The Sun. — London, England, 1834-03-24 00:00:00

PIM:FS Or ! , ,t , )e T'4 s DAY .t.'r Ow ) ' O'CLOCK. :1 , k StccK • Is went tied. 3 nor Cent. Cons gIVON 3,e; per Cmt..... . Ditto Red .. shut New 'S34 per Lent. :DS% S 4 3 rer Cent. Ann. 1726 .... - 4 per Cent. 1BEI6 Bank Long Ann. to expire Jan. 5, IMP shut Oct. 10, ISSO shut ' , lca S Per Cent. India Stock Ditto Bonds 3O 32 pm . South Fes Stock Old Annuities.. ~........ . » !New Ditto iier Cent. Ann. 1751 . Ex. Bills, £l,OOO 5 l. 54 pm. Ditto ... ...50P 53 1 54 7m, Ditto Small IDitto Commercial — om Ditto Advertised ...... lan. 5, 1800 l7 Jan. 5, 1860.. „ - April 5, 1881............, - Jan. 5, 1870 Bank for Account India for Account Cons. for Account PRICES OP FOREIGN PUNTA Austrian Bonds ..... .. Belgian Bonds 29 3 4 Ditto Account 1::1;;% Brazilian Bonds '314 Ditto Account -3 N 14 Buenos Ayres Bonds... 25 1 4 Ditto Account 254 Chilian Bonds .......... 25% Ditto AcC0unt.......... 26 Columbian Bonds Ditto Account 23 Ditto Bonds, 1924 2534 Ditto Account 25% Danish Bon .41 THIS DAT ♦T ONE 0 CLOCK Peruvian Bonds NV Ditto Account Of 44 Portuguese Bonds 6 5 3,4 Ditto Account eSiV, 6 j Ditto New Bonds 5 Ditto Acc0nnt......65 6 Prussian Bonds I C 3 ti Ditto Bonds, 1822 lO3 Russian Bonds, 1822 IC4 Ditto Account. 104'4 Ditto 111 'Spanish Bonds, 1822 1 ... 31 3 4 '2% Ditto Acc. SI xO4 Lf,...2A Ditto Acerunt 74% *reek Bonds ..... .......... — Ditto Bonds, :823 -2 6 1,4 Ditto Account 26 French Renter, 5 p. c. 1051 25e. Exchange ...... 25f. Oc. per cent —f. —c. Exchange • f —C ,Dutch, 24 p. e. 49X Ditto Account ...............49% Ditto, 5 p. c. Q 7 Ditto Account 7% ... Ditto Bonds, 1825 2g% Ditto Account.-- — If exican Bonds, 5 per cent 31% Ditto Account I At , o, ft per cent.......... 38;6 Ditto Account es Neapolitan PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAT AT ONE O'CLOCF._ Paid. Alien Mining Company XS Anglo Mex. Min. ...o. ties. at St. pm ) ElOO Bolanos Mining Company ...... ...£150 Brazilian Mining Company ZS Brazilian Tmp. Min. Co. (iss. at 51. pm.) £2O Ditto Macaubas Cocaes 2O Ditto St. John Del Rey , ln r i tp Rrnnea Mining Company 3% British Iron MMus Comnany evt Columbian Mini% Co. , iss at 51. pm.) 52% Lnglish Mming Company General Mining Association Hibernian Mining Co. £lo Mexican Mining Co. £4B Real del Monte Mining Co....(unreg.) United Mex. Min. Co. (iss. at 21. pm.) 40 . -. Per Share 11% 8 129 Ditto New So ip 5 Alliance Fire insurance Comp lO Protector Insurance Comp. £2 Australian Co. Canada Company .......... IS General Steam Navigation ('o l3 National Provincial Bank of England 15 Rio Doce Provincial Bank of Ireland 25 A 1 7 0 48 154 13N 2;6 42;6 3 PRICES 07 IRISH STOCKS, DUBLIN, LURCH 21. Bank Stock 217 St. Patrick Inicur.(perShare Consols, 3 Der cent Gov. Stock, Say per cent. MN, National Ditto Ditto, New ..„........« 97 Patriotic Ditto 4 per Cent.............. ........ I Hibernian Bank 24 Goy. Deb. S percent.,.. 89 (Provincial Ditto Royal Canal Stosk . Royal Irish Mine Grand Canal 5t0ck..,.. .... Imperial Mine City Deb. 4 per cent. — Xining Co. of Ireland Ballast ntlice Deb. 40. e. Commercial Buildings Arrived. Hamburg 0 Holland Jamaica..— ........ Leeward Islands Lisbon 1 Malta 0 Sweden .......... ...... 0 Waterford 0 MAILS. Due. 1 Arrived. O America 0 0 9 Brazil • Buenos Ayres 0 0 • Carthagena 0 0 • Dublin 0 0 I Flanders 0 0 I France I 1 0 1 Guernsey &Jersey 0 • 2 Due. }IIGI4 WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW. Morning...2B minutes after 2 I Evening...4B minutes after 2. MISS EDGEWORTH'S NEW WORK. This day was published, in 3 vole. post Svo., H E L E By MARIA EDGEWORTH. Richard Bentley, 8, New Burlington-street. (Successor to Henry Colburn.) To be obtained also of all respectable Bookseller• throughout the United Kingdom. r LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 24, 1834. While the University of Cambridge is ad vancing in the cause of religious toleration and an impartial distribution of academic honours, her twin-sister is receding, and improving even on the bigotry of the pedantic JAMES I. We use the word university, because, from the re spectability, the number, and the learning of the men who subscribed the petition to the Lords and Commons, as well as from the fact that no counter petition has been got up, we may take it for granted that the petitioners express the feeling of the general body. Taking into account the numbers that are neutral and passive, or favourable to the measure, but silent from prudential motives, sixty_two subscribers, out of a body consisting of 180 members, may be regarded as decisive of the question. Oxford, however, has prepared a petition, not to Parliament, but to the KING, and, not content with excluding the Dissenters from that University, calls on his MAJESTY to refuse a charter to any other similar institution which may interfere with their monopoly of degrees. Bigotted and blind, as most recluses are, we could hardly conceive it possible that the light of the age should have been so completely excluded from this abode of learning. While more than one-half of the population — a great majority of the House of Commons —and a respectable proportion of the Upper House, are calling out for the admission of dissenters into the Universities, the resident members of Oxford seem utterly ignorant of the fact, and are as devoted to the exclusive system as they possibly could have been had they, in the shape of monks, inhabited these places in the 15th century. The very extrava gance of the illiberality, however, disarms it of half its force. It can have few abettors, and if the dissenters only act with prudence, and obey the injunction of the poet," orandum est" &c., they may count upon speedy relief. The Leeds Mercury says Earl FITZWII, LIAM is favourable to the redress of the Dis senters, grievances, except on two points— exemption froin church rates and the admission to graduate at the Universities. To make the thing complete it ought to have added, " and reform in the ceremonies of baptism, marriage, and burial." The editor of the Mercury must be very ill inflnaed to impute such absurdity and bigotted opinions to a nobleman who, in the House of Commons, was ever the foremost in the cause of liberty and justice, but if the atmosphere of the House of Lords can produce such a change, that branch of the Legislature should be abolished by acclamation. Brussels papers, of Saturday's date, say that the health of the PRINCE-ROYAL was better ; but we understand, from private accounts, that such is not the fact. It will be seen by the following paragraph that our Belgian neighbours feel little or no disposition to reciprocate with us in the spirit of free trade, which feeling is unfortunately too generally entertained through out the continent. A Belgian paper says :—" In order to dispel the fears manifested by a ~c , l eharnlierc:of Commerce and other persons, on c., --the iiientiort- s :of the government to obtain iron 7 _, - - -. 'frOmiEnglind;for the construction of the in (4' '----(::.