The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-28 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, MAY 28, 1844.

mediate result of the motion. It is probable that but little
discussion would have taken place upon it. The mo-
tion would have been negatived—it may be " without a
division." 'What then ? The speech would, it is true, have
been heard with impatience by those who are always pre-
determined to vote against inquiry, in proportion as the
facts adduced prove the neeessity of reformation. Such
would only have "sat out" the discussion, that they might,
if necessary, record their votes against the motion. But in
the reports supplied by the public journals on the following
day, the speech thus listened to with impatience, or with
listless indifference, in the House of Commons, would have
been read by hundreds of thousands. Sooner or later,
the impression thus produced would operate within the
walls of Parliament, and speak even there " with most
miraculous organs." The days are long since departed when
a Member of Parliament spoke only to those within the
House of which he was a member. Then the effect he pro-
duced upon those who immediately heard him was every-
thing ; and the impression out of doors was scarcely worth a
thought. The Tories know that another era has dawned
upon the nation. Hence, whenever they can prevent a
motion for inquiry from being brought forward, they do so—
not so much from an apprehension of its effect within,
as of dread of its results upon those without the walls of Par-
liament. To this apprehension we refer the trick to which
they had recourse on Thursday night. By counting out the
House on Mr. Christie rising to bring forward his motion for
inquiry into the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, with
a view to render them more beneficial to the country ; they
hoped to keep the country in ignorance of matters which
affect the character of the close corporations of learning and
piety at Oxford and Cambridge. The fallacy of that hope
will become apparent.
STAND ARD.—Our readers will have known that the Irish
Court of Queen's Bench has refused the motion for a new
trial, that has now occupied it for a term and something
more. Mr. Perrin alone dissented from the refusal asregards
Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Crampton dissented in the case of
Mr. Tierney; but as two of the judges agreed to refuse in
every case, the rule for a new trial is refused to all, viz., re-
fused by the whole Court as respects six of the traversers, Dr.
Gray, Messrs. Steele, J. O'Connell, Duffy, Barrett, and Ray;
refused by three of the judges to one, in the case of Mr. Da-
niel O'Connell, refused by two of the judges against two, in
Mr. Tierney's case; but the equal division of the Court
operates as a refusal, because, where the judges are equally
divided upon an affirmative proposition, the negative always
of course prevails. In consideration of the equal divi-
sion in Mr. Tierney's case, the Attorney-General
intimated that he would not call that gentle-
man up for judgment. Mr. Tierney is certainly not the
least guilty of the eight traversers ; on the other hand, he
appears to us the most criminal, after the master incendiary ;
but no doubt the Attorney-General exercises a sound discre-
tion in bowing to the equal division of opinion on the bench.
It is amusing meanwhile to see the use which the Dublin Free-
man's Journal tries to make of Mr. Tierney's escape. " The
most recent fashionable announcement respecting the Irish
Attorney-General was, that the learned functionary
attended the Premier's last ball. He has just returned from
London—his last lesson in prosecution is yet fresh in his
memory. and we must, therefore, look upon his declaration
yesterday, that he would at once demand judgment on the
repealers, as the carrying out of orders issued by the head of
the Cabinet. The wily Minister wishes to keep his hands
off the clergy, and in deference to his known ' veneration'
for Catholic priests,' he has instructed his officer not to
demand judgment on the Rev. Mr. Tierney. We have no
doubt but the surpliced ruffians' will duly estimate his
forbearance." Whoever reads the argument of Mr. Jus-
tice Crampton, will see how much Sir Robert Peel's
instructions have had to do with Mr. Tierney's good luck.
We have copied from a morning Contemporary (the Herald),
a review of the grounds upon which the Justices Perrin and
Crampton respectively decided against their brethren in the
two cases, in which they did so decide. As this article pretty
exactly expresses our own views, we shall say nothing
more upon that subject except that every one antici-
pated from the first day of Michaelmas Term, how Mr.
