The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-18 00:00:00

VICTORIA THEATRE.

A short piece, entitled The Post Chaise Companion, was
introduced at this theatre last evening. It contains but

few incidents. Two brothers start in business about the
same time ; one is fortunate and conducts himself well, the
other meets with adversity ; and in the course of his varied
life Ihrms an acquaintance with a profligate adventurer
called illanderil, who persuades him to start with him in
the character of a highway robber. They meet with the
fortunate brother at an inn, unknown to them at the time,
and the adventurer, with the reluctant concurrence of his
companion, resolved to rob him of a large sum of money,
which he had ascertained to be in his possession. The pro-
digal brother in the mean time learns that the intended
victim is his brother, resolves to defend him, and, while the
attack was about to be made, Men:devil is surprised ant
shot by a Bow-street officer.- Some of the acting was
good—the part of the Waiter particularly was well per-
formed by Mr. Marshall, and the piece was announced for
repetition with 'approbation.

WESTERN INSTITUTE,LEICESTER-

SQUARE.

- Last night Dr. Epps gave the fourth and last lecture, on
the subject of Phrenology, at the Literary 'and -Scientific
Institution, Leicester-square. The three former lectures
were delivered on the three preceding Thursdays. On
each occasion the theatre was remarkably crowded; and,
owing to the enthusiastic manner in which the Doctor en-
tered into the defence and illustration of the doctrines of
Phrenology, the interest increased with each lecture. The
mental " fortune-telling" seemed to gain many converts ;
so many, that it was tolerably obvious that many who
" came to scoff," were obliged to listen very attentively,
and went away with their previous notions somewhat
disordered. We cannot pretend to give even the outlines
of four lectures, occupying as they did upwards of an
hour and a half each, the Doctor's oratory being rapid,
though remarkably clear. He adverted to the importance
of a knowledge of the human mind, and then to the gene-
ral propositions on which phrenology is based. He sub-
mitted—l . The brain is the organ of the mind. 2. That diffe-
rent parts of the brain have different functions (illustrating
his opinion by the heads of 'Hume, Franklin, O'Connell,
Ste.) ; 3. That the size of the organs is an index of the rela-
tive power of the faculties ;—also, showing his opinion by
the display of different heads. He- next contended, that
the external form of the head is an index of the form of the
brain. This was most. interestingly supported. He after-
wards examined and answered the objections to phrenology,
and proceeded to enlarge on its advantages, as 'applied to
the purposes of life, " in choosing servants, friends, relatives,
parochial officers, Members- of Parliament, in rer.rdating
education, and encouraging Christian liberality." This divi-
sion of the lecture was at once shrewd, merry, instructive,
and characterized by great knowledge of persons and skill
in the science ; and the series afforded opportunities for
information,- moral, instructive, and scientific elucidations,
that could not fail to impart knowledge—to make the wise
wiser—to confirm the benevolent in their benevolence—
and to convince all that this study of the brain is calculated
to advance medical skill, and the benefits and comforts of
mankind.

EXCLUSION OF DR. LAMB FROM

THE VICE-CHANCELLORSHIP.

(From the Cambridge Independent of Saturday last.)

From an article in yesterday's Chronicle, it appears that
the heads did not nominate Dr. Lamb as one of the can-
didates for the -office of Vice-Chancellor (as according to
the usual, practice they ought to have done), because he is
favourable to the admission of Dissenters to degrees in
the University. And it may be inferred from the same
article, that Dr. Davy, the Master of Caius College, or any
other bead who might advocate the same cause, would in
like manner be. excluded. .That the heads have' the power
to nominate any Members of the Senate they please, no
one pretends to deny ; but to deviate from the ordinary
custom in the exercise of that power in such a case, and
for such reasons, appears to us in the highest degree arbi-
trary and unjustifiable, not to say dangerous. It is one• of
those instances of the-abuse of power which saps the foun-
dation of the power itself, and paves the way for its ulti-
mate overthrow ; for if experience, and recent experience
too, teacheS any lesson to small bodies of men invested
with extensive powers and privileges, it is this—that it
behoves them to -be very circumspect in the use of those
powers—that they no not strain and put them to the proof
on every occasion which promises a little immediate advan-
tage, whilst at the same time 'they, give offence, and
estrange the minds of large bodies of favourable and up-,
right men from them. , Nothiter leads so effectually and-
speedily to the destruction of exlsive privileges in a free
country like this (as ifs recent history proves), as needlessly
confining them within a narrow and exclusive party basis.
That the exercise of the power invested in the heads
was at least unadvised and uncalled, for, if not wanton, we
hope to : prove
_to. the •sAtisfaction of every unprejudiced
mind. The office of Vice-Chancellor is undoubtedly -one
not only of honour, but also of considerable power in
many respects ; but that officer has no power, whatever
either to adinit Disienters to degrees, or to -pass laws iu
any way in.their. favour. He is not even one of the three
estates (if we may so speak) of the , University. Ex-
officio he is a member'of the Caput—a body consisting of
six persons, each of whom possesses the same power as
the Vice-Chancellor, ',viz. a veto. And every question,
after passing, the ordeal of the Caput, must also pass the
white-hood and black-hood houses separately, before it can
be the law of the University ; and We are told by the
writer in the Chronicle that three-fourths of the members
of these houses are opposed to the principles of Dr. Lamb.
What danger then can arise from his being Vice-Chancel-
lor? It may be said, that as a member of the Caput he
would reject petitions to Parliament against the admission
of DiTsenters. But from what •we know of Dr. Lamb's
character and principles we arc of a different opinion, and
believe that he would be slow to.exercis4.:his power of veto
on such questions, preferring to leave them to the decision
of the Senate; But even if .it should be otherwise, is the
rejection of petitions by the Caput to be confined in future
to one party ? Is Dr. Lamb to be stigmatised by some of
; his brother heads as unfit for the office ef•Vic-i-Chancellor ?

Are wholesome precedents to be departed from ? Are
those Members of the Senate who think with Dr. Lamb to
be set at nought ? Is a schism amonzA tht: heads them-
selves to be iisked (for they are not unanimous on this
point)? Is all this to ba done, to say nothing of other
evils, because it is possible a petition against Dissenters