The Express.
London, England, 1850-07-19 00:00:00

0! CAMBRIDGE.

Lord SEYMOUR said tial.,-1764-141;en the bearer of the
acreage of condole:co from that house to her Royal
Highness the Madsen of Cambridge, her royal highness
directed him to make the following reply: " I feel grateful
for the War se wlikk you hare presented to me on behalf of
the House of Commons on the oecasiou of tile loft of my
excellent and revered huthead. I beg ycti to convey my
heartfelt thanks for this elprissi,in of condolence, and to
wore you that nothing as he more coneolatory to my pre-
sent feelings than the smorance that the character of my late
husband has been duly appreciated."
Dli ORCE BILLS.
Bir DE L. EVANS moved the cossiderstion of petition
of William ClappindoU (presented 27th June), for permis-
sion to prosecute Chipp.ndairs Divorce Bill in f
pamperis. At patent so person could prosecute a divorce
sedum As had from 2002 to 6,0001., which was tantamount
ts a cam_ plate denial *Oinks to die poor.
Mr. W. PATTEN moved, as an amendment, to refer the
petition of WWiam Chippindall to the committee on divorce
tills and the lodge-Advocate.
Sir G. GREY said that improvements had been made of
Ista years, bat as much yet remeked to be done, hoped
Me government would be ready with soots measure next
Maim of parliament.
After a few words from Sir F. Youtonit the motion was
withdraws and the amendment agreed M.
TILE CORY POOR LAW UNION.
Mr. RO.IRE presented a polities from Coals, stating that
the antes had been very heavily taxed ; that the guardian
applied to the poor law sounthelostrs, asking them to
remit 2,e451., which bad been mud as a rate in aid, and the
poor law commissiosers ttaitenb d to met it, but said it was
noceseary to make appliettiou to the Lords of the Treatury,
who refused to grant thie power, and the petitioners hoped
the house would direct the sum of 2011. • year to he ,
refunded, to enable them to carry out the affairs of the
union till barna.

The SPEAKER oheervel that it spp.and to him that
aa the money waste be refumded out of the ezehequer,it weld
sot be nfuedeA wititew a vote of the 4MSII.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested
the pestponemsat of the petition is order that it might be
OM whether it came within the rules of the holm or not.
Mr. ROCHE withdrew the petition.
ANNUAL RETURNS OF EAST INDIAN FINANCES.
Sir HENRY WILLOUOHBF, asked "the President
of the Beard of Control, why the provisions of the Aet 3
aid 4. Mill. 4, 8.116, s. 116, requiring the production el the
assail returns of the Ert latthan finances within the first
flearteen sillies days of parliament alter May the first in melt
Sir
year, J.
not somplied with."
. 110BUOUSli read it was perfectly true that the
met of parliament el late rears had not been strictly eon-
piled with, and he would satisfy the hor. baronet why
that had not been the cue. The Indian ae•
mounts con..iated of two brads; the Indian armants
sad the borne nee,unts. As to the hone accounts they Were
made up to the 30th of April, every year, and between the
30th of April and the 14 sitting days, it might, under the
ecireetastances, be very difficult to have these accounts re-
pined is a & state tot promatatios to perliMent. The

accounts, after they had hem prepared.lssd to be szamimed
by the mart of (limiters, to bs audited by the avert el dial&
tors, and this to be tesnerared to the Board of Garai.
whisk had again.** audit thew sad agein te ink Gra
them. 114 might essount tee the home 081101•1111 brag
prupantod is soon as tee set doeseirbed. As to thou THYs
rams* them was &labia( to pravestlras brag
earlier; sad the al y name why they were rat
earlier, woe Mai it had bees= wee
ha asesrais shouldthe
earatiss dame see ar=4l. hod bra delayed to present
the seer. Oa Mora. Into the veldts% he did not me the
neeemity_ far bothlllllllollllo befog passested at the Ml*
time. The tram why the Tails messate were delayed was
that they were the raps% sessnate. Ito did set i.e the se-
moray of prorating both ammente ou the sera day, and
should take ears that the bras alsowsle &said be pre-
sented at the earliest possible period.
Mr. HUME Mated that last rails this heals had or-
dered metals relates from tails reigestialightkousse. He
had delayed =Waft for a marmillat- to Mks these into sot-
sidoratios. Ho asked whether *INS Mans were likely to
be produced braes the house adjeanail.
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said that the greatest difficulty had
mime in • the despatches. Om penes hid been
eta sows wreaths, lad It would take him sray day
till rat Easter to maks out the first half of the Mars.
PROVISION FOR THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE
'AND THE PRINCESS MARY.
Lord J. RUSSELL (all the members standing with their
haw off) appeared at the bar, and brought up the following
message from bee Majesty:—" V.A. Her Majesty being de.
sirens, in sammeence al the decease of her royal noel", the
late Doke at Cambridge, that some provision should be
wads for the honourable support of her Zoyal Higbee,' the
Princess Mary of Cambridge and the Dube of Cambridot,
recommends Um subject to the ansidaradea of the house,
sad relies epos the attachment of the ham to adopt such
measures as may be suitable to the arailan."
Lord J. RUSSELL gam aides that her Majesty's most
gracious memage be takes into essekimatisa to-morrow.
ENGLISH AND IRISH UNIVERSITLES.—
A DI OU RN ED
DEBATE._ _

