The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-02 00:00:00

should prevail in the education given in the Universities ; but
he thought that, instead of dividing and excluding Dissenters
from the Universities, they ought to see whether it would not
be possible to open their gates to persons of all religious per-
suasions. The Noble Duke argued at some length that it was
indispensably necessary to the preservation of the Established
Church, and the preservation of religion itself, that certain
tests ought to be agreed on and observed. He ( Viscount
Melbourne) would say, on the contrary, that tests would afford
no security for the preservation of any particular system. His-
tory abounded with proofs of this. Tests existed among the
heathens of antiquity. The deity which every man among
those heathens worshipped, might be said to have been a test
to him, and so might almost every action of his life ; but the
event proved that these tests afforded no security for the pre-
servation of their system of religion ; they did not, and could
not prevent the introduction of Christianity into heathen coun-
tries. The Roman Catholics had also tests for the security of
their religion ; but were those tests of any avail ? Did they
preserve that religion ? Undoubtedly not. The Protestant
religion, or the new doctrines as they were called, prevailed
against it, and soon became the established religion of this
and other countries of Europe. In the time of Henry
the Eighth there were certain tests agreed on in King's
College, Cambridge, with the view of excluding those who
entertained opinions opposed to those which were then
generally received. He would read to their Lordships
those tests in the language in which they were written. (Here
the Noble Viscount read a Latin extract of some length from
the rules and regulations of this College.) Yet, notwithstand-
ing all these tests, the new doctrines, within a few years, pre-
vailed to a great extent in that College, and soon became the
established religion of the country. The Church of England
like Christianity itself, rested for support and prosperity on
its own native strength and purity, and not on any tests what-
ever. He would say, as he had said before, that there were
difficulties connected with the question of the admission of
Dissenters into the Universities of the country, and he wished
the parties could have compromised their differences on the
subject, but it must be felt to be desirable, that men of all reli-
gious persuasions should be admitted to those Universities.
He could not think, recollecting as he did, how students be-
longing to the dissenting part of the community, had entered
the University of Cambridge under the more liberal system
that prevailed there, that the number of persons who dissent
from the Church of England likely to enter, were the Univer-
sities to be thrown open, would be so great as to lead to the
evils which the Noble Duke apprehended. He ( Viscount Mel-
bourne) thought that the evils which could by possibility result
from the admission of Dissenters to the Universities were no-
thing compared with the good that must necessarily arise from
it. Entertaining this opinion, therefore, he would vote for the
second reading of the Bill.
The Earl of C ARNAR VON had heard with great pleasure
the declaration of the Noble Viscount, that he was determined
to support the Church of England as by law established be-
cause it was the religion of his fore-fathers and of his country.
That declaration would diffuse gladness throughout the
country, and occasion many a countenance to gleam with joy.
He only regretted when he heard the speech of the Noble
Viscount, that it was not delivered from this (the Opposition)
side of the House.—( A laugh.) The Noble Viscount had
said, that notwithstanding the more liberal system that prevailed
at Cambridge, but few Dissenters had entered that Univer-
sity; but Noble Lords might depend on it, that when the
Universities were thrown open to the Dissenters without
any conditions at all, the number would be greatly increased.
