The Sun. — London, England, 1834-03-22 00:00:00

that his functions should be executed by a deputy ; but there was every danger in having only one office, and two persons appointed to that office. In the present state or the Exchequer there was enough to occupy one person in each department, but not two in the same department. He thought it his duty to offer those general remarks ; the de tails he would reserve for the several clauses of the bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said he would not repeat his former observations in support of the bill. He had already ex plained its provisions. The object was to have as efficient a control as possible. It was a matter of dispute whe ther double check, as before, was more effectual than single. He (Sir James Graham) thought, and it was the opinion of government, that the proposed mode of single check was better. The assistant should act only in the occasional absence of the principa►, from illness or some other unavoidable cause, and the comptroller-general would be bound to exercise his office personally and diligently. The fact of his being removable by parliament would of itself be a sufficient check. If he neglected his duty or filled any other situation that diverted his attention, then an address to the Crown would procure his removal. The plan of the right hon. gentleman opposite would cause greater evil than the present; because, if double checks were introduced, then there would he assistants to each chief officer, to provide substi , utes in cases of absence ; and in place of two officers, as was proposed by the bill, many would be required. In the higher offices of the navy arid the army there was n , ,t found that necessity of double check insisted on by the right hon. gentleman ; and, he would ask, was there one instance in the Ex chequer where a control was exercised by the clerk of the pelts when the account passed the auditors? It was the unanimous feeling of his colleagues, and all the reasoning he heard convinced him, that the proposed plan was the best. The other clauses were agreed to. Report brought up, and ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday next. SMUGGLING ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Smuggling Act Amendment Bill was read a third time. Mr. M. O'CONNELL proposed a clause, by way of rider, empowering the person accused under the act to demand trial by Jury. Mr. F. BARING opposed the clause, on the ground that there were parts of the country in which a fair trial by Jury could not be had. Such was found to be the case on part of the coast of Suffolk and Hampshire. The clause was negatived without a division, and the bill then pissed. The Con.olidated Fund (7,000,6001.) Bill and the In demnity Bill were read a third time and passed. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at half-past one o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 21. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack shortly after five o'clock. Lord POLTIMORE presented several petitions from the Dissenters of parishes in the county of Somerset, praying for relief. The Earl of ALBEMARLE presented a peti tion from the owners and occupiers of land in the western division of the county of Sufi,ik, against the repeal of the corn laws. The Duke of NORFOLK presented petitions from the dissenters of Weylanil, and other parishes in the counties of Suffolk and Norfolk, praying for relief. The Bishop of CHESTER presented petitions from Rochdale, Bolton, Wigan, and Knaresborough, for the better observance of the Sabbath The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from Weatherfield in support of the established church ; also, from Hampstead, Edmonton, and Bury St. Edmund's for the better observance of the Sabbath. The Earl of DURHAM presented a petition from the D ssenters of a parish in Fifeshire. praying for the separa tion of church and state; also a petition from the Dis senters of Bramlingham, praying for relief. LABOUR RATE. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition, signed by every magistrate attending ihe last quarter sessions for the western division of the o , unty of Essex, praying their lord-hips to reenact the labour rate. The noble lord also presented similar petitions from Sunninghill, in Berkshire, and from Thame. SCOTCH ENTAILS. The Earl of ROSEBERRY gave notice that on Mon. day next he should move for leave to bring in a bill rela. tive to entails in Scotland. SITTINGS ON APPEALS. Lord ELLENBOROUGH, in moving that the re terns which bad been ordered relative to the sittings of their lordships on appeals should lie on the table, said that he was quite sure it could not he the intention of the noble lord on the woolsack, in the observations that he had made the other night, with respect to the sittings of their lordshipson appeals, to hold out an inference that hehad worked much longer, and been assisted less, in bis sittings to hear appeals in that house than his predecessors. A notion however of that sort prevailed abroad in consequence of what the noble and learned lord bad stated. If, however, reference was had to the returns which he then moved should lie on the table, it would be seen that in the course of the sittings of the noble lord on the woolsack, a some what greater period than that which Lord Lyndhurst sat, be (the Lord Chancellor) had sat 156 times, and been assisted by other noble lords 44 days, while Lord Lynd hurst had sat 169 times, and been assisted only 19 d It was a'so right to mention, that in the course of one session Lord Lyndhurst sat 65 days : that was a greater number of days, according to the return, than any other noble lord had ever sat during the course of one session. It was right also to mention, in the absence of the noble lord who had preceded Lord Lyndhurst, that he had, previously to the arrangement for the speedy disposal of appeals, by the assistance of Lord Gifford, sat in 1821, 52 days, in 1922, 50 days, in 1823, 58 days, and although assisted by Lord Gifford in 1824, he sat 48 days, in 1825, 45 days, and in 1826, 50 days. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that in what lie had stated on a previous evening, he bad no intention whatever (well knowing that he should be worsted if he did so) of bringing himself into comparison with his predecessors. He had not had an opportunity of looking at the re turn to which the noble baron had referred ; therefore what its numerical result might he, he could not sty.. But he did not shrink from comparison between the time he had sat and the period when Lord Gifford was deputy speaker. During the first year he had had the honour of a seat in that hous-, he had certainly not sat fewer days than Lord Gifford did in the year 1826. He thought it would be found, on comparison, that he had sat a greater number of times. During the first session he (the Lord Chancellor) had frequently continued to sit to hear eppeals after the adjournment of the house, and that, ton, between ten and eleven o'clock at night. With respect to his noble predecessor, nothing was ever further from his intention than to cast the slightest re flection upon the way in which he had conducted the business of that house ; all that he had said was that he (the Lord Chancellor) had never had the assist ance of the regular judges, which had been afforded to Lord Lyndhurst. lie bad certainly bad the able and ready assistance of the noble lord (Wynford) without which he never could have got through the business he had done. There appeared to be one great fallacy, boxever, in those returns, which did not seem to lie well coin through. The number of appeals at the beginning of a session depended entirely on the time of year at which that happened ; for instance, the session of 1830 commenced in the beginning of November, while the present one did not begin till February, so that there were three months more for the setting down of appeals than there was before ; he was therefore entitled to deduct one fourth from the number on the return. