The Express.
London, England, 1866-03-22 00:00:00

TgE EXPRESS, THURSDAY E

committee, or in other words should aselvde rep
sentatives of the press. A third. organ Or
oil upon the troubled waters—foolsd by#
time looked and acted more Eke tlwrlsaShers
disorderly free-and-easy than a party of admin

trators meeting for the common good—by a practioal
suggestion, which, with the first proposal, it was
agreed to refer to the Homeless Poor Committee,
meeting next day. Public discussion and the reve-
l►tious of the press had, it was urged, impeded that
body in their earnest endeavour to obtain proper
casual wards; and so, yielding to numbers, the
small minority, advocating an immediate remedy,
gave way, and the unwelcome topic was once more
shelved for a time.

It made an instructive commentary upon this dis-
creditable jangle to stand five minutes afterwards in
the casual wards so frequently condemned. Not a
single horror bad been mitigated. The stench,
the crowding, the nakedness, and the insects were
all there. The guardian who had deprecated pub-
lic discussion most earnestly had also the hardi-
hood to maintain that cramming only double the
proper number into a particular ward—that is,
compelling two naked man to sleep in the narrow
bunk designed for one—was not so very bad, after
all, and the dreadful huddled mass of sleepless,
(=oblate nakedness we saw put his argument into
practical shape. We refrain from repeating
the filthy details already given. None of
them are subdued, and no improvement has
been introdnoed. Every night in the week
the casual wards of Clerkenwell witness scenes too
low and bestial for description ; every night lives
are endangered from the foully poisonous air their
hapless owners are compelled to breathe ; and every
night are casuals locked up in darkness to quarrel,
swear, and fight for resting places. The guardians
deny none of these shocking charges ; but seek to
condone them by the alleged difficulty of finding
premises for proper wards. " Next week," or
" to-morrow," or " as soon as possible," has been
the answer for months past to all questions as to
reform ; and it may now be fairly asked whether
these guardians cannot be indicted for shamelessly
upholding nuisances which are fatally destructive to
morality, and ruinously dangerous to health.

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.
(THIS DAY.)

TES ABOLITION OF TFISTB AT OXFORD.

The Times finds fault with Mr. Coleridge and
Ms Meads for going beyond the bill of yesterday, whisk is
a purely administrative niceenre, sad for isbodseing
wide sod difficult consideratmas which they appear at the

same time staxinas to deprecate. In so modest a bill
there was so place for speculations as to the
advantages of bringlag together at the universities eminent
oharehmen and noemosformists. Wen it otherwise the
Times would protest against converting st university into a
place where exciting religious coatroversies were SWIM.
raged. The compromise which the Timm would make
would be that all degrees, with the mention of those in
divinity, be open, without any religions test whatever.
Let the Y.A. degree also, if mammy, give a vote for
the university. Let university scholarships also be
open without distieetioa of weed ; but if dissenters
are appointed to professorships, let no one be compelled to
attend professors' lecture*. Bat do not let the prectioal
admioistratioo or teaching of the university be disturbed
by the introduction of discordant religious opinions. Above
all, let the colleges, which are not national but private
societies, have perfect freedom to conduct their instreetiou
en any principles they may choose. If the dissenters wish
it, let than establish a dissecting college, or the Roman
ostholies a catholic college, bat whatever the religious
teaching may be, let it be distinct and definite is each
particular moiety, In a word, let the university, as far as
posdhle, be epee, and the colleges free.
The Daily New takes the division as affording a better
militias than has hitherto been prerentei of the strength
of parties in the new perliareml. Tories sever use the
language of conciliation except when they exnect to be
bastes, and the oonciliatorinare of filr S. Northcote's speech
made it dear that he knew the weakness of his party.
Tories are, in fact, losing the courage of their principles.
They (shrink from meeting proposed reforms, whether
parliamentary or academie, by direct negatives,
but endeavour to defeat them by evasion. Though
it may have appeared to some that too much was
said yesterday of the church and too little in comparison of
the nation, yet the ground which Yr. Coleridge took,
arguing for reform both es a churchmen aced as a university
man, commanded with much effect the position of his
opposents. It would be &beard to deny, how-
ever, that the bill will do more than settle
just so mach as tt deals with, end so a great
deal that was urged yesterday woe direct:i egainst the
supposed corollary from the bill contained in the
measure relating to college fellowships which Yr.
Bonsai* 'will bring forward further on in the searion.
A permacect adjustment will be arrived at when cocoon.
formists obtain all that Mr. Lowe, who hat last a tho-
roughgoing academic reformer, claimed for them. In the
temper of Lord embolus, to whom the ides of a Christ-
',nay common to the various churches of Olhhtendoin is
utterly icapprehensible, we see the worst fruits of the
system which once prevailed at Oxford, and which Lord
Cranborne would perpetuate. He argument was refuted
by the very spirit which eniantel it. The system of ex-
clusion is not tem noxious to times whom alone it admits
than it is to those whom it shuts cut.