They would hold up this bill as the charter of their rights,
and enter in great numbers. Reference had been made to the
unanimity with which Roman Catholics had been admitted to
the University of Dublin. It could not be said that a similar
unanimity existed at Cambridge. Look at the petition so
numerously and respectably signed at that place against this
Bill, in which the petitioners stated that they would consider the
admission of Dissenters a death-blow to the University. It
would be altogether impossible to make the admission of Dis-
senters to the Universities compatible with the safety of the
Church of England. The Noble Lord sneered at the
idea of such admission leading to dissensions at the Univer-
sities. If the founders of these institutions had not been
of a different opinion from that of the Noble Lord,
they would never have thought of expressly excluding
Dissenters. The University of London found it impossible to
agree on any system of religious communication ; and he did
not, therefore, see how, if the Dissenter were thus indiscrimi-
nately admitted, the principles of the Church of England could
be maintained at those institutions. At present our grammar-
schools were filled by members of the Church of England,
the degree of M. A. being a security that they were so ; but
if Dissenters were admitted to the Universities, they would
no longer have any security. Let them have degrees at their
own Universities; but let them not, under false colours, come
into our grammar-schools. The fiery and ill-regulated feeling
which led to the murder of Laud, still prevailed in the Univer-
sities of Germany, where tests had been done away with. Their
Lordships ought to judge of the feelings to which the admission
of Dissenters to the Universities would lead, not from the spe-
culative opinions of certain Noble Lords, but from what had
actually occurred in other parts of Europe under similar cir-
cumstances. When he (the Earl of Carnarvon) saw the
rising generation at the universities, as well as the masters and
members of those institutions, concurring together, to the
number of 2,000, -in resisting the demands of the dissenters,
then he felt the day was passed when Noble Lords could make
them believe that the " spirit of the age" sought to subvert the
institutions of the country.—( Cheers. ) In foreign countries,
where there were no tests, religion languished ; but in this coun-
try, where there were tests, religion flourished. He felt great
respect for the Dissenters ; he had often acted with them ;
but -entertaining, as he did, the opinions he had expressed, he
should be a traitor to his conscience if he did not oppose their
admission to the universities. But the question was, whether
religious instruction was to be continued at the universities ?
The question, therefore, was not a question between this House
and the other House of Parliament, brit it was a question be-
tween God and his people ; and they had therefore the highest
inducement which they could have to reject this Bill.—( Hear. )
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY then rose, and said
that the object of the present bill was to repeal certain statutes
which at present imposed restrictions on persons resorting to
the Universities, and seeking to take degrees therein. The
Noble Lords who had spoken in favour of this measure did
not apply their reasoning to the proper question, which was,
whether the restrictions should be removed so as to allow per-
sons dissenting from the Established Church to be admitted to
honours in the Universities ? He should have expected that
arguments would have been brought forward in regard to this
point, but instead of that he had heard nothing but invectives
against the University of Oxford for having imposed those
restrictions. He did not think it necessary to refer to the at-
tacks which had been made by the Noble Earl on himself and
the Right Rev. Prelate near him. That Noble Earl went on
discussing a question which had been discussed over and over
again in that House, as to the feelings entertained regarding
those subscriptions ; but that question had nothing whatever
to do with the question before their Lordships that night. He
had heard the speeches of three Noble Lords, who had spoken
subsequently to the Noble Earl, with the greatest satisfaction.
There was not a word in their speeches, from first to
last, which he had not listened to with unfeigned satisfac-
tion. The cause of the Universities had been most ably
maintained.---( Hear, hear.) He had heard the declaration
of the Noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Govern-
ment, of his intention to maintain the Established Church,
with satisfaction ' and it gave him also gratification to hear
from the Noble Viscount that though he meant to vote for
the second reading of this Bill, he did so from a spirit of con-
ciliation. He (the Archbishop of Canterbury) would, how-
ever, prefer to have heard the Noble Viscount give an uncom-
promising resistance to a Bill such as this ; and he would be
excused for saying that, in his opinion, such a course would
have been better and more appropriate for the Prime Minister
of this country to have followed. He should have been glad,
too, if what the Noble Viscount had said was more strong in
favour of the Universities than it was. He congratulated the
Church on having found so eloquent a supporter as the Noble
Earl who last spoke.—( Hear, hear.) He would not go over
all that had been already said on this subject, but he would
beg to refer to two assertions which had been made by the
Noble Earl who introduced the Bill. The first was, that the
Universities were not intended for the education of the mi-
nisters of the Church of England.
