The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-08 00:00:00

No. 1.9,277.]

PUBLICATIONS.

, NEW EDITION OF BURKE'S PEERAGE.
Now Ready, in I Vol., with 1,5.1`t Enzraving, of arms,

THE PEERAGE AND BA RONE TAGE
OF THE BRITI*H ENIME.

By Sir BERNARD BURKE, Ulster King of arms.

New Edition, Revised ail Corrected to th, Present Time, from the

Pc'ison:ll CUminutrew 'Dos of the Nobility, &e.

" The best g o oLtical and herall, dictionary !f the peerage and
baronetw4e. au.i the first autho ity on all questtnis atf.;ctint the
aristocracy." Globe,
Published for K, Colburn, by his succesors, Hurst and Blackett.

ELEMENTARY WORKS
FUBLISIIED BY

WILLIAM BI.ACKWOOD and SONS„

NEW GEOGRAPHICAL WORKS.

By ALEX. K EITII JOHNSTON, F.R.SE.,&c.,
Geographer In Oidiinav o hor Aujes y for Scotland, author o 1

the "Ph sival &c

SCHOOL ATr.A.% of PHY:4,CAL GEOGRI.PHY. 18 maps, im.
p, rial 4:o, hall-bound in Bvo , I2s Gd.
SC 10(TF, A I'L.tt; of er.ls;rclL GEOM{ IPHY. 20 maps,
wth in,, , Imperial 40, halt-b :un lin Bvo , 12e. 6d.
SCHOOL aTL ,S of GE VEll A.L and ph:A' RIPTIVE GEO.
OR k tIY. 22 maps, with ind. s, imderial 4to, Ii lt-b.Jund in Bvo.,
Its. Gd.

SCIIOO% ATLAS of ..ISTRONJMY. Edited by J. R. RIND, F.R S.
In the press

E EMENTARY iCHOOL 'TL \S. 20 maps, incln ling a map
of ('a and Palestl,,e, and index. Demy 4tu, 7s 6d.
GEOGRAPIII :AL PROJECTION 3. In a portfAlo, 2s. 6d.

These Atlases 13y to 3 Ci •gree of accuracy and an amount o'
information fl it hitherto a' tempted in, ducational works The mans
have been coiistruc'ed with a special view to the purposes or and
Instruction, and are not copied from auy existing Atlas: hence they
ill be fOund free from the common faults of, v Tcrowding a dm-
fu.ion with which so many School Atlases are ja,tly chargeable Hy
means of a new process of p,o niction, the ma a comhiae the 'tam
racy and n atnesa of the ietest ,ityle of enz,ravile2: wi h a tneetial,
cal an -I-catin of colours, the etre 1 of vciich is to sent, a clearness
correctness, and elegance, unaporo ched by former tnet.lodi.

OPINION.A.
EDUCATIOVAI. TIMES.

They are as superior t all School Atl is es within o,tr knowledge
as were the larger works of the sa I.e author in advance f those that
preceded them. Tne Plates In the Phys eat Atlas excite• our warmest
adml "atio,l for the cleara?s+ or the engraving and the beauty of the
colourist . . . . A more complete work. for educational purposes
never came under our observation.

{ '~•/'

-/-1(-1 1 -'

JOtiANAL OF EDLICANION.
Decidedly the best school atlasses we have ever seen.

SCOTSMAN.

The plan of these atlases Is admirable, and the excellence of the
pl mis rivalled by the beauty of the execution. . . . . T best
security for the accuracy and substantial value of a School Atlas is
to hive it from the hands of a man Ike our author, who has pt,r
fected his skill b., the execution of much larger works, and gained a
char , cter which he will oe careful n,t to jeopardise by at.aching
name to anything that is crude, slovenly, or superficial.

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUL Y 8, 1854.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

MARINE CASUALTIES.

Lnrd FING\LL presented a petition from the in-
habitants of the county of the town of Drogheda, em-
bodying a full statement of marine casualties for t'Ae last
four and a half years, and praying for the most efficient
and impartial Government survey of that dangerous coast,
in order that a harbour of refuse be constructed in the
most judicious position.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE STATUTE LAW.
In reply to Lord LYNDHURST,
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not intend to in.
troduce any bills this session founded upon the reports
of the counnis-toners for the consolidation of the statute
law, but the reports would be printed, in order that they
might be c,nsidered during the recess, but next session
he would propose certlin bills grounded on the reports
with the view of their passing into law.

