The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-27 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MARCH 27, 1835.

shown that the error was merely clerical; but the assertion
Put him in mind 'of an Irish witness, who said that he had
een employed to prove an alibi in a case by swearing that
potatoes were wheat.—(A laugh.)
After a few words from Lord F. Egerton, Mr. Ronayne,
Mr. Freshfield, and Mr. O'Loughlin, the House divided, when
the numbers were—
For the motion
Against it lO3
Majority -27
LONDON UNIVERSITY.

Mr. TOOKE rose to move an Address to his Majesty, be-
seeching him to grant his Royal Charter of Incorporation to
the University 'of London, as approved in the year 1831 by the
then law officers of the Crown, and containing no other restric-
tion than against conferring degrees in divinity and medicine.
Before he proceeded, however, he begged to ask the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite whether it was the intention of his
Majesty's Government to oppose his motion ?
Mr. Secretary GOULBURN said that it was his intention
to move an amendment upon it.
Mr. TOOKE observed that although he certainly was not
in a condition to claim from the Right Hon. Gentleman at the
present moment an explanation of the nature of,his proposed
amendment, yet that perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman
would have the goodness to state generally what it would be.
Mr. Secretary GOULBURN replied that it was not,usual
to describe an amendment to a motion before the introducer of
that motion had stated the grounds on which he brought it
forward. He had no objection, however, to say that his
amendment would be in the shape of an Address to the King,
praying that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to order
that there be laid before the. House copies of the memorials
which had been presented to the King in Council, against
granting the proposed charter to the University of London,
and of the proceedings which had taken place before the Privy
Council in consequence.
Mr. TOOKE remarked that with respect to the memorials
Which had been presented against the granting of the charter,
he could describe them-in a few minutes • and that with re-
spect to the proceedings which had taken place before the
Privy Council, the return to an address for a copy of them
would be a sheet of blank paper. The Hon. Gentleman then
proceeded to state the grounds on which his motion was
founded. The first was the great increase of the University
in numbers, wealth, and respectability. It ranked among its
warm supporters many persons strongly attached to the Church
of England, as well as members of other religious persuasions.
The charter which it was proposed to grant, had, in 1831, re-
ceived the sanction and approbation of the Attorney and the
Solicitor-General of that period; and went through all the
official forms that were necessary previous to its being confer-
red. In 1833, memorials from the Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge were presented to the King in Council,
against granting a charter to the University of London.
Other memorials had been presented from the College
of Physicians and from some of the medical schools. In order
to obviate the objections which were advanced by these dif-
ferent bodies, it was determined by the friends of the
University of London to waive all claim on the part of
that institution, to grant degrees in. medicine, and to ask
only to be empowered to grant degrees in arts and law, with
the same initials as in the oilier Universities. With respect
to the proceedings which had taken place before the Privy
Council, in consequence of the memorials to which he bad
adverted, they would be much more satisfactorily de'scribed
to the House by his Hon. awl Learned Friend, the Member
for the Tower Hamlets, than they could be by himself. He
would merely state, therefore, that after the fullest hearing
had taken place before the Privy Council, in April.lB34, no
decision upon the subject was,enterecl on the minutes of the
Council. It had been asserted, that the University was a
joint-stock company It certainly was not so in the ordinary
sense of the term ; as the dividends upon the capital were
strictly confined to four per cent. There were four hundred
pupils at present in the University, and its medical board and
medical staff could not be surpassed in any institution in the
country. Almost every capital city in Europe had its char-
tered University, and there could he no good reason why Lon-
don should be without one. The Hon. Gentleman concluded
by moving the Address to 'his Majesty.
Mr. Secretary GOULBP RN said lie would state very
shortly the reason which induced him to propose an amend-
ment to the Hon. GentlemanViotion, it not being his inten-
tion by any means to go into the general question. What was
the proposition of the lion. Gentleman ? That the House, in
the absence of all information on the subject, should address
the Crown to confer a charter on the University of London,
with no other restrictions than those specified in the motion
itself. The Hon. Member for Truro brought this question
forward in the last session of Parliitnent ; but on the recom-
mendation of the Noble Lord, who was then Chancellor of the
Exchequer: to forbear, and to leave the matter to the conside-
ration of the responsible advisers of the Crown, he had been
induced to withdraw his motion. That consideration he (Mr.
.Goulburn) understood the subject had received. It was re-
ferred to the Privy Council ; the parties likely to be injured by
the granting of the charter had there beer, heard against the
proceeding ; nothing had been decided by the Privy Council
respecting it; and now the Hon. Gentleman again came for-
ward, and called upon the House, without the production of
the objections that had been stated before the Privy Coun-
cil—without any knowledge of the reasons Abet had pre-
vented the charter from being granted, to address the Crown
cu a point which was an exercise of the prerogative, and to
ask for that which should be a spontaneous emanation
from the Crown itself. He repeated that it was not neces-
sary for Not to go into any details of the merits of the Uni-
versity on to present occasion. He hoped the Hon. Member
would, as he load done in the last session, withdraw his motion,
and acquiesce id the amendment which he (Mr. Goulburn)
felt it his duty to rinstre—namely, that a humble Address be
presented to his MajestY, praying that he would be graciously
pleased to order that thee be laid before the House a copy
of the Memorials which been presented to the King in
Council against the conferring' of a charter on the University
of London, and of the procces4ings which had taken place
before the Privy Council with referCuce to those memorials.—
( Loud cries of " Divide, divide !")
Sir ROBERT INGLIS hoped the Llonse would not ac-
cede to the proposition of the Hon. Membe7 for Truro. It
was quite unnecessary on the present occasion !(:) enter into
any-consideration of the merits of the University of London;
and he was anxious not to say a single word tbat'could 1.):" con-
sidered disrespectful towards that body. But he agreed en-
tirely in ' opinion with his Right Hon. Friend, who had just
moved the amendment. - In the first place, the motion was in
some respects, if. not- entirely, an infringement of the pre-
rogative of the Crown.—(Hear; hear.) He knew that such
doctrine, unpopular at all times, was peculiarly so at the
present moment ; but, nevertheless, it was one which he
should continue to- maintain. In no conceivable case could
the claims of the University of London be more favourably
considered than they were last year. If, therefore, when the
persons who were most interested in the prosperity of the
University, and who gave all the aid of their talents and in-
fluence in its favour, had, nevertheless, not proceeded to ad-
vise the King to grant a charter to that University, it was
surely a proof that the circumstances attendant upon the claim
for such a charter were not such as would justify the House at
the present moment in adopting the proposition of the Hon.
Member for Truro. That proposition was quite inconsistent
with the declarations six years ago of the Noble and Learned
Lord, one of the principal founders of the Institution, who
was at that time a Member of that House, and who disclaimed
all intention of requiring the right of conferring degrees.
Mr. TOOKE observed that the Hon. Baronet was proceed-
ing on an assumption which had no foundation in fact.