The Earl of RADNOR—What I said was, that they were
not theological seminaries.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY—The Noble Earl
stated that Oxford was not a theological seminary, and he
cited the opinion of a gentleman at Oxford, who he believed
was a relation of his own, in support of that assertion. But
from time immemorial the object of the Universities was the
dissemination of religion and learning. They were considered
places for the diffusion of sound religious education, and they
were at all times connected with the Established Church.—
( Hear, hear.) That was the correct description of the inten-
tions of the founders of the Universities, and if they had been
silent themselves as to what their intentions were, their works
would have shown them. In several instances provision was
made for the solemnization of Divine Service in the most so-
lemn form of' worship. In the act of Uniformity the Univer-
sities were always mentioned as on a footing with the Established
Church. In short. the intention of the founders was uniformly
that they should be connected with religion, though he ad-
mitted that those intentions were sometimes better observed
than at other times. It was the same during the Romish times,
and after this country had rid itself of the Roman Church.
To this there was but one exception, and that was at a
period from which he believed and hoped that no prece-
dent would be drawn. The Dissenters had, therefore, never
hitherto desired to be admitted to the Universities, and' they
would not do so now but that they had ulterior objects be-
yond the mere admission—namely, an alteration and modifica-
tion of the course of studies in order to meet their own views.
Hear, hear.) The Most Reverend Prelate then referred
to several of the statutes of the Universities, to show that, from
the earliest times, they had been connected with religion. The
same also appeared from the course of examination followed at
the Universities. He had had a letter from a gentleman who
had long been a tutor in the University of Oxford, which
stated the course of education followed at that University, by
which it was fully shown that the course of education was in-
timately connected with religion. [The most Rev. Prelate
then read the letter, which minutely described the course of
education followed at the college to which the writer be-
longed.' He believed that their Lordships would agree with
him, that in this course a course of religious education was
followed, which formed a good substratum for forming a good
member of the Church of England.--( Hear.) Another part
of the University rules showed also that they were connected
with the Established Church. He meant that part of the dis-
cipline which required attendance on the service of the Establish-
ed Church twice on Sundays, and once every other day, and more
frequently if the health of the student would permit. Would
Dissenters submit to go through such a course of instruction ?
—( Hear, bear.) No, they certainly would not. But would they
not complain that they Were insulted by a permission to take

degrees on such terms as these, which they, of course, could
not comply with ? Would they not hereafter claim relief, and
ask that the privilege to be conferred on them should be made
effectual by making it accessible to them in a manner which
would not be degrading to them ?—( Hear, hear.) If Dis-
senters once obtained admission to the Universities, it would
be necessary to make the rules more palatable to them, and
that would be a change which would put religious instruction
in a worse position. Another consideration was, that at pre-
sent when a father sent his son to the University, he knew
that the son would receive the same principles of religious in-
struction which he himself professed ; but if this Bill passed,
what security would a father have that his son would not be
led away from the religion of his fathers ? He could not help
taking that opportunity of lifting up his voice in favour of the
Universities. He could never, at any time, consent to the
passing of this Bill, but much less so at the present time, when
there appeared to be a determination formed of destroying the
Established Church. In his opinion, it would be most unsafe
to admit Dissenters, some of the highest of whom had declared
their hostility to the Established Church.--( Hear, hear. )
The LORD CHANCELLOR then said that he rose to
give his opinion on this important subject, which had created
an extraordinary sensation throughout the country. His prin-
cipal object in rising at that time, however, was to bring back
their Lordships to the real question before them, .which they
seemed to have forgotten, inasmuch as every one of the Noble
Lords who had spoken in opposition to this Bill had, one after
another, began by complaining of his Noble Friend having di-
gressed to subjects which were nowise connected with the
question before them. If there was any exception to that, it
was on the part of the Noble Duke near him (Wellington),
and of the Illustrious Duke who is Chancellor of the Univer-
sity of Cambridge. With these exceptions, they had'all made
the same assertion, in regard to the speech of his Noble Friend,
and he thought they were wrong in so doing, and they had all
fallen into the same error themselves. The Most Rev. Pre-
late had given much information, which was very valuable as
to the course of instruction at the Universities, but he had
said nothing on the real question, whether Dissenters should
be allowed to matriculate at the one University as they were
now allowed at the other? or whether they should continue
to be excluded from degrees, as they now were, at both ?
