The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1845

dom
Lear

was placed.—
ned Member

properly drew
Scotland any

'nu r:t, begged to resre is 4 eie iieuse thas in ore
t important particular alone the was a marked similitude
bet eseen the collegiate institution. of tee, two countries. He
alluded to the fact that the Church of Scotland drew its mi-
nistry solely from the Scottish universities. 'fhe Government
were under solemn engagements to that Church by the Act
of Leghlative Union between the two countries, and it was
useless to tell him that the late separation in the establishment
had dissolved their engagements. It was no such thing, and
therefore Government could not, consistently with their duty to
the people of Scotland, allow this Bill to be read a second time.
But new, turning to the constitution of the Scottish Church,
he was prepared to show that the principals of the universities
in Scotland exercised a general superintendence over the stu-
dents admitted into these colleges. They observed that no
doctrines of a noxious tendency were inculculated; and the
House ought also to remember that the great majority of the
professors of the university were also members of the Esta-
blished church of Scotland. He repeated it, that the profes-
sors exercised a salutary control over the members of those uni-
versities ; and if Dissenters were admitted to these honours.
there was a power existing to prevent ally evil, and, at the
same time, to allow them any liberty to which, a. subjects of the
British empire, they were entitled. In that stormy period of
Scotland's history, when every interest was in a state of dis-
order, within the walls of the universities all was peace. It
would be remembered that professors were nominated
by certain municipal authorities, as in Edinburgh and
Glasgow. In the first city the members of town council
had the power of nominating the principals of the colleges ;
and as regarded the Church of Scotland it was urged by the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Ma-
caulay) that it was in a minority. He should be disposed to
question that statement. The Church of Scotland, he thought,
were in numbers greater than the followers of the Dissenting
Churches. It had been stated that very great names were op-
posed to the present system of Church establishments, and those
of Doctors Chalmers, Cunningham, and Candlish had been
cited in support of that assertion. As far as those gentlemen
were concerned, they had not expressed themselves opposed to
the present law, they were in favour of the extension of it.
On the motion that. the Bill be read a second time, and after
strangers had been ordered to withdraw,
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said that he regretted that no Gen-
tleman on the opposite side had risen to reply to the remarks
of the Right Hon. Baronet and the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Edinburgh. He had heard with the deepest
pain the speech of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr.
Macaulay), and it was with not a little astonishment that he
bad listened to one observation which had fallen from that
Hon. Member ; and he could scarcely believe his senses when
he heard the Church of Scotland denounced as a factious as-
semblage—as a branch which ought to be cut off. What was
the state of Scotland? 1: r as well known that Scotland was
in a state of religious h ensior, and he was grieved to find
thee some of the Memoers of that House were ready to lend
their assistance to the fomentation of that difference which was
already unhappily so great. He believed that the indiscreet
language of several of the members of the Free Church had
led to this spirit of opposition. The spirit of the Church of
Scotland was entirely opposed to those principles which occa-
sioned division. It should be recollected that they were not
about to impose any new tests, but simply to preserve the old
ones, and he believed that this was the time to abolish any of
those means by which the conduct of the universities in Scot-
land was secured. The corporation of Edinburgh appointed
twelve out of the twenty professors, and it was well known that
the whole tendency of the popular excitement in Scotland was
towards the Free Church. Now it should be recollected that
the whole of those tests were regebeedeby ttke senatus acade-
micus. It was of little consequence whether the officers of the
several colleges were appointed by the popular voice or by the
professors. He was one of that party—he believed it was a
great party in that House—who felt that it was necessary for the
Church of Scotland to be connected with the State.—
( Hear, hear)—and he wished to know how the Church
was to be supplied unless the universities were under
regulations which would enable them to supply the churches
with ministers of principles similar to those on which the
church was conducted ? It might be presumptuous in him to
differ from the Right Hon. Gentleman in points of history,
but he should remind him that it was not the Act of the year
1690, before the Union, but that of 1712, which regulated the
ministerial characters of the professors of those universities.