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said the noble and learned Jord had stated the facts of the case so far as he had gone ; hut from the return he saw then, he had had the assistance of the late Lord Tenterden for 13 days, as well as that of Lord Lyndhurst for some other. The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was evident the noble lord was speaking upon a subject of which he was utterly ignorant. Lord Tenterden had never sat one single ,tiny except when the twelve judges did so. Those were ,daya when it was optional with the Chancellor either to pit or not. The Duke of CUMBERLAND complained that the noble and learned lord had not done justice to the Errl of Eldon in his statements, as there never was a session that he had not .at to hear appeals. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had only alluded to Scotch appeals, all of which during one session had been heard by Lord Gifford. The Earl of ROSSLYN said a few words, which were inaudible. The Earl of RADNOR moved the first reading of the Liverpool Disfranchisement Bill, and in doing so he wished to state the course be intended to pursue with re gard to it. After the first reading he meant to move that a inessa a. be sent to the Comm ons request i ng that their „... Lordships might be furnished with copies of the reports of three committees which had sat upon the subject in former Parliaments, as also the reports of the two select coin mitt,ies which bad sat upon the late Liverpool elections. If noble lords would take the trouble of reading over those reports, he was sure they would not require that Pr more evidence ehould be bead at the bar of that house. He further intended to move that the Wit be read a second time on Monday, the 28th of April. Lord WYNFORD said he would never consent to take reports from committees of the other house, upon which to found judicial proceedings in that house. If their lordships should think that too much time would be con sumed by hearing evidence at the bar, they might send the whole of the disfranchising bills to committees up stairs. The Marquis of SALISBURY said that he could never for a moment consent that the house should delegate its judicial proceedings to any committee up stairs. He trusted the house would not on the present occasion de• part from those precedents which had so often before been acted upon. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the 28th of April was too soon to fix the second reading of the Liver pool Bill, as the Warwick one was fixed for the 24th of the same month.—(Hear.) The house could not possibly have got through with that one, and he thought it would be better to finish one before bringing on an • other. The Earl of DURHAM said he could see no reason for the house agreeing to the proposition of the noble baron. The bills were very dissimilar, and he could see no reason why the house could not proceed with both. He now, for once in his life, had the honour of agreeing with the noble lord opposite (Salisbury), for if the house decided that further evidence should be taken upon that class of bills, he would never agree that it should be taken before a committee with closed doors. While he was on his legs he wished to know what the noble and learned baron opposite (Wynford) meant by his notice of moving upon the second reading of the Liverpool bill, that counsel be heard against it at the bar. He (Earl D.) was not aware that any petition had been presented against the bill ; then did the noble and learned lord mean to examine witnesses himself ? There were no parties opposing the bill. Lord WYNFORD said be meant to examine any wit- ness that appeared either for or against the bill. If the parties who promoted the bill did not send any evidence, be could not help it. The Earl of RADNOR then moved that their lord ships be summoned for the 28th of April, and that a message he sent to the Commons for copies of the report, which were agreed to, and the bill was read a first time. Earl GREY presented a petition from Ashtou-under- Line, praying that in any measure which might be intro duced for the relief of the dissenters, the interests of the established church would be guarded. The noble earl also presented a petition from the Protestant dissen. ters of Suffield, praying to be rtlieved from the dis abilities under which they laboured ; and a petition from Ipswich, praying that some legislative measure might be introduce) for the better observance of the Sabbath.—Laid on the table. THE CAMBRIDGE PETITION. The NOBLE EARL then stated that he had now to present a petition which appeared to him to deserve the most serious and most attentive consideration. The petition came from a number of members of the Uni versity of Cambridge, and who were also members of the estabished church, and it prayed that the dis• senters might be relieved from one of the grievances which they complained of, natne!y, that they should be admitted to and enjoy the privileges of the University of Cambridge.—(Hear, hear.) With the prayer of the petition, he need baldly state to their lordships, to whom his opinions upon that subject had been repeatedly expressed, that he entirely concurred. Ile considered it a great honour in having the petition intrusted to his care. It prayed for an object which appeared to him to be just and reasonable in itself, and, if effected, would, in his opinion, be eminently conducive to the interests of the established church. The petition was signed by 63 members of the university. The members of the senate generally amounted to between 170 and 190, and the pe tition was signed by more than two-thirds ; but there were some who, from age or other infirmities, did not take part in the affairs of the senate, but many of them, be understood, were favourable to the object of the petition. The number then was a considerable portion of the members of the senate. Not more than one hundred and fifty bad voted upon any question brought before it. But if he could state that the petitioners were respectable in point of numbers he had thegratifieltion of adding they were much more so in point of talent and character. There were two of the heads of the university, 10 professors, and 11 tutors. Amopg the professors were men of the greatest eminence, and when he mentioned the names of professors Babbage, Lee, and others, he should be justified in saying that they were men who were d;stinguished in general know ledge, science, and excellent conduct in life. Amongst the tutors were such ai Peacock, Mozely, Fearn, and others; and indeed the whole, professors, fellows, tutors, and members of the senate were oistinguished for their t dents and influence, and, therefore, no petition could come before their lordships that could be better supported. It might be sad that the petitioners had it not in their power to make such a remonstrance to their lordships. But even if nine-tenths of the University of Cambridge had declared themselves favourable to an exclusive system, be thought he (Earl Grey) had stated enough to justify the petitioners in the course they had pursued. In order to show what their object was, he thought be could not do better than real the petition, which had been most admirably drawn up, and required and me rited the favourable consideration of their lordships. The petitioners expressed their attachment to the church as by law established, anti were well apprised of the benefit which it conferred on the kingdom. They also expressed their attachment to the discipline of the university of Cambridge, which had contributed, in such a material degree, to the piety and learning of the country. Strongly impressed with these considera• dons, they submitted to that right honourable house, that no system ever planned by the wisdom of man could be so perfect as not to require, from _ time to time, some modifications, arising frem change of circumstances and times. They respect fully suggested that no corporate body like the University could exist in a free country, unless its benefits were communicated to all classes of the people, as widely as might be compatible with the principles of its foundation.