The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-05 00:00:00

MILITIA BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. HENLEY asked for some explanation a the pro-
visions of the bill.

Mr. S. HERBERT said that under the clauses of the
old Militia Act the militia could only be embodied in
case of invasion or danger thereof. Whenever war existed
there might be said to be danger of invasion, though not
any imminent danger ; and on that account it was thought
desirable to give the power of embodying the militia in
case of war. Since the bill was brought in, he had received
several applications from militia staffs asking to be em-
bodied, and expressing willingness to serve in any part of
the country. The best spirit prevailed, and Government
would take care So to carry out the act as to cause the
least possible inconvenience to the parties concerned.
Mr. RU.3IIE-urged the importance of the militia and the
army being under the same general authority. The time
had come when the jealousy which created those different
authorities ought to cease. The militia was not under the
command of the Secretary at War, but of the lords lieu-
tenant. It had originated in jealousy of the Crown; but
no such feeling now existed. A great amount of money
was expended on the militia, which might be lessened if
all were placed under one authority. He would abolish
the militia, and increase the regular force by the same
number of men. The enormous cost of the militia was

highly discreditable to the country, at a time when the
b=st application of the public funds ought to be made. He
protested against the principle on which the militia was
conducted, and should take objection to the bill at a future
stage.
The bill was then read a second time.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill, com-
mencing with the latter part of the 6th clause, which de-
termines the constitution of the council.

Sir W. Heatheete, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and
Sir J. Pakington, also rose at the same moment, claiming
to move : mendments ; and for some time the confusion
was so great that the Chairman hardly knew how to pro-
cee‘ 1. At length,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obtained
a hearing, and said that he could not consent to accept the
clause as it was left by the committee on their last sitting.
It was now proposed that a professor of theology should
be elected by the professors as a whole. To this he ob-
jected, as the professors generally were not a fit bogy to
elect the professor of theology. He ought rather to be
chosen by the university at large. It was absurd to set a
professor of anatomy, of Sanscrit, of geology, of chemistry,
and other things,. to elect a professor of theology.
The words objected to were then put and negatived
without a division.
Sir J. PAKINGTON moved to substitute for the word
" congregation" the word " convocation." He viewed the
former body with great jealousy and dislike, and wished to
see it got rid of from the bill. It was a body hitherto un-
known to the working of the university, and he believed
that it would have a very prejudicial effect. He thought,
that party feeling might be brought into play to a danger-
ous extent by this measure. There was great danger in
his opinion that the tractarian party might exercise their
influence under this clause, and the university should not
be exposed to such a risk. (Hear, hear.) He was of
opinion that the convocation should have the power of
taking part in these elections, and would therefore move
that' the word " convocation" should be substituted for
" congregation."
Lord J. RUSSELL said the object of the amendment
was to exclude altogether from the bill the congregation as
proposed by the government. The substance of the amend-
ment was that there should be no such body as that which
the Government proposed. He thought the real question
in this respect was whether or not it was desirable to
have a body composed of all these residents in Oxford
who wore conversant with the business of teaching,
whether they taught as professors or tutors, or whether
they were there for the purpose of study. This was a
very material part of the bill, and one which the Govern-
ment would be disposed to press on the committee. The
right hon. gentleman said that congregation would be
carried away by party feelings of various kinds, especially
on subjects of religion. He heard with considerable dis-
may statements to the same effect, but in still stronger
language, from the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr.
Henley), and the hon member for Stroud. The right hon.
gentleman seemed to admit the truth of the statement
made by the hon. member for Stroud on a former occasion.
He (Lord J. Russell) could not pretend to deny that
statement, but if it was true, then the case seemed to
him to be hopeless altogether, because if these persons who
were the principal persons engaged in teaching in the Uni-
versity of Oxford, were so deeply imbued with party feel-
ings—varying from day to day—at one time possessed of
a tractarian, and at another time of a rationalistic spirit—
he should look with apprehension to the future education
of the youth of the country. If the case of that university
was as represented, he thought it should be put under the
management of another body altogether, or should be abol-
ished entirely. (Hear, hear.) If the University of Oxford
which was an institution of ancient fame, and which, he
thought, had hitherto maintained a consistent spirit in our
history, though it was not a spirit which he much admired
—which Lord Chatham accused of Jacobitism, and which
in later times exhibited a strong conservative spirit—if it
was true that such an institution might change from day
to day—and that the statements of the right hon, gentle-
man and the hon. member for Stroud seemed to support
that allegation—if it might bring up the youth of this
country, its gentry, and its clergy inthe rationalistreligion
of the German theologians, what could he feel but despair.
But he came to the conclusion that these statements were
not a fair representation. His own opinion was that those
persons who made teaching a business -who studied it in
all its aspects, and who, were acquainted with the practical
effects of modes of teaching, were the fittest to be entrusted
with authority. When questions of improvements in edu-
cation had to be considered, it seemed to him that it would
be an inconvenience and a disadvantage to bring together
from various parts of the country a body of 3,000 persons,
about 2,800 of whom had not turned their minds to the
subject of education for perhaps 10 cr 20 or 10 years. Per-
sons who had been brought up in the University of Oxford
some 30 or 40 years ago, would have the opinions and
principles which they imbibed there at that time ; and
if they cal!ed up from Cornwall or Northumberland
some five hundred clergymen who had not attended to the
subject of education at all, and who might have imbibed
prejudices f, ern some circular letter telling them that some
dreadful innovation was to be made in order to bar by
their votes the improvements in education which might be
proposed by those whose lives wore devoted to the subject
of education, it would in his opinion be a great misfof tune.
(Hear.) He hoped, therefore, the committee would adhere
to the plan of congregation. He would say admit all
those who were resident in Oxford, and who were compe-
tent to give an opinion from their daily acquaintance with
the subject, and do not allow their votes to be swamped by
the votes of these who were constantly absent from the
university. (Elesir.) At all events he hoped that the repre-
sentations made of the dreadful state into which Oxford
had fallen and the great danger there was that it might be
carried away by Some rationalist doctrines were unfounded.
Mr. HENLEY said that the noble lord had given a
colouring and something more to the statements he made
the other night. Ho did not say that Oxford was likely to
be led away by rationalist views. The hon. member for
Stroud, indeed, said that something like that might hap-
pen. But if they narrowed the ruling body to a small sec-
tion of not more than 100 persons, they might find that
number of persons in Oxford, as they might be found in
any other place,
who might give an impetus to such prin.
ciples. (Hear, hear.) He did not accosts the university
at large of countenancing any such principles, but there had
been suite sectione floating in the university from.tinao to