The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-21 00:00:00

and Presbyterian Universitiesnot produced their
share ?

‘ Viiere fortes ante Agamemnon Multi."

Might not the age of Louis XIV. be com-
pared with the most shining period of English
literature, and in what age can England boast
of a brighter galaxy of talent than that which
adorned the northern part of the kingdom to-
wards the end of the last century ? At that
period men arose eminent in almost every
walk of science and literature, yet they
had not an English university education,
nor Were required to attend theological lec-
tures, or sign tests of faith. The force of
public opinion, and the expediency and justice
of extending education to the greatest number
of the inhabitants, will finally carry the measure.
While we support the claims of the Dissenters,
we should be the last to afford them the means,
if such means could be afforded, of destroying
Protestantism in the Universities. Give them
education there, and degrees ; but while there
is such an intimate connection between. the
State, the Church, and the Universities, let all
the professors and teachers be members of the
Established Church.

In the House of Lords last night, Lord
WHARNCLIFFE moved an Address to the
KING, having for its object the appointment of
a Commission to inquire into the state of the
Gaols of Great Britain, and to ascertain what
alterations might be necessary for insuring a
uniformity of prison discipline. The question was
met both by the LORD CHANCELLOR and
Lord MELBOURNE in a spirit of frankness and
liberality, and in consequence of a statement
made by the latter, Lord WHARNCLIFFE was
induced to withdraw his motion and leave the
business in the hands of the Government.

We have not the vanity to think that, by the
observations which we made in a former num-
ber upon the course taken in the House of
Peers, with reference to the London and West-
minster Bank Bill, we contributed in any degree
to the refusal of the judges to answer any
questions that might be proposed to them,
with respect to it, but we are heartily glad that
they did decline. We trust that this occur-
rence will have its due operation in the further
progress of the bill. We do not know why
this bill, like every one of the kind, of which
there have been many, should not be sent to a
private committee. We have not heard it con-
' tended that the London and Westminster Bank
is an illegal association ; and, if it be not ille-
gal, we are altogether at a loss to understand
why it should not receive the facility of suing
and being sued as other joint-stock companies
have done.

We observe the Attorney-General has given
notice of a motion for leave to bring in a bill
to empower his Majesty to grant to certain
associations the right of suing and being sued
by their officers, and other privileges, under
conditions for the security of their creditors.
If this is meant to relate to joint-stock banking
companies, established pursuant -to the Act
' passed in 1826, we would request, of these
companies to consider whether any charter,
subject to conditions, can be of any use to
them, seeing that by that Act they already have
the right of suing and being sued in the name
of one of their public officers, and whether
they will submit to any compulsory conditions
whatever. They have been established pur-
suant to an Act of Parliament, and are entitled

to a continuance of the rights granted to them
by that Act, without any other conditions than
are therein mentioned. We shall forbear from
saying more until we shall see the bill meant to
be introduced by the Attorney-General.

Some weeks since we-reported the speeches
delivered at the meeting of the Protestant So-
ciety, at which Lord DURHAM presided. One
of the earliest speakers at that meeting was a

Dr. BROWN, who expressed sentiments, in re.
ference to the Dudley election, Lord J. Rus.

sELL's election for the county of Devon, the

conduct of the Dissenters on that occasion,
and the Marriage Bill, at which we ven-
tured to express ' surprise. The advice
given by that learned gentleman to the
Dissenters, in reference to future elections,
was very properly noticed by Mr. BAINES, the
worthy and intelligent member for Leeds, who
advised a totally different course. That ad-
vice, and similar counsel given by older, and
we think wiser, friends to the Dissenters than
the learned gentleman, who seemed to wish
that the Dissenters should abandon their
old connections, and rather vote for such
men as Mr. HAWKEs, the Tory, than
Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, the enlightened,
upright, and zealous Reformer, was preferred by
the Dissenters -of Edinburgh and Cambridge,
who, greatly to their own honour and the pub-
lic advantage, have, by their excellent conduct
at the recent election, defeated (we trust once
and for ever) the hopes of the Tory faction of
returning to place and power. No, no. The
Dissenters will never assist that factious and
beaten party, who resisted, until resistance was
useless, the repeal of the Sacramental Test and
Parliamentary Reform, and who have now
placed themselves at the head of those indis•
erect, selfish, and intolerant churchmen, wl
claim as their personal property, not only the
possessions which they hold in trust for the
whole Church, but the Universities, which
ought to afford the benefits of sound learning
and true knowledge to the people at large, of
every class and every denomination.
So far, the advice given to the Dissenters
to hold by their old friends and connections,
has not been thrown away. It was sound
advice, and they have proved their good sense
and patriotism, as we knew they would, by fol-
lowing it. The remarks ascribed to Dr.BaoWN
respecting the Devonshire election, and the
views of the Dissenters in sending support to
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, were equally unfortu-
nate. The Dissenters who set on foot their
subscription discovered the motives ascribed to
them, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL addressed a