Authors

The University College: a network of interests

The University was set up in 1909, long after the abolition of the slave trade in 1807 and slavery in 1833. However, its predecessor institution, the University College, was established in 1876. It was supported by educators such as John Percival, headmaster at Clifton College and Benjamin Jowett, Master of Balliol College Oxford amongst others. When the University College was set up, the city of Bristol had gone through tremendous changes. From appointing Isambard Brunel as project Engineer for what would be later known as Clifton Suspension Bridge, to demands for political reforms following the riots of 1831 after the House of Commons passed the Reform Bill, the access to clean water through waterworks in the 1840s, to setting up the University College in 1876, a year before Colston statue was erected. These changes may appear to be unrelated at first glance but Bristol had established itself as a centre for international trade in mid-18th century and the source of wealth came from its trade with the world including its involvement in the African trade.

By the 19th century slave traders and plantation owners who had received compensation for the loss of their so-called 'property' had invested in other ventures and donated to various causes. 19th century Bristol was benefitting from the support of wealthy patrons, from former families of planters, slave traders to staunch abolitionists. The history of the city of Bristol is therefore a multi-layered story of legally sanctioned displacement of human beings, coerced labour, trade and collaborations between various groups, exclusion as well as abolitionism and philanthropy.

From the debates to the research: University College Bristol

Methodology

The approach chosen for this research was based on the availability of source material. It followed four leads:

• Lead 1: Understand the context in which the University College Bristol was set up by delving into several source material.
• Lead 2: Identify a network of donors and educators who contributed to the University College and to the University.
• Lead 3: Examine the nature and frequency of donations and try and see if some of those individuals or their families received compensation money (using the UCL British Slave-Owners Database) and have a list of individuals and try and identify their relationships and their business interest within and outside the University
• Lead 4: Look at the links between the University and slavery with the aim of challenging definitions around the notion of direct and indirect links.

Research project

This part of the research is based on archival material provided by the archivists of the University of Bristol in March to September 2020. The pandemic had an effect on the project as most documents were not digitised and one could only work on the following:

• A. MMA (Memorandum and Articles of Association University College Bristol) 1862-1867
• B. a rough copy of the list of citizen petitioners to the king for a University (1908).

Several individuals were put in groups of occupations to have a clearer picture of the nature of the trades and professionals involved. Particular attention was paid to identifying names of traders associated with Merchant Venturers.

• C. DM506 (1889): papers relating to Bristol Medical School, Bristol Day Training College, Bristol Educational Society, University College Bristol and the University of Bristol (committee minutes and so on) – DM506-55; DM506-56; DM506-57; DM506-58; DM506-59.
• D. University Bristol Sustention Fund (1887-1888): this sustention ledger provides information about donations.
• E. Memorandum and petition to the king.

These list of names and documents highlight the fact that a number of professional and influential Bristolians were keen to convince the crown and politicians of the importance of a university in Bristol. The main argument was that there was no such institution in the region. The momentum and the commitment were important enough to gather traction outside Bristol (Oxford). This also emphasizes the fact that Bristol's educational scene and businesses were intertwined, which had ramifications beyond the city.

Minutes of committee meetings

When we examine these minutes, one notices that several individuals appear regularly and over a long period of time. That might be an indication of their commitment to the committee and to the University. This might also add credence to the assumption that these committees' members were a tight knit group that seem to have some influence across various aspects of Bristol's society.