Perrin would act; such anticipation, however, being wholly
unconnected with any doubt of the Learned Judge's
integrity, and resting solely upon the practical proofs he had
given, when Whig Attorney-General, of his erroneous views
of the law of conspiracy. It were strange, indeed, if the
Learned Gentleman should not, as judge, have some qualms
at treating, as criminal, what himself had connived at if not
encouraged, when charged with the vindication of the law as
first law officer of the Crown. Mr. Crampton, too, had a
difficulty of the same kind, though much less in degree, to
contend with, for he also had been a Whig law officer, but it
was in the earlier and better period of the Whig Administra-
tion. On Saturday the Attorney-General called upon the
counsel for the traversers to offer their motion in arrest of
judgment, if they intended to make one. Sir Coleman
O'Loghlen, on the other side, declared that a motion in
arrest of judgment was intended, but the traversers'
counsel were not ready. Not ready, at the end of
six months! The Attorney-General demanded to be
at least informed of the grounds of the motion, and of
the authorities by which it was intended to support it.
in order that on Monday (this day) he might be prepared to
reply instanter, without wasting more time ; but for this the
traversers' counsel were not prepared at the end of six
months. The Court interposed with more firmness and de-
cision than it had previously manifested, and told the learned
advisers of the traversers that they must, in the course
of the same evening, communicate to the Attor-
ney-General the information that he so reasonably re-
quired ;—and there the matter rested. The motion in arrest
of judgment being, as every one knows, designed merely for
delay, will be spread over as many topics as possible ; but
as on such a motion there can be no apology for the traver-
sers being allowed separate and distinct counsel, and as the
Court seems to have awakened to the duty of discounte-
nancing pettifogging quibbling, intended merely to con-
sume the public time, the whole matter may possibly
be disposed of in the course of the present week. And
whether it is or not, is a matter of little consequence, for
the case is one of those that may be said to be forgotten
before they are completed. Nobody now has reason to re-
gret the delay that has occurred, except the traversers, who
have now still before them the whole of that punishment, a
very considerable part of which would have been already ex-
lei:Wed, had they not resorted to the dilatory policy.

them transmitted to all the Members of both Houses of
Parliament.
After a speech from Mr. BREWSTER against the reso-
lutions, and speeches from several other Members in their 1
favour, Mr. BREWSTER said he had intended to move a
counter resolution, but as he felt that the whole of his
brethren would be against him, he would not trouble
them.
The resolutions were then agreed to.
MINISTERIAL COMMUNION.
Dr. Coox, after a few observations, in which he urged
the necessity of ministers taking care not to open their
pulpits to any one who did not entertain the principles
of the Establishment, otherwise: the minds of the people
would be bewildered and unsettled, and some risk in-
curred of rooting religion altogether out of their minds
—proceeded to read the following report of the Com-
mittee appointed to consider this subject :
" The Committee are deeply impressed with the im-
portance and desirableness of promoting unity, and
maintaining friendly relations with all who love the
Lord Jesus in sincerity and truth. They feel that it is
of equal importance to maintain the purity of Christian
doctrine and discipline, and to guard the great principle
of an Established Church. To secure those important
objects, the Committee would respectfully recommend
that admission of those other communions to the bene-
fits of the Establishment shall not be left to the discre-
tion of individual ministers, nor granted t.-) those of the
soundness of whose faith we cannot be fully aseured, but
that in every case it shall be required that permission be
asked and received from the Presbytery of the bounds, or
a standing committee of their number, who shall in any
case report to the Presbytery ; and that it shall be borne
in mind by every Presbytery, that such admission is
to be granted only to those who, by the recognition of,
and subscription to a creed or symbol of faith, give un-
doubted evidence that they maintain with us the vital
doctrines of the Christian faith, and the principles which,
as an Establishment, we are bound to maintain."
Mr. Balfour of Clackmannan, Dr. Muir, and Mr. Clark,
of Inverness, having expressed their approbation of the
report, it was unanimously agreed to adopt it in the
meantime, and to send it down to Presbyteries for their
consideration.
The Assembly adjourned at six o'clock till half-past
seven in the evening.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
!ROM THE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
TIMES.—We long ago informed our readers of the proba-
bility that Judge Crampton and one of his brethren would
prove inclined to allow a new trial in the case of the Rev. Mr.
Tierney. Such turns out to be the case. The speech which
was the only evidence of conspiracy against that traverser,
" was one," said Judge Perrin, " no doubt of a highly repre-
hensible character ; it was rash, and such as ought not to have
been expected from a gentleman of his profession and calling."