The Telegraph says that yerterfay's debate was made
remarkable by the marked parliamentary success of Mr.
Coleridge, by the striking address of Mr. Butler-Johnstooe,
who, breaking loose from tory Mediae's., spoke extremely
well in favour of the bill, and the address of Mr.
Lowe, who employed the owed= to air as
much intellectual democracy as could be roodeneed in fif-
teen Ininutes. It was a curious instance of the truth, well
known to pathologists, that en sent* d s:ase will yield for
a time to one no re a-ute. Mr. Lose bates the people,
bat be Wes a parson worse : th r devil of the odium poli.
Goan was cad out by that of the odium theologietass, and
this Wangs man ail his beet to help a measure which is
really hr moredangerous is To pan is its ultimate results
than the downward secession of the suffrage to 71. rentals.
To the Telegraph the Idea of (cowling denominstiooal col-
leges is radically bad. In order to make Oxford national,
we must make it a university where students can keep
their terms without belongiog to say particular college,
hell, or house, sod more of her wealth must be spent upon
her professed professoriate end public lectores, even if less
go to, encourage celibacy, and to peoaion clergymen in the
conetry.

The Sfar observe. that neither side expected a divisioo.
If Sir St 'ford Northeote spin challenges the judement of
the house be may probably find that he has iaereased the
muster of his followers, without materially altering their
numerical proportion to the supporters of tbie just and
beneficial measure. The speech in which Mr. Coleridge
moved the sewed rrsdiug of the bill absolutely alarmed the
conservatives, not so much by its eloquenee or cogency—
though both were remarkable—as by its truly marvellous
moderation and winaingsess of tone. Mr. Coleridge is a
magnificest accession to the liberal side of the bones.

ILdoom, it t• 'stating, A 6 ibior, thaltarb4 1
i which, at flp same that, lithe most p
ro on , shortoondip and leoperfustions of thfit 1
e
pleasure. most most bi limd indeed whileh, purporp,
1p rep - claims ' Mad grievances ,of ths
finds no salliport from the people themsella 'But ablar:
the people stand aloof, or, in the most fa4durable point of
view, may be described ea lukewarm and iadiffereot to the ,
111000111 of the bill, the middle class and upper class do not
cowed their dislike to the whole of its provisions. Is it
not tree that is address has been presented to Mr. Vil-
liers from hie constituents, urging him to oppose
all most crud*, and fraught with danger—the very
measure he must have approved of io the cabinet?
If Lord Grosvenor's ameadment should be carried, the
Reform Bill sad the occupant' of the Treasary will be
swept away ; and the Post has only to hops that the
career so nobly achieved by Lord Palmerston may bring '
forth better trait in the government which will soon sue-
, cud the present weak administration.
TheAdoertiser thinks that if ministers hod the patriotism ,
and the pluck to bring in at once another bill for the roils- ,
tribsttion of seats in boroughs, they would completely !
checkmate the conservative opposition in allianoe with re-
creant liberals in what they regard u a mastarly move.
But it fears they have neither the inclination nor the
courage to take such a step.
The Tekgraple sus, with unfeigned regret, the repo- ,
sentative of a wealthy and noble whig family associating'
himself with interested disaffection sad reactionary selfish-
ness. No one who has any aainainteame with Lord
Greavenor's purity of &stutter will believe that, in
moving • resolution upon the Reform Bill, which is
worded by Mr. Disraeli and will be seconded by Lord
Stanley, be is other than a dupe whose accidental antago-
nism to liberalism, springing from some peculiarities in
the electoral system of the borough which he represents,
haa bees skilfully utilised by the tories. Does
Lord Grosvenor flatter himself that the sour of
millions of his fallow-conotrymen will leave his
son in peaceful and taxation possession of that
colossal wealth which they have themselves created
if he denies to them the exorcise of those first and jest
rights of citizenship—a deprivation of which, ever Niue
the days of the Greek republics, has implied dishonour and
diaries ? Has be reflected how may unscrupulous laud
violist man will leak great mums of Beglishmen Into a
flame, by repreauting that the interests of great aristo-
cratic houses, am interpreted by Lord Grosvenor and Lord
Stanley, are is antagonism to the interests of the people of
England ? The Telegraph submits to Mr. Disraeli that in
associating Lord Stanley with Lord Grosvenor he has com-
mitted a gnat mistake.
The Star says that Earl Grosvenor is a poor speaker and
• feeble politician, sad is simply a'roan cf mark because he
represents • peerage and has a brother or two in the House
of Commons. There are cooservatives who would sat op-
pose point blank the wooed reading of the Reform Bills
and it is for their beguilement quite as moth as for that
of wavering whip that Earl Grosvenor has been made •
decoy dash. Earl °routines's amendment in no way alters
the actualities of the peasant situation.