-Sir ROBERT INGLIS said that if the Hon. Member for
Truro was disposed to throw overboard the declarations of Mr.
Brougham, who could tell but that six years hence some one
would repudiate the statements of the Hon. Member for Truro,
and contend that the power of the University to grant degrees
should not be confined to arts and law, but should be exten:led
to medicine and divinity ? Once let the small end of the
wedge be inserted, and it would soon be driven, home. There
was another consideration, the general application of which,
he apprehended, the Hon. Member for Truro would admit ;
namely, that the real value of the examinations upon which
degrees were conferred at the University of Oxford or Cam-
bridge, arose from their not being examinations by tutors, but
by men selected from the great body of the University, and
whose decisions therefore were wholly free from partiality or
bias. When time had shown that the degrees conferred by the
University of London were of value, the letters indicating them
would be treated with es much respect as those indicating the
degrees taken at the Universities of Oxford or Cambridge ;
but it was not fair for a new institution to take the letters indi-
cating the degrees conferred by the old institutions, whose
reputation, acquired in the course of ages, gave them value.
They must recollect, also, in this particular case, that the
shares of the University of London were to be bought and
sold like shares in a Gas or Water Company ; so that
that there was no saying into whose hands they might not, at
some time or the other, fall. Witk respect to the concession
made by the Hon. Mover, that the London University should
not confer degrees in divinity, it was one of little value. This
discussion having come on rather unexpectedly, he had only
been able to consult a paper of the year 1831 ; but by that it
appeared that whilst 268 degrees of B. A., and 168 of M. A.,
were conferred at Oxford in that year, only 12 degrees were
conferred in divinity, and he dared to say that the proportion
was not higher at Cambridge. The Hon. Member for Truro
conceded that, therefore, which was valueless to the Universi-
ties, but retained all that could yield substantial benefit. He
should, upon all these grounds, oppose the motion.
Dr. LUSHINGTON—If the memorials and proceedings
laid. before the Privy Council contained anything to give
validity to the observations of the Right Hon. Secretary for
the Hcme .Department, no doubt they would be laid before
the House ; but had there been anything in them that should
induce the House to suspend its judgment, it could not be
doubted that it would have been urged by the Hon. Baronet
the Member for the University of Oxford, who had just spoken.
To that Right Hon. Baronet he would say, as also to all who
wished with hint to exclude the Dissenters from Oxford
and Cambridge, that in proportion to their desire to shut
them out from those great schools of learning ought to
be tteir anxiety to throw open wide the portals of other
Institutions, in which they might, as far as possible, obtain
the same facilities for acquiring knowledge.—(Cheers.) The
lion. Baronet and his friends might depend upon it that it
would be no disadvantage to the Universities of Cambridge
'and Oxford to allow another institution to compete with them
in the race. Excellence in degrees of learning was best ob-
tained, as in other objects of human desire and exertion, by
competition.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It had been urged that a
degree conferred at the London University would be obtained
without religious education. This was hardly a fair represen-
tation of the case, for although degrees obtained at the Lon-
don 'University would not be, as they were at the ?ther uni-
versities, a test of education in the established religion,it did
'not ram
that it was a principle cf the University. of London
t,o throw religious education entirely out of the question.