-. - tend4xo ad t 'tfict Minister of the Interior gave, L ~~! in the sitting of the 17th, detailed statements proving that we ourselves have iron in abund ance. The quantity which the several farmers, &c., in Belgium can produce in a year is 18,700 tons. Of this quantity there is a re gular demand for 9,700 tons, leaving 9,000 tons to be disposed of annually. There will, therefore, be much more than will be required for the iron rail-road. As for the locomotive machines, waggons, &c., there will be found in the country mechanics as well able to make them as in England ; however, by way of precaution, we shall procure from that country the most perfect models." BELGIAN FUNDS.—BaussELs, MARCH 9.1. Actual Debt, 9. y, per Cent. Rothschild's Loan, 5 per Cent 978 Loan of the City, 1834, 4 per Cent 94:- German Papers of the 17th instant have been received this morning, but their contents are not worth extracting, being chiefly an address from the Bavarian Chamber, in answer to the KING'S speech, of which it is merely an echo. The French Papers are chiefly filled with re ports of the discussions in the Chamber of De puties on the subject of the law of associations, which, though at every step of its progress it encounters the determined hostility of the oppo sition, yet bids fair to pass the Chamber by a large majority. Considering the arbitrary na ture of this law; that it is virtually a bill of pains and penalties against all freedom of discussion:; that it strikes at the root of the dub mania, which France of late years has had so much at heart, and which has been the means of producing so many momentous alterations in her institutions ;—considering all this, two things have struck us with surprise, first, that the Ministry have had the hardihood to propose such a measure; secondly, that the Parisian Liberals have submitted to it so philoso phically. We should have imagined that they would have fired up at the bare idea of such a project, justifying their opposition by the fact that it is nearly, if not quite, as tyranni cal as any thing ever projected by the Villele or Polignac administrations. But instead of this, they submit to the gag—so far at least as we can perceive at present—with as much indif ference as if it were a matter of course. M. PERSIL, who spoke in favour of the association law, and expressly asserted that it was levelled at the " Societe des Droits de l'Homme," and such other refractory institutions, got up a " shocking story" for the occasion, touching the recent clandestine manufacture of cannon-balls in Paris, evidently for the purpose of frightening the Chamber into acquiescence. We have no means of ascertaining the truth or falsehood of the learned Deputy's statement, but we must confess we are not altogether without our sus picions on the subject. The cannon-balls have been manufactured at such a convenient junc ture ; the detection of them is so exceedingly apropos; and furnishes the Ministry with such a capital, clinching argument, that we are strongly disposed to think that the whole affair is neither more nor less than a Sidmouth old stocking, or a Castlereagh blue-bag job. But granting that " within the last ten days more than 80,00 t) ball-cartridges have been clandestinely got ready in Paris," and that " last Sunday a distribution of 'arms took place in all the sections of the Societe des Droits de l'Homme," still it is far from improbable that the ministry, who have already proved themselves such adepts at all sorts of tricks and contrivances, know more about the manufacturers of the car tridges and the distributors of the arms, than they deem it prudent to acknowledge. Of one thing at least, we are well aware. Louis PHILIP know s well the precarious tenure by which he holds the throne of the barricades, and is not the man to stick at a trifle in order to maintain himself in power. But if he imagine that his Associations Law will effect the desired end, he will find himself miserably deceived ; for so far from being a measure likely to give him additional security, its immediate result will be to relax still more the weak hold he already has on the affections of his subjects ; its ultimate one, to set him out once again on his travels. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY) FROM LLOYD'S. DEAL, MAttct► 23.—Wind N.W.—Arrived the Water loo, Blakeley, from China—sailed Oct. 19, and from St. Helena, Jan. 27 ; and the Lord John Russell,from the Me diterranean. Arrived from the River and remain the H. and M. brig, Laws, for St. Kitts; the Florence, Lundy, for Constantinople; the Thomas Lawrie, Lang don, for Van Diemen's Land ; the Woodman, Bayne, for Bristol ; and the Brothers, Patterson, from Newcastle to Demerara. PORTSMOUTH, MARCH 23.—Wind S. to W.—Sailed his ALijesty's ship Belvidera, for Birbadoes. PLYMOiITH, MARCH 22.—Wind W.—Arrived the Mitchel, Riass, from Charente. Off port the Maria, Assander, from New Orleans. FA LMOUTII, MARCH 21. —Wind E. toE. S. E. , moderate. 22.—Wind W.S.W. to W., fresh.—Arrived the William, Jordan, from Matanzas. Off port the Brilliant, Gad,by, from Lisbon. Sailed his Majesty's ship Pike, for Oporto and Lisbon ; Renard packet, for St. Domingo, Jamiica, Mexico, and Havannah ; and Pandora packet, for Leeward blonde. LIVERPOOL, MARCH 22.—Arrived the Integrity, John, from Jamaica ; Palestine, Settlefield, from New Orleans ; Catherine, Durnison, from Savannah : Aris, Thompson, from Mobile ; Dependant, Gallilee, from Charleston ; Victoria, from New York ; Diligent, from St. Michael's ; and Broad Axe, Garey, from Rieboo. Off port the Har mony, from Sierra Leone. The Swallow packet arrived at Jamaica on the 4,th ult., and was to sail on the 9th, on her return. BUOYS AND BEACONS IN THE SOUND. The following letter has been addressed to Capt. John Lidgett, from the British Consul at Elsinore, dated 24th Feb., 1534 " With reference to your letter of the 17th December last, covering a petition from various British shipmasters frequenting the Baltic, to his Majesty the King of Den mark, respecting the early removing of the Buoys and Beacons in the Sound, I beg leave to inform you, that I have taken the earliest opportunity of causing that docu ment to be laid before the King, and I have now the satis faction to add, that his Majesty has been pleased to grant the prayer of the petitioners ; in consequence of which, orders have been given that in future the Buoys and Beacons are to remain until the navigation is stopped by ice, and further, that three additional buoys are to be placed in that part of the Sound called the Grounds." Taglioni's benefit, on Thursday, was very productive ; the net receipts were nearly 9001. It is understood that it was insured to her by the lessee at 8001 NEWS FOR THE MALTHUSIANS.—Yester day, at the Mansipn- House, a wcman named Sarah Snayth was brought before the 111,yor to affiliate an illegirimat child, being the fourteenth she bas sirnilariy [nought into t :e world.—Hull Advertiser. 60!.; 19 64 54 M 4 94 9i IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, THIS DAY, MONDAY, MARCH 24. