The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-11 00:00:00

Mr, Gladstone and Oxford,

•
re
The following letter, in reference to the coral%
University election at Oxford, has been addressed
by the Right Hon. Sir John Coleridge to the' Guar'
than newspaper ; and, out of consideration for the
honoured and learned writer of the letter, we here
give it insertion in our columns :
Sir,—You have been in the habit of admitting corresP°ll;
donee with reference to the expected election at Oxford.
request you to give me room for a few observations, al-
though I shall certainly not be led by them into any cor-
respondence on the subject.
I have been very much struck with so much of a letter
from Dr. Pusey to the editor of the Churchman as appeared
in the Times of the 28th of April ; and although I ain 11°'
vain enough to suppose that anything I can say ought tot
have the authority which belongs to what ha has said, Ye
as a very old lay member of Convocation, I hope I I'l
without impertinence or impropriety, venture to addl.%
through you a few remarks to the electors of Oxford as
matter touching so nearly the interests and reputation of

our common mother.
I am proud as an Oxford man of our present represent";
tives. No member on his own side of the house is Dell:-
with more respect and even affectionate attention than I
William Heatcote,—no one's character out of it can stall f
higher as a Christian gentleman. In the house and out °
it equally, his talents for the transaction of business are re;
markable. I speak from long acquaintance, ripenetl,,,,
thankfully say, into intimate friendship, when I desert
his courtesy, his ability, his integrity as admirable ; tb
soundness and sincerity of his religious principles as ui;-;
questionable. So much I may say of him : I wish I coal-
properly say of him all that I feel. Perhaps it was
lt
necessary to say so much, because I understand that on 3"
hands it is agreed that he is to be re-elected.
In Mr. Gladstone we are represented by a statesman, tl.
originality of whose views, and the simple earnestness,'"
call it, if you please, impetuosity,—of whose manner, ha-f_d°
provoked many, from whom in his political career he inw,
differed, but whose integrity or sincerity not the bittereoy
of his opponents has ventured to question. We hale 11
scholar worthy of his University ; we have an en,
lightened statesman—the most successful and scie°;
tific financier of the age—and an orator whom I
I do not over-praise when I call him the greatest win)::,
this century has produced. If any one thinks I exagger°L
let him consider on how many and on what different sub'
jects and occasions he has spoken, and as to tho manne}
the lucidity of his arrangement, the clearness and fora° ot
his language ; as to the matter, the astonishing anw,ll:3o
and variety of knowledge, the force and subtlety of
argumentation.
Why is he not to be ro-elected ? Not because anythg4
I have just said is denied to be true, but becaus© 1031;
men, sincero Churchmen I doubt not, differ from lit°l_,
somo Church matters. They do not question, 1 belief 'r,
lam sure they ought not to question—that he is as sinceto
a Churchman as they are, or that ho has applied his ne.litior
mind to them with as much sincerity and industry as t'-nf
have bestowed on them. But they differ, and bocallSe

this difference they will have none of him.
Now, I venture to submit to them that this is a I/I°l
principle in regard to such an election ; it is wrong to V° a
on a principle of partial agreement or disagreement, an
not on a fair consideration of the merits of the wholo 01`,0,
Do they expect ever to be represented by a mall ssl
P-
it
whom they agree in every particular ?—will they sul),
themselves in nothing to a difference of opinion with

whom they send to Parliament ? atea
..
In respect to an Oxford election, the conduct 1.
and now avowed towards Mr. Gladstone has been, T s,
venture to say, without a precedent. The case of Su
Peel is often appealed to ; it is entirely distinguishable' j
may speak without delicacy of that personally, becatil
disagreed with my dearest friends upon it, and althong-t
was then strongly opposed to the Emancipation, 1 Weiti
to Oxford and supported Sir Robert Peel. But laell°-0
and I say, the case was different—the question then
issue was deemed vital to the Church. Sir Robert, "Wilhey;
he changed his line of conduct in regard to it, honouvt,:,
resigned, and offered himself for re-election. In (1°,4
he challenged the University to pronounce on the ster
had taken ; she could not have re-elected him without e'rg
pmssly approving his new opinions, and pronounet°o
against her own old and unchanged ones : the poll Was.„
determine not so much whether Sir Robert was to be
uld
elected, as whether Oxford was at once, and as it i-
have seemed without conviction but at the beck of Diner
nister, to support Emancipation. I regretted at the t-
but I cannot now condemn the resolution she adopte"'
I sincerely respect and regard Mr. Hardy. I think litin it
excellent member of Parliament. I hope ho will find it,eas.6
there, but I trust that he will not be offended if OP,t.big
my regret that he has been induced to lend his name to
miserable travestie of what then took place. As the[4 go
jority then voted not so much to elect Sir Robert ing,%-st)
to exclude Sir Robert Peel, so now we shall have (I tr„o- t
°1
a minority voting not so much out of a well-merited r5cD•
for Mr. Hardy, as out of a bitter, all but personal, oPP°I3O
tion to Mr. Gladstone. My confidence in Mr. Gladst°r 1
is as Dr. Pusey's, perfect, and it is unshaken ; moreolreoto
also confide in the principles which I believe to act tue
him ; and as I yield to no man in my attachment t°,/v j
ClAurch of England, or in respect to the clergy and aloe'
desire to add one word of affectionate and earnest a"'lley
The clergy will, I am sure, commit a fatal mistake, if t
band themselves together, under whatever leaders, t°
pose all progress—all change ;if they confound thou ig
portance of externals and ilAternals, of that vilitc,ital•
accessory, and may be temporary, with that which is
uiDd
They must be blind indeed who cannot read the meat
of the history of the last half-century; they 10°,,," irit
strangely minded who can doubt the force of the sr .01
which has been and is at work—it is easy to call it of au
spirit—but though not all good, nor all-w:se, it is not
evil : wise men will not deal with it blindly, or wiv.ildg-
temperat-e. and inconsiderate opposition, but witll.3o ,or
went, temper, candour, and charity. It has not Yet' tio/
opinion, lessened in a single fibre the vital strengtli etcareD
Church; nor will it do so. I firmly believe, if the °„t oa
be true to herself,—if Churchmen will bo less intes-oor
defending even her unquestionable rights, than elt,o Deal
ing her from decay or injury within; if they labour yet
differences that distract her energies in a spirit noti'looto
charitable ; to purify her from all abuses which ro help to
crept into her practice, and to present her by God'!„ scrir
friend and foe as the most tolerant, charitable, an
tural branch of the great Chu
Heaths Court, May 1, 1865.rch of
Join: T Christ.
. CoL-El'lP°7,o

CAPE MAILS.—The Union Comp fro
royal ;01
royal mail steamship Cambrian, Captain W. 1-43(nt10-
Southampton on Monday, arrived at Plymouth Laos
day, when having embarked mails for Ascension,_rioo,
and St. Helena, under the superintendence of 31-r•
postmaster, Devonport, she left yesterday roorniug '"
nd
destination. She takes out also about 70 passeng°l g
tteroi
full general cargo. Her mails consist of 10 woks
17 sacks books, and 88 sacks nowsparem