The Express.
London, England, 1861-03-02 00:00:00

FELLOWSHIPS AT TRINITY OOLLEGX.

Mr. POLLARD ÜBQUHAST the. row pnrauaot to
notice to call the attention of the Secretary of State for the
Home Department to the circrumetanees under which Mr.
Stirling, the senior wrangler at Cambridge in the year 1860,
haddeclined to compete for a Trinity fellowship. He said
be believed only one single instance had occurred in which a
senior wrangler had faded in obtaining a fellowship, but
Mr. Stirling wee prevented from competing because he
happened not to be • member of the church of England,
but • member of the Presbyterian church, of which his
father was • minister. Mr. Stirling, however, frequently
attended church, and had actually communicated, but he
did not acme to be tied down by formularies, more swe-
atily when by so doing he might be supposed to be actuated
by interested motives. A Trinity fellowship was looked
upon not as • means of obtaining a stipend, but as • reward
for past attainments, and he might mention that Lord
Macaulay, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Wensleydale, the prment
Chief Baron, and other eminent men, had held it. But he
did not call the attention of the house to the matter so
much for the sake of Mr. Stirling as to point out the in-
justice of the law.

Mr. STBI7ART said, before the right hon. gentleman
answered the question, he trusted he might be allowed to
state what he knew of this case. After the hon. member
for Westmeath called attention to it last year, he made it
his tattiness to inquire into the circumstances, and he was
informed that for years Mr. Stirling had been a communi-
cant, and had regularly attended service in the church, and
it was believed by his friends that he would come forward
for a fellowship ; but the hon. member for Westmeath
having called the attention of the house to the subject, Mr.
Stirling, although he was a member of the church of Eng-
and, and did not wish to leave its communion, yet con-
sidered that if he came forward under such circumstances,
it would be said that he did so from interested motives.
APPOINTMENT OF MR. JEPP AS DISTRIBUTOR
OF STAMPS FOR ABERDEEN.

Mr. STEUART proceeded to say that be would now call
the attention of the house to the appointment of Mr.
Andrew Jepp to the office of distributor of stamps fur the
Aberdeen district. It appeared somewhat remarkable that
on the motion fur adjournment it should be the dutyof two
private members of the house in one night to call attention
to the mode in which in two recent cues the Treasury bad
exercised its patronage. The appointment of Mr. Jepp
as distributor of stamps for Aberdeen appeared to him to
be a stronger and more objectionable cue than that men-
Mooed by the bon. member for Swansea. Mr.
Andrew Jepp was • young man, and was re-
markable for no peculiar qualification. He was
employed in the office of his father at the time that this
valuable appointment of MO/. a year was conferred upon
him. It appeared that two gentlemen of expenence in the
Inland Revenue-office were candidates teethe appointment,
and as one of them was of the same political opinions as
hon. gentlemen opposite it might have been supposed that
he would have had the appointment. The county of Aber-
deen wee agitated for no lees than from six weeks to two
months on an election question, and he had occasion last
week to ask whether government had received any inform,-
ties of no lees than three riots at polling places, at which a
number of persons sustained serious injuries. In con-
nexion with the election Mr. Andrew Jepp,
was an active and zealous partisan ; be addrewd
meetings, and, without saying that he countenanced riotous
proceedings, he was certainly mie of the party in whose
favour those riots were got up. His father was the head ,1
election agent of the district, and the only inference he (Mr.
Steuart) could draw was that it was out of gratitude for the
services of the father that the son hail this valuable office
conferred upon him.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he was ignorant of the circuity
striates to which the hon. member for Westmeath (Mr.
Pollard-Urquhart) had alluded, and, supposing the case
to be as the hon. member had stated it, be
merely gave an example of the operation of the
suiting law. Under the existing law a person who was not
• member of the church of England could not be • fellow of
• college. The house Lad recently legislated on the ques-
tion
of the University of Cambridge, and a commission had
recently sat which had mode lawtent changes in the con-
stitution of the colleges, and some in the constitution of the
university, and it was open to the hon. gentleman or to any
other hon. member to bring the question before the house
with • view to alter the law, but he did not see that any-
thing was to be pined by merely calling attention to the
opemtioe of the law as it stood. With regard to the
colliery inspector of South Staffordshire, he had been recom-
mended by the Lord-Lieutenant of the county, and was, he
believed, a at and practical person, though not • scientific
or literary man.
The LORD ADVOCATE defended the appointment of
Mr. Topp, whose family held a high position in the county
and who was • fit and proper person for the office. He took
the opportunity to deny certain statements connected with
the late riots at Aberdeen.
THE ASSMISED PROPERTY AND INCOME TAXES.
Sir M. FARQUH AR—in asking the Chancellor of the
Exchequer whether be was aware that a document headed.
"The immediate payment required," calling for payment of
armed property and income taxes, due at Christmas last,
and suggesting the discharge in advance of taxes due on the
20th March next, bad been issued in certain districts in
London ; and by whose authority such a document had been
I circulated—said the day before yeaterdey this singulardocii-
meat was left at his house. It required the immediate
I payment of three quarters assessed taxes, and suggested
that it would save trouble if they were paid up to the 20th
March.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was
much obliged to his hon. friend for giving him this oppor.
tunity of answering the question in the bowie. His hoe.
friend mentioned the matter to him in the course of yesterday
evening, but he had not been able to obtain *be fullest
information in the short time which had elapsed. Of the
document referred to he knew nothing whatever, but under
the present system of law the direct taxes of the country
were not assessed and levied—with certain exceptional cases
—under the authority of the Queen's government, but under
thatof local and independent authorities. and it was under the
immediate instruction of the local and independent authori-
ties that the circular mentioned by the hon. gentleman hail
been issued. His hoe. friend bed required an explanation
of the document of the collector, and he. no doubt with per-
fect propriety, said he had received it from the secretary of
the tax.oltice, in Red Lion-square. If the hon. gentleman
wanted the exact information it could be obtained, but it
wee clear that it had been issued by a local officer, and not
an offices sating wider themeren's government. (Hear,
hear.) As to the &mad for a collection of a quer-