Instruction in a particular form of religion it was not insisted
the students should receive ; but they were left to be placed
under the religious guidance of such instructors as their pa-
rents or guardians might select in their own homes. With
respect to this question being still sub judice, he had been in-
formed that the late Government had no objection to granting
this charter ; but circumstances had prevented the Privy
Council giving its decision upon the memorials sent to them.
If there was anything which could more conduce to the wel-
fare of the kingdom than another, which would lead more to
check crime and advance virtue, it was the cultivation of those
talents with which the Almighty had endowed man—and which
it clearly could not be the intention of this great Bestower
should remain uncultivated—to the highest extent-4 Hear)—
and it was the bounden duty of every Government to afford
every facility for the attainment of that object.—( Cheers.)
Lord FRANCIS EGERTON said, that as he intended to
vote for the amendment of his Right Hon. Friend, he was
anxious to guard himself against the supposition of being dis-
posed to quash the proposition of the Hon. Member for Truro.
Entertaining the highest respect for the Hon. Baronet the
Member for the University of Oxford, he must confess, that if
he had to judge of this question by the speech delivered by him
compared with that just delivered by the Hon. and Learned
Member for the Tower Hamlets, he must vote with the latter.
In fact, he did not apprehend those dangers and inconveniences
which had been so much dwelt upon by the Hon. Baronet, nor
did he think that the interests of sound education would suffer
from the incorporation of the University of London. He could
not forget, however, that acceding to the motion would, in
effect, be to found a Dissenting University. He confessed
that he was unfortunate to entertain scruples—he said unfor-
tunate, because he considered k a misfortune—to entertain
scruples which he did not see any likelihood of being removed,
to the admission of Dissenters to Oxford and Cambiidge ;_ and
for this reason, he was disposed to countenance some central
institution for the education of the Dissenters ; and he did not
doubt, were such an one established, that their numbers and
wealth would enable them, whilst their knowledge induced
them, to give it greater support than,'as far as he could ascer-
tain, they had yet given to the University of London.—
( Hear, hear.) Wind, however, determined him to vote
for the amendment, in preference to the original proposi-
tion was, that he had not sufficient information whereon
to ground his opinion. It was the favourable feeling he
entertained to the general proposition that made him anxious
to obtain information to guide him in his course. As a sub.
scribing member to the College, he could not now say that he
even had information enough to induce him to consent to the
exclusions the Hon. Mover was willing to make. Till he had
further information, he was unwilling to decide that this insti-
tution had not qualifications for bestowing the very degrees the
Hon. Member was willing to take from under its control. For
this reason he should vote for the amendment.

