The Sun.
London, England, 1823-05-27 00:00:00

himself with some surprise, and said that he did not see how hood. But with every disposition to come at the truth, lam a
the Heads could have a right to nominate. very poor casuist, and it is, perhaps, on this account that I
The account which I have now given of my conversation.with have not yet discovered the possibility of giving an affirmative
Dr. French is not new. I have constantly stated it to my friends answer to these questions.
in the University ; and when I was in London last year, to as- Such are the observations connected with one part of our
silt in preparing my affidavit, I stated it to Mr. Tindal. He, case, which I have thought it right to address to the Mem.
however, advised that it should not form any part of my affida- hers of the Senate. Some of those whom I address may, per.
vit, because it would be considered to convey an imputation on haps, think that we must be in the wrong, because we are op.
the conduct of the Vice-Chancellor. posed by so venerable and experienced a body. But I request
On this account, and on this account alone, it was withheld them to consider, that all the Heads of Houses have not
from the Court; though another of our legal advisers did then, been ranged against us. The Master of Trinity College,
and does now, hold the opinion, that the conversation with Dr. on motives most honourable to himself, never took any
French ought to have formed a part of my affidavit, part in, the transaction ; and the Masters of Magda.
The preceding statement will, to any candidandlittprejudic. lene? Cams, Trinity Hall, and Queen's, were not in the tTni.
ed man, be a sufficient answer to my first question, via. What versity when the question of nomination first arose. On this
did Dr. French understand by the words of the gnice when he subject I may refer to the 25th page of Professor Christian's
proposed them to the Senate? pamphlet.—The 334th page of our Statutes prove, that Heads
To the second question (vie. What did the Senate under- of Houses may sometimes err, even after " mature consults.
stand by the words of the grace when it was accepted and rati- tion," and on this very question of their rights of nomination.
tied ?) I may content myself with a very short answer. I have On some important points connected with the cause which is
sworn, that I voted for the grace of Dr. French, under the ex- pending, the Court has declared them to be in error. For they
pectation of its being followed by an open poll, and that I verily have been told—that they are not the interpreters of the Sta.
believed it was passed by the Senate m the same general ex- tutes when their personal interests are concerned—and that the
pectation. The assertion ought to have been put in stronger King in Council is not the Visitor of the University.
language. For Ido not believe that one single Member of the I do, however, allow that we are opposed by persons vene.
Senate attended on the occasion who did not expect, as a mat- rable for their learning and experience. For all this we were
ter of course, that the grace would be followed by some form of disposed to give them full credit, without giving them the
open election. It is well known that the grace passed without trouble of proving it by the formalities of an oath. But
any division ; and a few days afterwards, when the Members if, with all their experience, they have not been able to bring to
of the Senate first heard of the intended nomination, public light a single fact with which we were not before acquainted,
meetings were held, at which several men attended, who were andif they have not brought forward a single argument which (if
favourable to the claims of the Heads. Yet no one ventured to the Court allow into file new affidavits)we do not believe ourselves
assert, that either he himself, or any other person, had put a ableto refute; we may well rejoice in the goodness of our cause. 1
construction on the grace, at the time it passed, different from am not now writing so much on the law, as on themoralityof the
that which we were endeavouring to enforce. If any one desires question ; and, whatever the Courts of Law may decide, the
any further evidence, I can only refer him to the twenty-fourth equity of the case is indisputably on our side. This is a great
page of Professor Christian's pamphlet. advantage, and I hope that every Member of the Senate consi-
But it may be asked, did the Heads of Houses consent to ders it more than equal to that which our opponents enjoy, in
this construction ? I answer in the affirmative, because it was having entrenched themselves in all the formalities of legal
impossible for them not to have known the sense in which 'the possession.
grace was accepted by the Senate ; and if they dissented from Soon after Mr. Henslow was admitted to the Professorship of
that meaning they ought, at least, to have recorded their non Mineralogy, it was resolved at a public meeting of the Mem.