That was the Act which transferred the patronage of those
churches to the heritors, and it was necessary, therefore, to be
careful that they did not deprive the Church of Scotland of one
of those securities which had been given by the last Act for the
government of the Church. The universities of Scotland
were even now more open than any other universities in the
kingdom, and there was, therefore, no reason to allege for the
transference of that government on which their peculiar
character depended. That was the real question. It was
not to be overlooked that the object of this motion
was to transfer the patronage of those churches and
those universities to the hands of those who were their
greatest enemies. He felt assured that in the late seees-
(inhere was to be found an immense number of persons who
xeseceded simply from attachment to their ministers. The
- tee Church of Scotland had shown the utmost readiness to
:ferry out the views of the body in an active interference with
the academies of the country. In one instance, when a college
in connexion with the Free Church, and when it was stated
that 30,000/. were wanted, no less than 20,000/. was subscribed
by a few individuals. He was no opponent to the Free
Church, for he thought that the establishment of this
Church was likely to excite a generous rivalry, such
as had been exhibited in England in consequence
of the discussions at Oxford. From that discussion a new
spirit had arisen, new churches had been built, new schools
established, and all would allow that an impulse had been dif-
fused over the whole Church. He was no opponent to the
Church of Scotland, or to those who were seeking to establish
a better system of ecclesiastical polity. He wished to see a
generous rivalry among the several portions of the community,
but he must assert that this attempt to popularise the govern-
ment of the universities was uncalled for.
Sir G. GREY felt called upon to express his surprise
at the course which the Government intended to pursue
on this question. Pressed as they were by the arguments
of his Hight Honourable Friend in opposinC,these tests,
not a single argument of the least consequence had been ad-
duced to support their continuance. He was sorry to say that
there was a total disregard.of principle on the part of the Govern-
ment. He wished to know what circumstances had occurred
during the last year to induce the Government to change
their minds to such an extent as they did upon the present
Bill? The Right Hon. Gentleman, in opposing the Bill,
had resorted to such shifts that he could not adequately de-
scribe them. He had stated, however, that in all the univer-
sities these tests existed.
Sir J. GRAHAM—In all the universities except Edin-
burgh.
Sir G. GREY replied that Sir D. K. Sandford, professor of
Greek in Glasgow was admitted through an Episcopalian pro-
test. The Hon. Gentleman said that no evil resulted from
these tests ; but the reason why they did not result in evil was
because they were never brought into actual operation. He
hoped, however, that they would not allow sectarian collegiates
to be tolerated in these countries. He would on these grounds
give the Bill his most cordial support. If the bond of union
between Church and State in Scotland was the system of
patronage which existed, he should like to know how long
the integrity of the Church would continue, as the great ma-
jority of the patrons were Episcopalian Protestants? This
was a sample of the expedients which Hon. Gentlemen were
obliged to resort to. lie hoped the Government would not
look to the opinion of the General Assembly alone in this
matter, but that they would re-consider the course which they
had determined to adopt on this question, and remove for ever
sectarian education from the colleges and institutions of the
country.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS hoped that he would be acquitted
of any disrespect, if he said that the speech of his Hon.
Friend had only one argument of any value which called for
the least attention. If it was true, said the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, that the Church, as established in 1707, and by the
subsequent Acts in 1712 and 1742, was not the same Church
as now established, he would ask, where the Church was to
which the State was allied, and which required these Acts ?
The argument of his Right Hon. Friend proved too much.
Ile could never conceal from himself that it was his duty to
promote the right of the Church to which he belonged, and
in Christian charity he was equally bound to support the
Church as at present established in Scotland. The question
was not whether they would impose tests, but whether they
would preserve those which had been considered necessary
for the preservation of the Established Church of Scotland.
To say that this was persecution was a very different reading
of the word to what he had been accustomed to. He thought
it was not fair for the Right lion. Gentlemen who made the
motion, and the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, to
taunt the Right Hun. Gentleman ( Sir James Graham) with
treating Ireland on a different footing in respect to collegiate
education. His opinion was that the two countries were placed
in different circumstances. There was no analogy whatever be-
tween them. He would certainly now look upon the
Free Church of Scotland, which had withdrawn itself from the
Establishment not from a difference of creed, but on a point of
Church government, as not deserving of any privilege what-
ever. He thought the Church of Scotland should continue to
receive that protection which it deserved, and that the vote this
night would show, in a marked manner, what was the feeling of
the House on this important question.