Mr. WARBURTON said, that although the Noble Lord
had concluded by expressing his determination to vote for the
amendment, he confessed, considering the views generally
taken by the Hon. Gentlemen who now occupied the Treasury
bench, and with whom the Noble Lord was associated, upon
the subject of educatiOn, he had not heard the sentiments ex-
pressed by the Noble Lord without some feeling of mitigated
satisfaction. It was true, that Noble Lord, in common with
those with whom he acted, was determined to oppose the
motion, but still his opposition had been expressed in terms
infinitely more liberal than the House was accustomed to hear
from the Treasury benches.--( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. War-
burton) would venture to affirm, that a similar proposition,
made in behalf of such a body as that of the Londen
University, would have been very differently treated by any
Government that might have been in power 150 years ago.
After the discussions that had already taken place upon
the subject--after the course adopted with respect to it in
the last cession of Parliament, he confessed he was sur-
prised to hear the objections that were now urged against
the motion of the Honourable and Learned Member for
Truro. It was asserted by the Hon. Gentleman opposite that
the London University was a mere stock-jobbing concern, and
that the professors and other parties interested in it, looked
only to the amount of profit that might be derived from it.
Never was an assertion made more completely destitute of
foundation. The profits, if any, derived from the institution,
were limited to four per cent--(Hear)—so that under any
circumstances, it could not be regarded as a speculation into
which parties would enter with a view to pecuniary profit.
Yet it was constantly thrown in the teeth of those who came
forward, to advocate its interests, and to endeavour to obtain
for. it a charter, that it was a mere stock jobbing company, and
that the only object in empowering it to confer degrees was to
make it more profitable.--( Hear.) This was one of the chief
grounds upon which the charter was objected to. Another ar-
gument used by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite was, that the
report, if it were deemed of such importance, ought to have
been more strongly pressed in the last session of Parliament,
when the parties generally supposed to be most favour-
able to the London University were in power. ‘4, Why."
said the Honourable Gentleman, " did you not press the
question under the former Administration ? " The answer
was obvious : the parties then in power were generally
favourable to the admission of Dissenters to the Univer-
sities of Oxford and Cambridge, and consequently the
incorporation of the University of London was not deemed a
matter of so much importance ; but now that the Government
was composed of persons known to be directly hostile to the
admission of Dissenters to the other Universities, it became
paramountly necessary that no time should be lost in pressing
the claims of the University of London.—( Hear.) If there
were any thing in the argument that had been advanced, that
the chief desire of the friends of the London University, in
obtaining for it the power of conferring degrees, was to in-
crease its profitableness--if the sple motive were considered
to be one of profit, the same argument would apply with
equal force to the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
because those Universities had throughout the whole of the
discussions upon this subject been most anxious to main-
tain their monopoly of granting degrees in the arts and
sciences. " Do not interfere with our monopoly in this
respect," exclaimed they : " we do not care about degrees
in divinity and medicine; but touch not our degrees in
the arts—that is the source from which we derive our
profit--that is tabooed ground—touch it not."—( Hear.)
But if the Right Honourable Gentlemen opposite thought
that the professors of the London University might have too
great an interest in multiplying degrees, let them come for-
ward with a proposition to establish one general University for
London, comprehending the King's College as well as the
London University, and let them appoint a set of examiners of
the pwn to determine upon the granting of degrees wholly
indeperiAent of the professors of the two Colleges.—( Hear,
hear.) Right Hon. Baronet, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer woad pledge himself to adopt that course, he
(Mr. Warburton) would withdraw his support to the propo-
sition now brought forward by the Hon. and Learned Member
for Truro, but unless he had an assurance to that effect, lie
should certainly recommend his Hon. and Learned friend to
press his motion to a division.
Mr. BARING addressed -the House, but was very im-
perfectly heard. We understood him to say, that not-
withstanding the sweeping charge of illiberality which
the Honourable Member for Bridport had brought against
the Bench upon which he (Mt.. Baring) had the honour
to sit, he begged to remind the Honourable Member that
he (Mr. Baring) was one of the earliest subscribers to the
London University—(Hear)—and having been one of the
earliest subscribers, he certainly was enabled to confirm
one of the observations that had fallen from the lion. Mem-
ber. The idea of the University having been established with
a view only to the profit of the subscribers, was wholly un-
founded.—( Hear, hear.) That the University of London
should have the honour of conferring literary and academic
honours was, no doubt, important ; but that it should have
the honour of granting degrees in the same way as the Univer-
sities of Oxford and Cambridge, was a question that, in his
opinion, ought to be most maturely considered. ,It was a
question that had several times been brought before the
House, and in what position did it now stand? It was
brought forward when the Hon. Gentlemen opposite were in
power—it was referred to the Privy Council, of which the
great patron of the institution was a member—it was, of
course, very maturely considered by them, yet, up to the
removal of the late Ministers from office, no step had
been taken upon the subject. Surely, then, it was fair
for him (Mr. Baring) to presume that the late Govern-
ment had found some difficulty standing in their way
which prevented them from immediately recommending
the Crown to grant a charter of incorporation to the Uni-
versity ; and if such a difficulty interposed between the
Members of the late Administration and the object to which
they were all supposed to be favourable, surely it was not too
much to say that the present Government ought to be al-
lowed to pause before such an address as that proposed by the
Hon. Member for Truro were presented to the Crown.—
(Hear.) At all events the House ought to know what took
place before the Privy Council before it called upon the
Crown to grant a Charter in precise and express terms. He
(Mr. Baring) would suggest to the Gentlemen who sat upon
the Liberal Benches—( A laugh)—whether the concession of
this power to the London University, to the exclusion of the
other schools in the metropolis, weuld not be to give it that
very monopoly which they complained of in the Universities of
Oxford and Cambridge. Never having entertained the
slightest hostility to the London University, he must still fairly
confess that that part of it which had since grown up, and
which was not contemplated by those by whom it was ori-
ginally established—he meant education unaccompanied with
religious instruction—he could not approve of. The Right
Hon. Gentleman concluded by expressing his determination
to vote for the amendment moved by his Right Hon. Friend
the Member for the University of Cambridge.—(Load cries
of " Question," and " Divide.")
The Gallery was partially cleared for a division, when—
Sir ROBERT PEEL rose amidst loud cries of " divide,
divide," and spoke as follows :—Sir, I take it for granted that
the Gentlemen at the lower end of the House, who appear to
be so anxious for an immediate division, are well acquainted
with the nature of the motion upon which they are going to
divide.--(" Hear, hear," and a laugh). I take it for granted
that they have well weighed all the details of the charter upon
which they are about to address the Crown—( Hear, hear)—
and that therefore there is no further necessity for discussion
on the subject.--(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial side).
For the benefit of those, however, who are not exactly aware
of the nature of the proposal upon which they are about to
pronounce an opinion, I will read the motion. It is for " An
Address to his Majesty, beseeching him to grant his Royal
Charter of Incorporation to the University of London, as ap-
proved in the year 1831 by the then Law Officers of the
Crown, and containing no other restriction than against con-
ferring degrees in Divinity and in Medicine." Now, Sir I
do say that no man who has not read the proccediugs before
the Privy Council is well qualified to place that restriction
upon the act of the Crown in kranting a charter.---( Hear).
I ask if the House of Commons is acquainted with the mea-
sure approved of by the Law Officers of the Crown in the year
1831 ? Is it right then that, as a matter of course, the House

should come to a vote to grant a charter without at all weigh-
ing what the nature of that charter should be ?—( Hear). Will
the House consent to this—that I should examine Hon. Mem-
bers as to the nature of this charter which they are about to
vote for ?—( Hear, hear). Oat of the 350 or 400 gentlemen who
will divide upon this question, I am to assume that they have ail
sufficiently weighed the nature of such charter in all its details,
and that it shall contain no other restriction than against
conferring degrees in divinity and medicine.—( Hear, hear).
It may be obvious that it is right to restrict the granting of
degrees in divinity, but why restrict the right as to medicine ?
Why address the Crown to exercise its. discretion in granting
a charter, but limit-that discretion 'as to conferring the power
of granting degrees in medicine ?—( Hear, hear.) I have in
my hand an account of the state of the London University in
the year 1833. In that year the number of students was 430.
Of these 293 were students in medicine, 113 in the arts, and
74 in law. The House, therefore, is now called upon to ad-
dress the Crown to give the privilege of granting degrees to
the 74 students in the law, and to the 113 in the arts; but to
restrict the privilege as against the 297 students in medicine.
—(Hear, hear.) This question was on a former occasion
brought under the consideration of the House, and was subse-
quently referred to the Privy Council. Sir, I ask what course
is to be pursued now ? Is the matter again to be referred to
the Privy Council ? The Privy Council have made no report.
Is the Crown to disparage its report, and to grant a charter
without any reference to its proceedings ? That is the ques-
tion. The matter is now before the Privy Council. If this
address be presented, is the Crown to exclude the Privy
Council, or is the Crown to refer the matter to it again ? The
Honourable Member for Bridport (Mr. Warburton) thinks
there is a better course than the one proposed. If he is of
opinion that there is a better course, why tray not the House
of Commons take his advice? He thinks it would be better
not to grant a charter to the London University, but to invite
ether bodies, including King's College, to form one great
University. Why, then, address the Crown to grant this
charter? The Hon. Member said he was in the habit of hear-
ing opinions from gentlemen on this side of the House rather
opposed to liberality.
Mr. WARBURTON—I said in former times.