tor's income tax under schedule A (which fell due in Deeem- I
her) in the present quarter, instead of waiting until the
half-yearly collection in April, his hon. friend would
remember that that was a proceeding taken un-
der the instructions of the revenue department,
those instructions being in conformity with the law passed
last year. It would also be in the recollection of the hon.
gentleman that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) in his
statement to the house showed that he required a certain
amount of money to be raised to square the accounts of the
country at the end of the year. Two methods were sag-
gested to obtain Oat end. The hon. gentleman said it was
not agreeable to be required to pay a quarter's taxes three
months earlier than usual. No doubt that was so. (Hear,
hear.) But, as be had stated, two methods of proceeding
were suggested ; one was, whether the government sh
collect the income tax at the rate of TA. in the pound at
the end of the half-year in September; and the other was
whether it would not be better to collect it in three quar-
terly payments. The three quarterly payments were
adopted instead of that of one half-yearly payment.
Now, although it was not agreeable to pay in January what
was usually paid in April, yet it was agreeable to pay in
January what might have been required in October (Hear,
hear.) As to the invitation given by the notice, to pay •
quarter's tax in 'denim, he begird leave to declaim all re-
simnst.ibtility whatever,and he
the authorities iestb" knew nothing of molB7t. He
objected to any payment being required in advance, because
it would entirely disarrange hisetaliaions for the year. He
greatly regretted that such instructions had been issued by
any local officer, and it, would lead to some difficulties if it
were acted upon. He strongly deprecated the proceedings.
(Hear, bear.) The notice might have been sent through a
esire to @see trouble. It was sometimes done in country
districts in the collection of the poor-rate. It was no doubt
in perfect good faith, and without any intention of coin-.
mitting an irregularity. It would be seen, however, that
the notice had not been sent by any officer acting under
the Queen's government, and he would endeavour to pre-
vent such a document being issued again. (Hear.)

Lab) inttlitgaut.
—.—
HOUSE OF LORDS.-MARCH 1.
APPEALS.
BROOK B. BROOK.

In this appeal, involving the question of the validity of
a roan with deceased Wife's sister in a foreign coun•
try, the arguments were brought to a conclusion, and She
further ceusideration of the case postponed.

EQUITY COURTS.—lehaul 1.
(Before the Master of the Rolla.)

F. FORD.

The question in this case was whether, under the circum-
stemma stated below, the defendant, one of the executors of
the testator in the cause, was entitled to retain a legacy of
1,0001. bequeathed to him by the will. The testator died
in 1652, having nominated two persons, of whom the de•
fendant Ford is one, as executors of his will. The other
executor obtained probate, but Ford renounced. Seven
years afterwards the latter changed his mind, and proved
the will. At that period the estate was in the course of
administration, but before it had been completed a hill was
filed to administer the estate under the court, and to that
bill Ford was made a defendant as the executor of the tes-
tator, and as such be now claimed the legacy in question.
His claim, however, was opposed, on the ground that his
formal renunciation of the executorship precluded him from
all title to the legacy, notwithstanding the probate subse-
quently obtained by him.
Mr. Jesse! appeared to oppose the claim, and Mr. South-
gate to support it.
His Honour decided in favour of the claim. The ques-
tion, be said, depended on the bona•fides of the defendant's
mourning the office he had once renounced now. He had
proved the will before the duties for the discharge of which
he was nominated had been completed, and having fulfilled
the obligation in respect of which the legacy was gives, he
must be held entitled to retain it.