He had certainly however discussed, with great ingenuity,
this other question—which was perfectly, independent of
the question before their Lordships—whether it was expe-
dient that there should be a disseveration between the disci-
pline in the Universities and the Established Religion. But
he would presently show them that no two questions could be
more distinct or independent of each other, and those who
should that night vote for the second reading of this Bill might
most consistently on the morrow of the day on which they gave
that vote object to any measure for altering the internal disci-
pline of either of the Universities. He would first remind
them of what this measure proposed to effect, and also wherein
he feared, with his Noble Friend at the head of the Govern-
ment, it would not be as efficacious as was sanguinely ima-
gined in remedying the real practical grievances, the termina-
tion of which was the object of its introduction. He would
begin with the latter of those points, which was perhaps the
first in the natural order. The Noble Duke the Chancellor
of the University of Oxford had argued this case again
and again as if every thing were now going on as well as
possible there, as if every thing were perfectly satisfactory,
and as if no complaint of any kind were made. And why, said
the Noble Duke, should there be any interference with a sys-
tem so perfectly satisfactory ? Now he stood not there to ad-
vocate any speculative doctrines, but the plain ground on which
he stood was that the bill was a practical remedy for a practi-
cal grievance.—( Hear.) If that ground were removed from
him he had none whereon to stand. Was it not a practical
grievance that because a man conscientiously happened to
differ from them on a religious question, because he could not
as they could conscientiously assent to the doctrines and sub
mit to the discipline of the Established Church—because he
dissented not only without any interest, but against his interest
—that therefore he should be subject to certain disqualifica-
tions, and be excluded from some of the most valuable rights
which their fellow-citizens enjoyed.—( Hear.) Was it nothing
that the Dissenter could not educate his children, or, if a
young man at the age fOr such education, himself receive the
advantage of education, at the two most illustrious, most an-
cient, and most justly-renowned seminaries of public instruction
in the country ? That in order to obtain such an eduCa-
tion he must resort to other countries at a great expense,
enduring at the same time what must be considered
as a species of banishment? Was it no grievance that
he was thus compelled to resort to other establishments which
they themselves, as if for the purpose of making his argument
the stronger, declared were much inferior to the two learned
Universities in question ? Was this exclusion, simply on the
ground of conscientious difference in religious opinion, no
grievance ?—( Hear, hear.) To proceed, was it no grievance
that the Dissenter was virtually excluded from entering one
of the most lucrative and honourable professions, or that if
they did they must stop short—that in Oxford he should not
be admitted at all, and that in Cambridge he must stop short,
when his previous labours entitled him to expect that degree
which was to crown his hopes, and entitle him to practice in
his profession ? Was it no grievancd that, in order to obtain
the degree of M.D. or B. M., the dissenting student was
compelled to resort to Parma, to Padua, Pisa, Edinburgh,
or Glasgow ? This was a custom savouring of persecution,
and a practical grievance to the subjects of the realm. This
grievance it was the object of this Bill to abolish, as well as all
that tended to exclude the Dissenter from matriculation and
graduation in both Universities, by way of subscription or
otherwise. He should almost have thought it superfluous
to refer to the existence of these grievances,' had not the
Noble Duke spoken as though he had never heard of any.