Sir ROBERT PEEL—Does the Hon. Member mean
during the last year ?—( Laughter and cheers from the Minis-
terial side.) lam not aware that I have given any opinion
upon this matter, but I do know that .the-strongest opinions
were given against it by those who occupied this side of the
House in the late Session of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.)
The matter was referred to the Privy Council last year, and
it received the petitions of parties adverse to the object, or at
least so far adverse as to require that any charter should be
accompanied by certain conditions. The Privy Council
heard speeches--one from Sir Charles Wetherell, and one
from the Hon. and Learned Member opposite (Dr. Lushing-
ton). The Privy Council have never yet given an opinion.—
( Hear, hear, from Mr. Tooke.) The Hon. Gentleman says
" Hear, hear," but I only answer that it has not been from
gentleman now on this side of the House, that any obstruction
has arisen.—( Hear, hear.) I know well that the gentlemen
who last year occupied these benches were not indifferent to
education, but I can easily imagine that they had some good
and valid reason for not advising his Majesty to grant the
charter.--( Hear.) Lord Brougham was one of that Privy
Council, the Archbishop of Canterbury was another.—( Hear,
from the Opposition.) Sir, is every matter of this, kind to be so
received by the House ? Is it to be that one cannot even
read a name without exciting a cheer from one side of the
House or the other. The other names were those of the Arch-
bishop of York, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of
Ripon, Earl Grey, the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of
Eldon.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition)—the Earl of
Carlisle. Sir, there ought to be a groan, I must say, from
this side of the House. The other names were—Lord J.
Russell—( Loud cheers from the Opposition side)—the Bishop
of London, Lord Holland, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Denman,
Chief Justice Tvndal, Lord Stanley, and Lord Melbotirne.
The Privy Council gave the greatest attention to the question.
It met on the 26th of April, and on the 3d of May. The late
Administration did not quit office until the 15th of November.
'iley had heard the speeches of Counsel, which did justice to
the subject, in length as well as ability, and after all they took
no step up to the 15th of November, when they left office,
which it is to he presumed would not have been the case if
they were not satisfied that great difficulties intervened, either
legal or •:..onstitutional.—( Hear.) Be this as it may, I ask
what is the Crown now to do? Is it to refer the matter again
to the Privy Council?—(" No, no," we believe from Mr.
Tooke.) It is not to refer it again.
Mr. TOOKE—I rise to explain. The Right Hon. Baronet
alluded to the report of the Law Officers of the Crown. I
am hardly aware of the charter it recommends, for it was only
printed to-day, and imperfectly circulated. It contains the
form of a charter to be issued on the report of the Attorndy
and Solicitor General. It received the approval of the Privy
Council. and had passed through the offices of the Privy
Seal and the Signet, and had received the sign manual of
his Majesty.
Sir R. PEEL—Then, Sir, I put the Hon. Gentleman
out of Court at once. He says the report has been only im-
perfectly circulated this day.—( Hear.) Was there ever such
a farce of legislation?—("Hear, hear," from the Ministerial
benches.) Has there ever been such a mockery of our pro-
ceedings.—( Hear.)
Mr. TOOK E—l am not fairly dealt with by the Right
Hon. Baronet.

