The weakest point in the Conference was Manchuria. The net result, so far as the three Eastern provinces of China are concerned, is that a few concessions waiving preferential rights in regard to railway construction and the engagement of Japanese advisers were made by the Japanese Delegation, and that Group V of the Twentyone Demands was definitely abandoned. The latter concession was little more than a formality, since a demand which, according to Prof. Willoughby, 'would, if granted, have made of China a virtual political dependency of Japan,' could hardly have been revived in the atmosphere of Washington.

The situation in Manchuria rests upon a series of Treaties and Agreements concluded during the last twenty-five years between Russia and China, Japan and China, and Japan and Russia. This vast area of 400,000 square miles is traversed through its whole length and breadth by railways, owned, controlled, and policed by Russia and Japan; and it requires only a slight acquaintance with this form of railway penetration in the Far East to realise that the political and economic influence it exerts is beyond the power of any Conference to regulate. I have watched the working of the system in Korea and Manchuria since its inception twenty-five years ago, and can testify from personal knowledge to its efficiency as a means of peaceful absorption. Before the European war, Russian domination in the North and Japanese predominance in the south worked in close alliance on parallel lines. Russia's position was greatly shaken by the war, while that of Japan was immensely strengthened. Japan took the opportunity to exact an extension of the leases of Port Arthur, Dalny, the South Manchuria railway and the Antung-Mukden railway for a term of 99 years. China, on her side, profiting by the collapse of Russia, succeeded in establishing a hold over the Chinese Eastern railway, in which she had previously only a nominal interest. The Chinese Eastern railway is redeemable in 1938, while the lease of the South Manchuria railway runs to 2002 and that of the Antung-Mukden line to 2007. The contrast is further accentuated by the difference between the status of the Japanese settlers in the south and that of the Russians in the north. There are 120,000 Japanese in South

Manchuria living under the protection of their own authorities; while in the north there is a large Russian population which is amenable in all things to Chinese jurisdiction.

It will be seen from the above brief sketch that the Manchurian problem is essentially a railway one, and that any attempt to assimilate the position to that obtaining elsewhere in China must be based on that fact. Such an attempt was made by the United States Government in 1909, when the problem was far simpler than it is now. The Knox proposal of that year sought to promote the development of Manchuria under a practical application of the policy of the open door and equal opportunity, by bringing the Manchurian railways under a system of international control on lines similar to those contemplated by the Consortium of the present day. It met with a decided refusal on the part of Russia and Japan, and only led to the Russo-Japanese Treaty of the following year, which consolidated their joint interests in Manchuria and formed the basis of their subsequent policy. The Soviet Government, however, shows no marked eagerness to exploit the Manchurian legacy which it inherited from its Imperial predecessor; and, as China and Russia have to live as neighbours on a common frontier of nearly 4000 miles, it is not improbable that the situation in Northern Manchuria will undergo considerable modifications in favour of China. If ever Russia and China emerge from their present weakness and attain a degree of strength commensurate with their population and natural resources, the position of Japan on the mainland of Asia may become one of some difficulty; but, in the meantime, she is not likely to be hampered in the vast enterprises on which she has embarked there by the decisions of the Washington Conference.

J. N. JORDAN.

Art. 8.-BRITISH STUDENTS AT PADUA.

1. Bibliotheca Seminarii Patavini, Codex 634. 2. Monumenti della Università di Padova. Venezia, 1884, and Padova, 1885.

MS.

By Gloria.

3. Statuta Universitatis Juristarum Patavini Gymnasii in Archiv für Literatur und Kirchengeschichte. Edited by H. Denifle. VI, p. 309.

4. Die Entstehung der Universitäten des Mittelalters bis 1400. By Heinrich Denifle. Berlin: Weidmann, 1885. 5. De natione Anglica et Scota Juristarum. By Jo. Aloys Andrich. Patavii, 1892.

6. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages. By Hastings Rashdall. Clarendon Press, 1895.

7. Atti della Nazione Germanica Artista. By Antonio Favaro. Venezia, 1911 and 1912. R. Dep. Ven. di S.P. 8. Atti della Nazione Germanica dei Legisti. By Biagio Brugi. Venezia, 1912. R. Dep. Ven. di S.P.