—( Hear' hear.) He agreed with his Noble Friend at the
head of the Gevernment, that if a measure of this kind
were forced unwillingly upon the Universities, there was a
probability that it would not receive that cordial, well-natured
execution, which could alone extend to Dissenters the full
benefit it was calculated to confer upon them ; and it would
have been much more satisfactory and advantageous, if the
Universities would themselves freely adopt an alteration in
their rules, or if some middle course could have been struck,
but agreeable to both parties. They would not by this mea-
sure compel colleges to admit any man, whether Dissenter or
Catholic ; and after this measure had passed, the Dissenter
might still find himself rejected from degrees, by the internal
rules
and regulations of the University. He did not go to the
length of the Noble Earl on the bench behind, who spoke that
night for the first time, and who expressed a hope that if this
measure was adopted the Universities would consider it against
conscience, and refuse to obeY it. He did not think so ill of
those learned bodies as the Noble Earl, or those who cheered
him.—( Hear, hear.) He did not believe they would disobey
a law. He was apprehensive not of resistance to the law, but
of a more outward and simulated obedience. This brought
him to the observations of the Illustrious Duke, the Chancellor
for the University of Cambridge, and he trusted that the
University would take this matter into their serious consideration
and make such internal regulations as would remove existing
objections. As far as matriculation was concerned, the result
would be obtained by not requiring subscription, and with
regard to degrees, if medical degrees were permitted to
Dissenters, the great bulk of the practical grievances would,
he thought, be removed. Why he took a distinction between
medical degrees and other degree, which facilitated the en-
trance of students into the profession of the law was this, that
the regulation which shortened the term of probation for bar-
risters to three years for persons who have taken a degree at
either University, instead of five, was a regulation of the Inns
of Court alone, and one which they alone could abrogate, and
which they might very easily alter, in the same spirit, by ad-
mitting, in the case of a Dissenter, a certificate of residence in
the University for a certain period, instead of a certificate of a
degree.—( Hear.) With regard to the right of fellowships
and scholarships, &c., in most cases they were founded by
members of the Established Church for members of that
Church alone, and in most cases a Dissenter had no more right
to complain of exclusion than a member of the Church of Eng-
land would have to complain of exclusion from Highbury, or any
other Dissenting college. The Noble and Learned Lord then
entered into the question of subscription generally, and referred
to the statutes of the University to prove that subscription, as
practised, was, in point of fact, a declaration of opinion in favour
of the Thirty-Nine Articles, and not, as had been contended, a
mere promise to study and endeavour to understand them at
some future time. If the latter were intended, why not make
a plain declaration to that effect in so many words. Many
observations had been made about the union between Church
and State ; that was a vague, indefinite, somwhat fantas-
tical, and, he was quite sure, an inconvenient term, which
of late years had not been heard till last session. The defi-
nition which the Noble Duke had given of it would not hold
either. Dr. Warburton was the first who introduced the
term, but he regarded the religion of the majority as the reli-
gion of the State. If, therefore, the Church were, as the
Noble Duke contended, to be regarded as united with the
State, through the King, as its head, it would in England
have an Episcopalian head, in Scotland a Presbyterian, and in
Ireland a Catholic one. As a most sincere friend to the
Established Church, he believed that there was no better way
of promoting her interest than by the abolition of all secular
worldly disqualifications for religious opinions.—( Hear.) He
was surprised that the Noble Earl had commemorated his
accession to that House by such a sweeping tirade in favour of
tests ; and he was still more surprised to find an impression
running through all the speeches on the opposite side of the
question in favour of that, he would have hoped, exploded
species of persecution. Good God !of what use were reli-
gious tests? How did they effect their object ? Tests kept
out none but the conscientious. But what cared the knave for
any tests ? The test was addressed to the wrong quarter.
It excluded the religious and admitted the irreligious.