the heads of houses should be deprived of a direct repre-
sentation. What advantage would it be to them to have
a voice in the election of professors, when they were but
25 against 200 or 300 masters of arts ?Vine did not be-
lieve that the heads of houses would elect their represen-
tatives by seniority, but would send their ablest men to
the board. He hoped their lordships would adhere to
the bill as it had come up from the other house.
The Earl of DERBY said they had the unanimous
vote of the whole University of Cambridge, in favour of
the principle that each body should elect their own re-
presentatives to the governing body ; and this was an
argument in favour of the clause as it stood.
Their lordships then divided—
For the amendment lO7
Against it ...
Majority
---24
The Earl of DERBY asked for an explanation of that
part of the clause which required six professors to be
elected, and one professor to be separately elected.
The flake of NEWCASTLE said it was proposed to
omit those words.
The Earl of DERBY said he objected to the govern-
ing power being entrusted to the resident body alone.
He regretted that the system was not ad pted which
had been recommended both by the commissioners and
the university itself—that there should be two governing
bodies. They had now decided that there should be
one, and they proposed to ex: lude from all representa-
tion about iiine-tenths of the members of the universities,
oy confining it to the residents. It was very much like
a scheme for throwing the whole power in the university
into the hands of one party, of about 250 members. No
uch objection could arise it the convocation with its
2,500 members had hal its powers reserved. 'They were
handing over Oxford to be governed, .not by a free re-
presentation but by a limited -oligarchy, whose views
were confined to the university Itself, who had had little
_eiperience beyond its walls, and who had not learned,
by mixing with the world at large, to take more liberal
and extended views of the interests of the university.
He, therefore, proposed to omit the words " the con.
gregation hereinafter mentioned," and insert " the con-
vo,ation."

Viscount CANNING said it was quite impossible for
the Government to accede to this amendment. After
s;ating the considerations by which the Government had
been led to propose the clause as it stood, he observed
that the argument of the noble earl was the same as
that on which universal suffrage was advocated in refe-
rence to Parliamentary representation. He contended
that no body could be so fit to decide on questions of
teaching and discipline as the great body of tutors and
professors. yesident in the university. If the opposite
plan were adopted, tha members of convocation would
be summoned to Oxford rather to support the party they
espoused than to give an independent vote.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that the speech of
the noble viscount was just such a one as might have
been expected some 70 or 80 years ago, if the subject of
Parliamentary reform had been mooted. His noble
friend saw some analogy between the amendment and
universal suffrage. Well, he (Lord Malmesbury) should
not object to universal suffrage if the country were
peopled only with adult and well-educated men. But
who were the persons of whom the noble viscount was
afraid l Why, men who had been educated like himself
and with himself (for he believed the noble lord was a
a Master of Arts) ; at all events, if he was not, many of
their lordships were ; and yet the noble lord compared
them with au unfortunate class whom they were dis-
cus-ing the other night— the dog cart drivers. (Laughter.)
The Bishop of OXFORD said the noble earl who had
just spoken appeared to be under an entire misapprehen-
sion as to the objects of those who supported the clause.
Thy did not wish the give the government of
the university to congregation ; hut they simply proposed
to entrust to it one special function—namely, the elec-
tion of the hebdomadal council, which was itself only the
executive body of the university, for every measure must
ultimately cone before convocation. Neither lrid they
argued that convocation was unfit to perform that duty ;
they only said that it was less fit than congregation,
which would be composed of men whose daily occupation
was university instruction and discipline. (Hear.) Con-
. regation would also possess another advantage ; it
would be less liable to those sudden clffiatus of new theo-
ries, to which non-resident members of the university
who usually took their opinions on trust, were occa-
sionally subject. He thought therefore that congrega-
tion would be the safest body to entrust with the duty
pr,,poed to be' committed to it. He believed that all
the principal organs of opinion were obliged to resort to
the resident members of the universities for their ablest
writers—a most remarkable circumstance, and one that
completely disproved the idea that the residents were
men of monkish habits of thought and of contracted
The fact was, they knew far more of what was
gassing in the world around them than could possibly be
We case with a clergyman who gave himself up to the
conscientious performance of the. duties of a country
parish. At all events, he protested against bringing
every member of convocation up to Oxford every three
years. (Hear, hear,)

views.

The Earl of DERBY said that what he complained
of was that measures would nut necessarily go before
convocation, for it would he in the power of congrega-
tion to prevent them from ever being submitted to the
larger body.
Aftersome fu rtlitlr con verßation, the committee divided:
For "congregation" 99
For "convocation"
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 11-14 were inserted after clause G.
On clause 15—' the Vice• Chancellor to make a regis-
ter of congregation."
The Earl of DERBY wished to know whether that
register was to be conclusive as to who were members ?
Toe Duke of NEWCASTLE said it was intended to
be binding.
Toe Earl of DERBY would suggest to the Govern-
ment the omission of the latter part of the clause, pro-
viding that "if the vice-chancellor failed to comply with
the provisions of the section to the satisfaction of the
commissioners, the commissioners shOuld thereupon carry
the same into effect," &c.

The clause, with this amendment,
"toN CANNING
at lent
ioo
no bojfectthieo ncot trihl
iesll e omissionrs
ofViscountthe
a u swordse sI6C
was agreed to.
ClOn clause 19, relating to the promulgation of statutes,
to 18 inclusive were also agreed to.
The Earl of DERBY said, in his opinion, the effect of
the clauses on that subject, as they then stood, would
be to constitute the 250 resident members of the univer-
sity a mere debating society, devoid of any power of
proposing amendments.
Viscount CANNING dissented from that view.
The Bishop of CHICHESTER said he should move
the omission of all the words which gave to the congre-
gation power to constitute themselves an intercepting
body between the hebdomadal council and convocation
in reference to a statute.
After a few words from the Bishop of OxFoRD in sup-
port of the clause,
The Bishop of CHICHESTER said as it did not op-
pear likely that he wou:d receive sufficient support, he
should withdraw the amendment.
also
The
clausesstoodto; aud.
speak h.
The Earl of DERBY said he thought that in 'such
matters the liebdoniarlal board ought to have the power
of regulating its own proceedings.
Viscount CANNING considered it desirable that a
iiii.lority should have facilities for making its opinions
generally known.
The clause was then agreed to..
On clause 23,