1. The most frequent attendees

1. G.F. Schacht with 38 appearances from 9 October 1889 to 14 March 1894. He was appointed chair 3 times.
2. Albert Fry with 30 appearances from 9 October 1889 to 14 March 1894. He was chairman of the committee 30 times. He had an avid interest in educational works, especially in the University College Bristol. He has largely been accredited as the reason for its inception and success under his chairmanship. Albert Fry was also linked to Member of Parliament and committee member Lewis Fry (who appeared 10 times in the documents we examined between 12 November 1890 and 12 March 1894).
3. Dr Robert Shingleton Smith with 26 appearances from 9 October 1889 to 14 March 1894. He was a lecturer in physiology first then was appointed as professor.
4. Mr. J. W. Arrowsmith appears 29 times from 13 October to 13 February 1894. Arrowsmith had a company of the same name and was a major printer and publisher in Bristol.
5. Mr. P. F. Worsley, with 16 appearances from 13 November 1889. He was chair of the committee 6 times, and he was a chemistry teacher.
6. Mr. F. M. Alleyne appeared 16 times from 11 December 1889 to 14 March 1894. We found little information about him in the documents we analysed.
7. Prof. Lloyd Morgan appeared 16 times in the documents from 11 September 1889 to 14 March 1894. He taught at the University College and fought hard for the Charter for the University College to be established. He specialised in the study of animal psychology.
8. Prof. Reginald Fanshawe appeared 24 appearances from 9 October 1889 to 14 March 1894. He was professor in classics.

Key points

There were many committee members who made over thirty appearances, which suggests that there was a small group of people who were regularly present in those meetings. The committee members were staff of the University and people who had considerable influence and were involved primarily in businesses external to the University. The documents examined also suggest that the close-knit group had connections across Bristol within the University College and had political influence. Lewis Fry and the Fry family were indeed very influential in the committee. Albert Fry's approval as the chair of the committee was necessary for most important decisions.

2. The relationship between the Merchant Venturers, local businesses and the University College Bristol

The individual members of the Merchant Venturers are not revealed in the pages we looked at in detail (pp.1-40). However, we know that they played a crucial role in the University College Bristol. For example, The Society of Merchant venturers lent its large hall to house the extra lectures on 9 October 1889. New district classes that the committee was setting up were changed based on the Merchant Venturers' curriculum such as: Latin, French, freehand and perspective drawing (these subjects were already taught at the Merchant Venturers' school).

Committee members were also associated with the following local businesses:

1. J.W Arrowsmith was a printer and publishing house, associated with the Hugh Conway scholarship and they printed his 1884 book Called Back.
2. Western Daily Press
3. Mercury Daily Post
4. Bristol Times and Mirror
5. Evening Post
6. H. Hill
7. J. Fawn and Son

Key points

Through these examples, we can see that the transactions between the Merchant Venturers and the University College Bristol were on an optional basis so neither party was coerced (this was not recorded as forced) and these goodnatured interactions highlight amicable and beneficial relationships between both Merchant Venturers and committee members. A range of businesses were also used by the University, from cleaning companies to newspaper businesses and so on. That nature of those relationship was multi-layered as we will see in the following pages. Some of these companies were further involved in the University College through donations while others remained on business terms with the University College Bristol.

3. Salaries of staff, other financial benefits and group dynamics

This section provides a comprehensive look into the salaries of the staff and provides an insight into the monetary value placed upon certain staff members thereby depicting either, seniority, or/and hierarchy.

There seem to have been interesting internal party dynamics. For example, in 12 November 1890 meeting Prof. Rowley, Mr. A. Richardson, Mr. J. Rafter, Mr. A. P. Chattock, Mr A. Leipmar, all received a salary increase but at the same period, Mr James Luick requested for such an increase in his application but was unsuccessful.

Professor Schuman had another job in New South Wales (member of committee).

On 13 November 1889 it was organised that 3/4 fees for extra lectures would be given to Professor Rowley (member of committee).

Key points

Some lecturers had various sources of income within the University. For example, Professor Lloyd Morgan was paid for his role as both Dean and professor. This shows that there was no strict delineation between administrative duties and teaching duties. Senior staff members were also expected to teach. The documents examined also show that the cost of new equipment, grants, workshops, and any developments to school departments were detailed and the Committee wanted financial information about various aspects of the University College Bristol's inner workings, from salaries of its staff and committee members to the payment for cleaning services.

The 'share fee' column in the documents provides further details about the management of the University College. The 'share fee' refers to the percentage lecturers and/or professors could receive if their classes were popular. It was a form of retainer for the lecturers. The more attendees the class had, the higher the 'share fee' was.