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took his seat at twenty minutes pass twelve. A considerable time was employed in forwarding private bills far the first reading of which this was the last day. The following bills were forwarded a stage. viz., the City of Edinburgh Watching, Lighting, &c. Bill, read a first time ; a bill to compensate two individuals for loss sustained by them of certain sugars under peculiar circum stances, read a first time ; a bill to preserve the piers and harbour of Rotherham, read a first time; a bill to repair certain roads in the counties of Derby andLeirester, read a first time; a bill to commute for a corn rent certain tithes in the parish of Kirby Lonsdale, read a first time ; a bill to enable the General County Amicable Insurance Company to sue and be sued in the name of one ()more of the direc tors, read a first time ; a bill to repair and maintain certain roads in the parish of Deans, in the West Riding of York shire, read a first time ; a bill for paving, lighting. &e., cer tain parts of the parish of St. Pancras, read ;first time; two bills to enclose certain lands in the county of Dorset, read a first time; a bill to establish a market at Fish guard, in the county of Pembroke, read a first time; the Longley(Gloucestershire)Enclosure Bill was read a second time ; the Gloucester and Berkley Canal Bill, was read a second time ; a bill for granting further powers to the British Iron Company was read a first time; a bill for enabling the United Kingdom Life Insuraace Company to sue and be sued in the name of its chairman was read a first time; a bill for enclosing lands in a parish in the county of Stafford was read a first time ; the Stafford Bridge Bill was read a first time ; the Dudley (Worcestershire) Water Works Bill was read a first tim' ; a Bill for enclosing certain lands in a parish i n the county of Somerset was read a first time ; the Wishaw Railway Bill, and the : Crinnan Canal Bill, were read a first time; the Leith Harbour Improvement Bill was read a filet time; the report of the committee on the Limerick Water Works Bill was brought up ; the British American Land Company Bill was read a first time. Mr. JAMES OSWALD presented a petition from cer tain burgesses of the borough of Anderston, praying for the repeal of the Police Act of that borough. A bill for the improving of lands in the parish of Old_ bridge, in Lincolnshire; also a bill for the improvement of the town of Merthyr Tidvil ; a bill for the construe• tion of a railway to the town of St. Helen's; a bill for the improvement of the Calder Navigation ; a bill for the better paving and lighting of the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, in the Borough of Southwark ; and a Bill to amend an Act relating to the roads of Middlesex and Essex, were all read a first time, and ordered to be referred to the committee. Mr. HALCOMB brought in a bill for the better provi sion and maintenance of the Rector of Christ Church, Surrey, which was read a first time. Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the merchants and other inhabitants of Wapping, against the East Smith field toll bar. TITHES COMMUTATION BILL. Mr. SPRING RICE, in answer to a question from Mr. Hughes, said, that if his noble friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer shouNl be sufficiently well to attend on Wednesday night, he would introducc his bill for the commutation of tithes. Mr. H. HUGHES suggested that it would be better i: the bill wen., to be further postponed. He had himself postponed a motion on this subject in consequence of the indisposition of the noble lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. STANLEY, in answer to a question from Mr. Goulburu, said that the supplies would be brought forward this evening before the other orders of the day. PETITION of the SENATE of the UNIVERSITY of CAMBRIDGE, in FAVOUR of the DISSENTERS. Mr. SPRING RICE said he rose to call the attention of the house to a petition which was of the utmost impor tance, and one which was well entitled, if he might pre sume to say so, to the most respectful consideration of the house, as well on the score of the subject to which it re la ed, as to the rank of the individuals who had signed it. The petition was from 63 resident members of the senate of the university of Cambridge, praying that the advantages of that university, as far as respec ed the degrees conferred there, might be opened to all classes of his Majssty's sub jects, without any distinction whatsoever on the score of re ligious difference..—(Cheers.) This petition was, in fact, consonant with the prayer of mmy which were addressed to that house by the dissenting body of this country, and he thought it must be even more gratifying to those who were friendly to the object of those petitions that the principles hid down in them was on the part of the members of this university subscribed to, namely, that they were desirous to open their doors to the dissenters, — it was, he would repeat, far more gratifying than if it bad come from the dissenters themselves.—( Hear, hear.) This was a matter of concession, but it was of the highest importance that all concessions should be made as an amicable adjustment, and come as a gift from those in possession of the monopoly rather than in compliance of repeated demands by the excluded. It was perfectly just that he should state that it was not the petition of the Uni versity, but it was from sixty-three resident members of the senate, hut that, he thought, would not deprive the petition of the slightest portion of its weight. He believed there was one member who, by pos sibility, might be described as a non-resident mem ber; ha alluded to Professor Babbage, whose name was enough.—( Hear, hear.) The resident members amounted to about 108, and the greatest number that ever voted did not exceed 100. Out of that number there were sixty-three who bad signed the petition, and there were several others, he had reason to know, who agreed in the object and prayer of it, though they might not concur in every sentence. There was then more than one-half of the Senate in favour of the petition. But the mere declaration of numbers was not so important upon any occasion as the name of the individuals. He was sure, ff he should have the misfortune to be opposed by his right hon. friend (Mr. Goulburn), he was sure he would agree that the signatures to the petition were those of men of the highest moral character and most brilliant talent. It was signed by ten professors; and when he mentioned the names of Lee, Sedgwick, Dodd, and others, he might say that no petition could be more respectably signed. Now, what was the prayer of the petition ? The petitioners set out, as they were entitled to do by their character and endowments, by declaring their attachment both to the church and the university, for no men had exerted them selves more to uphold and maintain the high character and dignity both of the one and the other.