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He (Lord Grey) read those sentiments with wrong feelings of pleasure; they were the sentiments and views of mem bers of the established church, and lie felt happy in having had it in his power to state, in the emphatic words of the petitioners, those feelings of attachment to the established church, which he was sure would insure to them the favourable consideration of their lordships. It could not he supposed that persons, actuated by such feeling-, would lend their assistance to any measwe which would subvert that establishment they were bound to support. The petition proceeded to state, that among the changes which they thought might be adopted with advantage to the state, they suggested the expediency of rejecting every religious test which it was necessary to take before proceeding to the degree of maser, bachelor, or doctor, in arts, divinity, or medicine. In praying for this they were only asking for the restitution of their ancient laws and customs; for these restrictions had been imposed on the University in the reign of James the First, and against the wishes of many of its members. They had been imposed during the prevalence of dogmas at variance with the true interests of religion. He (Lord Grey) thought this was a matter which required their lordships' serious attention ; because, what the petitioners prayed for was not at variance with the original constitu tion of the university. It was to remove restrictions imposed under peculiar circumstances.— (Hear.) Perhaps their lordships would allow Win to state shortly how the matter stood as regarded the constitution of the univer sity. Several acts had been passed in the reigns of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Mary, and there was one act (12 Ede.), collecting all those statutes into a general rule, under which that society was to be governed. There was no mention in that statute of religious tests. It was not until a subsequent period that these restrictions were introduced. In the early part of the reign of James 1., in 1604 , , the convocation passed the canons ecclesi astic, and among these was the carton which enacted that no persons should obtain the degree of bachelor or master, in arts, lee-, or physic, unless he should• subscribe to the three articles contained in the 136th canon. Their lordships would observe that this did not extend to the degree of Bachelor of Arts, but that that still remained open to any per son who received his education at the University. But afterwards this was extended in a very singular way. The petition stated that it was Informal and unusual, and be (the noble earl) believed it was in such a manner as had never been known before.—(Hear.) lii 1600 another doctrine was communicated to the senate, which stated the substance of what passed between the King and certain members of the University—(Hear, hear, hear)—and in which the King expressed his desire that in future not only should degrees be granted, as stated in the letter which he (the noble earl) had just quoted, to bachelors of divinity, and doc tors in divinity, law, and physic, but that no degree should be granted to any person who did not subscribe to the three articles of the thirty-sixth canon. This was almost all that appeared. No degree should be granted to any, except to those persons, from that time. This practice had never been confirmed by any greet.. It was well known to be against the opinions of many of the Senate at that time,l and it was fair to presume that if that Geo. Peacock, Trinity J. Hind, Sidney J. W. L. Heaviside, ditto S. Skinner. Jesus S. N. Ward, Magdalen J. Bowstead, Corpus FELI Jos. Romil REGIS] H. Aslett, Pembroke F. Heldyard, Trin. Hall Ed. Barnes, Christ's R. Dawes, Downing Thiriwall, Assist. G. A Brown, Trinity J. Moore, ditto R. Sheepshank, ditto T. Field, ditto T. B. Barsham, ditto J. W. Barnes, ditto. J. A. Barnes, ditto R. W. Rothman, ditto C. Thirlwall, ditto C. Craufurd Heath, King's G. W. Craufurd, ditto OTHER MEMBE: C. C. Babington, St. John's C. Cope, M.D., ditto J. Guthrie, Trinity J. M. Kemble, ditto J. M. Robinson, ditto T. G. Hughes, Emanuel Thos. Veasey, Peterhouse T. M. Randall, ditto Masters • Vice-Provost of Professors ly, Trinity. :'RARY. Capel Lofft, King's T. Ingle, Peterhouse Henry Calthrop, Corpus J. Croft, Christ's R. Willis, Caius A. Murlett, ditto R. Murphy, ditto J. Saunders, Sidney C. Currie, Pembroke W. L. Jones, Magdalen W. D. Rangeley, Queen's IS OF SENATE. J. I'. Woodhouse, Caius J. T. Wall, ditto E. G. Pearce, Jesus S. Wells Lucas, Downing C. Humphrey, ditto Geo. Leapingrolle, Corpus H. Gunning, Christ's John Parkins, Queen's. King's 1 Tutors Fellows not being Tutors Other Members l7 Total •• 6:2 On the question being put row the woolsack, The Duke of WELLINGTON said he would have adopted on this occasion the course which he was in the habit of adopting upon all occasions of the presentation of petitions, namoly, that of avoiding discussing the sub ject to which they referred until it came substantively be fore the house; but the importance attached by the noble earl to the petition he had just presented—th e formal no• lice he bad given of his intention to bring it forward — the attention with which his speech had been received, and the general attention which that speech was likely to ex cite out of the house—all conspired to render it necessary for him to address a few words to their lordships upon the present occasion. Before, however, he proceeded to do so, he could not help lamenting that the illustrious duke who filled the office of Chancellor of the University of Cambridge was not then present, in order that he might state more in detail than even the noble earl had done what were the peculiar circumstances attending the grant ing of those degrees to which the petitioneis referred.-- ( Hear.) It was not to be expected that he (the Duke of Wellington) could be much acquainted with matters 01 this description relating to either University; but, what ever he might know of Oxford, he was obliged to confess his entire ignorance of how those matters were arrenged in the University of Cambridge. From the statement, however, of the noble earl it appeared, the University of Cambridge woe a e,orporatioti—a corporation with the power of judging and deciding upon all matters of reform in respect to those particulars to which the petitioners re ferred, and, what was more important for the house, a corporation possessed not only of the power but of every requisite capability to form a proper judgment upon the subject.