The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-30 00:00:00

NEW STAMP DUTIES.

The following petition of the Committee of the
Stock-Exchange against the new Stamp Duties Bill
was presented in the House of Commons on Tuesday
evening :
" TO THE HON. THE COMMONS OF THE UNITED KING
DOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

" The humble petition of the Committee of the Stock-
Exchange of London,
" Showeth—That your petitioners are the •hair-
man, deputy-chairman, and committee of the London
Stock-Exchange.
" That their long practice in business has rendered
them intimatately acquainted with the effect of the
stamp charges on transfers of shares of bank, canal,
dock, assurance, railway, and other companies, as now
levied.

" That the effect has been to limit considerably the
extent of bona fide transactions, and to engender a
system materially at variance with the interest of the
revenue of the country.
" That the shares of public companies are in this
anomalous position, that, although for all purposes of
conveyance they are treated as real property, yet that,
in the event of death, they are brought under the de-
nomination of personal property, and made liable to
probate and legacy duties.
" That, such being the facts of the case, your peti-
tioners had anticipated, when an alteration of the
stamp duties was under consideration, that a material
reduction in their amount would be proposed, both
upon the ground of equity and the policy of the prin-
ciple now recognised as a general rule in levying
duties, that extreme rates of impost defeat the object
intended.

" That your petitioners have, therefore, learnt with
great surprise, that instead of reduction in the exist-
ing rates, the now before your Hon. House pro-
poses a scale of charges of which the practical result
would be an increase of not less than 60 per cent.
upon the average of stamps now in use.
" That your petitioners therefore pray that, in the
establishment of a scale of duties, regard may be had
to a rate, which, by its moderation and uniformity,
will remove the many evils incidental to the existing
charges, which act most injuriously on the large in-
terests involved in the question, on the business of
your petitioners, and on the public revenue.
"And your petitioners will ever pray, &c."
The petition is signed by "
.James Hutchinson,
chairman, Charles Cancellor, deputy-chairman, John
Barnes, Robert Barnett, George Bayley, enry
Bilke, Charles J. Brown, Matthew Flower, James
Foster, Thomas Gibbes, Thomas Gribble, Stephen C.
Hope, Edward Jourdan, Thomas H. Longden,
George Loveless, William Mello, Francis Mercier,
Robert W. Moore, Charles S. Mortimer, William H.
Mullens, John Norbury, Samuel H. fulley, Louis

Samson, William Scott, L. M. Simson, Henry Tu-
dor, S. J. Wal.y, William Whi‘P, Arthur
W,lkin, 11,

UNIVEItSIT Y • IN TELLIGENCE

TUE ROYAL COMMISSION.

CAMBRIDGE, MAY 29.—Tne Vice-Chancellor has
informed the members of the Senate that he has sub-
mitted to his Royal Highness the Chancellor the two
addresses of resident members of the Senate pre-
sented to him, and also the following representation
(for which he alone is responsible) :

" TO HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE ALBERT, K.G.

CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
" Christ's College, Cambridge, May 14, 1850.
" The Vice-Chancellor has communicated to the
heads of colleges Lord John Russell's explanation of
the views of her Majesty's confidential servants, in
advising that a Royal Commission should be appointed
to inquire into the state and revenues of the Uni-
versities of Oxford and Cambridge; into the provi-
sions of the statutes by which the said Universities
and their several colleges are governed; and to re-
port their opinions whether any measures can be
adopted by the Crown or by Parliament, by which
the interests of religion and sound learning may be
promoted in the conduct of education in the said Uni-
versities.'

" The Vice-Chancellor feels much pain in stating
that this communication, so far from dispelling, has
confimed and increased the objections and apprehen-
sions which the heads of colleges entertained, in con•
junction with himself, at Lord John Russell's an-
nouncement; and in expressing his conviction that,
if made known to the Senate at large, it would pro-
duce a similar effect upon them.
" The address of the resident members of the Senate
to the Vice-Chancellor, which has been submitted to
your Royal Highness, so clearly and satisfactorily
meets nearly every point of his Lordship's letter, that
it seems unnecessary to trouble your Royal Highness
with any additional statement. The Vice-Chancellor
will, however, venture to make a few brief observations.

"It is stated that the object of the proposed Com-
misssion is not to interfere with the additions recently
made to the studies of the University by an authority
ab extra, but to bring the aid of the Crown, and, if
necessary, of Parliament, to assist in their completion.'
" To this it may be respectfully submitted that the
changes are already made, and require nothing but
time to test them, whether or not they are beneficial,
and whether or not they may be usefully extended.
If, as is confidently hoped, the verdict of experience
be in their favour, the University now has within
itself the power, and (the Vice-Chancellor believes)
the will, to complete and extend the good work.
" It is impossible to say beforehand how these ad-
ditional branches of study will affect the distribution
of honours and rewards in the several colleges. This,
too, can only be shown by time and experience.
How far those who attain honours in the new triposes
may be deemed worthy to share in the rewards
hitherto mainly given to proficients in mathema-
tical science and classical literature will be seen
after a few examinations have been held. If
deemed worthy, the colleges possess ample power
to reward them. Lord John Russell seems to be
under the impression that, in each college, some
particular branches of study are prescribed to
candidates for fellowships and scholarships, and that
the electors are restricted to rewarding proficients in
those branches only. But, with respect to the col-
leges in Cambridge, at least, this is not so. There is
DO difficulty created, so far as the Vice-Chancellor is
aware, by the statutes of any college in this Univer-
sity, to the recognition of any sound and useful
learning as a qualification for advancement to situa-
tions of honour and trust within it.

" His Lordship states that, In many cases, the
advantages and emoluments in the separate colleges
are limited, by the wills of founders, either to the
natives of some particular county or district, or to
the scholars educated in some particular school, or in
some instances, to the descendants of the founder and
his family. Such restrictions cannot fail to be inju-
rious, and to be injurious in proportion as the field of
choice is narrowed by the particular condition an-
nexed to the advantages of the college.'
" The absolute restriction to the descendants of a
founder and his family of any emoluments is very rare
in this University, if it exists at all.
" In the opinions of the heads of colleges, to disre-
gard and set aside entirely the wishes of a founder in
the disposal of his bounty, and to open unreservedly
to all candidates what was given by him, and accepted
by a college, as an advantage to a particular county,
district, or school, would be an interference with the
rights of property both dangerous and unprecedented.
" If the proposed plan be persevered in, the Vice-
Chancellor can only regard with the deepest anxiety
and sorrow the future prospect of the University.
The issuing of a Royal Commission, especially after
having been so earnestly deprecated by so large a
number of resident members of the Senate, will be
taken to imply that, in the opinion of her Majesty's Mi-
nisters, the governing body of the University are unfit
for their position, and that, although possessing the
power to adapt the institutions over which they pre-
side to the requirements of the age, they want the
will or the capacity to do so. Regarded in this point
of view, the Vice-Chancellor fears that it will be felt
as an affront and an indignity, and as such will be
resented. A painful struggle will in all probability
ensue, which, whatever may be its termination, will
destroy the peace, and impair the usefulness of the
collegiate bodies, and of the University at large, for
many years to tome, and will inevitably create in the
minds of a large body of educated men a permanent
feeling of distrust in the wisdom and generosity of
the Government of the country, and a spirit of re-
sistance to its authority and influence.

" The Tice-Chancellor begs to be forgiven for ex-
pressing himself thus frankly, and for adding his
earnest hope that, after all these difficulties and objec-
tions have been stated, her Majesty's Ministers may
be induced to re-consider their determination."