—(Flea!' , hear.) It should be remember e d th a t P ro f ess or S doviclis svho so strenuously advo ca t e d t h e open i ng o f the university , was, during the present year, the most able and zealous advocate of the religious and moral institutions of the country. His opi n i on was ent i t l e d to t h e consideration of the house on both grounds. Why was it that the able upholder of the religious institutions of the country was the earnest supporter of the claims of the di s senters? It was, because he was firmly a tt ac h e d to the interests of the established church, because the just concession of those claims was identified with the latter. He called the at tention of the house to the fact that the interests of the church and the University of Cambridge were concerned in the fair adjustment of the diss en t ers demands, and not to continue their exclusion from the benefits of edu cation. Let it not be supposed that that exclusion had its origin with the great men who established and adorned the established church—that it had been coeval with the reformation—( Hear, bear)—that it originated with Elizabeth or Edward Vl.—with the Cranmers, the Ridleys, the Latimer., who were the leaders and the mar tyrs of the national faith. No : it originated in the days of a King, who, in state affairs, employed king craft, and derived his religious opinions from the con ferences of Hampton Court—a King who wrote a treatise on demonology, and who declared that the service of the established church, was but a bad mass in English, and required but the lifting up of the hands to reduce it to complete popery. His right hon. friend was aware that in the consolidated statutes of the reign of Eliza beth, where even rose water was prohibited in the cere mony of baptism—when the utmost rigour prevailed in religious tests,—even then there was no exclusion from university education. In the reign of James the First, the decree made by that monarch, Was the first step to the exclusion which had been so unjustly continued. In that observation, he alluded especially to the Royal letter of James 1., in the year 1613, to the University of Cambridge, in which his Majesty admitted that there were at that time no religious tests whatever. Now, what did that King proceed to do? Why, not to introduce the pi e• sent system ; he did no such thing, but lie stated in t e rms, which had no doubt struck lion. members, h a ving taken a dislike to the degree of doctor of in consequence of . a person, nam e d B urgess, baying quitted that profession for the purpose of takingimly orders, he directed that in future no person should be admitted to the degree of a bachelor of divinity, or any degree unhss lie first suhscrikd ,the three articles of the 36th canon. Then the King directed that in the degrees of bichelor of divinity and Drs. of the faculty, excluding m us i c , the test should be required. Now it was imp ortant to see h ow his Majesty followed this up in consideri ng t h e legal i ty o f the subsequent proceeding; be did not rest upon that, but he direeted tho Univereity to pus s price or Isw the purpose of carrying it i n to effect, and accordingly a g ace or law was passed imposing these religious tests ipon doctors of the faculty and bachelors of di vinity. So matters rested until the year 1616, when his Majesty proceeded to Newmarket for the pur l' ose of amusement, and be then thought fit to revise those orders of the University, and at that time his Majesty's let ers were passed, by which, from that period up to 1772, Dissenters were excluded, for he directed that those religious tests should not only be imposed upon Doctors of the Faculty and Bachelors in Divinity, but upon all persons. But in doing so, he forgot to ask the University to pass any law or grace upon the subject. That second letter was, therefore, not operative, though he (Mr. S. Rice) admitted it had been acted on, but he did not attach much importance to that. He believed the journals of that house would show that in the time of James 11., in the struggle between the Stuarts and the people, they were disposed to treat rather summarily with the house, and the house was rather disposed to submit. He would merely give one instance as a proof of that submission. James 1., upon one occasion, sent a message to the Commons, desiring them to have a conference on a certain subject with the other house; the Cemmons resisted, and then he sent to desire them to cotnmunicate with the Judges, or in other wcrds to call in the aid of the Judges to assist them in their legislative capacity. Here, then, was a direct interference of the crown with the legislature, tantamount to the interference of the crown with the universities. It was on the journals of the house that the house assented to the request, and it was stated by one member upon that occasion, that " the Prince's command came upon them like a thun derbolt ; that it was like the roaring of the lion ; that there was no contradiction to it ; and the only thing to be considered was the means by which it was to be obeyed." If, then, that command came upon the house like a thunderbolt, and similar to the roaring of the lion, there could be no wonder at the heads of the colleges obeying it. In the year 1641 there was a precedent which he knew would not receive much value in the eyes of seine of his hon. friends, but in which the whole pro ceedings respecting the test were stated in a resolution of Parliament as being contrary to law, and therefore ought not to be suffered to exist; from that period and until 1660 the test ceased, and then it was reinforced.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Goulburn.) He (Mr. S. Rice) did not attach any importance to that precedent, by which he con tended the test was improperly imposed, and without any lawful author ity—all that be meant to argue was, that, being improperly imposed, it ought not to exist now; so that, whether by the interposition of that house, or by the university itself, the time had 'now arrived when the test ought to cease.—(Cheers.) In the year 1772, that was made University law, with some variation, which bad previously only been an usurpation by the crown, and tacitly acquiesced in by the University. About that year it was resolved, in order to relieve certain par ties to some extent, that, in place of requiring a concur rence in the three articles of the 36th canon, a mere de claration was required that the parties should bona fide belong to the established church. That resolution was adopted by a grace or law, and was now in existence. It might be said that they were -arguing upon abstract principles, bnt he would prove that at the period when these tests were proposed they had worked most inju riously in the University, and that their ill-working had been felt as soon as the grace had passed. He should read an extract, although he was aware that hon. members did not like to hear a passage from a book read which would elucidate his statement. The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to lead an extract from some work, which stated that so soon after the passing of the grace as the month of January, 1773, Mr. Thos. Illackburne, a strident of St. Peter's College, Cambridge, having passed through his various examinations, applied for his degree and was rejected. He had all the neces sary testimonials and qualifications as to having spent the proper period in the college, and as to his moral character and attainments.