Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-12-17 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT-YESTERDAY.

(BEFORE J. K. BLAIR, ESQ., JUDGE)
BUSBY v. oeovarn—ln this ewe the plaintiffs, Messrs
Busby, omnibus proprietors, sought to recover .£3 damages
for injuries done to one of their omnibuses, by what they
alleged to be the negligence of the defendant's servant.
It appeared that on the 25th of August last, the half-past
six o'clock omnibus, from the Pier Head to the Zoological
Gardens, was going through North John-street. The
defendant's carter was backing a horse and float up a gate-
way in Brotherton's-building. The carter was at the horse's
head, and the statement of the omnibus driver was, that
the carter suddenly let go his horse's head, and the horse
started forward. The shaft of the cart came into collision
with the omnibus, broke the window and a panel, occasion-
ing damage which cost £3 to repair. Mr Hime appeared
for the plaintiffs,andcontended that the injuries were caused
by the negligence of the defend.tut, pertly in endeavouring
to make the horse back up the gateway under a load too
heavy for him, and partly because he left the horse's head.
The defendant's carter was examined, and deposed that
there was sufficient room for the omnibus to hive passed
clear of the cart, and that he called out to the omnibus
driver to look out. He also stated that he only left the
horse's head when the omnibus was so close upon
him that he must have been wrack by its shaft if he had
remained any longer, and that the shaft did actually
graze his hor-e's shoulder. He added that, although ho
had some difficulty at the time in backing the horse up
the gateway, yet after the collision he succeeded in doing
so; and that the load was not a heavy one. Witn, sees
having been examined on each side, his Honour said he
did not think the plaintiffs had made out such a case of
negligence on the part of the carter as to entitle them to
recover damages. The mater looked very like an
accident, in which neither party was decidedly to blame.
A verdict was accordingly given for the defendant, without
costs.

JUDICIAL COMMITIT'F, OF TETE PRIVY COUNCIL.

DECEMBER 14.

Bri.PORE MR. FEMBERTON LEIGII, SIR W. MAULS, AND SIR

T. DODSON.

LA PLATA.—COLLISION.—TOiS was an action brought
by the owners of the Hanoverian brig He'eue, 190 tons,
against the S.itith American and General Steam N ivigetion
C7)mpentt, the owners ef the steam-ship La Plata, to recover
damages for injuries which the Helene had sustained by a
collision. It appeared that between 10 and 11 on the
morning of the 10 of Oabber, 1856, the Helene, then on
her way from Newcastle•on-Tyne to London with coals,
was proceeding up the Thames in charge of a licensed
p lot, and towed by the steam-tug Kent, when, up:et roand-
tro she perceived La Plata ccraing in as
opposite direction, towed by the steam-tug WilliareG:re-
ston. The case of the Helene wae, that she ported her
helm and immediately afterwards put it hard to port, and
that La Plate, instead of porting her helm, came stem on
and struck her just before the main rigging on .the port
side. She was so much injured that she had to be run on
shore at the south side the riser and temporarily repaired
before she could proceed to her des ination. On the part
of La Plata it was alleged that her helm was put hard to
port, and that of the steam-tug was put to port of Black—
wall, as the Rose and other vessels, among which was the
Helene, were seen rounding the point that the Rose
passed her, but that the midships of the Helene shortly
afterwards wore into cohtact with her stem in consequence
of the Helene and the Kent not porting their he:m until
too late. La Plata also contended that the Helene was
keeping more on the south silo of the river than she ought
to have done when the accident occure4 The cause wes
tried in the Admiralty Court in May last, and the Trinity
Brethren came to the conclusion that La Plata was not to
blame for the collision. The owners of the Helene now
appeeled against that decision. Mr. J. Wilde. Q.C., and
Dr. Webinson were coureeil for the appellants ; Dr. Addams
and Dr. 'Twise for the respondents. Sir. W. Manic said
their Lordships were of opinion, that La Plata was not
shown to have been guilty of negligence, and that the
colision was an accident for which no One was to blame.
The decision of the Court must therefore be reversed.