" It was," said Judge Crampton, " what he should say was a
seditious speech—it was of a very violent and inflammatory
nature, and proved that he was aware of the effects produced
by the monster meetings—effects likely to excite to hatred in
the great mass of the people against those whom he called
the Saxon race ;" but both agreed in considering the evi-
dence of conspiracy as insufficient. If a nolle prosequi were
entered as to him, Judge Crampton was prepared to
refuse the motion for a new trial ; but if that were not done,
he would, he said, at the risk of any public inconvenience, do
justice to the individual, and grant him a new trial, though
it should have the effect of awarding a new trial to all. The
only other exception to unanimity regarded a more impor-
tant culprit. Judge Perrin alone was prepared to grant a
new trial to the monster-agitator himself, Mr. O'Connell.
His grounds are not very satisfactory to the unprofessional eyes
of those who have a bias in favour of what are called
the merits of the case. Judge Perrin had no doubt
whatever of Mr. O'Connell's criminality. He had no doubt
that the verdict was right both in fact and law—in
the facts which it decided, and in the law upon
which it was based. So far all is natural and conceive-
able. We often have the most entire moral conviction of the
guilt of a prisoner, upon evidence which is yet insufficient to
support an adverse verdict. But Judge Perrin had farther
made up his mind that there was plenty of proof—plenty of
legitimate, admissible, conclusive proof—against the chief
conspirator. "He thought there was ample evidence, inde •
pendent of the objectionable parts to warrant and sustain the
verdict." But then came the difficulty. Though there was
a sufficiency of good evidence laid before the jury, yet with
it there was some bad—some at least which, though good
for one purpose, was yet bad for another, to which the jury
might have applied it, or might be thought to have been en-
couraged to apply it. And as the jury (though they
had plenty of good evidence before them) might, per-
haps, have based their verdict on this fraction of
bad, Judge Perrin was for giving Mr. O'Connell a fresh
start. And now, finally, what is the supposable pars-
logism—what is this illegitimate reasoning of which the mere
possibility is to be held sufficient to quash a confessedly
honest and right verdict? The judge apprehends that the
jury may have concluded that certain seditious speeches
were spoken by Mr. O'Connell, because they were reported
as his in his own papers the Nation and the Freeman, and
because in his presence and out of his presence they were re-
ferred to by counsel on both sides of the question as his, and
neither he nor anybody else dreamt upon the trial of
questioning either the fact that they were his or the evidence
of their being so. It is certainly, therefore, not inconceivable
that they may have drawn such a conclusion, unless they
were very specially indeed cautioned against it. Nor should
we presume to meddle with the legal conclusion which might
be authoritatively deduced from that possibility. Law we
know is law, and laymen must keep their fingers off it if
they would not burn them. But, as friends of common sense,
we heartily rejoice that for once law and reason run together,
and that the Court does not insist upon our swallowing
Judge Perrin's most indigestible deduction. That a verdict
should be set aside because in the course of the trial certain
notorious facts not necessary for its support had been at-
tempted to be proved by evidence of the most conclusive
kind, but not applicable, in the eye of the law, to that exact
purpose, is a proposition which, if it were law, would inspire
some distaste for English jurisprudence. We are happy to be
relieved from the painful obligation of so considering it. On
the case of Mr. Tierney, then, the Court is equally divided.
On that of Mr. O'Connell they refuse a new trial, dissen-
tiente Perrin. On all the rest the Judges are unanimous.
The legal result is (as an equal division affirms what has
gone on before), that the traversers' motion is rejected
in Coto. We hear, however, that by the time the Chief
.Justice had finished delivering his opinion, a new motion in
arrest of judgment was announced; that this, however, is
likely to be speedily disposed of, and that judgment may be
expected in the course of the present week. We think all this
intrinsically probable. The experience of the past trial leads
us to suppose that they cannot possibly have much more
to say for themselves, but that, if they have anything what-
ever, they will most certainly say it. They had, indeed, the
grace to strike off from their late list of objections, or at least
to omit to argue some, of which Judge Crampton observes,
that " they were of such a nature as he had never heard of
before, and of which, for the credit of the Court and its
practitioners, he trusted he might never hear again."
But those which remained to be disposed of were not all
of a very creditable cast. Let us look at a few of the
answers given to them by the judge most friendly to
the traversers. In answer to the second objection,
what Judge Perrin "'principally rested on was, that Mr.
