The Press. — London, England, 1858-06-05 00:00:00

0 for the good old times of 1836 and 1837, when Conservative dinners followed so fast upon the heels of each other that criticism was out of the ques tion, and the chief topic of remark was, how many Conservatives were mustered —sometimes 1,200, sometimes 1,700, or even more. All those mus t e rings Owe over ; the Conservative ascendancy was ga i ne d by th e followers and then lost by the leader, and for seven years past a Conserva tive dinner bas been a thing of comparatively rare occurrence. Two consequences naturally follow. First, thoughts and words so long " bottled up " often burst forth when occasion is given with all the gush and sparkling of effervescing wines. They may even transgress decorum, and overflow upon persons and things for whose use they were not intended. A second result is, that as such productions are now com paratively rare, the critics are sharp set, and fall upon them with unwonted zest and voracity. Thus, a Minister happens to meet a party of his con stituents, and to give them a humorous description of recent Parliamen tary occurrences; and forthwith, two ex-Premiers and an ex-Secretary of State occupy the ears of Parliament for hours together with criticisms upon one single speech, delivered in a Buckinghamshire village ! As we just now said, in the former days, when each week that came round saw some great Conservative gathering, who would ever have dreamed of Parliamentary comments on such affairs? But neither Whigs nor Tories dine much in public now ; and when a knife-and-fork fight does take place, it seems to be considered an event of startling importance. Speaking seriously, however, it surely was no slight compliment to be paid to a single speech at Slough, that three different Whig statesmen of the first class considered it worth their while to occupy the precious hours of Parliament with supposed refutations of this after-dinner speech. This fact places festive oratory in a higher rank than it had previously held. Conservative statesmen must now tread warily. Should Sir BULWER Ixrrox or Lord STANLEY be tempted to dine with their constituents in the elections which are now about to take place, let them carefully weigh their words. More critical and difficult will be their position than when addressing Parliament. For in the House of Lords or Commons the op ponents are before them, and the reply, and rejoinder, and explanation, are immediate. But in a country tent or barn, with two or three country re porters, a few words may be misunderstood or misstated, and no correction be practicable. Then follow complaints to Parliament, debates on speeches heard by none who are present, and an absurd waste of time, ending in nothing, except a fresh proof that the Whigs are vexed, and that the ex- Ministry are disconiented. The immediate object of the late Visitorial inquiry at Trinity College, Dublin, was to pronounce on the justice of a University censure formally passed on Drs. SHAW and CARMICHAEL, two or the Junior Fellows, by the Hebdomadal Board. In the month of March last there appeared in the columns of the Dublin Conservative journal a letter on the subject of University Reform, of which Dr. SHAW was the writer. This letter vir tually imputed to the Provost and Senior Fellows the same charges which have been adduced at greater length in the May number of the Dublin University Magazine, of which the principal count is the following : That, whereas, in the year 1801. an M.A. degree cost 71. 18s. 6d. ; seve ral other degrees, '29/. 45.; and the degree of B.D. or D.D., 36/. ; of which sums the Provost and Senior Fellows received nothing, and the college chest as much as 29/. 10s. ; in 1851 the cost of each degree had been slightly raised, making an increase in the aggregate of about 10/. ; and that, of these monies, 39/. 10s. went to the Provost and Senior Fellows, and to the College chest nothing. For this offence, Dr. SHAW was sum moned before the governing body of the University, and punished in the mode above described. What may be the actual effect of this punishment, we do not know. Probably, nothing beyond the supposed disgrace of it. But, however that may be, Dr. SHAW thought it sufficiently severe to justify an appeal to the Visitors, and hence that inquiry which has created so much excitement in Dublin during the past week. The result of it is that the appeal of Dr. SHAW has been dismissed, and the propriety of the censure co nfirmed. After due consideration we cannot, we confess, bring our selves to see this question in any other light than such as it appeared in to the Vice-Chancellor. The columns of a newspaper are not the Proper channels for exposing abuses such as Dr. SHAW" complained of. Having first of all laid a proposition of reform before the Hebdomadal Board, which was rejected, his proper course, as it seems to us, was to have appealed at once to the Visitors. If the case was not one of