I:
i )Irtihneaitp
Yoveßlai; tleh.isthc:liatusoef i
tnht
er o
reupc
reed.
sentation of the minority-_a principle which, when in-
troduced into the Rabana Bill, met with universal con-
to for Efirrl
s of ER
demnation. (Herr, hear.) In all cases the minority
ttiineaßn
must submit to the majority, of principle they
had several examples th it night. (Laughter.) There
night be some show of reason for the introduction of
that principle into the election of members of Parlia-
ment, because in that case there was party organisation
and party division which was not, „rid
which he hoped
would not, be the case in congregation,
The Duke of NEWCASTLE thought it right to ob-
viate the possibility of any dominant party having the
election of the whole governing body in its hands. He
thought the noble earl was mistaken in saying that the
principle of the representation of minorities was univer-
sally condemned. It was misunderstood for some time,
but the more it was before the public the more it was
appreciated.
Lord INIONTEA.GLE thought the principle of the
representation of the minority a wise one.
The clause was then agreed to, with the addition of
a proviso to the effect that no elector should have more
than one vote for each candidate.
Clause 24 was agreed to.
The Earl of PO ISIS moved the following clause after
clause 24 : "It shall be lawful for the convocation of
the university to provide, if it shall think fit, that votes
may be given either personally or by proxies, being
tnembers of convocation, authorised by writing, accord-
ing to the form in the Schedule B to this act annexed,
or in a form to the like effect, under the hand of the
member of convocation nominating such proxy, at any
election of a chancellor of the university or of a burgess
to serve in Parliament." The clergy being excluded
from becoming members of Parliament, he thought that
every facility should be given to them to express their
views with regard to those who were to represent them.
It was a great check upon that expression, that the
members of convocation were compelled to come from
distant parts of the country to the university before they
could vote.
Viscount CANNING said this Government were
ready to adopt the clause as far as it applied to the chan-
cellor. With regard to the members for the university.
there would, he thought, be a prejudice against its ap-
plication to them in the other House of Parliament.
Lord CAMPBELL said the proposition of the noble
earl would be a great constitutional innovation. It
seemed to him to lie highly unconstitutional to vote by
proxy for the election of members of Parliament. Then
might be a change in the administration, or some other
great change in the interval between the giving the prox.)
and the giving the vote. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of CIARNARVON said that whilst he be
lieved sw.l a coudtituency as that of Oxford was the

-

~-c_ G~

-
tit
• ' • • "4,
•
..4111SI . et)
•
• 1,0 •
• 0, •
:1 •••
1' . 0 44,. •
r, -4.
( -
' • j I •
•
- i t>/:f *E'F'
.fl.q cor .
#1 . • • 00. VAL.
4.4111...-- • 11-7,r7t,r10'
".
-
.k 12,1 V . • ‘v• ,'•7- • ow).
' 1' 40. • ••

1"-

j 9~ ____

-----e_„,.,..

....,

I**fre.&ffft.

itt
Pariffihi; Mci of ovitg fa th 6 iotlt 'osi The foit sts .‘
Did the noble earl wish to see those intentions okillidia out ? (Bear.)
The clause was agreed to.
On clause 34, _._
...i 1
. ...
The Duke of MONTROSE proposed some amend;
ments, which led to a long conversation.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE suggested that notice
should be given of the amendments, and that they should
be brought forward on the report.
The Duke of MONTROSE consented to adopt this
course.
Clauses 34, 35, and 3G were agreed to.
On clause 37,
The Earl of DERBY suggested some amendments,
which the Lord Chancellor promised to consider.,
. Clauses 37 to 44 were agreed to.
Oa clause 45,
The Earl of DERBY said he had oome down to the
house disposed to admit Dissenters as a matter of grace
and favour, but after the clause which had been phased
that night, and after the glosses which had been put
it, he could not now consent to give any facilities for
their admission.

[PRICE SD.