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He appeared at the customary hours before the Senate, and as he was known to have distinguished himself, the time of his examination was renewed. He passed with applause, and in the judgment of the examiners was declared worthy of all the honours the University was wont to bestow.* At the close of the examination he hinted his objection to the declaration, and delivered a paper expressive of his opinions upon the subject, in which he declared his full persuasion of the truth of the Christian religion, but that he had not as yet attentively considered the grave waiters of faith which he was called upon to subscribe. This young gentleman, after having distinguished himself by his moral conduct and scientific attainments, not because be was a dissenter, but because he hesitated as a Christian to subscribe to a declaration without having considered fully the importance of the subject, he was deprived of his degree and rejected. —(Hear, heir.) Was not that example worth any ar gument that could be brought forward on the other side? How many more instances must there not have occurred of the same description ? But a few years afterwards a petition was presented from the under-graduates to the Senate expressing their attachment to the doctrines of the church, but complaining that, from the nature of their studies, they had not time to consider the declaration they were called on to subscribe, and that the obligation to do so was but laying a snare for their consciences. If that argu ment were of any importance then, how did it stand at the present moment ? Were they to be told that after having repealed the Test and Corporation Aets they should now stop short ?—( Hear, hear.) He conceived that to argue against these religious distinctions was a mere waste of time. There was not an argument brought forward on the other side, the fallacy of which did not strike him. He contended the onus lay on the other side. He would confine himself to the University of Cambridge, for he had not any acquaintance with the proceedings of the University of Oxford. He would say, however, that there was some consistency in respect to the proceedings at Oxford, for be understood their argument, though he differed from it; for what did they say? They said they held themselves to be a church establishment, and that, therefore, they certainly could admit no dissenters.— (Hear, hear, hear.) But what did they say at Cam bridge? They admitted that the dissenters attended to college discipline and reputation, that they were exactly as good members of the University as the members of the established church, and he, (Mr. S. Rice) could ape de from experience, that they (the dissenters) were as amenable to the discipline of the University, as strict in attenda‘nce upon establishment. —(Hear, st n a i b y l e is r h ai m ty en otf.—C(amHbea Cambridge, bea the r. ) diss But enters then may go it duties, an d as honourable to the University of which th ey f ormed a part as the members of the a. s to through t t h l l e e the college eour , e to a certain extent; they expose the University to t h e d anger of schism, they expose contamination of . this intercourse ; but when the dissenters come to the senate to state that they were about to leave the University, then the senate interposes and throws its shield over th ose i n di v id uals from whom the danger was moreap b e ro period t d ? foolishto and d d e p thanat h r t e n— rd'mwihiti a e t a t r h .) them principle % p ' la t ot could okuicledrta they bine upon o p l I :n a a exclude them ? They excluded them from degrees, and thus, whilst they neglected the orthodoxy of the Univer sity, they protected the orthodoxy of the bar, and of the College of Physicians. Thus they subjected them to a disqualification which could be of no possible use to the University. But had they no experience, did the case rest upon general principles, or had they no experience to justify them in admitting the dissenters to the University? He would recall to the attention of the house a most power ful argument, which had been adduced on a former day by the hon. and learned member for the city of Dublin, namely, the proceedings respecting this same subject which had taken place in the University of Dublin. If there were gentlemen who thought Ireland so calm and tranquil that it was convenient to admit Catholics into the Protestant university, but not the Dissenters of England to the same privilege, be could understand that argument; but if the experiment had ben tried in a country agitated by religious discoid without any incon venience, he should like to know by what process of reasoning it could produce any inconvenience when tbey were treating with a different class of peo. plc under different circumstances.—(Hear, hear, hear.) By the act introduced by Mr, Pitt in 1793 Roman Catholics were admitted to professorships, and that act was passed in a parliament in which the Provost of the University was a member, and there was no objection offered to it but one, which was that the bill did not go far enough, because it excluded Roman Catholics from fellowships. con T si l , i le a r t ed ob a je ga c r ti e on t friend to the Catholics, Jobn Claudius Ber es f or d. ,a the s urged office l of y f Provostjan who and could notbe A speech delivered on that occasion embodied many of the objections which were now urged against such propisi- Lions as those contained in the petition. " God forbid that I should ever see the pious intentions of the royal founders of the universities frustrated by any perversion of the privileges or revenues thereof, to support and en courage Popery, or these hallowed walls made the resi dente of superstition and tyranny. If, however, it be determined to open the university to Catholics, let the British :Ministers first procure an act of Parliament to open the English universities, and then the bitter potion may be more readily swallowed by the infatuated and hetrayed Protestants of Ireland." Now, if such arguments were to be, urged against opening the universities to dissenters lo the pronat doy, that who mod them would oul involve themselves in a great and inevitable dilemma, and merely exhibit themselves clothed in a worn out mantle of Dr. Duigenon. He had to explain to the house how it was that the petition came before the house in its present shape, and how it was utterly impossible, under the pre sent constitution of the University, it could be otherwise. He did hope, h owever, that if the petition did not meet with immediate success it would at lnast produce calm and temperate discussio n , b y w hi ch the principles of truth and] justice, however they might be retarded for a time must be finally success f u l . —(Hear, hear, hear.) The constitution of the university required unanimity in the members of the Caput ; if a single veto were given, it was sufficient i to defeat th e propos i t i on brought before it as Then, how was acting fairly to the country, the uni versity, or the dissenters, to require that such tin inimity should be found before a remedy could be applied to the abuses of which they complained ?