Rigby was sworn (as juror) with the express assent and con-
sent, and in some degree at the united instance and desire, of the
counsel on both sides, and with a full knowledge of the facts."
In answer to the third, he observed, that when the extension
of the trial (now objected to) was formally applied for, " the
attention of the defendants' counsel was invited to it, and
they declined to argue the subject or object." In answer to the
fourth, "he rested upon the deliberate assent and continued
acquiescence of the traversers and their counsel throughout the
trial, and making no objection till after the verdict was
found." There cannot be much more to be said when ob-
jections are raised capable of being met by such answers as
these. It is like beginning to pay in sixpences. Desperate
as they may be, they must be near the end of their cash in
hand ; and we may fairly indulge some hope that rumour is
not far wrong, and that this wearisome affair will reach what
is at least something like a conclusion about Tuesday next.
CHRONICLE.—Most of the grounds upon which the ap-
plication was placed are of a nature which renders them
unfit for discussion in the columns of a newspaper. There is
amongst them, however, one, the merits of which may, as
we think, be justly appreciated by any person of ordinary
capacity, and as that one formed the most prominent subject of
the judicial difference,ancl as it related to the case of the principal
defendant, and constituted the principal ground upon which
he relied for the success of his application, we shall take the
liberty of making a few observations upon the subject. In
the course of the trial, and for the purpose of proving that
Hr. O'Connell upon certain occasions attended certain meet-
ings, and gave utterance to certain opinions, copies were put
in of the Dublin Pilot and of the Freeman's Journal, contain-
ing what professed to be statements of the attendance of
Hr. O'Connell at these meetings, and reports of the speeches
which he was said to have there delivered. No other evi-
lance whatever was given, either of the speeches or attend-
ances, except the mere production of the newspapers them-
selves, and the question as to this point upon the motion was,
whether these newspapers had been properly received as
svidence of the truth of the statements therein contained,
of Mr. O'Connell's having attended the meetings, and given
utterance to the sentiments in question. If Mr. O'Connell
Thad been the sole defendant upon the trial, and was there
uipon a direct and substantive charge of having spoken the
speeches and attended the meetings in the manner which the
newspapers professed to record, no person having the slightest
acquaintance with subjects of that nature could be so igno-
rant as to think that the charge could be proved by the
production of the papers ; and no counsel in the empire would
so affront the good sense of any judge as to tender such do-
cuments for such a purpose. It was, however, contended, in
the present case, " upon the other side," that as the papers
in question were published by Barrett and Gray, who were
themselves upon their trial for having conspired with Mr.
O'Connell, and as the papers were evidence respectively
against the respective publishers, they were evidence against
the co-conspirator of the publishers as acts done in further-
ance of the common object by Gray and Barrett; and as,
therefore, 'being acts which, according to the law of evi-
dence relating to conspiracy, may be given in evidence
against Mr. O'Connell, although he had not personally par-
ticipated in the publication of the reports, and may, as a
matter of fact, be absolutely ignorant of their existence. It
seems to be universally acknowledged, apii we believe it
to be an undeniable fact, that such evidence was never be-
fore admitted for the purpose for which this evidence was
adduced upon the recent occasion ' • and the exposition which
the three judges of the Irish Court of Queen's Bench have
given, of the grounds of their judgment in favour of its ad-
missibility, appears to us to show very clearly that the de-
cision is as wrong as it is novel. The Chief Justice, adopting
the words of 31r. Phillipps (Treatise in Evidence, ch. 5, sec. 4),
observes that the " act of the publication being done by one
conspirator, in furtherance of the common design, was to be
considered as done by him in the character of agent to his
co-conspirators ; and, therefore, that if Mr. Barrett
published a statement of Mr. O'Connell's speeches and
proceedings at public meetings, he published it as the
egent of Mr. O'Connell." Now, in the very place where the
Chief Justice found the first part of his doctrine, he must
have also found that an exception was made in regard to
such declarations or statements as consisted in relations of
antecedent events. The conclusion, therefore, which the
chief Justice drew from one part of the text, was actually
prohibited by another, and that which his Lordship has de-
duced as a consequence from the rule, is declared by his own
'authority to be an exception to it. As this matter is all
within the department of Sir James Graham, we recom-
mend the Right Honourable Baronet to step from his own
chamber in the Home-office to that of Mr. Samuel
March Phillipps, and to ask that learned and able person
whether what one of the several conspirators may have stated
in the form of a narration of a past occurrence, can be given
in evidence against any other individual of the same party?