Vin................10.11M1N1M most deserving of such a privilege, he did not see how, the opposite effect. He observed that the Beryl-
if they conceded it in favour of Oxford, &could be re- ' tors of Christchurch would be admitted for a guinea a
fused to other constituencies, week, forgetting that they were supported partly by
The Earl of POWIS said that he was ready to limit. eleemosynary assistance. The whole number of servitors
the application of the clause to the cilancellor, as sug• was ten or a dozen at the outside. In speaking on the
gested by the noble viscount. He conceived that no subject of expense the noble earl overlooked the fact that
inconvenience would arise from the use of proxies, as lie the social habits of the young men were the chief source
proposed ; for he had taken the clause, enutatis mutandiso ! of expense ; and in the absence of sumptuary laws he
from the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act. - (the Duke of Newcastle) knew no means of remedying
After a conversation the clause was agreed to, as waa i the evil except the establishment of private halls. As
clause 20.
On dance 27, 'regarded discipline, he apprehended that the halls would
have an advantage over the colleges. What was the in
The Earl of DERBY said he entertained a very strong I ternal discipline of the colleges ? The students were
objection to the proposed private halls. He thought they ! obliged to attend cerain ctures, and to be within doors
would be of 110 benefit to the poorer classes of students, i by 12 o'clock at nightie but the authorities would no
as the welt-endowed colleges could always afford the ' more think of entering their private rooms than they
most economical maintenance. If these halls were esta- ! would think of entering any of their lordships' houses.
blished they would be rather for the benefit of the rich , Nothing like domestic discipline could be said to exist.
than the poor ; and the students in them would not re- ' lie could not understand how those who advocated the
ceive so good an education as in the colleges. He I system which existed at Cambridge, with rard to ri-
thought their effect would be absolutely to destroy all I vate lodgings, could object to the establishment of thepse
discipline in the university. Having stated his views on halls at Oxford. In the one case the domestic discipline
this subject very fully last evening, he would not say might be of the most complete character ; in the other
more than that he should offer the utmost opposition to it amounted to nothing at all. He had risen to defend
the clause. 1 the Government against the assertion made by the noble
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE-add.ressed the corn- , earl in his last speech, that the avowed intention and
mittee in support of the clause, but was nearly inaudible I &tied of the clause was to place within the bosom of the
in the gallery. He was understood to say that there university nests of Dissenters who would make them-
jwas no fear of the system of private halls having any in selves antagonistic to the principles of the university—
urious effect on the discipline of the university. He 'in short to..place within the precincts of that learned in-
had looked carefully at the bill, and could nut conceive : stitation a body of men whose sole object would be its
on what ground such appreheesions were expressed. I eventual destruction.
There aas no greater probability of obnoxious novelties ! Lord CAMPBELL said it was a mistake on the part
g
being introduced by these halls than by the existin col- i of the noble earl (Derby) to suppose" that the Vice-
leges. On the contrary, the discipline in private halls Chancellor would be compelled to grant a license. It
was neces arily more strict than in colleges. It might
he asked, why esteblish these halls ? Because the cel- ian application were made to him (Lord Campbell) to
I compel the granting of a license, be should refuse to ac•
leges were overflowing, and numbers were compel le I to I cede to it.
connect themselves with smaller colleges, where the Their lordships then divided.
the clause
education was not so efficient. The establiehment of Forl private halls would, by stimulating competition, compel Agaieet it
re
these colleges to modify their system, and introduce the
Clauses 28 to 30 were agreed to.
necessary improveente. Tiiey could only be regarded On clause 31, giving colleges power to amend statutes
as a useful and valuable aedition to the univ gsity, I with respect to eligibility to headship's, &c.,
whereby a much greater number of persons would be I
admitted into the pale of the university, and would par. I Lerd WYNFORD said that in his experience he
take of the benefits of its instruction. It was said these never saw any great benefits arising from the teachingof professors. In his time very few of the professors,
halls would not be cheaper than the colleges. If they
I except the divinity professors, had any•attendants at
were not cheap they would fail to attract. At Durham I
their lectures. It seemed to him wholly inc insistent
there were halls, and they were much cheaper than the
colleges. In the interest of the university itself, and of with the designs of the founders and donors that the
learning, he thought it essential that they should give it college emoluments should be estranged from the col-
every means of extension, and render it, as Lord Bacon leges and given t,;professors ; and this being his opinion
said, exempt from the wrongs of time, becau-e suscep-
he should move the omission, of the words which would
tilde of perpetu..l renovation. (Hear, bear.) have that effect.
The Earl of DERBY said there was certainly nothing
The Earl of MA.LMESBURY said the Vice Chan- to encourage bun to propose any amendment in this bill,
cellar would have no power to refuse a license to any because, whatever might have been the case elsewhere.
person who had mechanically conformed to the doctrines there at least the government were able to do what they
of the Church.
The Earl of CARLISLE said the noble earl (Derby) pleased. At the same
friend not concurring altogether iii
the view of his noble who had jest spoken, he
had on the previous night most logically established the should propose an amendment, for the purpose of mak-
connection between this clause and those admitting Dis- log the enacting part of the clause agree with the pre-
,enters. Oathat ground he should support this clause, amble. He proposed that the alterations to be made by
believing that the admission of Dissenters would be an
stihteercy,lleges should be subject to "the consent of the vi-
unmixed good to the university, to the Church, and to He also proposed to insert the words "so that
themselves. (Hear.) But such a !mission ought not to be the same be not inconsistent with the main design of the
merely a nominal one, or one which should operate as an founders." As regarded the jurisdiction of the commis-
annoyance. He had been, therefore, grieved to hear last sinners, he would observe that it was desirable that as
night that no exemption from attendance on religious ser- soon as a good scheme had been devised it should cease
vices should be granted ; but lie was glad to learn that the a d determine, aid lie moved an aim ndment to that ef-
noble earl (Derby) would not insist on requiring from
young feet. He did not intend to put their lordships to the
men—,tiers children—on their admission to the trouble of dividing on these or
