag., 11 March 1885, pp. 163-64.
93. See, for example, the letter of Canon Liddon to HWA, 13 March 1885, MS Acland d.98, fols. 24-25, Bodl.: Liddon wrote to assure HWA that his speech had not been meant as personal attack.
94. "Medical Degrees at Oxford," Lancet, 13 June 1885, p. 1092.
95. The relevant papers are in MS ADD 179/66, BSC-UCL: see JBS, "The Medical Statute in Its Relation to the Study of Medicine in the University," which comments on previously published letters by Samuel West ("Observations upon the Proposed New Medical Statute, to the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford," with "Postscript to Letter to Vice-Chancellor") and W. Bruce Clarke ("A Letter Concerning the Proposed New Medical Statute, to the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford"). On the medical graduates club's activities see "Resolutions Passed at the Preliminary Meeting, on May 8th [1885]"; and "Oxford Medical Degrees," which organized the June 2nd meeting that produced "The Proposed Medical Statute." See also a letter by other science instructors and a letter by Gilbert W. Child. The controversy was complicated by a further dispute over a decree related to medical examination that had passed on 10 March without notice due to the antivivisectionist debate. This decree was then rescinded because of a technicality.
96. Liddell to JBS, 26 April 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fol. 35, BSC-UCL.
97. JBS, 29 January 1886, Extracts (n. 18), bk. 3, p. 77.
98. JBS worried about the 1891 vote for the anatomy building (while recovering from an attack of flu). He wrote to HWA: I have endeavored to learn what my former opponents intend to do, but no one seems to know. I suppose that Prof. Freeman will make a speech which I hope will be violent & personal. And somebody else may ask some foolish questions. Unless some misstatement of fact is made, neither speech nor questions need be answered and I should for my own sake be glad that nothing should be said about experiments. (JBS to HWA, [1891], fols. 58-59, MS Acland d.65, Bodl.) See also Arthur Thompson (anatomy instructor and eventually professor) to JBS, 25 May 1891, MS 20501, fols. 133-36, Burdon Sanderson Collection, National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh; E. Ray Lankester to JBS, 30 May [1891], ibid., fols. 139-40; William Gillem (?) to JBS, 30 May [1891], ibid., fols. 141-42; Edward Chapman to JBS, 30 May 1891, MS ADD 179/6, fols. 41-42, BSC-UCL. These fears, however, appear to have been totally unwarranted.
99. See announcements to that effect in Lancet, 29 May 1886, p. 1051; and Brit. Med. J., 29 May 1886, p. 1049.
100. See announcements to that effect in Lancet, 29 May 1886, p. 1051; and Brit. Med. J., 29 May 1886, p. 1049.
101. Here I have simplified the many possible routes to an Oxford or Cambridge medical degree. For a more detailed account see Brit. Med. J., 10 September 1887, pp. 547-49.
102. A. M. M. Stedman, ed., Oxford: Its Life and Schools (London: George Bell and Sons, 1887), p. ix.
103. Champneys to JBS, 4 March 1885, MS ADD 179/5, fols. 18-21, BSC-UCL.
104. Ibid.
105. HWA, "Oxford and Modern Medicine, A letter to Dr. James Andrew" (printed for private circulation, Oxford, 1890).
106. Robb-Smith, "Medical Education" (n. 26).
107. I. F. Payne to HWA, 25 February 1890, MS Acland d.92, fols. 24-25, Bodl.; J. B. Nias to HWA, 17 March 1890, ibid., fols. 21-22.
108. See G. G. Glover (a general practitioner) to HWA, 8 February 1890, ibid., fols. 12-13.
109. John Simon to HWA, 1 February 1890, ibid., fols. 100-1.
110. John Simon to HWA, 30 March 1890, ibid., fols. 102-3.
111. F. A. Dixey to HWA, 17 February 1890, ibid., fols. 6-7. By 1892 Dixey, a demonstrator in the physiology department, was involved in a public dispute with Burdon Sanderson.
112. John Marshall to HWA, 2 February 1890, ibid., fol. 18.
113. See, for example, John Simon, General Pathology, as Conducive to the Establishment of Rational Principles for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Disease: A Course of Lectures, Delivered at St. Thomas's Hospital, during the Summer Session of 1850 (Philadelphia: Blanchard and Lea, 1852). For Acland's views on medicine, medical education, and the role of science generally, see H. W. Acland, Introductory Address Delivered before the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature and Art (Oxford: The Association, 1880); idem, The Unveiling of the Statue of Sydenham in the Oxford Museum, August 9, 1894 (Oxford: Horace Hart, 1894).
114. See, for example, John Simon, General Pathology, as Conducive to the Establishment of Rational Principles for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Disease: A Course of Lectures, Delivered at St. Thomas's Hospital, during the Summer Session of 1850 (Philadelphia: Blanchard and Lea, 1852). For Acland's views on medicine, medical education, and the role of science generally, see H. W. Acland, Introductory Address Delivered before the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature and Art (Oxford: The Association, 1880); idem, The Unveiling of the Statue of Sydenham in the Oxford Museum, August 9, 1894 (Oxford: Horace Hart, 1894).
115. See, for example, John Simon, General Pathology, as Conducive to the Establishment of Rational Principles for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Disease: A Course of Lectures, Delivered at St. Thomas's Hospital, during the Summer Session of 1850 (Philadelphia: Blanchard and Lea, 1852). For Acland's views on medicine, medical education, and the role of science generally, see H. W. Acland, Introductory Address Delivered before the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature and Art (Oxford: The Association, 1880); idem, The Unveiling of the Statue of Sydenham in the Oxford Museum, August 9, 1894 (Oxford: Horace Hart, 1894).
116. Notably, Owens College, Manchester, appointed the Brackenbury Professor in physiology in 1873 (Arthur Gamgee); Edinburgh University appointed a Professor of Physiology in 1874 (William Rutherford); University College, London, appointed the Jodrell Professor of Physiology in 1874 (John Burdon Sanderson); and of course Michael Foster had gone to Cambridge in 1870 as the Praelector in Physiology at Trinity College. And before the creation of the Waynflete professorship in 1883, King's College, London (Professor, 1880 - Gerald Yeo) and Birmingham Medical School (Lecturer, 1881 - Alfred Carter) had created physiology positions. See Stella V. F. Butler, "Centers and Peripheries: The Development of British Physiology, 1870-1914," J. Hist. Biol., 1988, 21: table 1, p. 478.