—(Cheers.) And what was the case the noble earl had made out for legislative interference? It appeared that sixty members of the senate came, through the me dium of the noble earl, and desired their lordships to in• terfere in their legislative capacity, and overturn the power and authority of the corporation upon matters connected with its internal management. The noble earl had called upon their lordships to decide neither more nor less than that the rules and regulations of the University of Cam- I bridge were bad in principle and required revision, their sole authority being the ex parte statements of some sixty members of the senate. He (the Duke of Wellington) had I yet to learn that it eves the duty of Parliament to interfere in the revision of corporate regulations. But at all events he would contend that Parliament would ill dischai ge that ' duty, supposing it to belong to them, if they interfered at the instigation of but 60 members out of a body com prising at least 4,ooo.—(Cheers.) It would indeed be strange if 60 individuals, not the one-fiftieth part of the whole number, could, by petitioning Parliament, dictate what regulations should be passed, and what revised. But, said the noble eat], it was not the great body of the senate —it was only the Caput, consisting of not more that 370 or 380 members— Earl GREY—The noble duke is under a mistake. The caput consists of but 180 members. The Duke of WELLINGTON—WeII, of 180 mem bers, that made objection to the admission of dissenters to these degrees. He wou!d not say that the caput were not right in persevering in the resulation ; but of this he was certain, that, if the deliberative opinion of the University of Cambridge was in favour of admitting dissenters to degrees, the senate bad only to propose it to the caput and it would at once be adopted. Earl GREY—It has b: en twice proposed, and each time the proposition was rejected. The Duke of WELLINGTON—That is true; but why was it rejected ? Because the great body of the senate was decidedly opposed to it.—(Hear, hear, hear.) That being the case, he was not sure that it was not the impe rative duty-of the caput to reject the proposal.—(Hear, hear.) But on such subjects as the present he believed it would become the house to consider well who, in point of fact, were the dissenters whom it was proposed to admit to the privilege of taking degrees. He called upon their lordships, before they were induced to assent to the prayer of the petition, to take the distinction of who were and who were not dissenters from the established church. There were many of the persons who called themselves by that name who only dissented from th e church of England in one or two not very important points, while there were others who did not agree with the church of Eng land in any one part. There were some who denied altogether the existence of a Trinity, while there were others who were altogether Athiests.—(Hear.) Now he wanted to know whether it would be desirable to ad mit to the privilege of a degree persons who altogether denied the doctrines upon which the established religion was founded.—(Cheers.) These were questions which it was important should be considered—questions which both the University of Cambridge and the House of Lords were bound to consider they adopted the principles con tended for by the noble earl. The noble earl had made a great complaint to the house that the dissenters, although allowed to enter on a collegiate course, were precluded Irons receiving the degree of Bachelor of Arts unless they subscribed to certain articles. But what were those ar ticles upon which the noble earl put such a light value? Why they were neither more nor less than the articles of the church of England, or of the articles of christianity.— (Cheers.) The noble earl called upon the Louse to sanc tion the admission of persons refusing to subscribe to those articles, but he need scarcely say their lordship would never respond to such a call.—(Loud cheers.) The noble earl had argued upon the disadvantages which members of dissentine congregations purposing to enter the professions either of medicine or of law laboured under on account I of their inability to obtain the &Tree of Master of Arts. But was the University of Cambridge to be blamed en that account ? It was true that in the medical profession a certain education received in a University did give certain advantages both in the way of promo tion and in the way of time; and it was likewise true that among the attorneys and the barristers a gentleman who possessed the degree of Master of Arts had the ad vantage of being admitted to his profession in two years' feel time than those who were not so fortunate. But this was an advantage created by the rules of the benchers of the King's inns, for which the universities were in nowise responsible.—(Hear, hear.) If those bodies chose to make the distinction, and if that distinction pressed on any par ticular party, it rested with them to redress the grievance. But surely it was no argument to be used in favour of that revi.ion which the petition called for,—(Hear, hear.) He therefore entreated their lordships not to consent to inter . _ _ fere with the regulations of the corporation of the univer sity of Cambridge; but, at all events, not to do so on the sole instigation of the insignificant minority whose petition the noble earl had just presented. Lord ELLENI3OROUGH sail there could not be a subject more interesting to the great body of his Majesty's suti . jects than that brought under the notice of their lord ships by the pre.entation of the petition which the noble earl had just laid upon the table. It was a subject fraught with many and serious difficulties, not merely difficulty in point of principle, but of a nature so complex and entan gled that he owned he feared the house would be scarcely able to encounter them. In the first place, there was a difficulty in dealin g by parliamentary enactment on points already det e rmined by the charter and regulations of the university. For his part he had the greatest disposition, should it be practicable, to acquiesce in the wishes ex pressed by the petitioners. He saw clearly a great ad vantage to the public in providing for the general and common education of all ',hisses of his Majesty's subjects . professing belief in religion. He saw the great advantage likely to result to the established church by the union of young persons in early life, and the consequent fostering of friendly feeling and social intercourse; he saw on the other hand the greatest of disadvantages in teaching per sons professing particular religious beliefs that they were id_treated by the laws of their country on account of their religion ; and therefore, on principle, he should have no objection to extend to all persons professing the Christian religion such privileges as tended to facilitate the approach to the several professions of law and medicine ; but at the same time he felt it but due to himself to state distinctly that nothing would ever induce him to consent to the granting to persons dissenting from the Church of Eng land power and authority in the Universities; practically identified and essentially connected as they were with the Church of England.—(Cheers.) He was ready, he re peated, to accede in a certain degree to the demands of the petitioners, but in doing so lie would draw a line of distinction, from which nothing should ever induce him to depart.—(Hear, hear.) He was prepared to vote in favour of a proposition admitting the dissenters to such collegiate degrees as tended to facilitate their progress to the professions of law or medicine ; but he never would consent, directly or indirectly, to any proposition likely to place the dissenters in a situation to interfere in the manage ment of the universities. Such was the principle which would guide in, on any vote be might be called upon to give on this important and interesting subject. Highly important it was on many grounds, but on• none mote than its effect upon the religious peace of the country. To attain religious peace had been the great object of the Ad ministratiun of the noble duke near him ; and, convinced as he was of the excellence of that principle, he was ready to do any thing in his power for the purpose of maintain ing it, if now possible.