The test appealed to his pock et—to his ambition—or,
at the best, to his vanity and love of distinction, but
generally to love of pelf. Not only would he swallow the
test—not only would he swallow the Thirty-Nine Articles,
but regret there were not thirty-nine more, they were so
good for him.—( Hear.) It was strange, too, the admission of
a few Dissenters to the Universities should be held as preg-
nant with danger to the Established Church, by those who
had repealed the state tests upon Catholics and Dissenters
and who saw no danger to the Church from Catholics and
Dissenters holding seats in that Legislature, by which the
Church itself was regulated. He should regret if this Bill
was thrown out; but if, as the Noble Earl had stated, its re-
jection were certain, he would most respectfully address him-
self to those present connected with these learned bodies, and
entreat them to employ the interval between this and next
session, in endeavouring to bring the question to a fair and
satisfactory settlement. It had been said, why did not the
Dissenters get degrees from Universities of their own ? This
was rather hard ; for the moment they applied for such a power
for such a University, the two Universities were the first to
oppose the grant of a charter. They would neither give the
Dissenters degrees themselves, nor let them obtain them else-
where. The grounds of the grievance were plain, and the
justice of the demand was manifest. Whether these claims

•••••..ra--
succeeded now or not made only a slight matterNimn••
of time in
to
history of this question. The oftener the question WAS tu
r fVle",
cussed the nearer it approached to a successful issue.
ther it passed this session or not remained to be proved, but
uo
not he was certain that something still more advantageous
e.
the Dissenters would soon meet the sanction of the Legislatur.
The Bishop of EXETER felt that it would be impossil?le
to add any thing to the able defence made for the Universities
t.
by the Chancellor of Oxford. In refuting the charge of abeut
tang perjury, the Noble Duke had been peculiZ b
IY happy' his
the refutation was not complete. There was one, who, by
own showing, was still involved in the charge, and ti;..at
l.
the Noble Earl who had moved the second reading: of the .1-1`
That Noble Earl said he had taken the oaths to keep the
tutes as regarded what he had called the foolish things
in the course of his speech he enumerated, and admitted stas
5
he was in the constant habit of breaking through these regula-
tions. Others certainly broke through the regulations, but
they took the oath either to keep the statutes or pay the Pe'
nalty. The Noble Lord wok the oaths, not knowing tbeci
alternative, not aware as it would appear of the penalty, an
yet without knowing this saving clause, he violated ther;
The Noble Earl was in the constant habit of offending, on„,d2„
was not easy to acquit him.—(Hear and laughter.) I°'
Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack said he wished to,
be as the Noble Duke was on this question. He (the Bishop 43;
Exeter) was glad to hear that the Noble and Learned L°
rd
to be like the Noble Duke—(Cheers)—he was glad
that the Noble and Learned Lord intended to take lesson'..
from the Noble Duke, and imitate him in all but his
career.—( Cheers.) The Noble and Learned Lord, svish
ing to be practical, said the Dissenters only sought rake°
of grievances, and complained of exclusion for conscience'
sake. Now, the Universities were instituted for the Par:
poses of giving education according to the doctrines of rh!
Church of England. This was the professed object fel,
which they were founded ; and because persons not of tha''
profession were not admitted;'complaint was made. The 01)-
ject of the education given in the Universities was not 5°
much precise science or classical learning, as to make they
true Christians and good citizens.---( Hear.) The ground-
work of such an education must be laid in religion, vrh,ie h
must be given in a precise and definite form. The hignes •
intelligences in the English language taught what the ok,
ject of education ought to be ; Milton said, " The end of
learning is to repair the ruins of our first parents by re:,
gaining to know God right, and out of that knowledge
love him, to imitate him, to be like him, as wd rnaff,
nearest, by possessing our souls of true virtue, viinr,„
being united to the heavenly grace of faith, makes up
highest perfection." This, according to Milton, was the
end of learning. A complete education he characterises
as follows :—" I call, therefore, a complete and generl
education, that which fits a man to perform justly, skilfully, an
magnanimously, all all the offices, both private and public, es.
peace and war."—(Loud cheers.) He rejoiced to find that
those quotations were so received, and he repeated, that the
religion inculcated in the Universities must, to be effectireci
assume a definite form. The Noble and Learned Lord ba
told the world some time since, when speaking of the Londollf
University, that it would be impossible, from the difference es
opinion which must exist in that seminary, to give religh•fe
instruction without interfering with the consciences of ra
pupils, and, therefore, there should be no religious instruoti,ell
in that seminary. That, then, was the principle on which t`i
London University was established. The Universities of (5/-
ford and Cambridge were established with quite another view.