In answer to this question, we presume that Mr. Phillipps
will give the same information to Sir James Graham that he
has already given to the rest of the world in the 4th section
of the sth chapter of his "Treatise upon the Law of Evi-
dence." The published accounts of the judgment of Mr.
Justice Burton represent him as concurring in the judgment
of the Chief Justice, upon the same grounds and upon the
same authority, and making the same omission of any re-
ference to the exception which we have already men-
tioned, and which, in fact, altogether governs the present
ease. In regard to Mr. Justice Burton, it is, however,
extremely singular that, in support of his own and the
Chief Justices view, of the admissibility of such papers for
such a purpose, he actually refers to the case of the " King v.
Hardy," which is the very authority upon which Mr. Phil-
lipps relies for their exclusion. But the extravagance to
which Mr. Justice Crampton has carried this novel doctrine
is perfectly romantic, and absolutely soars into the sublime
of the absurd. lie says, " that even though every speech
and every fact stated in the newspapers were false, they were
as much evidence against Mr. O'Connell as if he had written
every line of them." This is one of those daring flights of
imagination before which criticism falls prostrate in utter
and impotent amazement.
GLOBE—By a piece of paltry manoeuvring, in perfect
keeping with their paltry tactics, the Tories managed on
Thursday night to prevent Mr. Christie from bringing on
his motion for inquiry into the constitution and present con-
dition of the two Universities, with a view to assimilate them
to the changed circumstances of the country, and thus ex-
tend their usefulness, in conformity with the design of their
founders. The mode in which the Conservatives—of all
abuses—effected this was explained by Mr. Christie on the
following evening. To that explanation we refer in
justification of the term we have used to designate their con-
duct. We do not charge this act of disreputable trickery
upon the members of the Government. It was concocted
and executed by honourable, but—except in such duties—
very insignificant, gentlemen who occupy the third and
fourth seats behind the Treasury Bench. These worthy in-
struments of the party seem incapable of any higher eleva-
tion of thought or act. In this instance they had just dis-
cernment enough to see that the statements by which
the Honourable Member for Weymouth would support his
motion for inquiry would open the eyes of the public to facts
they are unwilling should become known ; but without
having sufficient foresight to discern the consequences of
fnat__lon,
burking those statements. Those who plotted for the pur-
pose of stifling the motion may rest assured that the course
-taken to prevent the statements and arguments of the Hon.
I:4o:bdebreifnrgrosmtattnmuteteeidon.ting the public eye has tended to strengthen
he generally received impression that a searching investi-
with
ose
a yiews,Etoixsaangnegceeessrxattaeedrnysa,ive renovation and reform
mind, calked up by the efforts at concealment, apprehensions emlnmsu s'eontnts,
atwi n nit
will tend
et e
publicndistantd
tto
!norms° the demand for an extensive and _ salutary change. The
motion fir inquiry is merely postponed; the temporary de-
haft has sustained will tend to facilitate the "
object, instead
al stippreasins the investigation. No expectation was enter-
tainted ibet the inquiry would hare been obtained, as the inv.

EVENING SEDERUNT.
The Assembly met again at half-past seven, and pro
ceeded to take up

THE CASE OF BANFF.
The facts of this case appear to lbe these:—On the.
10th of August last, a presentation in favour of the Rev.