university, subscription to a mass of doctrines which but he felt bound to submit them to their lordshiany other amendments,
s.
were difficult to comprehend. He (Lord Carlisle) had Viscount CANNING said, in the case of three of the
punction at the facility and the want of con.s p
often looked back with something of shame and corn- colleges at Oxford, the visitors were prohibited from con-
tion with which, at that age, he was called upon to idera- Renting to any alteration. In the case of Exeter College
the bishop of the diocese of Exeter bad refused to sane-
edopt at once—to swallow down at one gulp—such a tion any change in the statutes, and he believed the nobl.
e imprehensive system of dectrine. (Hear.) He should earl himself (Earl of Derby) in his capacity of visitor of
be equally loth to impose the still graver mockery of Pembroke hail taken a similar course. He could not agree
compulsory worship. He thought that they were bound to the amendment proposed by the noble lord opposite
to retain the provision for these private halls, as the (Lord Wynford). But he proposed, on the part of the
only possible manner of opening retreats where the dis Government, to add after the word "emoluments," in
seaters, to whom they affected to give admission to the the 4th line of the clause, the 'words "other than fellow-
university, might enjoy that privilege.with a due regard ships or studentships." The effect of the amendment
Y would be to limit the operation of the 34th clause. (The
to their own ease, comfort, and dignity ; and where the
might enjoy that liberty of conscience which their lord- clause referring to the retention of the preference of
ships proposed to respect, and from which he hoped they schools, which was introduced by Mr. R. Palmer.)
might see wally precious fruits. (Cheers.) The Earl of DERBY said he had a great objection to
The Earl of CARNARVON should support the the limitation to which his noble friend proposed in the
clause, for he thought it combined all the advantages 34th clause—a clause the House of Commons thought
without any of the objections which might justly be it right on two occasions to affirm in order to protec'
brought against other plans intended to effect simillr the schools. But as he was aware that ia the present state
objects. The noble earl opposite had argued that these of the house, whatever his noble friend proposed, or op
private halls would never he able to compete, even in posed, he was able to carry, lie would not waste their
the matter of cheapness, with the larger and endowed lordships' time by dividing the house against the amend
colleges ; but the Scotch and continental system of pri- went. The noble viscount said last night that the design-
vete lodging-houses in the universities, had at least been of the founders was to benefit the colleges, and not the
successful on the score of economy. It was said, again, schools. He believed that was a perversion of the rea
that the halls would he injurious to the discipline of the state of the case. In the case of Abingdon Schoo
university ; but that he must also dispute. Amongst the design of the founder was to benefit the town
the other beneficial reselts that Might be anticipated and not Pembroke College, with which it was connected
from the proposal would be the replacing of the system Tile depressed state of some of the schools arose from
of private tuition by a far sounder and more legitimate their exemption fiom the ordinary rules with regard to
practice. It would also lead to the real and practical the taking of honours, and not from any restriction with
revival of the professorial system, without which, in- regard to scholarships and fellowships.
deed, he felt that the private halls would never work The Earl of WINCHELSEA said that the bill was a
well. Lastly, as those halls would be the result of pri- gross violation of all justice. Henceforth no man would
vete enterprise, they would have an effectual guarantee leave a farthing to any charitable institutiln, for there
for their success. They would admit of gradual intro- would be no security that his bounty would not be di-
duction and of extension as the wants of the age might vetted into a differeet channel, before he was well in the
require ; and lie should, therefore, gladly give his sup- grave. He never knew a bill which did so much vie-
port to the clau-e. (Loud cheers.) lence to all justice as this cursed bill. (Laughter.) It
Lord LYTTELTON said that as the subject of these was the beginning of the separation of Cnurch am-
private halls had a considerable hearing upon the ad- State. The first day that he took a seat in that house
mission of dissenters into the universities, he would take —now some 26 years ago—the noble duke (Richmond)
this opportunity, rather than a later one, of expressing told him that he was an ultra-reformer both in Church
his views upon that important question. For his own and State. (Laughter.) On that occasion he declared
part he was prepared to assent to the admission of dis- it as his decided opinion that if ever that right rev. bench
seaters so far as this bill proposed to do it ; that was to ever gave itself a political characterethe time would come
say, he was ready to admit them to the university as when it would be the feeling of Englishmen that it would
distinct from the present colleges. (Hear, hear.) He be for the interest of the Church to separate that bench
thought that this would be a wise and proper conces- from their lordships' house—(laughter)—and that its
sion ; but, at the same time, he could certainly not occupants should retired toha theird respuecttify.ter
diieotcaeustes.
'assent to the claim which had been put forward for ad- (Laughter.)
foriltehbeheyeehtt
depend
eaedv wuaso o
it there was a
mission as a matter of absolute right. That claim had (laug(rhtfeer)l. ey mie
been grounded on the statement that the universities springing up in I:heh coupntnry that it wool,,
were national institutions ; and that the Di-senters, bsterodnebcideedlingfortheintarests of the Church if those
right rev. loyrds confined themselves more to their spiri-
being an integral part of the nation, were
therefore
1 d •and less to d
entitled to avail themselves of them. But the univer- tua duties
cities were national institutions only in
liter.) He pledged himself to say that if he were
which the Church of England was a nationalthe
i sense in (1,411 g
to submit a motion for the removal of the right rev,
nstitu-
tion ; and, therefore, to argue that the universities bench that table would not support the petitions in its
ought to be thrown open to Dissenters, would be as favour. (Loud laughter.) It was because he was a
absurd as to contend that Dissenters ought to be eligible friend to the Church, which he valued more than life
to fill Church livings. (Hear, bear.) The real ques. itself, that lie spoke thus. (Laughter.)
tion was, what had been the wishes and intentions of the The Bishop of OXFORD said he would not go to the
founders ? It had, indeed, been said that the Reforms- trouble of answering the speech which they had just
tion had introduced an altogether new state of things,
heard. He had far too deep and refined a reverence for
and then came the old question, whether the pro-Refor-
mation Church was or was not identical with the Church the honesty, piety, and holy intentions of the right rev-
of the present day. Now, he contended that the Refer- lord—(laughter)—he had far too sincere a respect for
mation had not effected such changes in the doctrines the feeling which prompted the noble earl to make the