placets. Again, it is the majority of votes that ratifies a grace, bens of the Senate, " That the legal proceedings against
and the Heads have .only single votes like other Members of the Heads of Colleges should be conducted on the principles
the Senate. of amity and courtesy." I am not aware that we have since
But it may be said that they were misled by Dr. French's that time offended against the letter or spirit of the resolution.
notice. This we day, because the notice was exactly in the Should any one object that lam now acting against the spirit
usual form. Their claim to the right of nomination was with- of the resolution, lam bound to state, that lam acting on my
out any precedent, lounges unexpected. They were therefore own sense of propriety, without having been influenced by the
specially bound to see that the Senate was not deceived by rani- opinion of any other person. Amity and courtesy, however ad.
fying a grace in an old form, which was not to be followed by mirable in the conduct of any cause, ought never to stand di.
the old practice. rectly in the way of truth. Indeed, I nicy assert that I have
Moreover, the Heads had, the power of dictating to the Uni- only written what I thought necessary, in order to place the
versity. For, by circumstances almost unprecedemed, not less equity of the cause in its proper light, and that it was not my
than three of them were Members of the Caput : and, therefore, intention unnecessarily to hurt the feeling of any one ; and lam
each- of the three had the constitutional power of throwing out conscious that I deserve credit for the assertion. If, however,
any grace by his single veto. Any one of them might have the facts which are here stated, and the circumstances under
shall go down to the Senate unless our rights be distinctly pro- them before the public, I have nothing else to offbr in my yin-
said, we mean to claim the right of nomination, and no grace which they happened, be not an 'ample apology for laying
tected. But no question of the kind was agitated; and the dication. With this observation I shall conclude my remarks,
three Heads did by their silence in the Caput, and subsequently and have only to request of the Members of the Senate to give
them the attention which they deserve, and to pardon me for
by their
to ygotvtees the
tSrhaet en , (
posed .
any I have the honour to be,
thtrer eivserynoodniveiwsihono,a)uvienrtdusallisys"be-- having attempted to detain them so long.
come parties to the ratification of the grace. Whether
other Heads of Colleges did attend I know not. Bat their ab. , Gentlemen,
sence can be no reason for putting on our grace a construction Your most faithful servant.,
different from that which we intended when we voted for it. A. SEDGWICK.
From what has been stated, it is impossible to doubt the sense
in which the grace was passed by the Senate. Considering also
the fact, that in passing any grace, the Heads only give their
votes in their capacity of Members of the Senate—that it is the
majority of votes alone which gives the sanction,—that the
grace originated with the Vice-Chancellor—and that three, out
Caeges were, in a manner
of the six Members of the Caput, were Heads of Colleges—l
venture to assert, that the Heads of
the most unequivocal, parties to the ratification of the grace,
which founded the Professorship of Mineralogy, and in that
very sense and construction which we are endeavouring to put
upon it.
It now only remains for me to consider, whether the words of
the grace have been used before, and have received any inter-,
pectation by the practice of the University. This subject has
been argued at considerable length in the King's Bench, and
we wait for the decision of the Court. Under these circum-
stances, I think it best to limit my observations to a very short
statement of facts.
Our grace was' avowedly copied word for word fmm the
foundation of the Botanical chair. That foundation has been
followed by only two elections, the second Professor being still
living, and both these elections were by open poll, without any
additional grace. This was denied in Court; but so feebly,
, that the dental did not, I think, produce any impression on the
Judges. To put the matter out of all doubt, I bad a ammo-
nication with -Professor Martyn, and his answer is now before
me, from which I extract the following words : " I looked
among my papers with the hope of finding some memorandum
on the subject of my own election—but I cannot find any. My
recollection, however, is clear, that my election was by open
vote, more burgensinm."—So much for the facts of this case.
and so much for the denial of our opponents. And what do we
ask, except that our election should follow the precedent from
which it was copied ?—The words more burgensium only-mean
I open poll, and had never been used in any University document