—(Cheers.) To the attainment of that object, lie repeat d, he would ever be ready, and he c onfessed that at the present moment hesaw nothing more injurious to it than the adoption of any line of policy by that house which would assimilate political consideration with the discussion of church details.—(Cheers.) The result of such a union in the present crisis would be, in his opinion, utterly ruinous to the best interests of the coun try, and therefore, as far as he was concerned, it would be his anxious object not only to avoid it in himself, but to dissuade others from being led away by its influence. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he heard with much pleasure the concluding observations of the noble baron. Ile agreed with him that nothing could be more desirable, more useful, or more necessary, than that every exertion :should he used for the promotion of religious peace among every class of the community. He heard, therefore, the sentiments of the noble b iron with the greatest pleasure are indeed, they came with peculiar grace from the descend ant of a man who was one of the most enlightened, pious, and eloquent men of his day—a man who would shed a lustre on any time—a man, and be (the Lord Chancselor) would say it without disparagement of his dal or of the present day, a man who was one of the twist talented and e nlightened prelates that ever adorned the episcopal bench.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Lord Chancellor) agreed with the noble baron as to the great importance of this subject ; he agreed with him that its importance could not be overrated ; but he could not agree with him as to the difficulty with which he (the noble baron) comidcred it to be surrounded. He (the Lord Chancellor) saw no difficulty connected with ir, unless it were in its details. He could see no difficulty in carrying the joint question of civil and religious liberty, and certainly the had been proposed now it would nut have been adopted. This restriction bad been adopted, probably, in come.- quence of that ne g ativ e p ower p ossesse d by the pa ' trons, who would have it in their power to protect any degrees given. This practice continued from the year 1641 to the Restoration, when, by a letter of Charles the Second it was reviewed, and in the year 1772, some alteration was made, by which, in receiving the degree of Bachelor of Arts, it was rendered unneces• sary to subscribe to the three articles in the thirty sixth Girton, and it being shown that the applicants for the degree were bona fide members of the Church of England. The operation of this was to exclude from the Universities all persons who, not being of the Church of England, could consistently subscribe the three articles of the 36th Canon, and it was chiefly for the removal of that grievance that the petition prayed. In granting the prayer of the petition, he (Earl Grey) did not think any danger wou!d, he worked to the established church ; on the contrary, he thought that great benefits would be derived by the admission of persons of character, wealth, and talent in the country, differing from the established religion, to the fruits of a learned education, when they arrived at that period when it would be natural for them to apply for those distinctions. Nothing could be further from his wish or in tention than for their lordships to consent to this petition, so as to make it the means of increasing the members of the established church—(Heat, hear)—hut he would prove to their lordships, by stating the names of men of considerable eminence, that persons who bad gone to Cambridge as Dissenters, and who had received their education there, had conformed to the established church, were now members of it, and were not the least distinguished by their zeal and piety. In the University of Dublin, in 1798, Catholics were first admitted to take degrees. The granting of this privilege was not objected to by any one but Dr. Duigenan, a man celebrated in the annals of religious disputation. So far from weakening the established church, it had rather a contrary effect, bringing many over to it who were not before members of it. He was a strenuous supporter of the object of this petition on all the grounds he hal stated, and his conscientious belief was, that many who dissented from the church, condemned the violent proceedings exhibited in some quarters ; and that they took up the question not merely as dissenters, but as members of the community, desiring equal privileges with their fellow subjects. Ia conclusion, he would only say 1 that the names he had mentioned were a sufficient se. corky that they would make no proposition injurious to the welfare of the Church.—(Hear.) As a friend to general liberty and to the church he trusted the peti tion would be well received. The Petition of which the following is a copy was then read :—. " To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Tem poral in Parliament assembled : " The humble Petition of the undersigned, resident Members of the Senate of the University of Cambridge, showeth—That your Petitioners are honestly attached to the doctrines and dis cipline of the Church of England as by law established, and are well persuaded of the benefits it hath conferred, and is con ferring, upon the kingdom at large. They beg leave also to declare their sincere attachment to the University of Cam bridge, grounded upon its connection with the established re ligion of the country, and upon a conviction of the wholesome effect it bath produced on the learning, piety, and character of the nation. Strongly impressed with this conviction, they would humbly submit to your Right Honourable House their belief, as Protestant Christians, that no system of civil or eccle siastical polity was ever so devised by the wisdom of man as not to require from time to time some modification, from the change of external circumstances or the progress of opinion. " In conformity with these sentiments, they would further suggest to your Right Hon. House that no Corporate Body like the University of Cambridge can exist in a free country in honour or in safety, unless its benefits be communicated to all classes as widely as may be compatible with the Christian principles of its foundation. " Among the changes which they think might be at once adopted with advantage and safety, they would suggest to your Right Hon. House the expediency of abrogating, by legislative enactment, every religious test exacted from members of the University before they proceed to degrees, whether of Bachelor, Master, or Doctor, in Arts, Law, and Physic. " In praying for the abolition of these restrictions, they re joice in being able to assure your Right Hon. House that they are only asking for a restitution of their ancient academic laws and laudable customs. These restrictions were imposed on the University in the reign of James the First, most of them in a manner informal and unprecedented, and grievously against the wishes of many of the then members of the Senate, during times of bitter party animosities, and during the prevalence of dog mas both in Church and State which are at variance with the present spirit of the English law, and with the true principles of Christian Toleration. " Your petitioners conscientiously believe that if the prayer of this petition be granted, the great advantage of good acade mic education