and discipline of the Church as to make it a new one ;
and he thought it was a mere assumption to say that remarks he addressed to the house, to treat it in the only
way he could then treat it. The noble earl said that
the founders would not have assented in common with
the great majority of the clergy and people of the coup- this was the first step towards the ruin of the Church.
try by the changes which were made by the Church in whereas, if be had not mistaken the noble earl on many
her own formularies and discipline. (Hear, hear.) The former occasions, they must have got over a great
universities, therefore, ought to go with the Church ; many steps of the kind before. (Laughter.) This
and while he denied that the Dissenters had the least
was not purely a political question, as the noble earl
claim to admission as a matter of right, he must confess
his inability to perceive how their exclusion was a griev-
seemed to think, and for which he censured them for
ance. They had already one university, and as they in- taking part. If he thought that the result of this bill
eluded many persons of great opulence, they R ere able , would he to sever the connection between the LTniver
!
to found colleges of their own. Still it would no doubt sity of Oxford and the church, he (and he believed h•
be an advantage to them to be admitted to Oxford and, might say the same for his right rev, brethren) would
Cambridge, and as their admission would involve no ' endure tar extreiner penalties than the noble earl de
disadvantage to the Church he should not oppose it. • nounced againstave
that result. It was because he believeo
them before they took part in any von
(Hear, hear.) He differed altogether from the noble . that would h
earl opposite in thinking that they might be safely ad- that the church would be benefited by the measure, ri,
witted, provided that they were not-allowed to form a I well as the university, that lie supported it. (Hear.
distinct and recognised body. He thought that the hear.) With regard to the cl muse itself, whilst he ad
Cambridge plan did riot work well ; at least. when ' witted that the design of the founders with regard t
he was there, for be had seen not only Boman thel smaller schools. wasd to benefit the localities in which
Catholics and Dissenters, but even Jews, attending they were established, he maintained that the ohjec
di vine worship in the college chapels. He thought with regardTthoatthwe larger foundations wenagsetowibtehureefistptehe:
that the colleges were domestic institutions ; and that . colleges
they ought, much more than elementary schools, to to Saint Mary,Winasch.penstteeurtionHeeyofwatsheoffooupeildiieorn,,
htyhatthi2
supply moral training. But that training could not be - they interpreted the. 1
hitshaenrdesetnrincitpioeitii,
i benefitn
g out
theof thein
administered unless it was based upon definite religious . light
and,
tndwoouleldre
therefore,
rcatrhrey
doctrine. He thought that some test ought to be taken schools . of
themselves,exlie n c'
from students on matriculation ; but whatever might ' t e
itli
it
ei oh a
is
looaf, there
ven t foundersed
wholesomei f theyre ner
stimulus
id
be the proper form of that test, he was convinced that 1 R
earl referred to, what was the effect of the
signature of the Thirty-nine Articles was not. (Hear, tiou in these schools. In the case or Abingdon, whist,
hear.) It appeared to him that that test ought to be the noble
? Because the money could hardly have been so waste-
of the same nature as the terms of communion re- 'present system? It was to depress the school. Why 7
quired from a young layman. Bet the Thirty-nine '
Articles were anything rather than the rudiments of fully expended as in the holding out of a close fellow
religious teaching. (Hear, hear.) He should support -
shipin a college as being a benefit to a school like this.
the clause. If 10,000/. were given to establish a close fellowship,
it would give to the person who held it about 390/..
The Earl of DERBY said that the question bad
fbeehne
which he would probably hold till late in life. A single
put on a very different footing by the speeches ouothle
fellowship of that kind therefore would hold out a very
noble lord and the noble earl opposite. The
danger.
slight inducement to the parents in the locality to send
Marquis had treated with scorn the idea that anyitwas
their children to that school. But if the 10,0001. went
was to be apprehended from the clause ;but nowadmis.
; one of which would be vacant every year, that ywould
to establish three scholarships to beheld for three ears,
avowed that the Dissenters had a right to claim
sion without being amenable to the discipline
; give a far greater stimulus to parents to send their
Church of England. It would, no doubt, beto
children to the school. (Hear, hear.) He therefore
under any circumstargies, for the C i
;but°rnl one; f the ! maintained that they would be best cal eying out the
ne
difficult,of the
frame regulations for these private halls
obct of ,intentions of the founders by subst't • h t
stated av the .
1 uting such a sys em
things which the bill expressly
he students on public ' for the present one. (Hear.)
those rules was the attendance
thatof the
the
inmates of the After a few words from Lord WYNFORD the clause
worship. Yet they were told
worship of the with the amendment dby C •
on idlepropose Viscount arming,
private halls were not to attend
uld there he the was agreed to.
Nor WO
Church at all. (Hear, hear.)
least security as to the character of the halls ; for the Clause 32 was agreed to.
Vice-Chancellor would have to grant the licenses as a On clause 33,
He would call the The (Hear,
hear.) le Earl of DERBY objected that it passed over the
matter of course.
bench that the favoured ob-powersof• •
attention of the right rev.
of
s the establishment separate when it was proposed to alter the statutes and regula-
ject of this clause wa
very heart of the university, tions of colleges. If he had riot veto he ought at
dissenting colleges in the
lunation from Lords C least . a
..and
if _
few words of exp AR- to have the power of making objections ;
After a
LISLE and LYTTELTON, declared, in conjunction with the majority of the govern-
f NEWCASTLE said that the noble earl ing body, that any proposed regulation was inconsistent
The Duke o
had entirely misrepresented the Government.
misrepres nt. The with the interests of the college and the intentions of
,nasters of private balls must be, originally, at least, the founder, they ought to be sufficient to prevent its
nembers of the Church of England, and if' they de- taking effect. He merely threw out this suggestion for
carted from that Church their licenses aught be with- the consideration of the Government.
drawn,The intention with which these clauses were The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that in many of the
r trii ii need was simply that which had been announced;
colleges the statutes themselves precluded the visitor
i
'lan ieiy, the facilitating of edecation, and the destroy- from exercising such a power as the noble earl proposed.
'
.i of any monopoly on the Part of colleges which As to the intentions of the founder that was a question
VAS injanuu • s to (locution. The noble earl said on that had been already discussed. Some of the colleges
the previous night that, so
,fee
,from introducing a had been instituted by the founders expressly for the
poorer ~
the
Clan of Otticlentm, the clause would have precisely purpose of opposing the principles of Wicktill and e

