The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-22 00:00:00

LIST OF THE MINORITY

Of 141 (Teller incl'aeo -who, on the 2ist of April, voted against
the paying 250,001.1/..a.-S,ear out of the. Land '4 ax, in of the
Church Hates.
4dams,
Aglibsiby;
Bainbridge, E. T.
Baines„ E. , •
Baldwin, -Dr.,
Barnard, E. 0.• -
Barron, H. W.
Bellew,*ll. 11,
Isewes, . .
Bish; T. " •
Blackney, W. •
Blake, J. M. -
.Blamirc, .
:ZeWes,, J. - •
Briggs, It.
Briscoe, J. I.
Brock tehtirst, J. ' •
Brothertol!,,ll.'
Buckingham, J. S. -
8a1wer..,11,4
Butler,. lion. P. S.
Cayley,-- IR- S.
Cayley, Sir G.
Chapman, • M. L.
Chichester, J. I'. B.
.Clay, W.
Dalmeny, Lord
Dashwood, G. H.
Davies, Colonel
Divett, E.
Ellis, W.
Evans, G.
Evans, Colonel
Ewart, W.
E.- ing, J.
Faithful!, G.-
Fellowes; -Hon. N
Fenton,-.J.
Fergnsson, R. C.
Heiden, J.
Finn, W. F: •
FltaMmoYi, C.
Fitisithon, N.
French, F.
(iaskell, D.
Gilloni-W. D.
th-sborne, T.

Godson, R.

.
Grote; G.
Guest,_J.
, Gully,
Hall, B;
fi<arxlleq, B.
-'"
Harvey, D. W.
Hawkins, J. H.
Hal M. M.
Hodg,son, J.
Hudaon, T.
Hutt, W.
tiyett, W. H.
,lughatu, It.
Jacob, E. ,
James, W.
Jervis, J.
-Kemp, T. B.
Kenuedy,..L..
Lambtoh, H.
Langdale, Hon. C.
Leech; J • -
Lister, E. C.
Lloyu, J. H.
Locke, W.
Martin,- " -
Moksworth, Sir W.
Nagle, Sir R.
OTrien, C.
O'Connell, Morgan
O'Connell, C.
O'Connell, John -
oTorinor,Don
O'Connor,.Y.
O'Dwy.er,.A. C.
O'k errall,ll. M.
'Oliphant, L.-
Otd, -
Oswald, R. A.
Parrott, J.
Joseph ,

Roche, W,
Roche, D.
Roe, J.
Romilly, a .„
Aoiy, liH.l. ,i-
Ronaytie,
,Russell, Lord C.
Russell, W. G.
Ruthven E.'
Sc holelield,. J.
Seale, J. H.
Shame General
she 4 h.
Smith, R S.
Sraveley, T. K.
Stewart, J. ,
Strutt,' E.
Sullivan, B.
Talbot?
Tently on, C.
Thompson, W.
Todd, J. R.
Tooke, W.
Torrens, Colonel

TreLiwney, W. L. S.
Turner' W. ' - -
I'ynte, C. J. K.
Vernon, G. H.
VigorS, N. A.
Vincent, Sir F.
Vivian, J. H.
Wallace, It.
Walter, J.
Warburton, H.
Wason, It. • --
Whalley; Sir S.
Whitmore, W. W.
Wigney, I. N.
\Vilks,
Williams, W. A.
Williams, Col.
Winnlugton, H. J.
Wood, Alderman
Yelyerton; Hon, NV:

Philips, M.
Pinney, W.
Potter„ B.

Pryine, G.
Richalds; J.
Rippon,- C.
Robinson, G G. R.

TELLER.
Hume. Joseph.

_ .
,' • - LIST .OF. THE MINORIT.Y . • "
-Of -84 tTellers in eluded) ~.who: voted. f 'r Colonel, Evato 's Clause
for taking the Vote by,Ballot in the Borough of Hertford.
Aglionby, H. A. Gully, J. .• Iticter,-T. - - ,-,---
.7.,.
Attwood, T. Hall, B. Roche, I).
Bainei„ IL ' (._ :...i Hardy', J. Hatch, B. , ..-
Barnett, C. 1.-- —4 Hill, M. D. Ruthven, E. S. , .
Bellew, It. Al. „ HOdges, T. L. Ruthven, E.
l-thirliili.ll, .R. . 'I. '::, Hutt, W. - : Russell, fLoitt.e. -`,
Bish. T. I tlyett, W. H. Scholetield, J. '
Blake, M. . .-.''Jacob, E. Seale, Colonel
,Blackburne, .J. " - -Jervis, J. Sinclair,. G.
Bouverie, Captain Kemp, T. R. stanley,, E;., J.,.
Briggs,-IL - Keppel, Major ;Sullivan, 8..
Brotherton, J. Langdale' Hon. C. Irennyson, C. •:
Buckingham, J. S. E Lister, .C. ithrockmorton, R.
Cliaytor,,Str W. • Locke, W. Tooke, W. • - •
Clay, W. • Lloyd, ..1. H. ',Vomits, Colonel-
Chicheste,r, J. P. 8.. Lynch, A. H. lynte; C. J. K.
-Dawson,L. • Moreton, li. Vincent, Sir F. ,
Divelt,..E. Mullins, F. W. \rigors; 2C,__A.
' Dykes 'F. L. O'Connell, C. -- Wallace, K. .
Email, It. O'Connell, Morgan,- Warburton, -IL - --
Faithful, G. Ord, W. Wason,:.R.
_..
Fenton, J, Parrott, J. Waterpark, Lord
Ferguson, Sir Ron. cease, J. - Watkins, J.L.
'Fitzgerald, T. - Penlease, J. S. Wilbraham, 0: -
„Fitzroy, Lord C. . - Phillip, M. . Williams, Colonel
-Fleming; Adtniral...'i Phillpons, J. iA 71 . .. ... '
Gaskell. B. Potter, 11. -.- TELI,IIS. '
liOdSoll' R. Pryme, G. Evan's, Colonel -
Grote, 0. Bulwer, E, L.