—(Hear, hear.) But it was stated that Parliamentary interference was not that legitimate interference which should be brought to the adjustment of the question. Still, let hon. gentlemen look to the ancient usages on th at su hj •ct—to the interference of the legislature in the days of Elizabeth, respecting the revenues of colleges, when those very revenues were really appropri tied and portioned out, according to the discretion of the senate. The Parliament then had no hesitation in using their power when it was deemed requisite. In the year 1771, when an alteration was suggested in the Caput, the answer given was, that the University did not possess the power of making a material . chine as then proposed; but that the legisla ture of the country should be resorted to, as there the power lay of effecting the desired alteration. But now the legislature would be considered trespassers on the rights of the University if they attempted to interfere. Let hon. gentlemen consider what fair grounds were there for such a conclusion after what he (Mr. Spring Rice) had quoted to them, respecting the practices of the Par liament in other days, and the opinion of the University itself on the point. The Scotch University had no religious tests of any kind wherewith to try the fitness of candidates for education. And surely the members for Scotland were as jealous as any others on the subject of their religion. Would not any attempt to impair the Westminster con fession be as firmly resisted as if it were made in the 39 articles, which should be warmly repelled in English law. The house, therefore, had first the example of Scotland, next that of Ireland, and lastly the axiom of the Univer sity of Cambridge itself. Now it had been said that the house could not do what the petitioners required, because it would be interfering with the corporation. He (Mr. S. Rice) thought it was rather too late in the day to use such an argument as that; at all events such an argument was used most preposterously. When the house was called upon in the same breath not to interfere with a corpora tion because it was an University, but to interfere with a corporation because it was called the College of Physicians —(Hear, hear)—he (Mr. Spring Rice) was sure that his right hen. friend would not speak with unkindness or disregard of the conscientious scruples of the dis sen t ers . . . . . Whatever fault he had to find with them, he was sure it would not be a want of sincerity or an earne,t conviction of the truth of their religious belief.—(Hear, hear.) lie was sure also that he would not suggest that among the various classes of dissenters who it had been thought expedient to exclude, any of them were Athiests.—(Hear, bear.) He was sure that his right hon. friend, however he might differ from them on eccle siastical points, knew full well that those differences were founded on principles of sincerity, and a perfect convic tion that the course they were adopting was the right one. He admitted that the petition numerically only represented the government part of the members of the university ; but he would ask the house if they did not grant to the petitioners—to the dissenters of England—that privilege which he thought they justly claimed at the hinds of the house, and which was only the resto. ration of the old constitution, what would be the alternative ? It would, in his opinion, be the grossest of all acts of injustice if the house refused to the dissenters admission to the universities, and did not withdraw the difficulties which stood in their way to the admission of academic honours; if such was the case they tr.ust and would have universities of their own.—(Loud cheering.) Neither the power of the Senate, nor that of the Caput, could be exerted to prevent it ; but if it were attempted, neither it nor the power of this house could deprive the dissenters of England of the means of doing it.— (Cheers.) They might make graces—they might make laws in the University,—they might have highly pianol statutes as had been done in Ireland, but if they did so, fortunately there was a power beyond all those which said "fur the heart of man to be left without knowledge, was not good."—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The heart of man would haVe knowledge, and if they excluded the dissenters from the universities, they must encourage that numerous class in having universities of their own. He appealed to history, and asked whether, from what had transpired, it did not appear that by in stilling into the minds of the people religious education, they thereby imbibed principles of tolerance and good-will. Was the house prepared to take a course which would necessarily and justly drive the dissenters to a separate education, by which they would be estranged more and more from the established church ? He was not so timid as to apprehend danger to the established church. He did no ; think its doctrines and principles were of so slight a na ture that in granting the prayer of the petition a tendency would be created to bring the members of the church to dissent from it ; on the contrary, he believed that if the doors of the Universities were thrown open, there would be a tendency directly the reverse.—(Hear, hear.) He was convinced that the church was more likely to recom mend itself if it were freed from abuse.—( Hear, hear, hear.) On grounds of the purest attachment to the church he strongly recommended the prayer of the petition. Having said thus much, he had to apologize for the time he had taken up—(Cheers)—but the extreme importance of the petition, which he felt great honour in being called upon to present, compelled him to adve, t to it at length. To those who were the advocates of all ancient institutions, he would say, the best course was to return to former periods—he would take the time of Elizabeth and the reformation of our church, rather than that of James I. To those who were solicitous to the cause of science and knowledge he would say, let them look at the names in the petition—to those anxious for a collegiate education, he would refer to the high cha racter which the petitioners bore. It was of the highest importance that the disposition evinced in the petition by those members of the university of Cambridge who were chiefly members of the established church, should be known to the dissenters of England, and let the persons who were opposed to that disposition 'recollect that here wire 62 members of an university who were anxious to give up that monopoly which they enjoyed, and