109
. 76-33

The Bishop of OXFORD regretted that thesaAlensea
' had been inserted in the bill, fur he should have preferred
' that the university should have been left to grant the
' admission of dissenters as a matter of grace and favour.
The object of the clauses was only to remove those ob-
stacles which had hitherto prevented the university from
dealing with the question. But did the noble earl-think
that the admission of dissenters, and even of Jews into
the colleges would be a safer thing for the church or
the university than to admit them by means of privet*
halls ? (Hear.)
The Earl of DERBY considered that the admission of
Dissenters into colleges on the understanding that they
were to submit to their discipline, did not alter the cha-
racter either of those colleges or the university. litot he
considered that if Dissenters were to he, plated in belle
by thetpselves, and exempted from the getikiil rglgious
teaching of the university, it would be it flit IMO upon
the character of the university. Whir49,o4 have
been wiling to have acceded to was ' of the
Cambridge system to Oxford.
The Bishop of Sr. ASAPLI should have baea.glad to
have had su iscription to the Thirty-nine Aiticles at ma-
tricwation abolished ; not so much with referencelo the
case of Dissenters, but bee ehe did not think ft was
proper to ask a boy coining from school to say that be
assented to them. When he bad to matriCulitte a young
man, he used to say to him, " You are not going to as-
sent to the Thirty-nine Articles because you understand
them—Oaught,r)—but you are goinz to declare that you
have no oteection to them." He thought that the exa-
minationivai,,e eirnertchi!ee rr, hi inrttyl:
univAerrstiitc3l,e,sf
,w)rays
oounnegofmtehne
omffieisnt
came there very ignorant of Christianity, and very indis-
posed to study it. He had known cases in xvhich a man
had on his death bed thanked God that he had been com-
p-lied to study the Articles, because he had then for the
first time obtained that knowledge which concerned sal-
vation. What he should have proposed was that the
university should grant only honorary degrees to persons
who were indisposed to sign the Ankles.

The Duke of ARGYLL wished to impress upon their
lordships the importance of any religious body placing
the most liberal construction on their rules, so as to
-tdinit Dissenters, provided that the general management
and discipline were not altered. He thought the clause
would very materially strengthen the Church of Eng-
land.

The Earl of HARROWBy supported the clause.
The Bishop of RIPON expressed his dissent from the
clause.
After some further discussion, the clause was agreed to.
On clause 46 a division was taken.
For the clause
Against it 47-26
The clause was then added to the bill.
The rest of the clauses were agreed to, and the house
resumed.
The other orders of the day having been disposed of,
their lordships adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Lords' amendment to the Rannow Reclamation
Bill and the Traethbach Bridge and Road Bill were con-
sidered and agreed to.
On the motion that the Lords' amendments to the
Nliddlesex Industrial Schools Bill be considered and
agreed