Mr. PRINGLE did not like the House to come to a deci-
sion upon the Bill without affording him an opportunity of re-
cording his opposition to it. The Government who had thought
proper to establish those institutions imposed those tests, and
he considered that it was only due to the Church of Scotland to
fence it round by such provisions. He did not consider, how-
ever, that the members of the Free Church, any more than
Episcopalian Protestants, were bound by them. The object of
those tests was to prevent the subversion of the Church.
They were not of much use in themselves, but
they were indirectly of great benefit.—( Hear, hear. )
lie had seven petitions to present to•night which he had not
the opportunity of producing. He thought that if the whole
Church were consulted on the matter, they would express their
opinions in the same terms as were exhibited in the language
of those petitions. These tests had been in existence for 150
years, and during that period there was no clamour raised—
there was no complaint urged, and it was only within these
last two years that they were inclined to force from their
educational colleges all religious tests. Why should the Church
pf Scotland alone be deprived of that right which belonged to
use Church of England.? What would be the con-
sequence of passing this measure? It was his opinion
that if it passed, in the town council of Edinburgh
every elect; en would be more or less dep
d . endant
The students on the
in the
relh
gious commun:en of the persons hppointe
universities would be influenced in the same way. This mea-
sure was not directed against the principal establishments in
Scotland—it went much Nether, it was intended to affect the
supposed system of education generally, and it would strike a
blow that would be generally deprecated. He was entirely
against any measure that would tend to sever eound religion
from sound education.
Mr. C. BULLER said that the test that was
at pruopossed dove
e
continued by the Hon. Gentleman who had jst
aught to be the first to be abolished. The test which Sir D.
Sanford took was, that he would practice and conform to the
worship in use in the said church. He would like to know what
better plan was there that the most subtle enemy of the rights
of conscience could devise to keep out all the members of
other Churches, then to extract from persons a declaration that
they would practise the worship of a Church to which they
did not belong. The argument now in favour of the ab-
sence of bests in the Irish colleges was, that they would create a
sectarian system of education, and would work out religious
distinctions. Was that state of things peculiar to Ireland ?
No ; thanks'
to the Government, who had placed Scotland in
the same position as Ireland in that respect, the same argu-
ment could be applied to Scotland also. He saw with great
regret the course which the Government had -taken upon this
subject. In truth, it was an attempt to impose new tests.
'The great body of the clergy of the Free Church of Scotland
had petitioned against the imposition of tests, and now was
the time to conciliate that Church. By passing this Bill they
would effect that conciliation, and the cost of that conciliation
would merely be the abolition of a few tests.
The LORD ADVOCATE said the Bill was intended to re-
peal a part of the Act of Settlement. The Bill proposed to
abolish tests without any proposition for new ones in their stead
being made. He was not aware that any body of the Dissen-
ters of Scotland had expressed an opinion in favour of this Bill.
The resolution of the Free Church did not do it. The leading
members of that Church were not in favour of this Bill at ?Al.
He did not think that it had, been shown that any practichl
evil had resulted from the imposition of the tests at present in
orce. If no eiri had resulted from these tests, what ground

Hear, hear.) The
lad remarked that

Honourable and
English gentle-
tho un,versates

Cambrid

could there be for the abolition ? He did not believe that any
etas- in Scotland was in favour of the entire abolition of tests
in the universities of Scotland. Dr. Candlish hsd avid he
wauld rather have the present tests than rio tests at all. The
Di-seeters wisned the tests to be alteied, so as to
s.itnit their • own body to the universities; but they would
rather the present tests continued than have no
security at all, for in that case, if there were no tests at
all, persons who were of no religion would gain admis-
sion to the universities. Why pass the Bill; why proceed with
the measure—a measure which would be acceptable to no one ?
Part of the education inculcated on the students was logic,
moral philosophy, Greek, Latin, and mathematics; to the two
former sciences, viz., logic and moral philosophy, theology was
intimately connected, but it was proposed by this Bill to render
it obligatory on the Established Churchman to attend those lec-
tures as by professors of a different belief. Such a course was
eminently inconsistent, and would only serve to introduce dis-
satisfaction, if not irreligion. The system proposed was wholly
in contradiction to that pursued in Trinity College, Dublin,
and he trusted it would be discountenanced by the House.