might be extended to many excellent men, who are now, for conscience' sake, debarred from a full participation in them, though true friends to the institutions of the country. And your petitioners are convinced that this is the best way at once to promote the public good, and to strengthen the foundations of the civil and ecclesiastical establishments of this realm. " The University is a body recognised by the law of Eng. land as a Lay Corporation, invested with important civil pri vileges, and on that account resting on no secure foundation which is not in harmony with the social system of the state. Your petitioners, therefore, humbly beg leave to suggest that as the legislative bodies of the United Kingdom have repealed the Test Act, and admitted Christians of all denominations to seats in parliament and to places of dignity and honour, they think it both impolitic and unjust that any religious test should be exacted in the University previously to conferring the civil advantages implied in the degrees above enumerated. " Lastly, your petitioners disclaim all intention of hereby in terfering directly or indirectly with the private statutes and regulations of individual colleges—founded, as the colleges are, on specific benefactions, and governed by peculiar laws, of which the respective heads and fellows are the legal and na.. tural guardians. " To the several clauses of this petition the consideration of your Right Hon. House is humblybut earnestly entreated ; and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c." HEADS. Martin Davy, Master Caius J J. Lamb, Master Corpus Christi. Martin Thackerey, Ir . ice-Provost of King's. PROFESSORS. Dr. Hervett, Professor Physic I A. Sedgwick, Geology Dr. Lee, Hebrew I G. B. Airy, Astronomy T. Cumming, Chymistry I Thos. Musgrave, Arabic D. Clarke, Anatomy J. S. Denslow, Botany. C. Babbage, Mathematics TUTORS. .0 NV. only difficulty might by some of their lordships be hel d to be in acting upon the principle. This was no speculative question; it was no visionary or ideal grievance which was complained of by the dissenters. The body was highly respectable, and yet they were compelled to endure grievances to which others of their fellow-subjects were strangers, merely because they could not conscientiously subscribe to the doctrines and discipline of our church establishment. Heavy burdens bad been imposed and were continued on the dissenters, from which the others were free, only because they could not conscientiously adhere to the Church of England. By the same rule, then, and by the same parity of reasoning, he claimed for himself, aye, and for their lordships too, not only the right to have a church whose doctrines they could approve, and to whose discipline they could assent, as he would claim for the dissenters. He would at once admit all dissenters to the same rights as he had himself, and which, under the present law, they could not enjoy without injuring their consciences, and, in injuring and invading their con sciences, degrading and debasing themselves, by affecting to believe in the established church when their hearts were strangers to arid far away from it. These were first prin ciples admitted by almost every man. Every man in principle admitted the right of the dissenter to be relieved from the grievances which really oppressed Kira. He thought the dissenters could suffer no greater hardships than the exclusion from academical honours and situation., and this he would say, that he thought it impossible, that the common law, as applied to the Universities, or their statutes, or their by-laws, could much longer continue in their present state. If any man could find the existence of such statutes, or laws, which excluded men from the fair chance of obtaining information in law or medicine, he would put it to the country to say whether, in the nineteenth century, they were still to beallowed to prevail. The medical profession was in many cases a gainful one, and in all cases it was useful ; and he must say that the medical education in this country was placed in a most singular situation. It was directed by two bodies, one of which claimed a monopoly in entitling a man to prac tice, and the other a monopoly in refusing him such an education as would qualify him to practice. The one had the privilege to make doctors, and the other the pri vilege to refuse them the necessary knowledge for such a p bu ro t te t s h s e io. m n ome O n n t e of them hecameint c o ou h l i t m s 1 profession a Ate i h as ere r it of Arts, himsel under the necessity of going elsewhere to study fur some years before he could practise as a doctor. The truth was, these bodies had a monopoly of incapacity to teach, with the monopoly of conferring a degree. A person, to be a doctor, under such circumstances, studying in London,the emporium of knowledge, or in the provincial towns, must, at all events, go somewhere or other that, to the universi ties to obtain sufficient information. This was the case with the adherents of the church of England. But sup pose the case of a conscientious dissenter. At Oxford he could obtain no sufficient education to obtain a degree, and then he must go to some foreign country, either to Paris, or the north of Itily, or some of the Dutch Universities, which formerly was very much the practice; or, at all events, he must go to one of the Scotch Universities, as if, forsooth, they could not teach medicine in England. Such a person must go to a country where foreign laws existed ; and he had known a case in which, rather than let such a person do so, the determination towards the prac tice of medicine was abandoned. If the dissenter, however, wished to follow the practice of medicine, he must, at all events, go to Scotland, away from his family, a sort of exile from his country and his friends, and, added to that, at great expense; and all this before he could obtain the means of earning his livelihood. Why, he asked, should ell this difference be between the dissenters and the churchmen, who were fellew-subjects, living in a common coun ry ? Why all this, but because the dissenters con scientiously differed from others of his fellow-subjects in matters of religious faith and discipline. This stain, how ever, upon our institutions could not much longer be per mitted to exist. The dissenters complained justly, as they complained loudly, and not in a tone one iota too loud for the fair and full expression of the grievances which they endured. The noble baron would do some thing towards their relief, although he was afraid tae dif ficulty in doing so could scarcely be surmounted. But the noble duke took a much easier method of settling the dif_ ficulty than would strike the mind of mostordinary persons. The noble duke would not strike at charters, and of all other charters, nut at University charters ; but he would have all persons seeking academical education, and of course, or nearly so, academical honours, to subscribe to aricles which the noble duke seemed to think a sort of foundation, or basis, or safeguard of what he was pleased to call christianity. Butt the noble duke should not forget, that, however pure and admirable he (the Lord Chancellor), together with others of their lordships, considered the doctrines of the established church to be, there were many, very many, conscientious people, even in England, who did not coincide with thorn. Every one did not con sider the doctrines of the church of England to be of ne cessity the whole sum and substance of Christianity. But the noble duke again considered that there could be no great difficulty in this matter, for be seemed to be of opinion that if a Dissenter obtained entrance into a