The house is first known to have been a residence for scholars when

it had passed into the possession of one Elias de Hertford, from whom

it got its name of Hert Hall (_Aula Cervina_). This was between 1261

and 1284. A Hall was then simply a boarding-house, hired by a party of

students as a residence. One of them, called a Principal, paid the rent

and collected the amount from the rest. From the first the Principal

possessed a certain authority, but it was not necessary that he should

be a Master or even a Graduate. Eventually the University required

that he should be a Graduate, and a new Principal had to be admitted

by the Chancellor. When, after the Reformation, the Colleges absorbed

the greater part of the now greatly reduced Academic population, most

of the old Halls disappeared and no new ones were created. Hence the

few that remained divided the monopoly of University education with

the Colleges, and their Principalships became not unimportant pieces

of patronage, which after a long struggle the Chancellor succeeded in

appropriating to himself, except in the case of S. Edmund Hall. To a

very late period, however, there remained traces of the old democratic

_régime_, under which the students claimed the right to elect their

own Principal, that is to say, to consent to the transfer of the

house by the landlord from one Principal to another. Since, prior to

the Laudian statutes, there was nothing to prevent a scholar freely

transferring himself from one Principal to another, the necessity of

their acceptance of the landlord’s new tenant is obvious. Even after

the right of the Chancellor to nominate was fairly acknowledged, it was

considered necessary that the students (graduate and undergraduate)

should be solemnly assembled in the Hall and required to elect the

Chancellor’s nominee, a formality which at Hart Hall lasted as long as

the Hall itself. The present Fellows of Hertford enjoy less autonomy

than the ancient students, and the Chancellor still enjoys an absolute

right to appoint the Principal.

In 1312 the Hall, after some intermediate transfers, passed to Walter

de Stapeldon, Bishop of Exeter. For some years before the acquisition

of their present site, it was the habitation of the Rector and Scholars

of Stapeldon Hall, now known as Exeter College. After this, Hart Hall

continued to belong to them and was let to a Principal, usually one of

their own Fellows. The rent varied from time to time till 1665, after

which a fixed sum of £1 13_s._ 4_d._ continued to be paid, and it

became a question whether prescription had not extinguished any further

rights on the part of the College.

Among the “Principals” appear the first three Wardens of New College,

Richard de Tonworthe (1378), Nicolas de Wykeham (1381), and Thomas

de Cranleigh, afterwards Archbishop of Dublin (1384).[348] During

these years (probably 1375-1385) Hart and Black Halls were occupied

by William of Wykeham’s New College, while their own buildings were

in course of erection. There is, indeed, in the New College book of

“Evidences” what purports to be a conveyance (dated 1379) of Hart Hall

to William of Wykeham, under a quit-rent, by the Prioress and Convent

of Studley. But from the documents of Exeter College it is clear that

the “capital lords” in actual possession were the Prior and Convent

of S. Frideswyde’s.[349] Hence it would seem that the astute Bishop

of Winchester was outwitted for once by the Nuns of Studley (who were

really proprietors of the adjoining Scheld Hall), and bought land with

a bad title.[350] Nuns had a great reputation as women of business.

Later on the Hall was tenanted by a body of scholars supported by

Glastonbury Abbey. At the dissolution a pension of £16 13_s._ 4_d._

was paid for the support of five scholars to Hart Hall, or rather to

the University on its behalf. The amount was at first a rent-charge

payable, but not always paid, by the grantee of certain Abbey lands. At

the Restoration these lands were resumed by the Crown. The pension was

still paid at the end of the last century, but has now disappeared.

The most distinguished man who can be fairly claimed as an _alumnus_

of Hart Hall is the learned Selden (1600-1603), then “a long

scabby-pol’d boy but a good student.” Ken, the saintly Bishop of Bath

and Wells, was apparently a member of the Hall for a few months while

waiting for a vacancy at New College. Sir Henry Wotton, one of the

seventeenth century worthies immortalized by Izaac Walton, resided

here, though it would seem that he was not a member of the Hall but a

Gentleman-Commoner of New College.

Richard Newton was born in the year 1675 or 1676, being a son of the

squire of Laundon, Bucks, a moderate estate to which he eventually

succeeded. He came up to Christ Church as a Westminster Student in

1694. After being for a time a Tutor of that House, he became tutor

to the two Pelhams, the future Duke of Newcastle and his brother. In

1704 he was presented to the Rectory of Sudbury, Northants, by Bp.

