This thesis studies the reform of the nineteenth century universities of Scotland and England in terms of the conflict between the aristocracy, the professions and the mercantile section of the middle class. A methodology has been developed that draws on the secondary sources on the universities to identify the main characters involved in certain debates relating to university reform. The work consists of the study of the original correspondence of the central persons involved in specific changes in the two university systems. These sources have been set into a context constructed from the study of newspaper reports, pamphlets, essays, speeches and other accessible pieces. A background chapter on the main contrasts betw--en the university systems in Scotland and England in the years before the Victorian age is followed by three chapters that focus on parellel developments in the two university systems in three distinct periods. By juxtaposing the events in (1) the 1820s and 1830s, (2) the 1850s and (3) the 1870s and 1880s the thesis indicates that differences in the reforms of the various parts of the systems in the two countries can be related to the resolution of local compromises between the aristocracy, the professions and the mercantile wing of the middle class that reflected the relative strength of those classes in the local areas. By concentrating on events in this way the thesis draws conclusions which cast doubt on the analysis presented by G. E. Davie in his work 'The Democratic Intellect'. The study concludes that the ideas associated with the three identified contending interest groups had a divergent impact on Oxford and Cambridge, on the universities of Scotland and on the newer civic universities as the century unfolded.