The Express.
London, England, 1865-06-15 00:00:00

SHE

himself obliged to Tom whist the soma modlog, and
WY is the dams prithis on the resent ono
Mon. With, me samotioa he was sot setieried
that the (Moises wen aush es to make lnisiation desirable,
,bst at the sone time se the gumshoe, hid bees sawed, tae
there heist seem imprevements width* might be made, he
was prepared sow, ad be was hot year, to Emit any
penis submitted submitted to the house in the spirit indicated by
the Chawmike a Um EIOWMIC There was cee mimeses
In the existkg state of Map which made bim desirous to
esiseisin eke limmedmists prepored is the tamer NIL ri
hod been stated that a Boman catholic, or Illy other dis-
senter, could sot at Oxford open a separate ball for the
education of his soreligioehts ; sad power to do that might
be give, by Ibis bill. Rome eathobee asturelly required
that a strict religious riducatioa should be gives, within each
a hall, sad It wits hard to deaf theta that W iner, but he
weeda surgethat the mangers- ef these halls
sheald be iatrodueed into the namegieg body of the waver.
▪ (Beer, bear.) Upon that point he still ammortaised
the wasvietito which be formerly amend. A rote a*
this period of the session upon the hill wield have no
practical rossaing, except to tie the home to a pills:4ls,
without an opportunity of modifying it hereafter. 17alem
thore was a widesotoble theme of the sameure pudic whith
so one could suppose, it wee too much to expert that e,
meratan who were not prepared to go the whole i
of the hoe. member who proposed the bill would vote