George Henderson, minister at Cullen, by the Earl of
Seafield, was given into the Presbytery of Fordyce, and ;
sustained by them, and the usual steps ordered to be
taken towards a moderation in the call. The Presby-
tery met for the moderation of the call on the 24th of
August—Lord Aberdeen's Act having received the
Royal assent seven days previous. The call having
been signed by twenty-s-x persons, heritors and mem-
bers of the congregation, the Presbytery, in terms of,
and in the spirit of, Lord Aberdeen's Act, intimated
that, if there were any objections to be offered, they
were then ready to receive them. A list of reasons and
objections, amounting to fourteen in number, were ac-
cordingly given in, signed by forty-four parishioners ;
and included objections to " the exuberance of his ani-
mal spirits"—to his preaching being " incoherent, un-
connected, and ill-deduced"—to his " natural defect of
utterance"—to his want of " a musical ear"—and to
the sordid motives which they believed had influenced
the presentee in accepting the presentation. The Pres-
bytery, without giving any opinion of the relevancy of
the objections, allowed a probation of the same. After a
very tedious procedure, the Presbytery, on the 28th. of
March, came to the opinion that many of the ob-
jections were very frivolous, and that those objections
only were relevant which related to the alleged fact
of Mr. Henderson's preaching being " incoherent, un-
connected, and ill-deduced," and of his not being
distinctly heard because of a defect in his utterance ;
but that in regard to the former of these, the evidence
was extremely contradictory. The Presbytery, how-
ever, resolved, because of the novel situation in which
the recent Act of Parliament had placed the law, to
refer simpliciter the case to the Synod of Aberdeen.
The matter having come before the Synod in April last,
the Synod referred the case to the General Assembly.
Mr. Pyper, advocate, appeared for the presentee ; Mr.
Penney, advocate, for the objectors; the Rev. Dr. Mearns
and Mr. W. Grant for the Synod.
There was a preliminary point which occupied the
House for a considerable time, viz., an appeal by the
presentee against a judgment of the Synod, dismissing
a petition and complaint against the competency of the
Presbytery to treat this case under Lord Aberdeen's
Act, which was not in existence when the appellant's
presentation was granted and sustained. The Assembly
repelled the objection, and ordered the parties to pro-
ceed to state the merits of the case, which they accord-
ingly did.
Parties being removed, a discussion ensued, when Mr.
GIBBON, of Lonmay, moved—" That the Assembly sus-
tain the reference from the Synod of Aberdeen ; find
that there is full evidence that the people of Banff will
not wait upon the ministrations of Mr. Henderson—that
the people of Cullen are affectionately attached to him ;
that he is useful in his present, charge ; and that there
is no prospect of greater good to the Church by his
translation to Banff."—(Laughter.)
Dr. CooK then addressed the Assembly, and after
some remarks said he wished—he did not make a motion
—that the matter should be sent back to the Presbytery,
with instructions to proceed in the constitutional deed
of ascertaining whether there is ground for the transla-
tion, and to report to the Commission, which meets in
, August, and let them pronounce a decision upon it.
Professor ROBERTSON, of Ellon, said he could come to
no other conclusion than that they should send the ob-
, jections back to the Presbytery, remitting to the Pres-
, bytery to cognosce and judicially decide upon the ob-
, jections, and in the event of appeals or complaints, that
the whole case should be brought up to the Commission
in August, when it should be ready and ripe for decision.
, In this motion the Assembly concurred ; after which
, they adjourned at two o'clock in the morning.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
EDINBURGH, FRIDAY, MAY, 24.
UNIVERSITY TESTS.

The overtures on the subject of the University Tests
were read, when •
Principal MACFARLA!! said—lf ever there was an oc-
casion when it was justifiable to allude to a subject so
unimportant as the personal feelings of an individual, I be-
lieve that this is one. Sure I am that I never rose to ad-
dress the General Assembly or any other body with such
a distressing consciousness of my own inability to do jus-
tice to the subject which I have now taken the liberty to
bring under your consideration. The extent and the im-
portance of the subject appals me. The apathy, to me
unaccountable, which prevails in some parts of the
Church and the country requires no common effort to
dispel; but I take encouragement from the well-known
kindness and indulgence of the Assembly, to which I
have been often and deeply indebted, from the intelli-
gence of the members, and from the zeal with which I
know, when they are convinced of the importance of the
cause, they will embark in a measure which involves
the great interests of a national and Christian education
in our beloved country. The overtures upon the subject
show that they have been called forth by a variety of
measures which have been recently adopted by dissent-
ing bodies, by the Universities, and by municipal cor-
porations, for an alteration of the law of the land
in respect to the connection. between the Church and
the Universities. And
T? proceeding to lay before
you my views in connection with this topic, perhaps
mseoa
nw itl
ol bper
ofiprosste ttoo r et
ha de
mchention that it was my original
the best method
Athsesemrebslo;.utilonsmawyhi
of dot...Tng
purpose to have moved that we present a petition to
the Legislature. Had the question remained in the
same state that it was two months ago, when a legisla-
tive measure was in dependence, I should have persisted
in my resolution ; but as it is well known that a motion
was made for leave to bring in a Bill upon the subject,
and that that motiou was refused by the House of Com-
mons, I think that we should be deficient in consideration
for that respectable branch of the Legislature if we were
now to trouble them
with unnecessarily any direct
application. But think it proper that the Assembly
should adopt a series of resolutions expressive of their
view of the importance of this question, and should cause
these resolutions to be circulated, not only within their
jurisdiction, but that they should be communicated in
some shape or other to the Legislature. The resolutions
I mean to propose are as follow:-
1. That the General Assembly regard the moral
and religious education of youth in universities, public
institutions, and parochial schools, as a national object
of unspeakable importance,. and productive of the highest
benefits to every country in which it has been success-
fully conducted and maintained.