University, and there qualified himself to take a degree, at that very moment when they were so qualified they must be stopped short in their career, unless they subscribed to the existing statutes. This, indeed, was a simple process; but it was a process which never could be acted on. Suppose the noble duke bad to meet with a sturdy Presbyterian upon this subject—with a Presby terian, too, who considered some of the doctrines of the caurch of England as savouring of paganism, inasmuch as it resembled Popery, as they would call it, in many of its essential doctrines. Why the Presbyterian would not accede to the church of England, because he did not con sider it to be the church of God ; and yet he should not be deprived of civil right because he conscientiously thought so. No man should be punished who acted con. scientiously as long as he did not violate the law ; but when lie found the existence of certain laws, whether of the state or the universities, aggrieve him, it was neither unnatural nor unreasonable that he should constitutionally ask for their repeal. The exclusion from degrees in the universities was a serious injury to many, even in their individual capacity ; and it was, in his opinion, a still greater injury to the honour and well.heing of the state. He could not help thinking that the noble duke was exceedingly mistaken in supposing that, because this petition was signed by only sixty members of the college, it had not the concurrence of many others.— (Hear, hear.) Much more he thought must the noble duke have been in error in coming to the conclusion that all the non-resident members, amounting, as he said, to some three or four thousand persons, were opposed to the prayer of the petition. He Ira t reason to believe that the fact was the other way. Indeed he knew of his own knowledge many, very 'flirty, non-resid, nts who were alt .gether opposed to this system of proscription. Sin cerely did he wish to see the time, and he hoped and trusted he should see it, when this great anomaly would be done away with ; when the existing grievant es would be removed !rem the Dissenters, and the great blot and stain removed from the universities, under which they at present laboured. He sincerely believed that the time was not far distant when this would take place. In the meantime lie trusted that these lords' articles (if be might he allowed to use a phrase of the Scottish parliament), tie trusted, lie said, that these lords' articles would not prevent not only any thing from being done, but duke and his friends appeared to be of opinion that been done; that the question had hitherto not only not cwasoeu;ldbrutotthrele,,ta.oinultdhceiorai,tobeen considered, but that it had not been propounded for thing from being considered. As it was, t nnootbhliencr hadue consideration. It had been (lane, and the caput were the great absurdity of using endeavours to prevent any ul a s s s t io j n 2 o in n the o n t months; jneacyt: it was style,: proposed d o i se i jli twice Michaelmas, aet within ni,s t ) rett i tiC ie disc the st l and ord s o h ! s i o ps i nl would st T e l r o t o n k . liaetwtohuilsd n:iliteesvtieonnienasteroinnetowain,icinuriery lord shipsoppos opposed t a rs , it.—(Hear,) arguing a e r . . be tixstoieisifnts.t all 11:1: 11 ).:1, e aenr‘ h dsv o , ivipr slanders their ts d ‘tie,mhdi acinnh isq a xi nkvun s u,affijii junrtoceolnsddi manner. It :hair that l iwiti i t:d c ovii u euems l yli t dtt i ni e :avp s anbeot t et s seie ' eti e lt:lit r ill e ue,nuuipgru t tyo h ir(lien r ea o it ntowedtsoeni fullest i n a n t dli themost tray; it ink man could utter, to say that those illustrious bodies them, or the checks which they had it in their power to could doubt but great benefit must be derived from an in quiry so instituted and so constructed, while even the most timid could have nothing to apprehend ? He called upon the heads of those colleges to consider, he was going to say the fitness, but he would say the high expediency of such an inquiry. Ile called upon them to look with a fixed and scrutinizing eye into the whole of these sub jects, and to consider how far such inquiry, with a view to the removal of certain disabilities, viou:l be conducive to the community generally as well as to the established church itself. The Duke of WELLINGTON explained. The Earl of DURHAM said the noble duke had re gretted the absence of the illustrious duke who was Chan cellar of the University of Cambridge; hut be might also lament the presence of another illustrious duke •(the Duke o: Cumherland) who was Chancellor of the University of Dublin, where the practice with respect to the adinis sion of dissenters to college honours was altogether at variance with that of the Universities of England. The noble duke bad, it appeared to him, passed over, some- ._ inasmuch. as .thefere ' what slightly, the greet delay and incooveuienceli 1 tamed by the dissenters on their way to - lega l ' a e medical professions hy the existing regulations at n a ,; English universities. But the matter bad been brotiVi more home to him—if, in the organizatior of that gr ea s and glorious army of which he was the bead. --if. ° P e n is every turn he was there met with disabilities. arising 0- • of dissenting opinions, then the'noble duke Would W s been led to entertain feelings of sympathy for merloni,ra men, held back from advancement and honour , ''.oe ground that they bad not subscribed to the tb irt f -n a l me articles, or upon some equally futile objection' TbsSn t ke / duke seemed to have fallen into a considerable wi s h ' v with respect to the petitioners, when be supp osed t e : made, or even meditated, the she htest attack or imp u;:: tion upon the corporation. The fact was, that the nett tioners complained of no one act of the corporationThe} slid they wish to overrule any measure of theirs. aa, complained only of the general system as it at present exists. and as the whole of the body had found ir. That system t wm h ea e r y nea s g t a ehm te u d edn t i o ta l i,i i i e eer p eso r p e fe j . c u i d firr i c c ij i e a cs l oeine)nal generally, aij,riiat si n,s and peculiarly I°- jurious to a large and respectable class. They prayed ao t a e l i t l e ig ra ib ti i on e, of that sysion, and beyond that they did not at; tempt to go. But if they had so complained it would no have been the first time that such a complaint was made. Indeed it appeared that from the earliest periods objections were made to the regulations of the university and the in acts of Parliament, as well as other doe ' : preamble of an act of Edward VI. it was said that the ancient regulations of the college were " obscure, unin duke would have no right to find ' fault, even if the peti tioners p o o n s e i ' t s iv c e ou in n i t u r , them at hnuie? men to see a k n y d i,n se o t t n h i e a r ba c r o b u ir at in iess " t a h n o d v thaedrveafonrteages tie w o h n i b e l h e precedents to tiear them out. The noble duke apt the pearid_ i to think little of the inconvenience suffered by pphiysicn.tersvviens entering upon the profession of law of it not inconvenience to be obliged to leave Was it no injury to drive away eminent Y . , t 0 drive men to Italy, H o l e l m a r n e'n d tt , os' a b u e d lfno G u e tnh r (-e . w..re denied Was it no inconvemen • many, to obtai n th ose d egrees which were denied t h e n at i , home • In Germany it was well known de gree s w ert: conferred without any re f erence to religion , and en the ground of merit. With respect to what had fallen from his noble and learned friend on the woolsack relative to the noble baron (Ellenborough) and his noble relative, be (Lord Durham) fully concurred; but he could Dot go along with the noble baron in apprehending danger to the universities or to the church from the re'' , moval of the disabilities under which the Dissenter s ' laboured. The noble baron was liberal; he would giv e every thing required to the Dissenters but from a fear',.