for it.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER said, that both the Chancellor of
the F.xobequer and the boo. baronet (Sir W. Heathcote),
admitted that grimaces existed is the University of
Oxford, and were prepared to remove them. If the Chan-
celior of the Exchequer thought the time bad come whoa
the guano.) might have been settled by a compromise,
it wee is his power to bar settled it, and signalised •
session not otherwise remarkable for the measures pared.
He knew he would have been supported by his boo. col-
league in the representation of the uniresity, and by
gentlemen OA both sides of the hone% and been seabed to
airy a bill which he (Mr. Former) grated would have bra
a anbeWtisl adrotage. He (Mr. Ponta) ss an individual
could not depart from the principle laid down by the hoe
member for the City of Loadon. All the members who
bad spoken hitherto were members of that great institu-
tion, the Univerity of Oxford. Ho anforkunately was not,
but he had lard to the debate with great interest, be
cause if this measure bad pseud years ago probably be
would have bad the average, which be sever eased to
regret be bad sot bad, of being • member of one of the uni-
versities. (Hear.) He ram it mama they ought to be er-
rata with what they bad already got; but if they
cured the universitiesto dimmers it meet be done with
open rod. (Hest, hear.) Great se were the averages
of the universities, they never would, and never ought to go
to than until they were admitted on terms of perfect
equality. (Her, leer.) The boa. moodier for the Oily of
London said that the Universitl of Oxford was not •de
sominatiouth but a lateen institution, and that so subjoin
of the realm ought to be excluded from it. The gable iced
(Lord R. Cecil) had never bar* is hie hoeing made so
snide as attempt to meet the argoncesta he bad to reply to
as co that occasion in answering the mesa of the boa.
member for the City of Loodoo. The noble lord pawed over
altogether his amnion that the university was not church
property, nor as ecclesiastical saimistioo, but a great
national institution, though if he bad bed say roe-
sonable grounds for disputing that, be probably would
have offered some reply. The country would sow be able gs
consider the question without the prosper el toe
claim that
the university was chock property being advanced spin ;be
found no attempt to speak on Waal ef tern being retained
for member of the throb England.
He understood that
was or of the grievances which the Claudio" of the Ex•
chequer was prepared to remove and the hon. berme op.
reolite did sof object to Its removeL He rejoiced at that
Mr. HARDY admitted the candour with which the boo.
member foe London had seta the principle of his bill,
which was the mitre emanoipatioa of the Univiw•BY
of
Oxford from all Anglican tests. That was his entire aim,
and he bad not shrunk from string that he wished to men
its doors wide to men of all ringer deeraltatioss sod of no
creed whatever. He (Mr. Hardy) mast, however. express his
opinion that if all the meows& of that institution were to
be placed in the bands of men whew distinguished
merely for iatelleetaal ability,ark* be nem au
trey to the spirit os which • uolvende mght to be undo.
Lined, or more disastrous to the country at kept
Mr. MUTE ocuerred is the broad easeetioa et lie puler
tiptoe of the boa member for the City of Loam with
respect to the real objects of the bill. He was surprised to
hear from the lips die acute a reamer as the Chastener
of the Exchequer, when speaking of the widowed
the statement that whenever • disposition of property
been made to the church the express conditions of the er
dormant ought in all time to be Implicitly followed.
No doubt, so long se the objects of the INF
&tyrant could be lawfully and satisfactorily oar.
rid oat by abating to the exact 000dition of the endow-
moot it me beet to follow them ; bat surely it was right to
deal with foundations in such • way as would, while carry-
big out the views of the founder, extendthe privileges of
the foandatioo. Under the foundations of th• mg./entity,
DO doubt in many histances its privileges were rasa to
the church ; but he could not help thinking that it would
be a little dangerous to carry out to their logical conclusion
the argument" of the Obascallor of the Exchequer. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. HENNESSY said that almost every member who
bad spoken bad referred to the debate on the Items& Ca-
tholic Bill, and the supporters of the present measure had
all appealed to the Roman catholic members in he favour.
The bill was one which its proposer told them introduced
dissenter' incidentally into the meaning body of the uni-
versity. For his part, he did not see on the part of any of
the motional bodies of the country any desire whatever to
interfere with the government of the University of Oxford.
On the Nth of March the catholic bishop met, and passel •
resolution that it was not desirable to have a catholic
college at Oxford. and that it would not he beneficial to
have catholic" educated there. This, se th. Chancellor of
the Exchequer observed, was a question of denominational
as against • mixed atioation. (Hear, bear.) In Ireland,
catholic' were in favour of denominational education, sod
beer it was not to be wondered at that they opposed •
measure of mixed education. The University of Quebec
had been pentad upon exclusive Roman catholic prin.
ciples. Now, if protestants were to claim to participate
In the privileges of that university, the catholic bishops
in Canada would naturally protest. (Hear, bear.) Upon
these pro:aides, therefore, he felt it his duty to oppose this
bill. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. C. FORTESCUE looked forward to the day, which
he thought mast arrive, when Oxford would be thrown open
to every class and denomination of Englishmen. The
boo. gentlemen who had just spoken knew that if his oo-
roil/haste were admitted to Oxford they would be is a
very small minority, sad their faith might be somewhat im-
perilled on that account. The bill appeared to have so many
good things in it, that it was a sort of imbrued's richesses.
One hon. gentleman objected to one pert of It. and another
to another. It was his good fortune to agree in
every part of it, from beginning to end.
Mr. SCULLY observed that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had voted differently on this occasion to
his vote of last year, and said he thought this
measure would preys an Oxford teat bill in more senses
than one. (Loud laughter.) He regretted that the
right hon, gentleman did not gratify the expecta-
tions of his friends and admirers by adhering to
an opinion which he had 000 e given. (Hear, hear.)
It was quite a delusion to suppose that trtgoveruing body
of Cambridge would suffer if this bill into law. If
any catholic were ever to take an I& . degree he would
trouble himself again about the government of the
university. Then what was the magnitude of the benefits
which this bill proposed to give to ten? He remem-
bered certain Scotch mambas of Balliol College, who bad
cootrived to swallow the Thirty-nine Adair— (laughterl—
aye, sea the forty-one articles of the Atharrian Creed
besidereighty altogether. (Laughter.) H. (Mr. Scully)
did not think that any harm would be done to
the thumb of England or to the University
of Oxford by this bill, and therefore in giving
it his support he thought he was not violating his
oath, which theirs be often felt to be a great hard-
ship. He only wished to protest against its being supposed
that Roman eatholke as a body opposed this bill, and as its
effect upon the university and the church of Ragland would,
he believed, be infinitesimal., he felt so diffioulty in giving
his vote for the *scold reading.
Mr. HENLEY said he had tried to widendand what was
the real object of the mover and the promoters of this bill.
The first professed object of the measure was to emancipate
lay members of the University of Oxford from clerical tests.
He could not understand why hoe. gentlemen of the same
views as the hos. member for the county of Louth (Mr. C.
7024160II0) could support thin bill. ratty
f the oommunl.
crime that paned last year an offer to relieve lay members
from this way test of subscription was rejected. One of
the rum= why the hon. member supported this bill was
that it would promote free . Bat what would
free discussion be except a eerie" of deputes be-
tween a number of young men, catholic ad
protestant, of every denomination ? Would that,
he &eked, be beneficial to the discipline of the university ?
Then the boo. member said there might be a Christian life
without dogmatic teaching. But the boa member did not
say bow you were to secure the Christian life if you did
away with the dogmatic teaching, which lay at the founda-
tion of it. (bear, hear.) If the boa member succeeded in
doing away with such dogmas as theme—that there is •
Maker; that there is • Redeemer; that there is a future
state, and so forth—what would become of the Christian
life! (" Hier, hear," and "Oh, ob.") If there was one
poet which the member for the City of London laboured
more than another to prove, it was this—that
the right, property, and status of the Univer-
sity was solely dependent upon act of parliament.
The legion conclusion from the hon. member for London's
emerge wee that the property not only of the university
but of the church should be left to be disposed of at the
will and pleasure of parliament. Believing the object of the
bill to be to admit, not nonconformists, but freethinkers, into
parliament, he felt Mood to give it his oppoeitios.
Mr. MONSELL objected to certain epithets sod observa-
nces entered in the able speech of the hoe. member for
Loam, but wholly sword of the fainapleof the bill.
Mr. 800 VERIE denied that is his bill of the
year be had specially excluded Roman catholic"=llse
operate. His object was to relieve the maraformista,
sad he was set rakes also to embalms= IsimseM with the
Roman catholic grimace All that astosished him was
that titans mete had been permitted to none so I.
They had sighing to do with the students, but applied
exelesively to the profemoes, and should be forthwith
ahoildarl.