LIST

I?_7'II4IVIINORITY

Of 12 (Tellers included), who voted against the Grant to May
nooth
Agnew,' Sir A. Lowther -C: H '
I,ateson,'Sir R. :Vhuideville,
KnAtchbull, Sr E. Pereevali co.onel
Letr4, r. Pluroptr_e, J. I'. TELLER.
Wr..9Y2: A. Sohnstone, A.

[ Sinclair,
Verner, W.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 21.
Lora =HQWARD of EFFINGHAM presented a
petition from the dissenters of chapelry in York,
pra.ying.for relief. ,
The Earl of RADNOR preiented petitions from
Carmarthen and Breeknook te.the same effect.. Also a
petition from a parish in the county of. Down for a
repeal of the union. --

The Bishop of E X E TER presented petitions from
Topsham; and from - the Wesleyan methodists of
Exeter lorthe better observance 'of the Sabbath.

The. Duke of WELLINGTON presented a peti-
tion frCnin a parish in -the county of Derby, in support
of the eAtablislied church.

Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from Wil.
mington to the same effect. _

The Earl of DURHAM presented petitions from
the Protestant Dissenters of Newcastle-on-Tyne, Dun,
stable, Bury, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Gainsborough,
praying for a separation of church and state. "
Lord STRANGFORD gave notice that he should
to-morrow move -for certain papers connected,
with,the,§ubj.cet !vhich he had brought under 'their
lordshfps':;notice on Fridaylastirelatip to smuggling
on the coast of France.

• - ,PA.SIBRIDGE PETITIQN.
Tla bake of-OLOUCE STEM Said that in pursu-.
ance of the-notice-he had given-on Friday last, he now
rose to .present to,their lordships a petition, signed by
• - 258 members of the Senate Of 'the- -University of.;Carn-
, bridge, praying their lordships not to adopt that measure
which h a dbeen prayed' for = bylf pofition which had been
presented on a former evening. In doing this, he
hoped it would not be understood that he meant any
thing unkind or disrespectfullowardsrthose gentle-
. men who: had --signed that petition, for- they were
most respectable, and; 'for some of whom he
had a 'great personal regard. In present-
ing this petition, he did ,not 'think it ne-
cessary .to trespass oh- their time on, his-own behalf,
bet on behalf of his brother petitioners he thought he:-
ought to make a few statements, which he would do--as
briefly -as poisible. With, respect` to 'the first pe-
tition presented, he had never heard anything. of it'
until Wedneidaythe'l9tktif 'March, when he learned
roi: the first 'time, by the newspapers, that notice had,
been given in that' house that such a petition *as to be
.presented on the 21st. - He immediately wrote
to the Vice-Chancellor to express his astonishment
that he had not heard anything of it, and desiring to
'know from whom it emanated, by whom it was signed,
and particularly 'to be informed whether it con:.
tained the sentiments of thermajority of the senate
of the UniVersity of Cambridge.- He received an
answer to the -letter, on the Friday follovring, but from'
the secrecy maintained as to the petition, it was found dif='
&cult to cbtain any intelligence respecting it, neither by
whom it had .been signed, excepting a very few names.
The Vice-Chancellor said in his answer to that letter, that
he had communicated with the 'different heads of housei,
between the short period of receiving the letter and trans-
mitting the answer, and he could state that no change of
opinioillad taken 'place upon the subject, as far as he had'
an .oppOrtunity of inquiring. Now he (the Duke of GlOu-
ceSter') thought that until he could communicate-what he
considered to be the true state of feeling on this import-
ant subject, he had better not attend - their lOrdships'
house, when that other petition was presented. (The
illustriouS duke here Went into some particulars as to the
power of the veto by any member of Caput to prevent an
act of grace, which were most imperfectly heard in the
gallery—and he also spoke of • two instances in which
such a power had been exercised.) The petition, he
added, as he had already stated in the outset, was signed
by 258 nos 'resident members of the senate, and it was
signed in the short space of two hours, after the power of
a veto had been exercised by a member of the Caput. ; But
their lordships had been told that the dissenters ought to
be allowed to be admitted to take degrees at the university.
If such were to be the case,'whatdid the admission amount
to? It amounted to giving the dissenters power-in the
university. (Hear,- hear, hear.) They would have a
vote upon all alterations which might be proposed affecting •
the university; they would have a vote for all the officers,
and for that which would affect the general patronage .of
the church. It was said that the dissenters at that mo-
ment received their education at 'the university up to a
certain extent, and their degrees were refused them. This
was made a matter 'of complaint. By the wisdom of our
ancestors, by the Wisdom of former Sovereigns, the lawt
of the university had been framed. All that was required
when a young man entered the university was that he
•Aould take-two-Oaths;. and 'what, wpm-they? The ode wa4
requiring him to otivoii4e ilwdinipline of the university,