Lord D. STUART moved that the consideration of
the amendments be postponed until this day three months.
Re made that motion because the Lords' had struck
out of the bill the provisions which it originally
contained for enabling offenders to obtain religious in-
struction, notwithstanding that they dissented from the
Established Church. Offenders of all denominations
were entitled to the consolations of their own religious
teachers, and it was nothing less than an act of bigotry
and intolerance to refuse them that consolation. There
were other amendments of the kind which he objected
to, but it was the striking out of this provision relative
to the religious instruction that he principally found
fault with, and since the amendment made by the Lords
,iad made the bill worse, which he had always objected
to, he had no alternative but to move that the Lords'
amendments be considered this day three months.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY seconded the amendment, be-
lieving that the reformation of juvenile offeuders should
Fee made the subject of a general Government measure,
and not dealt with in an isolated niatMer, throwing the
expense of the reformatory schools upon the particular
listricts in which they were established. The time had
gone by for tolerating religious bigotry, it should be
discountenanced no matter from what denomination it
came ; and he trusted the house would reject these
amendments of the Lords, as they were a complete
,_rnbodunent of the spirit of Protestant bigotry directed
against the civil and religious liberty of Roman Catholics.
Mr. N EWDEGATE supported the amendments,
believing that it was at variance with the interest of the
State to recognise the authority of Roman Catholic
drissts, even in a private bill, as this one undoubtedly
was. The bill, as it had been amended, would be most
useful and salutary.
Mr. J. BA LL opposed the passing of the bill with the
clause appended to it, by the committee of the Lords.
Sir G. GREY explained the coarse taken by the corn-
•inittee of the Lords in reference to this bill. He read a
portion of 7th Geo. IV. c. 74, which enacted that three
chaplains shall be appointed fur every county prison in
Ireland, one Protestant, one Presbyterian, and one
Roman Catholic, and which further provided for the
celebration of divine worship according to each of those
three forms of worship every Sunday in those prisons. He
was prepared to disagree with the Lords' amendment,
but he was not disposed to support the motion of Lord
0. Stuart as it would have the effect of rejecting the bill
together. At the same time, seeing the pro,pect there
was of the passing of the Juvenile Offenders Bill which
contained the provision struck out of this bill, if the
house thought the Lords would not be induced to recon-
sider their decision, perhaps the best course would be to
reject these amendments altogether.
Mr. MILES opposed the motion to reject the bill.
Lord D. STUART said after what had fallen from the
right hon. baronet the Secretary of State for the colo-
nies, he was prepared to change his motion for another,
namely, that the house disagree with the Lords' amend-
ment.

Mr. M. MILNES hoped the bill would be withdrawn.
Mr. LUCAS argued that the object of the Lords'
amendments was to change the character of the bill from
a reformatory bill to a proselytising bill, and therefore
he called upon the house not to reject the bill alto-
gether, but simply to disagree with the Lords' amend-
ments. •
Lord D. STUART, as the member in charge of the
hill, begged the house to allow him to remark that this
debate was another illustration of 'how religious differ-
ences could stand in the way of useful legislation. (Hear,
hear.) However, all he asked the house to do was, not
to reject the Lords' amendments, as that course would
he tantamount to throwing out the bill for the session.
Mr. ADDERLEY said, the clause which had been
struck out by the Lords was wholly impracticable; if it
lad remained in the bill the measure would have been
iselsss, and although he was by no means deficient in
religious tolerance, he thought the Lords had
acted wisely in rejecting the clause. (Hear, hear.)
Cho clause was simply this ; it empowered the children
,f all denominations to be instructed by their own re-
Agious teachers, according to the religious persuasion of
:heir parents, so that, it a child's parents were to pro-
-e" infidelity, this clause would insist upon the child
being brought up in these reformatory schools to entertain
the ,erine opinions. (Cheers )
After some observations from Colonel Blair, Mr.
Williams, and Mr. Dunlop, the amendment that the
Lords' amendments be considered this day three months
vas withdrawn.
A portion of the Lords' amendments, which were of
a verbal nature, were then agreed to.
Lord D. STUART moved to disagree with the Lords'
tmendinents, which prevented children of other religious
denominations than the Established Church from having
iivine worship celebrated in these schools according to
their own faith.
Sir J. PA KINGTON said if the house rejected these
amendments the bill was lost for this session.
Lord J. RUSSELL, did not think so, the Lords
might be induced to Ireconsider their amendments, and
since he thought children of all denominations. were en-
titled to the religious instruction of their own pas
he could not agree with the Lords in their amendments.tc
After some observations from Mr.
Se•er.eer, the
house divided, when there appeared—
For the Lords' amendments ..........•• 151.
Against them .. 124-27
The lords' amendments were accordingly agreed to.
There was another amendment of a less important
character, which Lord Dudley Stuart moved the house to
disagree with.
The house again divided, when there appeared—
Forool
the Lords' amendiuept
Against them
Majority ... 135
The Lord'amendments were then agreed to.
Lord D. STUART said he was informed that an hon.
gentleman gave his who vote with the ayes gave his vote
with the noes. (Cries of "Name.") The hon. member
for Cheltenham—(cries of " Evesham," and laughter)—
Mr. Grenville Berkeley.
RETURN'S.
Unopposed returns relating to Irish whiskey were moved
for by Mr. COGAN.
TUE INNS OF COURT.
Mr. EWART begged to ask his hon. and learned friend
the Attorney-General what progress had been made in their
inquiry by the commission appointed to inquire into the
inns of court, and whether thero was any chance of their
making a report.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL begged to state in reply
that the commissioners were diligently prosecuting the inquiry, and were in the habit of sitting two days in every
week. They had prygro.isod a considerable way is the ia-