Mr. R. PALlliiipeemird tiattlatlsgal stens of every
university was that of a public corporatism, while the sepa-
rate colleges were prints corporations ffift the purpose of
ideation and charity. He went into • IMISSISIA history of
pest visitation and attempts at visitation of the anima-
tin by the crown, and showed that the quad= of the legal
character of those corporations had been made the subject
of Beal I.llldecision in the time of Charles 11., when they
had beau dedwd lay corporations, not subject to gicededae-
deal weaning*, but liable only to be oontroffed by the eons-
pleas 'reiterate of the land. He argued that the Iseult*
of a eimamissios, exempt under the authority of sea
legislature, would iodine a conscientious resistance
ea the part of the friends of the univenitiss. He '
next went into a history of the growth of the col-
leges. and the immanent diminution of the saint-
dike, and while admitting that various alteration wen de-
livable (especially is regard to the establishment of new
halls, upon a strictly economical bads), he contended that a
onamtiston was annecemary, and that publics opinion was
sufficient is produce all the requisite cheeps. He deoied
that the college statutes (which tae described as slanged and
liberal) by any means interfered with the introduction of
modern scientific education, and he adveced to the fact that
all the leading historian, geologists, and other luminaries
of the age bad beta educated under the present system ot
the niversitise. The statutes of the colleges, he said, were I
always liberally interpreted by those who were entrusted
with their execution, and all that w.s wanted was the means
of giving bitter effect to the intention of these statutes. Con-
trasting the spontaneous reforms carried out by the colleges
with the inefficient results of Crown visitation, he stated
that the colleges liable to the latter were least advanced in
accordnee with popular requirements. He concluded with
a warm exprenion of coafidenee in the meadow of our

nnivenity system. and with • rennonstranes against mine-
cowry interfeream with what aegees of eaperience had shown
to w-rk so well. The hon. m.taher.e.ompaoied his area
sent by some suggestions for impowarest. which he said
the primp minister had ovedeeked. wad by a copious
numeration of individuals prionninent in talent and ability,
whose career had testified to the 'mellow' of the education
provided in the nnimnities.

Sir G. GREY divided the question raised by Mr. Palmer
into two branches, the legality and lb. ezpeiliency
of t►e intandead commission. As the legality
of the coarse reeote.-- had been impugned before,
sad be •- ►e would call t►e