Sir R. PEEL--I am sorry if I misunderstood the Hon.
Gentleman. I understood him to say that it was only to-day,
that the report was circulated. What, however, is the proposal
made by my right Hon. Friend Mr. Goulhurn ? His amend-
ment is that an address should be presented to the Crown, pray-
ing that directions should be given to lay before the House
copies of the memorial and proceedings had before the Privy
Council. The House having those documents before them
would be then placed in a situation to enable them to ascertain
the most proper course to he pursued.—(Hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman says that he will press the motion to a divi-
sion, unless I give him an assurance that a'Still more extended
proceeding than the one proposed will be adopted by the
Government. Sir, I will not give any such assurance for the
purpose of escaping a temporary difficultye-4 Cheers from the
Ministerial side.) If the House think it decorous to present
an address to the Crown, praying for the grant of a charter to
the University of London, and to do so in accordance with
the opinions given by the law officers in 1831—if they are pre-
pared to decide the question upon grounds which will e7:clude
students of medicine from the advantages to be bestowed upon
others, let them do so, upon their own responsibility, without
any interposition of mine.—( Hear.) But I think such a course is
unreasonable. The course which I would recommend, and the
course which, in my judgment, Would be the reasonable one, is
to call for the Memorial to the Crown; and the proceedings
had before the Privy Council. This would not prejudice our
after proceedings; and, having obtained them, you will be the
better enabled to judge what would be the just and reasonable
ground to pursue.--( Hear, hear.) Feeling this objection to the
present proceeding to be well founded. I will say upon this.
as I have said upon former, and as I am prepared to say upon
any similar occasions, that I should rather be in a minority—
throwing the responsibility of an unjust and unwise proceeding
upon the majority, than acquiesce in any proceeding: for the
purpose of escaping from an occasional and temporary difficulty.
—(Cheers.) It is not in my judgment fair for the House of
Commons to present this address.—( Hear.) It will not faci-
litate the object of the Hon. Member by whom it has been
moved. Of this I am convinced by all my past experience—
( Hear, hear,)—and while I refuse to 'pledge myself to the
adoption of any specific line of conduct on this question, I have
no hesitation in saying, that I do feel that the position of that
portion of his Majesty's subjects who do not conform to the
Church of England, and who in conseqUence of refusing to
take certain religious tests are excluded from University de-
grees—l do feel that their position is one that requires the
maturest consideration, and that their claim is certainly not
unfounded. But I am not prepared to give any opinion upon
the precise course that should be adopted; nor am I.—( Cheers
from the Opposition.) No, I will not endeavour to en-
trap this House into withholding their consent to the motion
of the Hon. Member. by any declaration of the line of policy
which I should think it expedient to pursue.—( Hear, hear.)
Let the House take its own course, and while I do not mean
to interfere with that course, I think it but right to say that I
have no objection to the adoption of some course which may
obviate the exclusion of Dissenters from academical honours.
—( Cheers). I apprehend the opposition of the Universities
is not to the granting of degrees, but to the assumption of
titles, which may be confounded with their own.—(" Hear,
hear," fiom the Ministerial benches ) [The Right Hon.
Baronet here made some observation, in reply to a question
across the table, neither of which were audible in the gallery.]
He resumed—l hope I have dealt with the House fairly and
eandidly.—(.Hear, hear.) I make no pledge—l give no assur-
ance upon this subject. The motion is. I think, unreasonable,
while the amendment is reasonable ; and, therefore, do I prefer
the latter to the former. The Right Hon. Baronet concluded
h. y reminding the House, that their decision would carry with
it much greater weight and authority if they would condescend
before they came to a vote, to consider that information which
was within thew reach, and without which it would be difficult,
if not impossible, for them to legislate efficiently. They should
bear in mind, too, that the Hon. Member for Bildport had told
them that some more extensive measure would be desirable
than one which, out of 480 Members, excluded 293 from ad-
vantages proposed to be conferred upon the remaining 187.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that when the Right Hon.
Baronet acknowledged that the claims of the Dissenters to ad-
mission to Universities were well grounded, and when he said
that those who did not conform to the Church of England
should have an opportunity of obtaining academical honours,
lie (Lord J. Russell) wished that the Right Hon. Baronet
had, at the same time, pointed out some way in which the
House could have expressed its acquiescence in his opinion.
But while he allowed the justice of the claini under consider-
ation, he did not point out any mode by which it could be sa-
tisfied. The Right Honourable Baronet could not say that
the motion " took him by surprise."—(A laugh.) The notice
was sufficiently long before the House, and time enough had
been afforded for the production of the memorial. If it were
the opinion of the Right Honourable Baronet that some better,
some more enlarged course should have been adopted, he had
bad full time for taking the matter into consideration, and for
developing the plan which he should recommend the Go-
vernment to adopt. The present position of the case was
this t—The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge having
opposed the admission of Dissenters, and having succeeded
in making that opposition effective in the other House
of Parliament, they then stood forward and said in effect—
" We will not only
.exclude you from the honours and
advantages of academical
.education in our establishments,
but seeing another establishment founded at an ex-
pense of 160,000/. which is capable of affording all the ad-
vantages of education, we:shall oppose your receiving honours
and degrees there also." That was a grievance which cer-
tainly ought to be remedied. But he had heard from the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, that what the Universities