Compton. He was admitted Principal of Hart Hall, and took his D.D. in

1710, continuing to hold Sudbury. He made his mark as a preacher; and

a number of pamphlets testify to his zeal as a University Reformer. In

1726 he wrote against an undoubted abuse, the evasion of the statute

against unauthorized migration, though it must be admitted that his

zeal on that occasion was stimulated by a recent desertion from his

own Hall. Another of his pamphlets is on the perennial subject of

University expensiveness. It is clear that in his own Hall he attempted

to practise what he preached. In the pamphlets against him there are

sneers against “a regimen of small-beer and apple-dumplings”--which (it

is possible) had something to do with the frequent migrations of which

the Doctor had to complain, though we are told that in one case the

attraction was a Balliol Scholarship, and in another the “fine garden”

of Trinity which the deserter “hoped would be to the advantage of his

health.” Eventually he even stopped the small-beer, holding that (as

he explains) more beer was drunk when it was got both in the Hall and

out of it than when it could only be obtained outside. Newton was the

“active” Head of his day, the “Monarch of Hart Hall” as the scoffers

put it. He had pupils to travel or stay with him in “the Long,”

usually “young gentlemen of fortune” in his College. He lamented

the indolence and inactivity, and was pained to observe “the secular

views and ambitious schemes” of other Heads. He held what was then

accounted the eccentric opinion that “a gentleman-Commoner has a soul

to be saved as well as a servitor, and is under the same obligations to

religion and virtue.” In confidential moments he would declare himself

in favour of “Common-sense and Reason in matters of Religion”; and he

appears to have practised a somewhat latitudinarian mode of meditation.

“He[351] would, a little before bed-time, desire his young friends

to indulge him in a short vacation of about half-an-hour for his own

private recollections. During that little interval they were silent,

and he would smoke his pipe with great composure, and then chat with

them again in a useful manner for a short space, and, bidding them

good night, go to his rest.” When resident on his living, he had daily

service at seven p.m. He was a Church Reformer as well as a University

Reformer, and wrote on “Pluralities Indefensible.” After his call

to Oxford, he held his living as an absentee, but “never pocketed a

farthing of the profits thereof”; and eventually succeeded in resigning

in favour of his curate. Altogether the life of Dr. Newton exhibits an

example of independence, honesty, and disinterestedness, rare indeed

among the Churchmen of his time. Pelham gave it as his only reason for

not preferring his old tutor, that he could not do it “because he never

asked me.” A man whom Pelham actually employed to write King’s Speeches

for him might certainly have been a Bishop for the asking. It was only

in the year before his death (1752) that he got a Canonry at Christ

Church.

_Hertford College_, 1740-1816.

Newton had one ambition, and that was a disinterested one. “Dr. Newton

is commonly said to be Founder-mad,” wrote the malicious Hearne; “Dr.

Newton is very fond of founding a College,” wrote another, in 1721.

The patronage which he would not stoop to ask for himself, he sought

to use for his College. But his grand friends did little for him;

nearly all that he spent came out of his own pocket. He spent about

£1500 on building a Chapel for the Hall (consecrated in 1716) and the

adjoining corner of the present Quadrangle. He published an edition of

Theophrastus by subscription for the benefit of his College, but it did

not appear till after his death. His proposals for the foundation of a

College were made public in 1734 in a Letter to the Vice-Chancellor,

though he had already “made a noise” about it “many years.” Considering

the slenderness of the means at his disposal, it is not surprising

that the project encountered some ridicule. Hearne had at first been

much impressed by the Doctor’s sermons, and styled him “an ingenious

honest man,” but on the appearance of his pamphlet on migration

pronounced him “quite mad with pride and conceit,” and the book a “very

weak, silly performance.” Now he laments that “’tis pitty Charities

and Benefactions should be discountenanced and obstructed; but it

sometimes happens when the persons that make them are supposed to be

_mente capti_ and aim at things in the settlement which are ridiculous,

which seems to be the case at Hart Hall, as ’tis represented to me.

However, after all,” the charitable critic concludes, “’tis better

not to publish the failings of persons, especially of clergymen, on

such occasions, least mischief follow, the enemy being always ready to

take advantage.” The grant of the charter was long opposed by Exeter

College: but the opinion of the Attorney-General was unfavourable to

the claim on the part of that College to anything but the accustomed

rent. In 1740 Dr. Newton got his Charter of Incorporation, and his

Statutes approved by George II.