4. Scholarships and other kinds of support for students

We found various pieces of information about scholarships, recipients and about an awarding body of the scholarships as well as their purpose. Amongst such scholarships were:

• The John Stewart scholarship for 'poor lads native of Bristol'.
• The Cath Winkworth scholarship for female students.
• The Evening scholarship/grant for evening students, which included a fee reduction, or grants.

Key points

A range of scholarships were aimed at supporting particular groups such as women, and men from poorer families. These philanthropic deeds included several small and medium size grants. They ranged from: a grant for £10 to allow students to take part in a new scheme, a reduction of fees for certain students, the availability of evening schools (and the reduction of their fees from £5.00s.0d to £3.6s.00d), a further science scholarship to be awarded annually, to loans to students, or the opportunity for students to pay their fees in instalments. However, despite these efforts, education remained expensive for most people. £3 in 1889 (approximatively £387 in today's money) remained an important amount for most working-class families so the University College Bristol mainly catered for young people from the middle or upper classes.

5. Sustentation Ledger (Reference DM372/1/12)

The document provided us with information about the financial contributions key individuals made towards the University College Bristol. It further ascertained the point about the names of donors and the frequency of financial donations from those prominent benefactors. The documents include the addresses of donors, more associated businesses, and a record of female contributions.

When examining the addresses of the donors (some from the Caribbean and India) we can better identify a correlation between Bristol's executive committee and a global network. Similarly, the inclusion of the contributions of women provides us with valuable information about the involvement of women both as a subsidiary to their husbands and in some cases independent of a man completely (the Robinson family). All donations were pledged to begin in different years, but they were annually renewed, unless otherwise stated by the ledger-writer, to be annually renewed each year.

6. Frequent donors

The size of the donation was not necessarily contingent to the frequency of appearances in the committee meetings, nor was was it visibly linked to influence in the committee. Names such as Fry and Wills do consistently rank high in recurrence, but lesser-known people are also regular donors. However, one can also see a correlation between the frequency of donations and appearances in the committee and a link between repeated financial and academic interactions between the same people and the University College Bristol. This reaffirms the idea that there was a tight knit group that involved around and within the University College Bristol.

Key names

The Robinson family made donations (usually £2.2s.2d or £1.1s.1d) but also pledged twice (£50.0s.0d from Alfred Robinson and one of £250.0s.0d from Edwards J.P. Robinson).

The Budgett family donated 13 times (usually between £1.1s.1d to £10.10s.10d).

The Fry family members such as Albert Fry, Lewis Fry, their spouses and other female family members, such as Miss Mary Fry, and Miss R.W Fry to name a few also appear as donors. Albert Fry was the most frequent chairman in University College meetings. Lewis Fry was chair once. Frequency of donations might also be linked to seniority in the committee.

In addition, the name Fry also occurs among multiple other names: Pope, Abbot, Fry & Brown, which is similar to business names we found associated with the University College Bristol.

The Baker family donated 33 times. This was between £10.10s.0d and £1.1s.0d

The Wills family donated 37 times. They promised to donate usually between £2.2s.2d to £10.10s.10d. Once, £250.0s.0d.

J. Arrowsmith donated five times. He pledged to donate £250.0s.0d once. Arrowsmith was heavily involved in the pledges of donations with money transferred to a "Special Fund" and donating a oneoff lump sum of £250.0s.0d.

The Worsley family donated 9 times. Once, Mr Worsley pledged to donate £250.0s.0d. One pledge was transferred to the "Special Fund" for six years.

Dr R. Shingleton Smith donated three times. Two pledges were made to start before the first committee meeting. And, like Worsley, one pledge was transferred to the "Special Fund" for six years.

Mr. and Mrs. Schacht pledged a total of three times, pledging between £2.2s.0d and £5.5s.0d. Schacht had the highest frequency of appearances in the committee meetings: ranking at 38.