opposed was the conferring upon Dissenters the degree of
Master of Arts (as we understood the Noble Lord). These
were the accustomed titles by which University honours were
denominated ; and if they were otherwise called it would be a
mark that the honour was not regularly obtained. The Right
Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, had re-
ferred to what had taken place before the Privy Council. He
(Lord John Russell) was one of that Council, and he had
heard the very able argumentts of' his Friend near him, and of
others, who, on the part of the existing Universities, op-
posed the admission of Dissenters. There was a very grave
objection urged, not so much on the part of the Universities
as of the medical schools of London ; and it was shown, to the
satisfaction of the Council, and that there were schools in Lon-
don that ought to be entitled to confer degrees if such a pri-
vilege were conceded to the University of London.—( Hear. )
The Member for Bridport had Laid that it would not be de-
sirable to give the London University the power of conferring
medical degrees, and the objection which he (Lord J. Russell)
had just stated was the principal ground of the proposed restric-
tion.—( Hear.) There was so much objection of this kind given
that the Council had come to no decision. It had been urged
that nothing had been done by the Council. He (Lord John
Russell could say for his Noble and Learned Friend Lord
Brougham that scarcely a fortnight passed in which he ( Lord
John Russell) had not had had some communication with that
Noble and Learned Lord on the subject of granting a charter
to the London University, and on the possibility of counting
that privilege with a similar one to being conferred upon
King's College. While the Noble and Learned Lord was in
Scotland, his mind had been very much occupied with that
subject—(Laughter)—and he had written a very able and
voluminous paper upon it.—( A laugh, and " Hear, hear.) It
was in no wise derogatory to any man, no matter how exalted
might be his station, to devote his time and talents far the
promotion of science and knowledge ; and be could say of his
Noble and Learned Friend, that no matter how he might be
legally or politically occupied, he had ever given much of
his attention to that subject. This case then came to this—
the late Government, and more especially his Noble and
Learned Friend Lord Brougham, had been incessantly occu-
pied in considering—first, whether it was possible to obtain
the consent of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge to
the admission of Dissenters to the taking of degrees; secondly,
whether, failing that, it would be possible to obtain a charter
for the London University to enable that establishment to
confer degrees • and, thirdly, whether this privilege could
also be extended to King's College. Such was the position
and such were the views of the late Government ; but he did
not see any disposition of that sort manifested by the present
Government ; he did not see any prospect held out to the Dis-
senters of giving them the relief to whieh it was by all allowed
they were entitled. In illustration of the necessity of adopt-
ing some such course as that recommended by the motion be-
fore the House he should only mention the name of one indivi-
dual, who, to be sure, was not endowed with any rich plu-
ralities, but who nevertheless did as much for the promotion
of Christianity as any one who was. He spoke of Dr. Lard-
ner.—( Hear, hear.) A degree (an honorary degree, as we
understood the Noble Lord) had been conferred upon that
individual, who, upon obtaining this honour at the end of his
life, it might be, observed that it could not but be agreeable to
literary men to obtain honours of that kind. Men certainly
should not he obliged to go to Scotland to look for such
honours ; but there should be in England some establishment
with the power of conferring them. The Noble Lord con-
cluded by saying that he too wished the Hon. Member had
been in possession of the information, and of the papers ad
vented to it in the course cf the debate ; but on looking at the
question as it then stood before the House, and in the ab-
sence of all promise from the Right Hon. Baronet he did
not hesitate to give his support to the motion of the Hon.
Member.—( Cheers.)
Mr. ESTC UR'F (amid loud cries of "Question') said his
object in rising was to correct a misapprehension which ap-
peared to prevail during the entire of the debate. He hailed
with satisfaction the observations of the Noble Lord, because
they convinced him that the House would he unjustly treated if
they were not put in possession of the proceedings before the
Privy Council, before they were called upon to give their as-
sent to the motion of the Hon. Member opposite.—( Hear,
hear.) It was supposed by some Gentlemen that the Univer-
sities of Oxford and Cambridge were hostile to the granting
of a charter to the University of London, to enable that esta-
blishment to diffuse the advantages of education. Now the
fact was not so.—(Laughter, and " Oh.") In reply
,to that
cry he might.be allowed to refer to a passage from the petition
of the University of Oxford. [The Hon Member here read
a passage from the petition, in which it was stated that the
petitioners did not by any means object to an institution
founded for literary and scientific purposes; but they objected
to their assuming the same titles in conferring honours in civil
law and in arts.]—( Laughter. ) The Hon. Member pro-
ceeded to say that the objection was well founded, for many
bequests were made, with the condition that, having a degree
in arts—an M.A.—;vas a qualification to their enjoyment.
Now, it was obviously contemplated that the advantage should
be confined to those possessing a degree from Oxford or
Cambridge, while this object would be defeated if another
establishment were privileged to confer the same honour under
the same title. The Hon. Member concluded, amid reiterated
cries of " Question, question," by supporting the amendment.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, when the num-
bers appeared—
For the original Motion
For the Amendment
Majority in favour of the original I\lotion ...-110
ASSIZES (IRELAND).
Mr. O'LOGHLEN rose to move fur leave to bring in a Bill
for the appointment of convenient places for the holding of
Assizes in Ireland.

Sir HENRY HARDINGE said that there existed no ob-
jection on the part of his Majesty's Government to the intro-
duction of this measure.

Sir R. PEEL did not rise to oppose the motion, but
suggested that the Hon. Member for Salford had not exercised
his usual vigilance or he would have adhered to his determina-
tion of adjourning the House. To be impartial he ought to
act on the same principle whatever side of the House Gentle-
men might be sitting on.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved the adjournment, but with-
drew it at the request of the Right, Hon. Baronet. •
A desultory conversation followed, in which Mr. LITTLE-
TON, Mr. WALKER, .Mr. O'CONNELL, and others took part.
—The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BROTHERTON was about again to move the
adjournment of the House, but was interrupted by Mr. FINN
and other Hon. Members.

SUPPLY.
The report of the Supply Resolutions was brought up and
agreed to, after an observation from Mr. HLTME, that he would
not oppose this proceeding under existing circumstances, but he
must protest against_any money being voted after midnight.

DISTURBANCES (ARMAGH).
Lord MANDEVILLE rose to move for " the Chief Con-
stable's Report of the outran-es which were perpetrated at the
Armagh races io October fast—The dying declaration of a
man named M'Whinney—The committals of the persons
charged with the assaults upon the M'Whioneys—The various
bail bonds, with their several dates, and amount of bail—The
date of M'Whinney's arrest, and the cause—Copy (it any)
of the recognizance entered into by M'Whinney, previous to
admitting the offenders to bail—Copies of any. declarations or
depositions taken by Mr. Jones, the stipendiary Magistrate,
of men wounded by musket-shots, or otherwise, at or about
that time—The numbers, names, and religious b;:lief of all
men wounded by musket-shots,, or otherwise, at or about
that time—Copy of the reports from the stipendiary Magis,
tratcs, and of the reply to the Right Hon. Secretary for Ire-
land, respecting the Portreeve of Charlemont—A list of the
Magistrates summoned by the Lord Lieutenant of the county
Armagh, at the investigation held in the town of Armagh in
February last." The Noble Lord having read these returns,
there was a general cry of " adjourn, adjourn ;" and in the
midst of these