Dr. Newton was not at all disposed to lose by his elevation to the

Headship of a College the autocracy which he had so long enjoyed as

Head of a Hall. Hence, although he styles the four Tutors of the new

Foundation “Senior Fellows” and their eight “Assistants” “Junior

Fellows,” the whole government of the College seems to be ultimately

vested in the Principal, who was to be a Westminster student and Tutor

of Christ Church nominated by the Dean of that House. There were to be

no “idle fellowships” on Newton’s foundation: all were “official,” and

lasted, the Senior Fellowships till the completion of eighteen years

from Matriculation, the Junior only from B.A. to M.A. The College was

designed for thirty-two “Students,” who enjoyed a modest endowment of

£6 13_s._ 4_d._ for the first year and £13 6_s._ 8_d._ for four years

more, with commons. There were also four “Scholars” who were to act as

Servitors to the four Tutors, and to perform such functions as ringing

the bell and keeping the gate. Commoners and Gentleman-Commoners were

expressly excluded: but wealthier men might become honorary Scholars,

with leave to wear a “tuft” as well as the Scholar’s gown. Each Tutor

was to take charge of the freshmen of one year, who remained his

pupils throughout their course. This division of the College into four

classes must have been suggested by the Scotch University system, or

by the arrangement of the French Colleges on which the Scotch system

was based. It was, at all events, vastly superior to the old “Tutorial

system,” under which every Tutor played the polymathic Professor to

Undergraduates of every year simultaneously.

Dr. Newton’s Statutes are very curious reading. He aimed at

perpetuating the “system of education” which he had himself introduced.

They are full of wise provisions, some of them rather crotchety, and

others excellent in themselves but perhaps hardly practicable even

then. Each Tutor lived in a different “Angle” of the Quadrangle,

and was responsible for its discipline. His post must have been no

sinecure, if he was really to keep men out of each others’ rooms

during the hours of work, from Chapel (6.30 or 7.30 a.m. according

to season) till the 12 o’clock dinner, and from 2 to 6 p.m. Supper

was at 7 instead of the usual 6 p.m., to limit the time available

for compotations. The gate was shut at 9 p.m., and after 10 the key

was to be taken to the Principal’s bed-room and no egress or ingress

permitted. As an “educationist,” the Founder apparently believed in

Disputations and insisted much on English composition, but disbelieved

in verse-making except for “Undergraduates having a genius for

Poetry.” The sumptuary regulations are somewhat severe, including the

requirement that no bills shall be “contracted without their Tutor’s

knowledge and consent.” Allowances from parents were to be sent to

the Tutor, who was to pay his pupils’ debts before transmitting the

remainder to their destination. “Dismission” was the penalty for

contracting a debt of more than 5_s._ “with any person keeping a

Coffee-house or Cook’s-shop or any other Public House whatsoever.”

Newton’s first two successors were men of mark in their day. William

Sharp (1753-1757) was Regius Professor of Greek. David Durell

(1757-1775) was eminent as a Hebraist. But the Principalship depended

for its endowments entirely upon room-rent, and the Studentships

could never have been really paid out of Newton’s slender endowment

of less than £60 _per annum_. The existence of the College depended

upon the reputation of its Tutors. During the Tutorship[352] of

Newcome, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, the College was still

prosperous. His “pupils were for the most part men of family,” says

Sir George Trevelyan; among them, Charles James Fox (1764-1765). For a

Gentleman-Commoner (Dr. Newton’s Statutes were defied) Fox read hard,

and found Mathematics “entertaining.” “Application like yours,” the

Tutor found it necessary to write to him, “requires some intermission,

and you are the only person with whom I have ever had any connexion,

in whom I could say this.” He read so hard in fact, that his father,

Lord Holland, sent him abroad without taking his degree, to the no

small injury of his mind and character. It appears, however, that Fox’s

life had a lighter side even while at Oxford. In Lockhart’s story of

Reginald Dalton, we read: “Although Hart Hall has disappeared, we trust

the authorities have preserved the window from whence the illustrious

C. J. Fox made the memorable leap when determined to join his

companions in a Town and Gown row.” Alas! the window has disappeared

not only from the world of reality but (what does not always follow)

from that of tradition!