Mr. and Mrs. Alleyne pledged a total of four times. Two pledges were made before the first committee meetings, and one made in the same year that the committee started.

Schacht, Arrowsmith and Fry had one lot of pledges transferred to a "Special Fund". Names were linked with the committee minute book.

Business and donations

When we examine the list of businesses hired by the University College Bristol, we noticed that the following ones also made donations or pledged. We do not have detailed information about these businesses.

Fawn and Son, J. The company pledged to donate two lots of £1.1s.1d during the years 1879/80-1898/9. Based on their presence in other documents, we noticed that the company was also closely associated with the committee.

H. Hill pledged three lots of £1.1s.1d from 1883/4-1908/9.

Austin and Sons pledged to donate three lots of £1.1s.0d during the years: 1879-1900 and their initial pledges until 1889, were all before the first committee meeting in 1889.

Baker, J and Sons pledged to donate one lot £1.1s.0d from 1882/3-1888/9. This was before the first committee meeting.

Parnall, W and co-pledged £1.1s.0d from 1879/80 to 1880/1.

G. B. May pledged £1.1s.0d from 1880/1-1881/82.

L. Thomas and Sons pledged twice, two lots of £1.1s.1d between the years 1889/90 to 1898/99.

O. J. Gullick had money transferred to him from another business, Bird & Co, F. in 1890 and since then he pledged to donate two lots of £1.1s.1d during the years 1889/90 to 1908/9.

J. Crispin and Sons and J. Crispin's wife pledged to donate one lot of £2.2s.2d from the years 1895/6 to 1898/9.

Bird & Co, F. donated one lot of £1.1s.0d from the years: 1888/9 and one donation pledge was transferred to O.J. Gullick.

Key points

There were numerous anonymous donations that have been linked to the Fry family in the ledger. They pledged so frequently (53 times) that it would take a considerable amount of time to add their donations up. We noticed that not every big donor was part of the University College Bristol Committee. Some individuals made onetime large donations, such as Dr M. W. Travers, who donated £105. Donors tended to be across the country including in Sussex, London, Somerset, Sheffield, Warwickshire, Norwich, and Liverpool. Some donors' addresses were abroad.

This section shows that the same names are recurring and that can be linked to influence. Below there is an extensive list of businesses that were hired by the University College, and these same businesses were pledging to donate considerable amounts of money to University College Bristol. This mutually beneficial business relationship between the companies and the University College Bristol suggests that it was not just the attending members that could buy their way into the University College Bristol, it was the companies as well.

Despite the idea of close-knit interactions, not all the businesses hired by the University College Bristol were in the donation ledger, but one could assume that making a donation was potentially a way to be considered for a business relationship with the University College Bristol. Many of the businesses commenced donation pledges before the first committee meeting in 1889.

Conclusion and key findings

We looked at documents, starting in 1862. Although the University was set up in 1909, it is important to understand that donors had a long relationship prior to that date with the University College Bristol.

Bristol in the 18th and 19th century was a mercantile city with several families involved in various trades. The relationship with the University College was an extension of that longstanding relationship as exemplified by the Fry family, Arrowsmith and many others as donors. Several donors were also lecturers, and others became Vice-Chancellor (Lloyd Morgan for example). The recurrence of names, which are regularly involved in several committees is in keeping with research done on Bristol about the close-knit community of investors and traders, including slave traders, who socialised and had working or business relationships in Bristol from the 18th to the 20th century and onwards. In addition, about 30 individuals and businessmen have been identified as having been crucial in the development of University College Bristol and in supporting the University of Bristol financially. No information could be found regarding their direct relationship with the slave trade and slavery. Those names do not feature in the UCL Database about slaveowners who received compensation after the abolition. Further research is needed to provide more information about the businesses and their owners.

As far as donations and philanthropic deeds are concerned, several bursaries were aimed at supporting students including women. It would be interesting to look at the history of such donations and investigate how the history of philanthropic deeds extended to support the students of African descent in Bristol in the 20th and 21st century.