at the time of Professor Martyn's election. But because the
University thought proper afterwards to adopt the words more
bargensunn in a particular case, where there was a difficulty in
proceeding to an election, are we to be told that no other words
could confer the right of open election, and that the older pre-
cedents are null and void?? The election by open poll was the
oldest constitutional mode of electing to the higher offices of
the University, and was known in every period of our academi-
cal history ; though the contrary appears to be asserted in the
affidavit of Dr. French.
Again, the foundation of the Anatomical chair was exactly
like our own, and the five elections which immediately followed
were by open poll. This fact was also feebly denied ; but the
proof of it Is established by the Registrary's book, and by the
assertiens of all the older members of the University who have
any knowledge of the history of our elections. I myself spoke
on this subject to Dr. Ainslie, of London, who was a candidate
for the Anatomical chair in the year 1785, and he confirmed the
statement I am now making.
At each of the three last elections to this chair, the Univer-
sity did not, however, go to the poll, without passing a
that the votes should be given " more burgensium." Reesee
graces only gave a higher sanction to the 'old practice, and
ought to form no argument, at least, for nomination by the
Heads. If the whole, history of these graces were before
the Court, it would I doubt not, expose a system of aca-
demical tactics which does no credit to the party which has
adopted it.
The two graces introduced in the election to the Anatomical
chair, in the years 1014 and 1817, carry the stamp of irregula-
rity in their face. They were introduced without notice, and
'passed without the general knowledge of the Senate. I was
myself a Member of the Senate, and attended at both those
elections ; yet I never heard a word of the graces in question ;--
-voLdtti any one of my friends then suspect that there was any
novate.
"•-• tha earlier modes of filling the office. Still less
in
did we suspect tnat were afterwards to be made
the precursors of more imp7acreet the rights
of open election. If I mistake not, they were brotVit
by some individual for the sole purpose of vitiating those pre-
cedents, against which he dared net at the time commence a
direct attack.
Be this as it may, I have brought forward enough to shew,
that in the two Professorshipswhich were established by a grace,
exactly like our own, the elections have always been by open
poll ; and in seven instances out of ten, exactly in the form for
which we contend in the King's Bench, and exactly in the
form intended by Dr. French himself when the grate was pro.
posed, and by the Senate when the Grace was ratified by an
unanimous vote of the two houses.
After this explanation of the meaning of our grace, can any
one read without astonishment, one part of Mr. Alderson's ar-
guments in the King's Bench, [See THE SUN Newspaper for
play 8, 1823,1 in which he contends, from the words of the
original notice, (and also from a subsequent grace, not recorded
in the affidavit, which was thrown out by a very great majority
of the Senate,) that the University has put a construction on the
words of the grace of foundation brought in by Dr. French,
which was never intended by their author ? If, however,
we turn to the affidavit of Dr. French, we shall find,,
that this is not thrown out in the wantonness of legal ar-
gument ; but that it is fairly drawn as an inference from
his words. I should, therefore, wish to ask Doctor French,
whether this passage in his affidavit was drawn up with the in.
tendon of its becoming the foundation of Mr. Alderson's argu.
ment on the meaning of the grace. I call upon him to disavow
the inference of his own Counsel. Oth!rgeise, will he not himself
he implicated in an assertion which is at direct variance with'
facts which I have detailed, and which I am ready, when pro..
perly called upon, to confirm with an oath ?
It what has now been staled to the Members of the Senate be
true, and I know that it is true, was it right for Dr. French to
join any set of men, whatever might be their rank and charge.
ter, who endeavoured to force upon the University a construe.
tion of his grace. which was at variance with hie own meaning
when he proposed it, and, with the understanding of the Senate
when they accepted and ratified it ?
I should also wish to ask of the Heads of Houses, whether
they, as Members of the Senate, and parties in the ratification
of the grace, had aright afterwards to come- into the Senate,
and demand that .a sense should be put upon that graCe which
no one contemplated at the time when it 'was voted unanimous.
ly by the two Houses? lam not now using the word right as
it may be interpreted in a Court of Law, but of right as it ought
to be understood among the members of: a Chr:atian brother.