Their object was to give religious instruction; and it vvas `list
unjust to demand of them to depart from this principle, °s
(:„1-
would be in any sect to insist that some particular mode
religious instruction should be established in the Ladle)
University. This bill, therefore, was, in its own principle'
felo de se.—( Hear.) An argument had been urged, that per
sons graduating as physicians were excluded from these se"
minaries ; and the argument was applied as regarded Pefi
sons who wished to be economical in their outlay. He wr*
have no objection to make the expense of graduating lighter'
but economists did not seek to graduate in those universities,
that expense being lighter in other universities, and the tlal
less by two-thirds for obtaining degrees. It had been ostae;
what the subscribing of the Articles meant? As he (the
shop of Exeter) understood it, it meant that the person so csub-
scribing entertained an opinion or leaning favourable to to
articles, and it was made by persons of a tender age, for the pt;r:
pose of showing that they confided in the authority of the Choral:
it meant that they thought that the notions of Christianity inee
cated by the Church were correct, and that therefore the Ir,
tides upon which they were founded were right. The Artie ch
were not, as had been said, in themselves metaphysical, thoug
referring to metaphysical reasoning. The chartered rigkit to
ably supported by the Noble Duke had not been attempte°
be disputed. The allusion made by the Noble Earl to b
admission of the departure of the universities from their chart-
ter, he admitted to be correct ; he did not hesitate to eas,
it again a gross departure ; but then it was an error of rn°l,
than thirty years since, and without any pressure from without
it was reformed. The universities had corrected themseiveL
in a wonderful manner. It was said these establishment
were national. They were : but in what sense ? Because
they taught the national 'religion, because they added to the h 0
national honour abroad ; but in no other sense. Not in te,„
sense that they were supported by the nation. That they were
not national in the latter sense, was proved by an argonlen
which had been used elsewhere, when a Right Hon. &end;
man in defending one of the estimates said, do not opP°se this
grant to the University, but allow us to use it as an arguine
on another occasion, that we may be able to say that State
contributes pro tanto to your support. Was it because or 3
small grant, of such a nature that the State could assume of
right to break in on the institutions and violate the usages
the Universities ?—( Cheers.) The Acts of George the Setae
and Third provided for two offices ; but, because of this pr&
vision, was such a right to be assumed? and were a few hue
dreds thus granted, to weigh against thousands taken in taxes
on degrees, in matriculation, and otherwise? Another orge:s
ment was, that the admission of Dissenters would promT,,
peace. The language of the Dissenters did not bear out t
argument. The Dissenters of Plymouth and other
Pd-
looked for more than this Bill would grant—more than a;
mission. They sought a share of the dignities and emole;
ments of the Universities ; and even those who were 011
temperate, only postponed their demand for a severance la
the Church from the State, which they thought WI
not just now be seasonable, but which they looked for,
ward to as " the accomplishment of a glorious objeeut'st
The proceeding of to-night was the beginning of "b"
bt
they contemplated. The Dissenters plainly told ss,IP
they sought ; and it was for that House to say whether oe:,,
demands were to be complied with. Would they be the duP--
of the Dissenters ? Dupes they could not be ; for the Dissen-
ters spoke so plainly, that it was impossible for any one Pet,e"
sessing common sense to misunderstand them. Would they
their accomplices? That was equally impossible; for, to be
accomplices, implied some union ; and no union existed betweer;
them ; for they had no interest in common. What remained: •
Would they be their instruments, their tools, the poor roil
ters of their hatred against our sacred institutions ? II
they be the betrayers to them of the very sanctuary of Britis f
honour ? Would they be the corruptors of the fountain °Ol
British honour? Would they be the polluters of the weifT„
religious knowledge and faith? Would they be all this? NOB
it was impossible; and he begged pardon for putting the eas
even hypothetically. He was sure it was impossible that OW „
could join with parties who had disgraced themselves before
their country, by demanding an act of injustice, a complialle
with which must lead to the destruction of the most venerable
institutions in the country. He would not detain them ,„

longer.—( Cheers.)