- of some danger arising out of an attempt to carry bi l .' principles into practice. This was a groundless fear. I Vbf - That ed ne they inen n w er ou o l f d was it, he asked, on what ground of reason or worn ° f li e e lu e s n e ; e l r ? tain sense was it, that these just clams of the Dissenters were:. to say that such a removal of disabilities would be den t to that ~;i gerous to the stability of those universities; nay, d b o e ub g r r . ant l e t d of the church itself. The church ought not 5° ask for : • 4: Ali the esta- ali such protection ; she did not • . require It• blished church required and ought to ask for was a, clear ~.4 stage and no favour. The fact was, that the church of :`; the England would suffer more, tenfold more, injury by continuance of those disabilities than by their ren t/v a s : . i There were those in high stations who watched over tv " --t t they called the safety of the established church ; but io . watching from their elevation they overlooked those v/b,.. :,' power in thi s ,' argument- were diligently sowing that seed which no country could root out. What did noble lards expect hi '.' continuing to refuse to the Dissenters the removal of tbe i. , Cool idle, to entertain such a hope. , Was sooner ae or bile , disabilities under which they laboured? Did the y round and con- pest that the Dissenters would turn farm to the Establis!ied Church ? It were idle,. more ' i , , if ever, made converts.—(Hear- hear.) But bad they . not reason toyppreh en d an accession of hatred, ao . l ts :' mosity, and ill will towards that Church and he ' ! members who continued those dis abilities? he- they not reason to expect that the dissenters would e a degr e come hostile to the church of England, and that of asperity would prevail which should never have a riscat :. and all this founded on the danoerous doctrine that justice_ a : istencet:fe ~;, to the dissenters was incompatible oith the ex the church of England ?—(Cries of " Hea r" ft."' d opposition.) Noble lords iniaht deny thin , as it a pp s seas , they did by their cheer ; but 'he maintained that such g r is , i the doctrine which had got slimed. He bad heard the . ;; „d to the nearlye hu repeated rciif eu o sr v tfa e ob r i di iandsthiizoenvotef.r the established ad bi t , : s a h t e eaters (ii f P e eitirh,:sereecergieui r t ;i a i n ° n a n t is s , i n i t an i lbo dz e i ti w . r. ,;:' dissenters were conceded there would be en they were most resp etable ; and as to active organization th yf r outstripped any ~ thing to be tnet with in (air church e eastablishotent. Ile /,,, would ask, then, was it matte of policy' to urge su ~, body against the church ,and that, too, when they hid , ,!:, reason and justio i ' H had but one obsev ' f e on their side? c whether, • , vation more ' to snake, and that observation was, eel 'a as a question of prudence, they ought to allow tile setters to continue to press tbeir claims without successtr. He would conclude by reading a quotation from the writ, e berb .:, lugs of a great divine and high outhority in the (Arcloleaeon Paley ), l in his ' vindication of BishoP ~, L !lid, said-- w 10, t writes their influence was gross, " As the man who attacks a flourishing est abliShMCn A to at-. tempt alterations but men of more spirit than Pr' , " „ L os with a halter round his neck, few ever will be founi-1ce.....0f more sincerity than caution—of warm, eager, and im_P e eme ot s tempers ; that, consequently, if we are to wait for iraPr u cl b egin 1 till the cool, the calm, the discreet part a mank ind rapo° `f it —till church governors solicit or mini ster s of statel s ; erpos i. f : , ", it—l will venture to pronounce that (without His in o we ' tion, with whom nothing is impossible) ':. we ma y rema in are till the ren vation of all things." 'th hi s s' . The Duke of CUMBERLAND concurred svid 1. nolile and gallant friend (the Duke of would never conceal the opinions he entertained. oose ,'''' the statutes of the University of Dublin differed fo ln e. be .. of Cambridge and Oxford, it was no reason hee au t . 9 o ser (the Duke of Cumberland) was Chancellor of the ,. o He '• that he should not be aocious to support the let te ' r ; ce por ''. regretted the absence of his noble relative the Cbaattende i,,: for Cambridge, who was r evented by illness horn coo° ''',, inn, and who, if he were in his place in the houl l ' e lasi exulain the difference between the statutes of t Wen i ng to r ngt ou l t h f! versiCcs (:I.d A er ft e e d r . a to fet i v ie w on ord th s e fro ta m bl E e :t a l nGdßtEheir,bothue,cpaeditiotuiornaer; If_past seven. MEETINGS OF CREDITORS AT THE COURT, BASINALLSTREET GH ON MONDAY , (From the London Gazette.) 0. M. I 1 at , ...... 1 4 J. Natal', grocer, BirminghaM **************************** - 2 W. R. Turner, carver, Great Dover-road .... .............. . 1 J. Smith, hosier, Sun Tavern-fields, Sbadwell ........... ... ~ 1 Spital.. 0 T. Warland, silk-manufacturer. Steward-street, fields ...................................................................... i 0. DIVIDENDS. • ... At V I , R. Alderson, linen-draper, Crawibrd-street .. • ........... " G. Taylor, saiicloth-manufacturer, Crutched-gars ............ 11 W. R. croggon, auctioneer, Bartholomew 1 ............ .. 0 ane ... .., J. B e tts, cabinet-maker, Winchest - Winchester .......................... MARco 24. timSeslGasNnSumOeri.Fius THEa s tliey pas s through the Ncxport P.st•uffic', --------...... na perS that are -- , ; ee ..... . e ars sg . " ,) IVelshman. iv Clare, Cholera prevails at Toingrany, Coull` dir and has spread throtrzh a rin(re of mountains in tee t ~ I ma° j trict which it never visited before.--Dubfin .1 Journal. ----........'"'" I r ,., e l : elEt:e•—nt: fi h „r e e ylleWSr, a BIRTHS. On the 13th inst , Lady Sar ah Maitland, o ! f a son. At Carthagena, in Spain, the lady of Matthew Carter, his Majesty's Consul at that place, of a son. On the 18th inst., the lady of John Crawfurd, Esq., • crescent, of a son. On the 20th inst ~ the lady of Mr. William E llis ° °l4 ' Gracechurch-street, of a son. MARRIED. the i tev On the 18th inst., at Aston, W a rwickshire, bi n to 4 , John Smith, M.A., Mr. Joseph Kendall, junior Pa rte t e er of th e firm of Kendall and Sons, to Harriet, youngest daUghAiarn. late Thomas Mole, Esq., of the Poplars, near 1311111D.,134:4-ue On the 20th inst., at St. Andrew's, Holborn, Ar t " u7 f 010 49 ' Blakiston, Esq., to Emma Susannah, second daug hter ° Abbott, Esq. Wright , FA.' smith, to t A o Ta A gt l l i a e l i c a n , tiadlol,w=diatoef \Mvioitiliatangue-Place' On the 20th inst., at Fulham Church, James ' winrner.: of Port — c 11, s ' l '' land place. squ O ar n e t , he m l a 9 r t ia h , i v ns i t a . c , n a n t nt h e i s s a L D D O r r n E d n s p h ca i . third daughter of the Earl of Westmorela nd! , r 0 01 " has left a n :, i merous family. v icedi t On the 20th inst., Mary Anne the wife of James •— h seat Esq., solicitor, of Tewin-street '' • 1 te and south ~. , CriPP e g a ' Chambers. ~,,,,,sra,, , On the 21st inst , Elizabeth, eldest daiighter of P . Wigan, Esq. a • inst., , . Highbury-terrice Is , ington. rt k j On the 21 it inst , Mrs 1 ' ' (mother of lqr. 1 "..- ' ngrey Strand), in her 69th . year. . Lordship's residency in —0 1,5 ~ and Ladyship ii,0,...i, BINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MURDO YOU'S G , SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND.