The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-16 00:00:00

BISHOPRIC OF SYDNEY.

In answer to a question from Lord REDEBD ALE.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE entered into an explana-
tion of the circumstances from which delay had occurred
in the appointment of a successor to the late Bishop of
Sydney, who died in England on the 20th of February,
1853.. He had himself recommended the translation of
Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand, but the Bishop only a
few days ago declined to accept the appointment. Under
these circumstances, he anticipated that a clergyman
resident in the colony would be promoted to the vacant
metropolitan see.
Lord' REDESDALE was understood to express him•
self satisfied with the explanation.
Their lordships adjourned at eight o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.
NEW MEMBER.
Lord J. RUSSELL took the oaths and his seat on his
ro-election for the city of London. The noble lord, who
was received with loud cheers, was introduced by Sir C.
Wood and Lord Harry Vane,

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Lords' Amendments to the following bills were con
sidered and agreed to :—Aocrington Gas and Waterworks;
Doncaster Cemetery ; Havering, Dagenham, &c. Sewers.
The Caledonian Railway (Wishaw and Coltness line) Bill
was read a third time and passed.
Mr. GE A CH moved that the Sydenham andFarnborough
Railway Bill be recommitted to the former committee,
with leave to sit and proceed on Monday next.
Mr. JACKSON seconded the motion.
Mr. JAMES MACGREGOR defended the course taken
by the South Eastern Railway Company in this matter.
Lord H. VANE supported the motion for the recom-
mittal of the bill.
After a few words from Mr. RUM,
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. GEACH then moved that the West London and
Crystal Palace Railway (Bromley and Farnborough) Bill
be recommitted to the former committee, with leave to sit
and proceed on Monday next.
The motion was agreed to.
PETITIONS.
Petitions were presented by Mr. JAS. M`GREGOR, from
Leeds, praying for closing public houses on Sundays; by
Mr. ROEBUCK, from Sheffield, praying the house to take
measures to assist Poland in regaining her nationality;
by Mr. VERNON SMITE, from the town council of
Northampton, praying the house not to allow any
interference with municipal corporations or their police ;
by Lord HOTHAM, from Driffield, against the sale of in-
toxicating liquors on Sundays ; by Mr. BRIGHT, from two
poor men, parishioners of Ringmoor, in the county of
Southampton, and that for non-payment of church rates,
and kept imprisoned for 19 hours without food, that
next morning they were sent to Winchester gaol and
treated as common felons—the sums being ls. 9d. and ls.
100. demanded of them, and that they were only liberated
n uir
by public subscription. The petitioners prayed for iy
into the matter.
OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL.
The house then went into committee on the new Oxford
University bill.
Clause 1 was agreed to.
On clause 2,
Mr. E. DENISON called upon the noble lord the Presi-
dent of the Council to disclose the names of the persons
who were to be appointed commissioners under the bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, in addition to those already
mentioned in th . former bill, it was proposed to appoint
two other commissioners. Two gentlemen had been re-
quested to undertake the office, but their answers had not
yet been received: and he could not, he
trefore, give
their names. He proposed to add their names to the
bill in bringing up the report.
Mr. HENLEY asked if the number of the commissioners
was to be limited.
Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied in
the affirmative, and the limitations would rest with the
house.
Mr. WALPOLE thought there was every prospect of
this bill passing into a law this session, as, in its amended
shape, it was merely an enabling bill.
Mr. HORSFALL remarked that this was not the bill of
the Government, but the amendment bill of the right hon.
gentleman opposite. There was, perhaps, no necessity for
discussing the clauses which were disposed of by the for-
mer bill, but at the same time be felt that it would have
been much better to have had a compulsory than an
enabling bill. This bill, as altered, was an entirely differ-
ent measure to that which ho consented to on the second
reading.
Sir W. HEATHCOTE insisted that many of the clauses
of the bill were of a compulsory character, but, at the
same time, as amended, he thought the bill would be much
more acceptable to the University than the bill first intro-
duced.
The clause was then agreed to, as were clauses from
three to twenty-nine both inclusive without discussion.
On clause 30,
Mr. MOWBRAY suggested that, as the university would
not have sufficient experience of the working of new halls
by Michaelmas, 1855, so as to form statutes for them, there
should be an extension of the time.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
there was no need of that, for under clause 38 the univer-
sity would have the power of making alterations in any
statute.
Mr. HEYWOOD proposed to strike out the words " in-
struction and" from the clause. The effect of the omission
of these words would be to leave the students to select
their own tutors, and to prepare for examination in the
best way they could. At present the university know no-
thing of what was done in the halls, and thirty per oont.
of those who came up for their decrees failed—principally
in divinity and Latin composition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER heard the
amendment with surprise, and hoped it would not be per-
severed in. In a place of instruction, whatever else they
might control, he should have thought that they ought at
least to control instruction. It would be absurd to allow
persons to be matriculated and entered as members of a
university over whose instruction it had no control what-

ever.
After a few words from Mr. PLIILLIAIORE and Mr. FEL-
LATT, the amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. HENLEY wished to know what was the meaning
of the term " great halls."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the