It was in the time of the fourth Principal, Dr. Bernard Hodgson,

that the College collapsed. On his death in 1805 no one would accept

the almost honorary headship; but at last in 1814 the one surviving

Fellow,[353] who was (we are told) considered “half-cracked,” announced

that he had “nominated, constituted, and admitted himself Principal”!

At this time the place was all but deserted. It became a sort of no

man’s land in which a score of “strange characters” (“as if being

‘half-cracked’ were a qualification for admission”) squatted rent free.

Eventually the University took upon itself to close the building. In

1820 the building adjoining Cat Street actually fell down “with a great

crash and a dense cloud of dust.”

_Magdalen Hall_ (on this site), 1820-1874.

On January 9th, 1820, a fire deprived Magdalen Hall of its local

habitation.[354] The old Hall stood upon the site of the existing S.

Swithin’s buildings, and belonged to the College from which it took

its name. In 1816 the President and Fellows had procured an Act of

Parliament transferring the site and buildings of Hertford Society to

Magdalen Hall, _i. e._ technically, to the University in trust for the

Hall. With part of the small property of the College, the Hertford

Scholarship was founded: the rest passed to the Society of Magdalen

Hall, which in 1822 took possession of its new home. A word must be

said as to the traditions of which Hertford College thus became the

inheritor.

About the year 1480 the Founder of Magdalen College built some rooms

near the gate of his College for the accommodation of the officers of

his Grammar School. To these other rooms were added, and the building

occupied by students and called S. Mary Magdalen Hall. This Society

had at first the closest connection with the College, the Principal

being always a Fellow. It was not till 1694 that the Chancellor of the

University finally established his right to nominate the Principal of

Magdalen Hall.

It was in this Hall that the Ultra-Protestant traditions of Magdalen

lingered after they had died out in the College itself. It had been

within the walls of Magdalen Hall that the English Reformation had

its true beginning in certain meetings for Bible-reading started by

William Tyndale, afterwards the translator of the Bible; and in the

seventeenth century, when the Laudian movement had got the upper

hand in the Colleges at large, it became a refuge for the oppressed

Puritans. At one time it boasted three hundred members. In 1631 its

Principal John Wilkinson, and Prideaux, Rector of Exeter, were summoned

before the King in Council at Woodstock and received “a publick and

sharp reprehension for their misgoverning and countenancing the

factious partie!” Soon after, Oxenbridge, one of its Tutors,[355] was

convicted of a “strange, singular, and superstitious way of dealing

with his Scholars by perswading and causing some of them to subscribe

as votaries to several articles framed by himself (as he pretends, for

their better government),” for which presumption he was “distutored.”

In 1640 Henry Wilkinson (also of the Hall) was suspended for preaching

in a very bitter way against some of the ceremonies of the Church.[356]

But the day of vengeance came. When the Parliamentary Visitors came to

Oxford the suspended Tutor, Henry Wilkinson, senior, commonly known

as “Long Harry,” was the most prominent and zealous of the Visitors.

The students of Magdalen Hall and New Inn submitted to a man, and the

places of the ejected Fellows and Scholars were largely recruited

from their numbers. A very large proportion of the eminent Puritans

of the seventeenth century came from these two Halls. A few of the

distinguished Magdalen Hall men, whom Hertford College now claims as a

sort of step-mother, may be added. John L’Isle, President of the High

Court of Justice; John Glynne, Lord Chief Justice of England under

Cromwell; William Waller, the Cromwellian Poet (afterwards at Hart

Hall); Sir Matthew Hale, the most famous of English Judges; Sydenham,

“the English Hippocrates”; Sir Henry Vane; Pococke, the Orientalist;

and Dr. John Wilkins, the Mathematician, afterwards Warden of Wadham,

then Master of Trin. Coll. Cambr., and later Bishop of Chester. Few

Colleges in the University ever sent out so many distinguished men

within so short a time. But the greatest name that Magdalen Hall can

boast figures oddly in this list of Puritan Worthies. Thomas Hobbes of

Malmesbury entered when not quite fifteen in 1603, and went down in

1607 with the B.A. degree. It is curious that it should have been by

the Puritan Principal, John Wilkinson, that the Philosopher of Erastian

Absolutism was introduced as tutor or companion into the Devonshire

family with which he remained connected for the rest of his life. In

spite of the Puritan _régime_, which was, however, hardly established

in his day, Hobbes describes the place of his education as one “where

the young were addicted to drunkenness, wantonness, gaming, and other

vices.” Clarendon was also a member of the Hall for a short time while

waiting for a Demyship at Magdalen College. Swift, whose Undergraduate

life was passed at Dublin, took his Oxford B.A. from Magdalen Hall in

1692, and proceeded M.A. a few weeks later, during which interval we

may perhaps assume that he resided in the Hall.