Mr. P. M. STEWART, amid loud cries of" Divide," said,
that after the admirable speeches of the Members for Leith
and Edinburgh, the latter still remaining unanswered, he
would trespass but a few minutes on the attention of the
House. The opponents of the Bill had treated with contempt
the opinion of the majority of the people of Scotland, for the
Free Church undoubtedly comprised the vast majority of that
country, and had despised petitions presented from that eminent
body. The Government had now in their power, by passing
this Act, to offer a boon to a divided Church—to heal dissen-
sions—to afford relief when most required—and to consult the
universal opinion of the people of Scotland. Let the Govern-
ment adopt some decided course; let them adopt the motto
incribcd on a banner, yesterday unfolded by one of their officers
at his re-election—" Principle and no expediency ;" and thus
entail honour on themselves, and confer justice on the Church.
In the words of the Act which proposed the original test to
advance the religion of Scotland and the good of the Church,
they would at once take a better view of the case and oppose
the Bill, for which Scotland would be lastingly grateful
throughout the Church and the country.
Sir R. PEEL said he had never concealed from himself the
difficulties with which her Majesty's Ministers would have to
contend in bringing forward any scheme for the education of
the youth of Scotland. It had subjected the Government to
charges which had been most unjustly brought against them OR
a previous occasion. It had been said that theprinciples which
had been adopted as to Ireland necessarily compelled the Go-
vernment to adopt a similar principle in other parts of the em-
pire. He would ask, what were the circumstances under which
these new academical institutions were founded? It was wished to
provide at the expense of the State good secular education. It is
not proposed to insist on a system of sectarian education, nor to
educate ministers for the Church in Ireland ; nor was it pro-
posed to separate religion from the education which it was in-
tended to give. Having carefully considered the circumstances
of Ireland, the Government had called upon individuals to
make provision for the religious education of the young men at
the colleges. There might be found existing, both in Ireland
and in other parts of the empire, institutions of great antiquity
intended for the education of ecclesiastics and ministers of the
Church. In this very metropolis there existed King's College
for the education of clergymen of the Establishment. In Ire-
land we find Dublin University established for a similar pur-
pose. Maynooth also existed for the Roman Catholics ;
and in the north of Ireland a college for the edu-
cation of Presbyterian ministers had been founded.
It was quite true that the Government had not imposed on the
professors the taking of any particular test, but then they were
told they were guilty of some inconsistency because they did
not follow the sage course with respect to Scotland as they
had pursued towards Ireland. It was not intended to alter
Dublin University or Trinity College. The Government had
been charged with inconsistency because they had not opened
Trinity College to the Roman Catholics. The Government
had desired to establish these colleges with the understanding
that the same principle must not necessarily be applied to similar
institutions. These colleges were to be founded so as to meet
the special circumstances of Ireland, and they defended the
establishment of those institutions on those grounds. A suf-
ficient guarantee and security had been provided for the integrity
of the professors. It was proposed to give to the Crown the
absolute power of appointment, and the absolute power of re-
moval, and that was the substitute for any test to be Oten.
What was the case in Scotland? There were certain acade-
mical institutions which were immediately connected with the
Church. In these institutions the ministers of the Church
generally received their education. The proposed Bill ad-
mitted that the academical institutions of Scotland were con-
nected with the Church. It was especially provided in the
Bill that nothing should extend to interfere with the chairs of
divinity in any of the universities of Scotland. The Bill re-
cognised a material distinction between the collegiate establish-
ments of Scotland and those about to be instituted in Ireland.
It would be found that an engagement had been entered into
at the Union that the professors of those universities should
make a certain subscription implying compliance with the
doctrines of the Church. Could there be a doubt as to the
meaning of the requirements of the Act of Union? It was ex-
plicitly laid down that the professors of these universities,
before their appointment, should subscribe to the " Confession
of Faith" as the confession of their faith. The Right Hon.
Gentleman admitted the binding force of that engagement.