LONDON MARKETS.

IMPORTATIONS OF GRAIN LAST WEEF..
English. Irish. Foreign
•
Wheat lO,OOl 15
Barley
Malt
Oats
Rye 8
Beans
Peas
Tares
Rapeseed 2O
51,istartl
Snots 216
Plum*
Drank
Linseed

101

0 ............ 4•••,....•••

I
- 30
- 1,52

SEEDS, May 26.
Red Clover(Foreign) 14:24s—fine, 37s—new —s per cwt.
Ditto English 0L....16s 94s 99s—new, 34s 46s 49s 52s 93s
White ditto 27s 37$—fine, 51s 60s 63s
Trefoil .... per cwt.... ICs ISs—fine 151 17$ 19s per cwt.
Eibgrass ... 9Bs 36s—fine, 42s 451
Carraway Seeds 541 56s 60s
Coriander do lOs 19s 14s
Spring Tares ... sod—sOd —s
Cinque Foin
Rye-Grass ..
Canary per qr —l 43s to 48s Od per qr.
White Mustard Seed iOs to Hand
Brown ditto
9s to 15s Od
Winter Tares 24s to 30s Od per qr.
Rape iced . . 231 to 2610 s 271 301 per Last.
Turnip Seeds. , —s Od 6s to 7s 6d pr. bosh.
Linseed

.NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL MAii.KETS, May 46.
By the Carcase.
Beef.. ...... 25 lid to 31 13t1 Veal 3s Od to 4s 4d
Mutton 3s Od to 4s 4d I Purk 2s Btl to 41 Od
Lamb, 3s 4d to 5s Od.

sT.J AMEN'S HAY MAKKET, May 24..
N. Hay 31 3s Od to 41
.101 Od Clovtr, 31 121 to 41 10s Od
Old Hay 01 010 d to 01 Os Od f Stlaw 21 2s 04 to 21 176 04

SMITHFIELD.
Old Hay .... SI 15s od to 41 51 Od—Average, 31 121 OIL
Straw 2! 5s Od to. 21 lOs Od--Average, 21 4s Od
Clover 9l Os Od to 41 lOs oo—Average, 31 15s od
WHITE:CHAPEL.
Hay 3l 15s od to 41 los oil—Average, 31 181 Od
New ditto Ol Os Od to 01 Os od—Average, 01 Os Od
Straw ll 18$ Od to 21 14s od—Average, 21 54 od
Clover...— 4l Os Od to 41 18s Od Average. 41 Bs 04.

MICE OE HOPS, per t;wt., May 24.
I -
Pockets. Bags.
Kent .. 21 16s a3l lbt aOl Os Kent .. 41 6s a3lSs a 4110*
Sussex .. 21 12sa 31 Os a3l bs Sussex 21 2s a2l 8s a'2l 19*
Essex .. 21 14s a3lhs a 81 18s Essex.. 21 4s a9l 16s aBl 3s,
Farnham, tine, el es to 81 Oa--S Bond. 81 lOs to 61 Os

YRICF,S OF TALLOW, sO,
Town Talhiw 49s Od —a od
Yellow Russia 38s Od —a Od
White ditto •• 36s 64 Od
.Soap 36s od Od.
Melting Stott 28s 011.—s Od
Ditto Rough.. las od—s Od
PRICE OF CANDLES, rani
Price of c.:aintles, per closeii
6(1 per been allover

,AP, &c, per 1121b.—May 23.
Yellow Soap 706
Mottled yes
Curd US
Graves lased
Good Dregs 6106

NS TAI4I.OW CHANDLEa's HALI.
as od—Moulds, toy od.
ed for ready money.

Plti"?* RAW .Al7l)et Stone of 61h,--May 33.
Price of Thnow (as stated by the Tallow Matters). 21 3d

COUNTRY

hl A RKET.

Gumuroho
Wheat per isi Os tv 101 us
New V 4, beat.. —I Os to Os
Oats, per tly as to ti 1 is
iSQW A 11110.... 01 OS SO 01 Os

_
s.T• May 17.
Bartz y, llevt, 11 IQs to 1118 s
plexus, per qr. II las to it as
Pease, perqr. 11 las to 21 QS
Rye, per qr. 01 Os tool Os

COAL MARICET. May 96.
Ships at market. Shirt #old. Price.
Newcastle ... . ....
5 Stmtleriand ........ .......... 8a 4422: 90t1d

Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at thr Suit*
OrkstC, 112, Strand, by J. B. G*auTAIRo.