The Earl of RADNOR replied he was gratified to lead
The
that a different course of education was pursued from !Po
which was adopted when he was a young man, or even SIII,IA
he had sent his son to be educated at the University; 'le
admitting this difference, he considered the present Bill go' a
as much called for : and he hoped, therefore, it would be r.,„eact
a second time. He should vote for the measure on the grn,, t
that it would rid the Universities of a great burden and a gry
reproach.

Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared--
Contents—Present

Proxies
85
Non-contents--Present B5
Proxies lO2
-187
Majority against the Bill
The amendment was, then put and agreed to. The 1311
consequently lost.
Their Lordships adjourned at a Quarter-past One o'cloc•

;
GENOA, JULY 12.—The African, a Sardilo/10
vessel from Lisbon, having on board several persons °to
served in Don Miguel's army, and among them Generals Ll.O
and Cesar de Bourmont, and some other French officers;
arrived here.

BIRTHS. of
On the 28th ult., at Leamington, Warwickshire, the law
Richard Bo? " .

Jlton, Esq., of a son and heir.
Good'
On the 28th ult., at Woodbridge, the lady of Frederic Goo
Doughty, Esq., of a son. of
On the 30th ult., in Chester-street, Mrs. Henry Kingscote,
a daughter. the
On the 30th ult., on board the Dreadnought, off Greenwich'
wife of Lieut. Bowers, R.N., of a daughter.
_____-----

MARRIED. Brit°
On the 19th of May, at Florence, at the house of the ey.
Minister, Fanny Lucy Shelley, eldest daughter of Sir John Sh%.-arl
Bart., to the Hon. George Edgecumbe, youngest son of the
of Mount-Edgecumbe.
On the Ist inst., at St. Mary's, Islington, Mr. William Khter
Woodall, Newington, Surrey, to Miss Esther Brown, only deug
of Mr. Brown, Queen- square, Goswell-street-road. of
On the 19th of February, at Barrackpore, Captain J. Graba,l3j; of
the 50th Native Infantry, to Harriette Anne, only daughlrepsl
Major-General James Watson, C. 8., commanding the preeiu
division of the army. of
On the 31st ult., at Tottenham Church, Ford Wilson, E5V54.°
Stamford-hill, to Eliza, daughter of the late James Collins,
of the same place.
On the 22d of March, at Madras, Rowland Winsley if,eartroo
Esq., of the Hon. East India Company's civil service, to "Le we°
Trevor, youngest daughter of George P. Tyler, Esq., t"
place.

DIE

'.D. Nviolv
On the 30th ult., at Crawford-street, Portman-square, ~.5.
worth Allan, Esq., formerly of Halifax, Nova Scotia, aged ; staor i
On the 31st ult., Mary, wife of William Wansey, Esq., °
ford hill.
fourth daughter
On the 25th ult., at Headley, Francis Elizabeth, four
of the lat Rev. John Parson
abeth, aged 18.
On the 24th ult., Eliz, wife of Samuel Wimbush, 6‘l.' of
Finchley, Middlesex. young° '
On the 30th ult., in London, in his 30th year, John,
son of the late Thomas Weatherall, Esq.
___.......--

01/14
London; Printed and Published by MURDO Y - Gs
The Sun Mee, No. 112, Strand.