He said he would not attempt to quibble it away. The Right
Hon. Baronet, after having• alluded to the tests established in
1711 by an Act of Parliament passed in the reign of Queen
Anne, and showing the consistency of resuming tests which had
been in disuetude for 130 years past ; and speaking also of the
disruptions that had taken place of late years in the Scottish
Church, continued to say that the Government had been told
that no tests had been required in the new institutions in Ire-
land, and (the objection might be further urged, that there
were good grounds to abolish that principle in the English
universities. He had contemplated the proposed schemes for the
education of the youth of Ireland, and had thought it might be
a great benefit. The Bill for the Scottish universities pro-
vided that all the professors of divinity should be subject to
the tests. The Government had been assured that the Bill
would meet with general concurrence on the part of the people
of Scotland. If it had been otherwise, the Government, per-
haps, would not have been perfectly willing to have agreed to it.
What petitions had the people of Scotland forwarded in favour
of the measure ? He believed there had been one or two peti-
tions, but these did not contain the opinion of the people in
favour of the repeal of these tests.
Mr. HUME—There have been no petitions against—all in
favour.
Sir R. PEEL—The Hon. Member says none against. Since
the Bill had been brought before the House the General As-
sembly of the Church of Scotland had met, and it had declared
itself not in favour, but against the Bill, and prayed that the
Act of Union should be maintained. He (Sir Robert Peel)
was not prepared to set aside the Act of Union entered
into with the people of Scotland. He was not pre-
pared to set aside the guarantees of the Act of Union with-
out great consideration, especially as the people of Scotland had
not expressed themselves against it. Was there a general desire
among them that these tests should be removed, on the
grounds that they were against the sense and interest of the
people, then he should hold it to be a matter worthy of serious
consideration. But even then such a step should not be
sEghtly regarded. They ought not on slight grounds to inter-
fere with that which constituted the basis of a national compact.
—( Hear, hear.) They had desired to extend the benefits of
academical education to Ireland, and it had been objected to
that measure that the danger was the principle with regard to
the appointment of professors which it contained would be
extended to Trinity College, Dublin, and to the English and
. Scotch universities. There was, however, a great distinction
between those institutions established for the purposes of aca-
demical education, and institutions established for other pur-
poses—institutions set apart for religious instruction, and of
great antiquity—( Hear, hear)—guaranteed by particular
compact, founded for the purposes of theological education and
the instruction of the ministers of religion, who were to exercise
spiritual influence over the people. He did think it necessary to
apply a different rule to these institutions to that he proposed
for the Irish academical institutions. He would not consent
to alter the law so that the professors and instructors of youth
in the principles of religion should be exempted from those
tests which were guaranteed by the national compact, and
which the opinion and feeling of the country required.—
( Cheers, and loud cries of " Divide.")
Lord J. RUSSELL thought it was hardly necessary to argue
the question further.—( Loud cheers.) He had been taught to
consider that religion was a matter of principle, and that it was
necessary to maintain it as useful and beneficial to the State.
He could understand the tenacity of the Hon. Member for the
University of Oxford (Sir R. Inglis) in support of the tests
and privileges of the universities, and he could comprehend the
motives of those who looked upon those tests as cobwebs and
snares to entrap the unwary. Those who entertained such
opinions about the injurious nature of tests, as well as the Hon.
Member for the University for Oxford, could well defend their
opinions ; but as for the Government, it neither held one opi-
*on nor the other. They (the Government) told them one day
there was no need of religious tests, that they were utterly useless;
and the next day they came down to the House and told them
that tests were absolutely necessary for the maintenance of
religion in Scotland, and that in the language of the Lord
Advocate, they should not, by any means, act on latitudinarian
principles. He put it the House whether Ministers ought not
to assert one principle or the other—(Loud cheers)—whether
they were to act on one principle in dealing with the Irish
Colleges Bill, and on other re incip'es when dealing with English
or Scotch universities?—(Loud cheers.) It was not sufficiei
for them to be told that such a course of proceeding was to
serve the particular interest of the Ministry.—(Hear, hear.)
He had heard an old story of two knights who met each other
on different sides of a shield, one side of which was black and
the other white; they fought a desperate battle in support of
their opinions respecting the colour of the shield, the one
knight maintaining that the shield was black, and the other
asserting it was white. But the Ministry did something more
than this. At one time they maintained that the shield was
black, at another they declared that it was white. They sup-
ported one or two other principles alternately, so that it was
impossible to know what they really meant on any matter
involving the religious interests of the country.--( Cheers.)