SOCIETY AT WASHINGTON.--The more fashionable mom-
bers of Congress, from this State and elsewhere, who have
marriageable dalgliteri or pretty wives, are taking houses
at Washington for the winter. They intend to give bails,
soirees, parties, levees, matinees, receptions, dinners, drc.,
&e., and have a good time of it generally. The season
will be very gay in elite circles, and all the fashionable
women who have from twenty to forty dresses, and are not
shut up in private asylums, will do well to pack their
Saratoga trunks, and be off by the first train. We see
that several foreign aristoer as are going in the same direc-
tion. Lord Neo Ile, Lord S;;itidlesharaks, the Count of
Empty Pockets, and the BliO Borrow Sixpence, are already
on the ground, and will .remain dnrin3 winter.—New
YcrUaper,

MIDDLE CLASS EXAMINATIONS.

THE RELIGIOW DIFFICULTY.

The following letter has been received from an
eminent member of the Oxford Dslegacy, by a
gentleman ofthis town, in answer to some enquiries
regarding the reasons which influenced the
University to make the present arrangements, in
reference to religion :
I cannot refer you to any printed b)ok or pamphlet
which will throw any light on the many, many discussions
out of which the regulations of the Delegacy gcew. But
I will give you a brief analysis of the conclusive argu-
ments :

1. To make the religious examination compulsory would
be inconsistent with a due reepect for the law of the land.
By law the University is now compelled to give the degree
of B.A. without requiring any religious knowledge what-
ever. In regard to all those who choose to submit to her
teaching in religi,n, the University is empowered to teach
and to examine in religions knowledge. In regard to
those who decline her teaching in that particular, she
is bound by law to leave the responsibility with them-
selves. Would it be consistent to demand for the title of
A.A. what we cannot demand for the degree of B.A ?
An Atheist may be B.A. and we cannot stop it. The
University, in fact, bows to the decision of the Legislature,
which, as we are told, God hath ordained. As a private
inlividual, any member of the University may protest
against this, and may carry his protest so far as to decline
to act with a Univanity sa fettered. Bat if he chooses to
act with her, he must recognise the law of the land by
which she exists.

2. The University preaumes, and has a right to presume,
that the Legislature did not intend to ignore religious
teaching, but oaly intended to transfer the responsibility
from her to others ; i c., oiler to the learners or to their
parents. In the case of youths and children, it is obvious,
and is in fact in the spirit of the Fifth Comm Indnent,
that the parents shall be responsible. TAO University
therefore offers to assist the parents in discharging the
duties of this responsibility by examining their children,
if the, (the parents) wish it, and by informing them (i. e.,
the parents) whether in each case this part of the education
has received proper attention, If a father withes to know
whether his son has been properly taught the truths of
religion, the University will tell him ; if he does not wish
to know, the University considers that the Legislature has
relieved her from all farther responsibility, and presumes
that he wilt satisfy himself in some other way.