might impugned agam,
attention of the house to the frequent instances
in which euemissions of legate', had been is-
sued, and in which they were admitted to
have been strictly legal sad consutatioual. In the ease of
the commission of inquiry with regard to the corporations,
Lord Brougham proved distinctly that the noting of It was
justified by precedent, end ecuistout with constitutional
law. H. mentioned a vast number of commissions which
had been Issued of late years. In 1814 there was • commis-
don of 'equity into all the educational establishments of Ire-
land, maintained either in whole or in part out of the public
funds. It was admitted that there was no power to sempl
parties to answer the interrogatories addressed to then. Re
(Sir 0. Grey) need not advert to the series of commissions
Issued by the authority of the crown from 1826 to'
1936, first of all with regard to the Scotch mai- I
'males, and afterwards upon a wider scale. The powers
vested in the commissioners were, indeed, disputed by some
of the parties called before them ; but still the commissioners
obi died most valuable information, which afterwards
formed the basis of legislation. In the early part of 1530,
under the government of the Duke of Wellington, a com-
mission was issued by the crown to inquire Into the state of
the parochial benefices of Ireland and the mode of paying
curates. In 1832 there was a commissios of inquiry, apply-
ing both to England and Ireland, with respect to the reve-
nue and patronage of the epistolist sees and collegiate
churches. In the same year there was a commissicn to
inquire into the state of the municipal corporations • and
is 1835, to inquire into the state of the established
church of England and Wales with reference to the ecelesi-
astical revenues. In all these cues the same objection was
urged of the illegality of the commission, and there was
the same objection with regard to the obstacles which
might be thrown in the way of the inquiry. The hon. and
learned gentleman who had spoken last had drawn a dis-
tinction between universities and colleges, 'drafting that
the crown had a right to inquire into a lay corporation mists
lag under • charter from the crown.
Mr. It. PALMER said he did not intend to dispute the
abstract legality of the inquiry.
Sir 0. GREY believed that if colleges existed by mu
seription it was presumed that there was • charter originally
from the crown. Therefore, the abstract question of
legality was in favour of the course proposed. In 1817, in
the cue of Dr. Bentley, who complained of a grievano,
a Privy Council, which was attended by the highest
authorities, declared that his Majesty had an undoubted
right to visit the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
The facts of the ease would be found fully stated in the
life of Dr. Bentley. His hon. and learned friend (Mr. R.
Palmer) had stated what constituted the strongest ground
for the course now pursued. He had state I that many
important a'terations might, in hie opinion, be introduced
into the universities. Amongst these was the for-
mation of a new clue of halls for a class of
students who were now practically excluded, and the bon.
and learned gentleman said that the deficiency was owing,
not to a want of power, but to the want of an expression of
public opinion on the subject. There could be no more effec-
tuid mode of infiaencing pubic opinion than the eppoint-
mint of • commission of inquiry composed of men who were
ant hostile but friendly to the universities, and whose cha-
racter was • sufficient guarantee for their desire to secure to
the youth of this country the benefits of university educa-
tion. The report of such a commission would tend to cor-
rect many of the errors and mistakes into which those fell
who were possessed of no actual information, and would
show to England the great advantages derivable from a
university education, even under the present system. He
should regard the inquiry as most inexpedient if he thought
it likely to retard the improvements which were in progress,
and which he, fa common with the hon. and learned gen-
tleman, was anxious to see carried further. Ho
had himself too grateful • remembrance of the
advantages which he had derived from his resi-
dence in one of those universities to speak slightingly of
them, or to entertain any but friendly feelings towards
those by whose tuition he had benefited. If his advantages
were not so great as he could wish them to be, the kelt was
rather his own than that of the University of Oxford, or of
the system pursued there ; but he must say that, looking at
the shortness of the period which young men spent at the
naivenity before they took their degree, he greatly doubted
the utility of extending the system unless they also extended
the period. (Hear, hear.) Ile did not think that when he
was at Oxford the university held out sufficient
indssements to continued residence. (Hear, hear.)
Re ....assald not agree with his honourable and learned
WNW that the estli of fellows precluded them from asking
fhe em alteration MO* statutes. The right hon. gentleman
the member for the University of Cambridge had appealed
la him (Sir G. Grey) in the last debate whether, within his
tetra experience, application had not been made by the au-
thorities of the university which he represented, for the
mow of the crown to such an alteration of the startlee, as
would adapt them to the altered circumstances of the times.
Is that case, Una, the authorities were not precluded by •
menu ofduty from inking for an alteration, and with the con-
currence of the crowa the alteration was actually made.
But the right hon. gentleman would admit that there were
statutes which could not be altered without the authority
of parliament. His noble friend (Lord J. Russell)
had stated on a former oessekra that he could
not vote fur the motion, because it implied an accusation
against the heads of the universities, and had intimated that
on the resumption of the debate he should move the ad-
journment of the question. He (Sir 0 Grey) should now
conclude by moving that the debate he adjourned until that
day three =oaths.
Mr. JOHN STUART appealed to Sir George Grey to
withdraw that motion in order to give him an opportunity
of taking the seam of the house upon a motion of which
he had given notice.
Sir G. GREY assented to the temporary withdrawal of
hie motion, ea the understanding that it was capable of
being suhmonsutly renewed.
Mr. STUART then went into an argument to show the
illegslity of the proposed inquiry. Ile contended that no
man majoyingarze:rty is common with others had a right
so give such I Uos in regard to that property as would
give away the value of vas right of resistance to
possessed by those others, aad that any fellow of •
sh
other fellows of which opposed this inquiry, would. by gi-
mp n g the Invitation of this commission, be be-
traying the rights of thou other fellsue. He
denied that there existed any analogy 118wes
the inquiries cited as precedents by Sir Omega
Grey and the proposed commission ; and he larlsod
the difference between the admitted power of the grown, as
visitor, to issue a commission for the purpose of settling
collegiate disputes, and fa similar Judicial purposes, sad its