He believed that these tests only entangled scrupulous persons,
and furnished no guard against infidelity. That such tests did
not fulfil the object for which they were intended, he need only
refer to three notable examples—Lord Bolingbroke, Mr. Hume,
and Mr. Gibbon—all of whom held important appointments
under the Government. These tests did not prevent these men
holding these appointments. They were eood Tories and
b
Churchmen, though entertaining their well-known opinions on
religious questions.—( Hear, hear.) But the tests under consi-
deration did not exclude from the universities those men who
held different doctrines to those cf Presbyterianism. They
excluded those who agreed with all the leading doctrines of the
Presbyterian Church, but who differed upon points of Church
Government only. On this ground the tests shut out professors
of natural philosophy and mathematics. If any man, a teacher
of malthematics, did not hold with the policy of the present
General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, he was excluded
from all chance of filling a professor's chair. He happened to
knew the futility of these tests, having attended the University
of Edinburgh, and been present at the lectures of the celebrated
Dugald Stewart. The class that attended the teachings of
that great philosopher was composed of all denominations. At
the close of the session a Committee was formed to draw up an
address to be presented to that celebrated man,
which was composed of a Presbyterian and a
Member of the Church of :England, while the
party who drew up the address was a Roman Catholic—then
Lord Killeen, now the Earl of Fingall.—( Hear, hear.) It was
said that the clergy of the Church of Scotland had not peti-
tioned in favour of the Bill. This was not to be wondered at,
as they were, in fact, the excluding body.—( Hear, hear.)
Suppose they were to ask the Primate of Ireland, or the clergy
under his care, their feelings on the expediency of the May-
ne/eh Loud cries of " Hear, hear ")—what would be the
result ? Whv, he doubted if there were five or six of the clergy
would suppori that measure, or even the New Colleges Bill.
( Cries of " Hear, hear.") The appealing to theno clergy of
the Church of Scotland was, therefore, sound
this question.
criterion to guide the House in legislating on
But really after all, without entering into the question any fur-
ther, lie was disposed to ask the House to establish either one
or the other of the principles he had enumerated. His Hon.
Friend the Member for Oxford ( Sir H. Inglis) said the Go-
vernment had a general policy, and that they had made an ex-
ception to that policy in favour of the Irish colleges. But let
them adopt one principle or the other, and do not
let the country ask what it was. It would he
most injurious that the opinion of the country
should be altogether shaken—that there should be no
resting-place on any principlel by that House. If they adopted
a vacillating course, t epeople of England would be at first be-
wildered, but when they came to their senses, they would con-
demn the conduct which had led them into this painful di-
lemma, He had; theraore, to appal t 9 the House, a# he be-

gan, not to suffer this stain on their character—to trust upon
the Government of the day—and to let the House of Commons
remain in future free from such a stain, and not to be touched
by such a dishonour.—( Great cheering.)
he House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the motion .. —8
The announcement was received with great cheering by the
Opposition.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

( From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
WEDNESDAY, JULY 9.
UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order for Second Beading read ; Motion made, and Question pro-
posed, " That the Bill be now read a second time :"—Amendment
proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at the end of the Ques-
tion to add the words " upon this day six months :"—Question put,
" That the word now' stand part of the Question." The House

MINORITY-AYES, 108.
Aglionby, H. A. Ellice, la. lion. E. Ogle, S. C.
Baillie, 11. J. Ellice, Edward Ord, William
Bailie, Walter Escott, Bickham Oswald, James
Bannerman, A. Esmonde, Sir Thos. Pechell, Captain
Baring, F. T. Etwall, Ralph Philips G. R.
Barnard, E. G. Ferguson, Sir R. A. Plumridge, Captain
Bellew, R. M. Forster, Matthew Pulsford, Robert
Berkeley, Captain Gibson, T. M. Rawdon, Col.
Bernal, Ralph Gill, Thomas Redington, T. N.
Blake, M. J. Grey, Sir George Ross, D. R.
Borthwick, Peter Grosvenor, Lord R. Russell, Lord J.