3. When the University does examine in religious know-
ledge, she has a clear right to prescribe the subjects of
examination which she considers necessary. She declines
to examine in the Bible only ; she knows that her examiners
will inevitably presume a certain interpretation of the
Bible ; and it is obvious that it would be double-dealing
not to avow this, and the best and most straightforward
mode of avowing it is to name the formularies in which
which that interpretation may be found. The statute,
therefore, has tied up the hands of the delegates on this
matter, for the words " rudimenta ficlei et religionis" are
a known phrase in Oxford legislation, and could not be
interpreted to mean the Bible only.
4. If the examination in religious knowledge is to be
voluntary, it follows that it must be separated from the
rest, and have no marks given to it which can be added in
with the rest. Otherwise the examination in religious
knowledge, voluntary in name, would be cimpulsory, in
fact. A father, who had a conscientious objection to
recognising the University as an examiner in religious
knowledge, would compiain that his son, though wall
instructed in such knowledge, was beaten by anotaer lad
in no way his superior, simply because the latter could
count marks which his son could not. This would not be,
on the part of the University, a loyal submission to the
existing law.
5. But (seen besides this argument on the ground of
justice, which seems to me unanswerable, there is another
equally unanswerable on the score of feasibility. How
can marks be given for religious knowledge, as compared
with mathematics ? How much acquaintance with the
Gospel will balance four books of Euclid. or a good paper
in parsing ? The subject is not in pari materia with any
other subject, and cannot therefore be marked with them.
The primary ass of religious knowledge to the Candi-
dates who present themselves for the proposed examinations
is not as with all other subjects for intellectual but
spiritual purposes. There is but one class who can be sup-
posed to have professional (besides the universal personal)
need of such knowledge, namely, Teachers of Religion.
But surely the University can hardly be expected to ex-
amine into the fitness of young men to become Dissenting
Preachers, With every desire to recognise Dissenters as
fellow Christiania the University would be false to the
Caurch to which the Legislaeure has still left her attached,
if she were to assist in recognising as such, Ministers,
who, from their position are hostile to that Church.
G. We might, indeed. have given a separate class list for
religious knowledge, and this was much discussed. Bat,
in the first place a class list obviously belongs to those
subjects for which a man has a professional need ; and in
the second iplace is it seemly that the Bible, and the
doctrines of the Bible should be made the arena of intel-
lectual competition ? distinction in a class list the
fitting recognition of such a study ? Ought we to wish
to encourage young men to study the Bible as they would
a treatise on Geography ? The 11103 t reverential
way of touching this subject was felt to be to put
it apart as a study sui generi= and not to mix up with it
any cf those inducements which are in their proper place
only when encouraging intellectual cultivation. To give
prizes in Divinity within a single school, is a fair thing;
for those who give have the education under their control,
and may (and ought to) take pains to provide against the
danger of making a sacred subject too merely intellectual.
But young men gathered from all quarto: a from all sorts
of schools, some perhapeeself-taught altogether, who is to
protect theta from a similar danger ?
ees 7. It is quite, and obviously untrue, to say that the
subject is disparaged altogether, or that a young man who
declines it is, therefore, in no worse position than if he
took it. For the fact that he has passed, or not
passed, will be entered in his certificate ; and for the rest
of his life, whenever ha shows that certificate, he shows
that he did, or did not, touch this important subject. That
this will make no difference to him, seems to me incon-
c.ivable.

Farther, all parents may knew in regard to their eons,
whether or not this subject has been properly treated. If
a parent is prevented by conscientious objections, from
using the University test, let him use some other ; let him
ask some known religious minister whom he can trust, to
examine his boy, and give him a certificate.
I cinno believe that the mi.idle classes of this country
will be indifferent t) the fact, whether or not a certificate
bears this subject on its face or not. I believe that many
employers will look to that point the first thing, and will
immediately say to a youth who produces a certificate in
which religion was not mentioned.—" What were you at a
school where they did not teach the Bible %" And will make
careful enqairin before going further.
8. Lastly, we felt convinced that we were justified when
dealing with the middle classes, in putting the entire res
poneibility of the religious education on the Parents. The
middle classes have ehoen again and again that they
deeply value religions education. Every political move-
ment which ever seemed to ignore religious education has
been defeated, and defeated by the middle classes. In
spite of most serious difficulties, in spite of obvious and
crying evils, the middle classes of this country
have refused repeatedly to sacrifice not merely
the reality, but even the profession of religious
education for the sake of removing those difficulties, pr
curing thole evils. We feel safe, therefore, in offering to
co-operate with them, leaving to them the decision on th it
own children, but giving them every aid in executing that
decision, if they will accept our aid.
These aro our reasons for what we have done, and I
think the weight of them will be more and more felt, the
more they are considered.