_Hertford College, founded 1874._

The last of the many vicissitudes which this venerable site has

experienced remains to be recorded. In 1874 the defunct Hertford

College was recalled to life by the munificence of Mr. T. C.

Baring, M.P., who endowed it with seventeen Fellowships, and thirty

Scholarships of £100 per annum, limited to members of the Church

of England.[357] An Act of Parliament gave the new foundation “all

such rights and privileges as are possessed or enjoyed or can be

exercised by other Colleges in the University of Oxford;” and Dr.

Richard Michell, the last Principal of Magdalen Hall, became the first

Principal of the present Hertford College.

While future ages will feel towards the name of Baring all the

loyalty that is a Founders due, it is a fortunate circumstance that

the accidents which have been related enabled him to give to his new

foundation the only thing which money could not buy--a slight flavour

of antiquity. The existing foundation is substantially the creation of

Mr. Baring, but enough remains of its predecessors--the Elizabethan

hall now transformed into a Library, the Jacobean Common-rooms which

represent the pre-Newtonian Hart Hall, Newton’s Chapel with the

adjoining “angle,” the plate and pictures of Magdalen Hall and its ten

Scholarships[358]--to give us a link with the past, a not uninteresting

past, of which, however glorious its future, the College need never be

ashamed. In one sense, notwithstanding the newness of its foundation,

the College belongs to the past more than its more venerable sisters.

It is untouched by recent legislation, its Statutes are constructed

upon the old model, and it still rejoices in Fellowships which are

tenable during life and celibacy.

XXI.

KEBLE COLLEGE.

BY REV. WALTER LOCK, M.A., SUB-WARDEN OF KEBLE COLLEGE.

This, the most recent of the Oxford colleges, was opened in 1870, the

foundation of it being due to a combination of three different but

cognate causes: the first was a widespread desire to make University

education more widely accessible to the nation, and especially to those

who were anxious to take Holy Orders in the Church of England; the

second, the desire to ensure that this education should be in the hands

of Churchmen; and the third, the desire to perpetuate the memory of the

Rev. John Keble, formerly Fellow and Tutor of Oriel College, Professor

of Poetry in the University (1832-1841), Vicar of Hursley (1836-1866),

and author of _The Christian Year_, _Lyra Innocentium_, _A Treatise on

Eucharistical Adoration_, &c.

Of these motives the first had been stirring in Oxford for many years.

In 1845 the following address was presented to the Hebdomadal Board--

“Considerable efforts have lately been made in this country for the

diffusion of civil and spiritual knowledge, whether at home or abroad.

Schools have been instituted for the lower and middle classes, churches

built and endowed, missionary societies established, further Schools

founded, as at Marlborough and Fleetwood, for the sons of poor clergy

and others; and, again, associations for the provision of additional

Ministers. But between these schools on the one hand, and on the other

the ministry which requires to be augmented, there is a chasm which

needs to be filled. Our Universities take up education where our

schools leave it; yet no one can say that they have been strengthened

or extended, whether for Clergy or Laity, in proportion to the growing

population of the country, its increasing empire, or deepening

responsibilities.

“We are anxious to suggest, that the link which we find thus missing

in the chain of improvement should be supplied by rendering Academical

education accessible to the sons of parents whose incomes are too

narrow for the scale of expenditure at present prevailing among the

junior members of the University of Oxford, and that this should be

done through the addition of new departments to existing Colleges,

or, if necessary, by the foundation of new Collegiate bodies. We

have learned, on what we consider unquestionable information, that

in such institutions, if the furniture were provided by the College,

and public meals alone were permitted, to the entire exclusion of

private entertainments in the rooms of the Students, the annual

College payments for board, lodging, and tuition might be reduced to

£60 at most; and that if frugality were enforced as the condition of

membership, the Student’s entire expenditure might be brought within

the compass of £80 yearly.

The Colleges of Oxford: Their History and Traditions XXI Chapters Contributed by Members of the Colleges · 第 39 / 44 段