sufficient importance to justify such a step as this, it was certainly not of sufficient im portance to warrant so irregular and mischievous a proceeding as the one adopted. To attempt to decide a question of this nature by means of a THE PRESS, JUNE 5, 1858. newspaper controversy showed great want of judgment in the gentleman who commenced it, and something very like a preference of his own per sonal feelings to the interests of the University. These were sure to suffer in the process. It was impossible but that an unfavourable impression towards the University should be created by such statements; while, on the other hand, it could not be expected that the Board should yield to a letter in a newspaper what they had refused when regularly and respect fully requested of them. The letter has effected the minimum of good with the maximum of evil. It has aroused uneasy feelings in the public such as may possibly be detrimental to the College; and at the same time it has, by its result, strengthened the hands of " the Dons," and may perhaps have steeled them against certain reformatory measures which they might otherwise have been inclined to grant. For these reasons we fully concur in the dismissal of Dr. SHAW'S appeal. We should add that the sentence on Dr. CARMICHAEL, whose offence appears to have been of a minor character, has been cancelled. The ques tion of the censure having been thus dealt with, the Vice-Chancellor next proceeded to decide on the justice of the original accusation. This point likewise was given in favour of the authorities, on the ground that a image of sixty years was quite sufficient to establish the legality of the distribution of tees. Any other judgment would, as Mr. BilmwsrEtt observed, have involved the startling proposition that all the Senior Fellows for nearly a century had been rogues. We entirely concur with the deci sion of the Visitors in each case. But, now that the abstract right is established, the Seniors have an excellent opportunity for acceding to any really necessary reforms. And if such there be— a point which we are far from positively asserting—we trust the Hebdomadal Board will show itself equal to the occasion, and put its accusers to the blush by doing sponta neously what it refused to do by compulsion. The Bombay journals of the beginning of May could know nothing of the disputes then springing up in England concerning Lord CANNING'S Proclamation and Lord ELLENDOROUGH'S Despatch. We may, therefore, accept their testimony as untinged by English party spirit ; and that testi mony runs thus : "We regret to say that the policy which the Governor-General is pursuing in Oude threatens to be unsuccessful. The country is not be coming tranquilized, and we shall require another 40,000 troops from England within the next two years." The " Special Services Bill" has been withdrawn, and the whole matter is now in sea& quo. This Bill, it will be remembered, is the Bishops' Bill, in deference to which Lord SuArrEsnunv's was withdraws. But both bills, when criticized, were found to be open to objettions. The first having been laid aside, the second was passed through the Upper House, and handed to Mr. DEEDES, who undertook the charge of it in the Commons. But petitions began to flow in against it, and, on surveying the ground, Mr. DEIWES judged it to be the most prudent course to retreat. The question, therefore, is now withdrawn from Parliament ; and the original promoters of the Exeter-hall services are taking into their consideration the propriety and expediency of recommencing their labouta. It is the opinion of some persons that the inhibition of the Incumbent of St. Michael's will be found to have no legal force. Meanwhile, the special services at Westminster Abbey continue to be largely attended. The decision of the House of Lords admitting the claim of Earl TALBOT to the Earldom of Shrewsbury is one of no slight importance. Bearing in mind that inevitably the question had latterly become one in which the party sympathies of Protestant and Papist were deeply excited, it is gratifying to find that the highest legal authorities of all political parties were thoroughly unanimous in their opinion. Lord Caw/mow/it moved the judgment., and he was supported by Lord WENSLEYDALE, Lord CAmrnELL, and Lord BROUGHAM. The representatives of the late Lord's intended heir, Lord EDWARD HOWARD, announce that it is their intention still to contend for the estates, which, they maintain, do not necessarily go with the title. On this point, however, legal opinions are tolerably unanimous in the other direction, and the verdict will doubtless be an unimpeachable one. We gave our readers co large a dose of verse last week that it seems but right to pause for one number at least ; and we do so the more willingly, inasmuch as the weather is too hot to be favourable to verse making. The week, also, has been a dull oue in public matters, and them is little gaiety in any quarter. 541