2. That for this purpose the religious and educa-
tional establishments of Scotland have at all times been
closely connected, to their mutual advantage and secur-
ity, and their connection kept up by a number of Le-
gislative enactments, particularly the Act of Security,
1707, providing, among other safeguards of our national
Church, that professors in Scottish universities " shall
before, or at their admission, acknowledge and profess,
and shall subscribe to the Confession of Faith of the
Church of Scotland, as the confession of their faith, and
that they will practice and conform themselves to the
worship presently in use in this Church, and never en-
deavour, directly or indirectly, the prejudice or subver-
sion of the same."
3. That this Act is not an ordinary statute, but part
of a solemn national compact, insisted on as an indispen-
sable condition of even treating for an union with Eng-
land, engrossed in that treaty as
." a fundamental and
essential condition thereof," in all time coming; of vital
importance to the prosperity and existence of the Church
of Scotland, and not to be altered or abrogated without
endangering the constitution of our country in Church
and State.
4. That the Church of Scotland has hitherto reposed
unlimited confidence in the security and protection af-
forded by this law, confirmed as it has been by the sa-
cred oath taken by all British Sovereigns on their ac-
cession to the throne, and no less by the assurances so
often given and repeated to this Assembly by our pre-
sent beloved and most gracious Sovereign, of having
their rights and privileges, as established by the laws of
this kingdom, inviolably maintained and preserved.
5. That while the General Assembly rejoices in un
disturbed tranquillity the fullest confidence in the. fulfi'
ment of those assurances, they cannot but view wi,
some measure of anxiety the attempts which have been
recently made in various quarters to deprive the Church
of an essential element of its security, by dissevering
from it the most important establishments of public edu-
cation,—the petitions which have been presented to both
Houses of Parliament for the repeal of that part of the
Act of Security which relates to professors in universi-
ties, and the motion actually, though unsuccessful:y,
made for leave to introduce a Bill founded on those pe-
titions into the House of Commons.
6. That under these circumstances the General As-
sembly feel called on to declare, that etthy would consider
the repeal of the clause referred to n e Act. of Secu-
rity, as a direct attack on their most valuable rghts and
privileges, as a fearful obstacle to the training and edu-
cation of young men for the holy ministry ▪
our d land,
as inflicting a deadly injury on the Universi▪ ties of
i Scot-
land, by shaking the confidence of the public n the
principles of their professors, and as a measure fraught
with peril to the ecclesiastical establishments and educa-
tional institutions, not of Scotland only, but of every
part of the British empire. Such a change they must
earnestly deprecate and oppose on every occasion by all
lawful and constitutional means.
7. That these resolutions be printed, and copies of

NOMINATION AT KILMARNOCK. 1
(From the Scotch Reformers' Gazette.)
KILMARNOCK, SATURDAY.—This was an exciting day
in Kilmarnock. By Mr. Robertson retiring, the ground
remained clear for the Hon. Edward P. Bouverie, Refor-
mer • Mr. Henry Vincent, Chartist ; and Mr. Henry
T. Prinsep, Tory. Shortly after 12, as these gentlemen
approached the Council Chambers, and appeared on the
balcony, they were severally loudly cheered—Mr. Vin-
cent, as a matter of course, coming in for a double share
of popular favour. The windows of the opposite buildings
were filled with the beauty and fashion of the district ;
and the house-tops were clad by a number of anxious
and daring adventurers.
Mr. Sheriff Bell officially commenced the business of
the day. Mr. Sheriff-substitute Jameson was also on
the platform, as was also Provost Brown, Bailies Black-
wood, Wilson, and Young, Sir J. Campbell, Sir J. C.