9. L'Università di Padova. By Antonio Favaro. Venezia, 1922.

THE University of Padua celebrated its seventh century last May. It was founded in 1222, by a migration of students from Bologna, though, so early as 1169, we hear of a school of jurisprudence, kept by a certain Martinus Goxo 'in his house close to the main church of Padua.' It is certain, however, that until the epoch of the Bolognese migration, there is no trace of a 'Studium generale' at Padua.

It is well known that the proper designation of what we now call a University was, in the Middle Ages, a 'Studium generale'; the word 'Universitas' had another significance. The 'Studium' was 'generale,' not because it embraced all the faculties, but because it was a place to which students in general, from all quarters, could resort for teaching-a school open to the studentworld. Universitas,' on the other hand, in the Middle Ages, preserved its original connotation; it meant simply a 'collegium,' a corporate body of men, employed upon any business and united in a corporation for mutual advantage and protection-a guild, in short. Just as the arts and crafts banded together in a mediæval city for self-protection, creating a code of

statutes to govern the guild, and electing a Warden, a Proctor, or a Provost, to enforce them, so the medieval craftsmen in the learning and teaching business formed themselves into Universities' or 'Colleges.'

But inside this body of teachers and students the question of their relative position must soon have arisen. The Professorial, or teaching branch, maintained that students were merely on the footing of apprentices in the guild; the scholars maintained that the Professors were merely their hired teachers, that the students formed the demand which created the supply, that the Professors had the goods, but the students held the cash; and thus throughout the medieval world of learning arose a fundamental distinction. The students and the Professors became concentrated in separate ‘Universities' or 'Colleges'; and hence sprang two distinct types of what we now call a University. The great 'Studium generale' of Paris, the prototype of the French and English Universities, was developed as a Professorial University, in which the teachers, based upon the Church, held the upper place. The 'Studium generale' of Bologna, by a process we will presently describe, developed as a Student University.

In Italy, except at Salerno, which was a medical school, the Universities, in our sense, grew up round teachers of law. Bologna harboured certain Professors of world-wide fame; and students flocked from all quarters to sit at their feet. The avidity for instruction in law can be explained by the fact that a course of legal studies was obligatory on all who aspired to judicial, notarial, or secretarial employment in mediæval communes. A degree in law opened the gate to a wide and lucrative profession. These students, when their numbers became so large as they did at Bologna, being reckoned at one time no less than ten thousand, represented wealth, in fees to the teachers and in business to the townsfolk. The town, in the hope of fixing the students by fixing the teachers, enacted that Doctors of law must be Bolognese citizens, and exacted an oath from them that they would not leave the city to teach elsewhere. These short-sighted statutes gave the students their power. They were mostly foreigners, not Bolognese citizens; coming either from other regions of

Italy, or from beyond the mountains; they had no citizen-rights and owed no allegiance to the commune, but they banded together as 'nations' for their selfprotection against the extortionate charges on the part of the townsfolk. Other cities were always ready to bid for their presence and their cash. Thus organised, they claimed that it was they who had really created the University by their demand for teachers, and so, upon any resistance to their will, they put in operation their two powerful weapons-boycotting a recalcitrant doctor, and thus ruining his income; and migrating, and thus ruining the townsfolk who drew a large part of their wealth from the students' needs.

With these two weapons in their hands, the Bolognese 'University' of Students soon created an independent civitas in civitate inside the city. They evolved a body of statutes and, on the analogy of the trade-guilds, they elected their own Proctor to enforce them. The student swore fealty to the Rector of his 'University' and to the 'University' statutes, including the oath of solidarity by which he bound himself to obey the Rector's order of migration en masse; he did not swear allegiance to the town laws; and in civil matters he was subject to Rectorial not communal jurisdiction.

The position thus acquired by the Student University at Bologna furnished the type and is the model of all other Italian Universities, including Padua. It was so powerful that it enabled the students to proceed to the full development of the University Constitution. The students for the most part were foreigners, a free company on foreign soil. A native of the Commune of Bologna could not have taken the oath to the students' Rector without violating his allegiance to his own Town Statutes. The Universitas Scholarium' consisted of peregrinating students from other districts of Italy or from beyond the mountains, foreigners properly so called. The University of Students accordingly was divided into a Cismontane and an Ultramontane University, each with its own Rector and statutes; and these again were subdivided into 'nations.' The Cismontane University numbered three 'nations,' the Roman, the Tuscan, and the Lombard. The Ultramontane University originally numbered fourteen nations, among them the