BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICE OF ARTHUR CAYLEY. 
XIX 
less of information in 
i to leave a distinct 
idy what others have 
rrs, especially—it may 
e tendency of workers 
subjects immediately 
what is being done 
H: he was singularly 
f knowledge. Yet he 
read only so much as 
understand its scope, 
vestigation: he would 
ntly, develop it so as 
ly the work of others, 
e; his services in this 
■ of societies to which 
5. He wrote only one 
;as intended to bridge 
> Jacobi’s Fundamenta 
aaper after paper was 
their tale amounts to 
5, the republication of 
ye University Press,— 
ent of his fame. The 
; he willingly acceded 
e regarded as a great 
own editorship, have 
lappiness to him ; and, 
pation in his science 
me when the collection 
the purpose, but it is 
s of the Press intend 
, the illustrious author 
lis time. For the first 
om a large share in 
:ame better known for 
until he came to be 
nate. He was elected 
exception of some six 
ber of it until 1892, 
od of service he was 
re-elected three times. Party feeling ran rather strongly at times during the discussions 
that led to the new statutes; but both parties included his name among their 
lists of nominations—an adequate proof that he possessed the confidence of the Senate. 
He was free from party bias, and he became established in his position of strength 
by his fair mindedness, his sound judgment, and his calm temperament. He would listen 
to a discussion, speaking only when he had something of importance to add; when 
speaking he was listened to with full attention. More frequently he would take no 
part in the discussion until his opinion was asked, as was usually the case in difficult 
questions; his opinion was always valued and sometimes final. Similarly, on syndicates, 
his co-operation was much sought, and in particular the services which he rendered 
to the Library Syndicate and the Press Syndicate were of substantial importance. He 
also took great interest in the movement for the higher education of women. In the 
early days of Girton College he gave direct help in teaching, and for some years he 
was Chairman of the Council of Newnham College, in the progress of which he took 
the keenest interest even to the last. 
But, with all his general aptitude for business, he was perhaps most specially 
helpful by his legal knowledge. The training he had undergone and the knowledge 
he had acquired at the bar ultimately proved invaluable. His opinion on legal matters 
was sought by the University, by his own college, and by the scientific societies with 
which he was connected; when given, it frequently had the effect of a judicial 
decision. His powers of drafting were constantly being called into requisition; he 
responded to the calls upon him and, with unstinted generosity, placed his time and 
skill at the disposal of these bodies, so that the new statutes of Trinity College, and 
not a few of the statutes and ordinances of the University, owe much to him. 
One other illustration, at once of his general business capacity and of the confidence 
reposed in him, may be given. The elections for representatives of the Universities 
in the House of Commons are still conducted openly and by means of voting papers, 
delivered either by the elector himself or by another elector whom he has nominated ; 
objections may be raised against any voting paper, but they must be decided at once. 
In Cambridge the Vice-Chancellor, being the returning officer, nominates a number of 
assessors to act with him in the case of a contested election. At a bye-election in 
1882, when the candidates were Mr. H. C. Raikes and Professor James Stuart, Cayley 
was nominated as presiding officer at one of the polling places. His imperturbable 
firmness, his calm courtesy, and the justice of his decisions secured for his effectiveness 
in this capacity the admiration of the University. 
This brief account of his participation in business affairs is necessary; without 
some such indication a proper estimate of his position in Cambridge cannot be framed. 
And it also may help to show that his supremacy in the subjects of his investigations 
neither made him a recluse, nor limited his other interests, nor restricted his practical 
usefulness. 
The merits of such a man were recognised by the only means at the disposal 
of a grateful and appreciative University. He was elected an honorary Fellow of 
Trinity College on 22nd May, 1872, at the same time as Dr. Lightfoot, Mr. James