Fairlie, Charles WAllister, Esq., E. H. J. Craufurd, Esq.,
Auchenames ; J. Pattison, Esq., Cunninghamhead; P.
Cowan, Esq., Ayr ; G. Mitchell, Esq., Glasgow; D. R.
Andrews, Esq., writer; L. Lamond, Esq., writer, &c.
Mr. HUGH CRAIG, ex-Chartist, in a highly laudatory
speech, proposed Mr. Henry Vincent, with the confident
expectation that ere long he would be the Right Hon.
Sir Heary Vincent, Prime Minister of England ! This
auspicious announcement was received with loud cheers.
Mr. GEORGE OSBORNE seconded the nomination.
Provost BROWN came before the meeting, not to make
a long speeeh, but simply to propose the Hon. T. P.
Bouverie as a fit and proper repretentative.
Bailie YOUNG seconded this nomination, and expressed
his conviction that Mr. Vincent's appearance would only
divide the Reform interest.
Mr. WM. WALLACE proposed Mr. Prinsep, the Con-
servative candidate.
Mr. J. Tuomsos seconded the nomination.
Mr. VINCENT then stepped forward, and in a long and
highly popular manner addressed the multitude, eschew-
ing all party feeling—appealing to the sense of justice
and conviction of his hearers—and leaving the result of
the contest in the hands of the Reformers themselves.
He denied the assertion that had been made, that he
came to divide the Reform constituency, and asserted
that he was the only candidate who could honestly come
forward, and appeal to the people.
The Hon. P. BOUVERIE then addressed the meeting,
and stated that, respecting as he did the character, and
honouring the abilities, and appreciating nearly all the
political principles of Mr. Vincent, he could not go the
whole length that that gentleman was prepared to go.
In reference to his other opponent, Mr. Bouverie consi-
dered that he was totally unfit to represent the people.
Mr. Bouverie then defined the true meaning of the term
Conservative—that a Conservative is truly a Tory,
opposed to the alteration of the corn-laws, and the im-
provement of colonial interchange laws. Having illus-
trated at length the evils of these restrictive laws—and
dwelling on the absurdity of rejecting slave sugar, and
accepting slave-grown cotton and tobacco,--Mr. Bouverie
concluded by a hearty appeal to the numerous assembly,
which was favourably received.
Mr. PRINSEP then addressed the assemblage, but his
Conservative opinions were far from being palatable,
and he was accordingly but indifferently received, being
frequently interrupted by loud and repeated marks of
dissapprobation.
The SHERIFF then took a show of hands—first for
Mr. Vincent, when a whole forest was shown—next for
Mr. Bouverie, when comparatively few appeared ; and
as for Mr. Prinsep, we only observed a stout gentleman
in the centre holding up both hands !
The SHERIFF then declared Mr. Vincent elected by
show of hands, but intimated that a poll was demanded
by the other two candidates, which would take place on
Tuesday, commencing at eight in the morning.—Scotch
Reformers' Gazette.
h

ISLINGTON LITERARY AND SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY.
—The junior members of this Society met on Friday
evening, at Highbury, to commemorate the Queen's
Birth-day, W. 11. Butterfield, Esq., son of Admiral But-
terfield, in the chair. The usual loyal toasts were drank.
That of Prince Albert, in connexion with literature and
art, was received with enthusiasm. The Chairman, on
the navy being proposed, took occasion to observe, that
if the wooden walls of Old England had been able to
maintain the supremacy of the seas, surely, when iron
Old steam came into play, the skill and ingenuity of our
engineers and artificers would be equally successful.
This allusion to a recent brochure elicited warm applause.
GOING, GOING, GONE !—On Thursday last, at an
auction of household furniture in the Pleasance, among
other articles to be disposed of was a cage containing a
beautiful goldfinch, respecting which the auctioneer,
having praised its musical qualities to the highest de-
gree, and raised its price to the desired point, was pro-
nouncing the final " Going, gone—gone ! " when lo !
the bird contrived at that very moment to escape from
the cage, and make its exit out at the window, to the
astodisment of the auctioneer, the laughter of the com-
pany, and the great delight, no doubt, of the poor goldie
itself !—Scotsman.