Dr. LUSHINGTON observed that it was most desirable
an early day should be taken for the motion of the Noble Lord,
as they referred to charges which had been made against Lord
Gosford, in his capacity of Lord Lieutenant of the county.
That Noble Lord had left Ireland for England to meet these
charges, and he seas anxious for an early day, that he might,
on the part of that Noble Lord, answer them.
Lord MANDE VILLE assented to this proposition.
On Thursday next being named by Dr. LUSHINGTON,
Mr. RICE thought it would be most desirable fo: the pur-
poses of justice, that some motion of a more specific nature
than for the production of these papers should be made.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved the adjournment, and said
" I foresee, Sir, that we shall have a debate upon this, and
therefore I move the adjournment of the House."
The motion not having been put,
Mr. HUME moved the adjournment again, but was inter-
rupted by
Colonel VERNER, amidst cries of " Adjourn adjourn I"
The gallant Officer begged to state that an objection had
been raised to his being a Member of the Committee of In-
quiry into Orange Societies, and he could therefore not conti-
nue in that capacity with satisfaction to himself, as he felt as
he presumed every person would, who was conscious of the pu-
rity of his own intentions. He knew of no occasion which
could have led the Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary
to think him a partial man. He had been a Member of the
Committee of Inquiry into the case of that Gentleman, and
he had concurred in their decision. Now he (Colonel Verner)
did not hesitate to say that the Orange Committee was any
thing but an impartial and fair one, and lie said this in conse-
quence of the language they had used. Before they made
charges against others, they ought' themselves to have clean
hands. _

Mr. SHE IL said that in objecting to the Gallant Colonel
he had merely suggested that he was a strong partisan. He
did not mean the smallest imputation personally. If he had
unintentionally given him pain, he unaffectedly begged his
pardon.—Adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

We have much pleasure in stating that the glove
trade in the town of Yeovil is more brisk than it has been for
some months past.—Bath Journal.

THE ROBBERY AT MR. TATTERSALL'S.—It has
been already stated that the counting-house of Mr. Tattersall,
the celebrated sporting auctioneer, was robbed on Monday
night of cash and notes to the amount of about 11V., and bills
of exchange to the amount of 356/. ss. 6d. Further informa-
tion was given to the police yesterday, that the robbery was
supposed to have been committed by a man of genteel appear-
ance, of middle age and good height, of dark complexion,
with full black whiskers, and dressed in a dark surtout coat
and trousers. A person answering this description was ob-
served by, Mr. Tattersall himself looking into the keyhole of
a safe from which the property was afterwards stolen ; and
some one having asked who he was, he mentioned the name of
a friend of Mr., Tattersall's, which, however, turned out to be
untrue. The safe was opened with a false key, which broke in
the lock.

COURT OF CHANCERY.

COCKBURN V. RAPHAEL.

Sir WM. HORNE said this was,a petition for the pay-
ment out of Court, withoutlegacy duty, of a sum of mo-
ney left for charitable purposes. The testator, an Arme-
nian merchant, who died at Madras, in the East Indies,
had left the money to be laid out in Indian Securities, for
certain charitable purposes therein specified, the remainder
of his property he directed to be transmitted to England
and invested in English Securities, in order to meet de-
mands on account of legacies. The executors at Madras,
instead of investing the charity money according to the di-
rections of the testator, remitted the whole produce of the
estate to England, and a question now arose whether there
had been such an apportionment of the money intended
for charitable uses as would justify the Crown in foregoing
its claim to the duty chargeable on legacies. It was now
contended that there had been an apportionment by the
testator himself in his will. and that it was of no consequence
whether the money came from Madras separately or as a
part of the general assets.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said. his opinion was, that the mo-
ney had become a mere legacy, and that there was no appor-
tionment, brt he recommended that the opinion of the Judges
of the Court of Exchequer should be taken on the question.

ROLLS' COURT.

His HONOUR was engaged this morning in hearing petitions.

IN RE ESCIIEAT ACT.

Mr. MILLER made an application on petition, under this
Act, to have funds, which had stood in the name of Fontleroy
and Keary, previous to the conviction of the former, transferred
from the account of the Sinking Fund in the Bank of Eng-
land, to_the names of Hammond and Keary, as trustees for the
parties to whom the property really belonged.—Granted.

SURREY SESSIONS.

NEWINGTON, THURSDRT.

The Grand Jury having returned a true bill of indict-
against iliac Coonse,othe Michigan chief, on the charge of
committing an indecent assault upon a young girl, this
morning was appointed for putting in recognisances for his
appearance at the next Central Sessional Court.
The defendant rendered to his bail, accompanied by
several of the performers of the Victoria Theatre, where he
lately exhibited his skill in rifle shooting.
The CHAIRMAN inquired whether the required sureties
were in attendance

The Court was answered in the affirmative, and the
Hon. Sir Augustus D'Este, and Dr. Hodgkin, of Fins-
bury-circus, came forward and were sworn as securities for
the appearance at the next Central Criminal Court, in the
sum of .50/. each, and Alm Coonse in 100/.

The trials through the day were of no public importance.
The Court rose at five o'clock.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

BURY LENT ASSIZES,,-MAncm 25.

ARSON.—Jacob Rose, George Fulham, and Robert
Mott, were charged with setting fire to the house, barns,
&c., of James Baldry, of Lidgate, in this county.
Rose, Not Guilty ; Mott, Not Guilty ; Fulham, Guilty,
Sentence of Death passed in the usual form on Fulham.

Samuel Proctor and Daniel Andrews were charged with
assaulting, with intent to murder, Henry Juby, at Hitchara
on the night of the 9th of January last.
The Jury found them Not Guilty.