to see that justice was done. The hon. gentleman concluded by re questing hon. gentlemen in their discussion of this subject, to bring their minds to a calm and dispassionate view of it, for sooner or later the question must be set at rest. Mr. GOULBURN said that connected as he was with that learned body, certain members of which had pe - tltioned the house on the present occasion, he was sureit was unnecessary for him to ask the indulgence of the house while he entered not at such length as his hon. friend had done upon the subject of the petition, and while he stated fairly and candidly to the house both what the importance of the subject was, what the real objects of the petitioners were, and what were the sentiments which he (Mr. G.) entertained. He was sure that although his right hon. friend had expressed a doubt in the concurrence of that house upon the motion which he had submitted to it he must have done an injustice to that house in supposing that any petition, signed by 63 most respectable indivi duals, couched in respectful language, would be opposed. He was sure that so far as he (Mr. G.) was concerned, no such idea had entered his i mag i nat i on. H e agreed with his right hon. friend that the petition was signed by gentlemen the most respectable of the University of Cam. bridge—that amon g th e s i gnatures were those of men distinguished for the highest attainments in science and literature—whose charact e r s were not to be estimated by any observations made upon them in that house, but by the knowl e d ge t h e pu b lic had of their exertion's in the cause of science, an d t h e i r endeavours to advance theinterests of all who came within their sphere. He (Mr. Goulburn) would scorn to throw anything like a doubt upon the ability or character of the individuals who had signed the petition. He bore testimony to their worth most cheerfully, because he had the pleasure of being acquainted with almost all of them, and he was proud to call many of them his particular friends. But he should treat their opinions with freedom, as th.s was the era for the freedom of discussion.—(Hear, hear.) His right hon. friend bad told the house that this was a petition very numerously signed, as regarded the resid-nt members of the University. He had told them, and truly, that it was signed by two of the heads, by ten of the professors, and by eleven gentlemen connected with tuition in the University. But the house should recollect that it was signed by two out of seventeen of the heads, by ten out of twenty-five of the professors, and by eleven nut of seventy-four who were engaged in tuition in the different departments of t ie University. Therefore the house would see, out of 164 gentlemen comprising these three classes, the petition had been signed by but sixty-three. He . (Mr. G.) did not undervalue the weight or character of the gentlemen who had signed the petition; quite the con trary, but when the right hon. gentleman told them that : 113 hem should give implicit Merino to eh : Their names were not appended to th's petitio n petition, he thou g ht th e h ouse was bound t i bear l i . mind the nu m b er o f t h ose w h o had no .- ; s i g net. want of inclination to join in it, but from net concurr, ,ss in the prayer of the petition. He undervalued no the opinions, but he would say, that with every respe c t to ners t heads of colleges who had signed the petition; there he fifteen other heads of colleges who had not signed the petition, but who were equally deserving the attentio :ho consideration of the house. The right hon. gentleman the presented this petition would do him (Mr. Goulburn) , a profess. justice to believe him when he said that those a r to who had not signed this petition would not be ashame d stand in comparison with any learned body of men in 3" i respect whatsoever. So also with those who were erg that in tuition there were no men—and he was sure t Mr. Peacock would allow that even within his ow n pe titioners of the Universities, college, of which he was the ornament, there were thn ' e petitioo, but whose whose names were not appended to this qualifications were of the very highest order. This petition i n the_ therefore came to the house, fortified, no doulr, from 1::: respectability, character, and attainments of the names of those who had signed i t, but it did not come with that might which the house was accustomed to give to the pe minority, a small minorit ' and as the right hon. gentle man (Mr. S. Rice) ' haa y, dv rted to it, he would add scoters. t t , h .r e s. iie a small minority of the resident ae members of the University, it and a still 11 'ma er minority of the whole body. But the was more important that he should refer to prayer of the petition, than a general discussion as to the names of those who had signed it. He conf essed that this prayer appeared to have been in some instances very generally expressed. The noble lord the Chancellor Exchequer, who first brought this petition to the notice of the house, when he said that such a pe t ition was read y on for presentation , i t • • proving that house to represented as a pet'''. accede to the prayer of the 1 . . 0, '' the claims of the Dissenters were from the etitione which they presented to that house, or P frin n thedocuments which were sent before them, a nd' he owned he was surprised when the noble lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) stated what he (Mr. Goulburn) had just repeated. He (Mr. G.) was happy to find that those gentlemen who had signed the petition so far from going the length of calling upon the house to accede to the claims preferred by the dissenters, appeared to him to have taken a (nane most consistent with their distinguished character for fairness and justice, by at once, at the threshold of this discussion, announcing that they would not se cede to the claims of the Dissenters, and that t° the most important of those claims they intended to give the most determined resistance and opposition. Those gentlemen told the house most distinctly that they disclaimed all intention of interfering either directly or indirectly with the private regulations of individual bodies. What were the claims dissenters put forward? That they d might be admitted to the full benefits and privileges, an emoluments of the Universities, and stand upon the same footing with the members of the church of England. As upon the the latter were dependant for their romotions fellowships and endowments of the co lleges,P the exclusion of dissenters was inevitable.—(Hear.) Let it Bg he thought that the gentlemen who signed this petition agreed with the general claims put forth by dissenters. The real prayer, however, of this petition was for ad, - sion to the degrees of bachelor, master, and doctor in arts, law, and physic. He begged the house to rentember the limited extent of the prayer. His right hon. friend , had, in opening the discussion, said the petitioners aske d for admission to all degrees, but that was not the pray.er. The main body of the senate was opposed to sucb a claim . : but not to the granting of such advantages as ext a n t :L l be conscientiously conceded. The universities tveref thet bushed for the education not only of member' 0 ' the established church, but for all who came to • them in a. doctrines of that church, and upon this principle .a n o h , petitioor claims could not be granted. Toe prayer of the however, might be objected to on the general groundos.ce those who admitted the principle might doubt its pra - e l . ,_ bility. To the latter class of objections he would coati . : o r observations. If it were impracticable and inconsis _.at. with the constitution of the Universities, the further dio, cussion of the general principle woul I be a mere wasT_ e l time. His right hon. friend had stated that Canibrbdagr_ was now open to Dissenters, and that there was a ? d, vier whatever to their admission to every scholastic ilite, vantage, to every branch of knowledge, and to have !eat:, education superintended by men of the fint nix and also the opportunity of reaping t h ose e :te . England establishment , . .ataiver . st / matical and classical distinctions which the affm-dea.—(Hear, hear.) The University of Cambridge then, as at present constituted, d oes o va the Di'" nter , concerned, every advantage, so far as e-Jucatio; seas which was afforded to the member s of the established 2 church. Bat whilst it did this it did not derogate from f ia (Mr. Gouibuobeinig,)ntlhye petiti on jet%ii st its rank and dignity , I t was p exclusively a church .o with a di s p osition benefits to t• 1 h is; faith was , every dissenter whatever a _ 0 0 consistent with its own safety.--(1-lear, hear, 'e t It says to the dissenter come within our walls, aeee o P . our invitation ; but it lays upon him this condition-1; went with a full knowledee of its principles? must conform yourself to the present system of di sci P• es that is established, and which is based upon the doctor) it of the established church, of which you have no re l a i s a O ). to complain, ••n to extend Ite because you are coining into an e sti!) a l,. vancment of which those doctrines were h a do - But e if ever it should be determined that dissentersa were not only to have their present adeenatifing t b i u ,e t were to be admitted to take degrees, and hY,, t .. of to become a portion of thegoverning n'e n 7 e ;blet ill., body, whether that change be e ff ected by th e v e r sify interposition of Parliament, or by the act of the " ° '• w e * bole itself, he would say that, from that moment) the oo ‘clittiacter of the body was changed, and it would he of ' t r he claimed that they were not an institution formed ~ the members of the established church, not directed tu n ot education of the members of the established c hurch , ther confined to the preparation of its -members, " i f to t lay or ecclesiastic, for the duties they had to P er e t be in the maintenance of the establishment, hut by the adoption of such a course the house would proclaim:, _0 University to be an establishment for the general edruchetta"r) of the country without reference to religion--a lea . a don s 1 —in which all would have an equal right to particiP , e „,,, and from which it would be injustice to exclude tlt r o ~ for the wool. When the house had once laid down this prociple 11 ,, .1 would ask any man to state, and lie deep)), ~.,„a t tbeY - ' the petitioners had not stated how they Pr ° P" -- ' 1 bject o f the succeeded in carrying into e ff ect the O__ university.-- ,i 1 petition, to proceed with education in the g the charter .' (Hear, hear.) By the proposed chan-e altered, and of the University would be altogether to knoor when the change bad been e ff ected, he wished t t" whether young men were to be educated accordinge dorm ri original principles of the system, or according to th seo . arid practice of the system as it then existed. At P r ., e i e s the university was a seminary for learning and rein , hie instruction. lie (Mr. Goulburn) saw some 11 °n °n ., r ,, a a ny gentlemen smile, but if he said anything really ,i ridiculous, lie was led by his anxiety •a st i , ee e -- a - ' i of matter of such deep importance as the subject be art t ti e 'I . house. He would say, that the proposed change 'B9 t pro most woeful one. If the univ • divested itself of the religious education which it en" dist i religious education, would be neglecte , l.- - had been sn_ w i e eige : guished for inculcating, and substituted vulgar 1 0 "'" - in • g ht ' regretted tilos_ I lie —if such were done, all branc hes of scienc e - i e L ee taught, but that only A bronchi o f ".-8 1-1; sour). w would they be prepared to shape (Hear.) wa der s'iould ho ask hon. gentlemen if the change were to be a te , , struction conformably ? How were all the errors of .0, . , i tiers to he avoided ? How all the vagaries of relig a i .o _ l ; , scepticism to be guarded against ? Were all persural O s , to be admitted, how were the doctrines of Unita % I li% Jews, and others to be excluded from the system of e: i n__" 4 tion ? He (Mr. G. admitted that a great defect e a. ' r ho in the educ ition i f young men at the Universities t t i n period alluded to by his tight hon. friend, --he r o ve the year 1771 ; but since that the greatest ireP r° fr eed, ha 1 taken place, religious doctrines were carefully ins u n , f e lt • and the consequent benefits of religious imlger n e e nrabl! • Would all those good results be abandoned 1 1 " e reg rette ° gentlemen in their projected plan ? g e es Were the course f fao ln a , that he had not been informed bow all those chi advantages to have been obviated, without diminishing the 8 the Ci2V of religious inst uetion. He objected not to a mem ber templated change as a member of that house) a! s o licitude of the senate of Cambrid ge , b u t as a father. fi l ; din to the for his son prevented him from committing u ld he ne indiscriminate rage of principles by which , b ,, e ,e vi o ° o f his la& cessat ily contaminated, at the most miaow P e the untvcriatl could the house suppose that the harmony °f would be preserved by the proposition being en the do orl ,T the consciences of men be improved by it? To __ nor , to to dissenters, would be to require the disenters to c" establisheli rules which were made to reaplate members of conscientiousthef church, and then in what a situation would the . oass 0 Dissenters be placed ? Would that benefit the LIT_ . 0 a u • Dissenters ? Why it would be carrying proselyktedistufo,r ivi .sot extent that never was attempted before. He a' em bers ° ,`, made In i! , formation, how after Dissenters by being degrees to 5 woe the university, and thereby raising them by . -- en tcou thegoveriiing body, thegovernment of the establisrm. At Pr e ' e' : carried on to the benefit of the established church. _ hat Ini 1 . ; he would take the extent of disqualification to be r "_” io bit ~/., right lion, friend had stated, and no further ; oth . e local It IT right lion, friend would have stated them. One < l ' 4 agreted to? WOOS