Bouverie, E. P. Hallyburton, Lord Scott, Robert
Bright, John Hustle, Archibald Seymour, Lord
Brotherton, Joseph Hawes, B. Shell, R. L.
Browne, W. Hindley, Charles Shelburne, Earl
Buller, 1. Horsman, Edward Smith, Vernon
Buller, Edward 'toward, Henry Smythe, George
Chapman, B. Howick, Viscount Somerville, Sir W.
Christie, W. D. 'Mine, Joseph Stanstleld, W. R. C.
Clay, Sir W. Humphery, Alderman Stewart, P. M.
Colebrooke, Sir T. Jervis, John Stuart, Lord J.
Cowper, W. F. Labouehere, H. Tancred, 11.-W.
Craig, W. G. Langston, J. H. Towneley, John
Crawford, W. S. Lemon, Sir C. Troubridge, Sir E.
Curteis, H. B. Loch, James Villiers, Charles
Dalmeny, Lord Macaulay, T. B. Vivian, J. li.
Dalrymple, Captain M`Taggart, Sir J. Wakley, Thomas
Denison, John E. Mangles, R. D. Wall, C. B.
Dennistoun, J. Marjoribanks, S. Warburton, H.
D'Eyncourt, C. T. Marshall, William Ward, 11. G.
Duncan, Viscount Mitcalfe, Henry Watson, W. H.
Duncan, George Mitchell, T. A. IVawn, J. T.
Duncombe, Thomas Morris, David Williams, William
Dundas, Admiral Morison, General Yorke, H. R.
Dundas, Frederick I%lorrison, James 'Maxus.
Dundas, David O'Brien, J. Hill, Lord M.
Ebringt9n, Viscount O'Connell, M. J. Tufuell, Henry

MAJORITY-NOES, 116.
A'Court, Captain Forman, T. S. Lygon, General
Acton, Colonel Fox, S. L. Mackenzie, T.
Alford, Viscount Fremantle, Sir T. Mackenzie, W. F.
Arkwright, George Fuller, A. E. M`Neill, Duncan
Ashley, Lord Gaskell, J. M. Meynell, Captain
Austen, Colonel Gladstone, 'Captain Mildmay, 11. St. John
Bailey, Joseph Gordon, Captain Neville, Ralph
Baillie, Colonel Goulburn, 11. Newdegate, C. N.
Baird, W. Graham, Sir J. Nicholl, John
Barkly, H. Granby, Marquis Northland, Viscount
Baring, W. B. Greenell, Peter Packe, C. W.
Bentinck, Lord G. Greene, Thomas Palmer, George
Bernard, Viscount Grimston, Viscount Patten, J. W.
Blackburne, J. I. Grogan, Edward Peel, Sir Robert
Bowles, Admiral Raiford, Sir H. Pringle, A.
Brisco, M. Hamilton, C. J. B. Rashlelgh, W.
Broadley, Henry llamilton, George A. Renton, G. W. J.
Bruce, Lord E. Hamilton, W. J. Rolleston, Colonel
Bruges, W. H. L. Hamilton, Lord C. ganderson, Richard
Buck, W. L. Hampden, Renn Seymour, Sir H.
Buckley, Edmund Harcourt, G. G. Shaw, Frederick
Burrell, Sir C. Ilarris, Captain Smith, T. B. C.
Campbell, Sir Hugh Henley, J. W. Somerset, Lord G.
Cardwell, Edward Herbert, Sidney Spooner, Richard
Carew, W. H. P. Hogg, J. AV Sutton, H. 31.
Clerk, Sir G. Holmes, W. A'Court Taylor, Edward
Clive, R. 11. - Hope, Sir John Torment, J. E.
Cockburn, Sir G. Hope, Charles Trench, Sir F. W.
Corry, Henry Hope, G. W. Trollope, Sir J.
Darner, Colonel Ilug-hes, W. B. Trotter, Jena
Darby, George Hussey, Thomas Vivian, J. Ennis
Denison, E. B. Inglis, Sir It H. Waddington, W. S.
Douglas, Sir H. Jermyn, Earl Wellesley, Lord:C.
Douglas, Sir C. Jocelyn, Viscount Wortley, James S.
Duckworth, Sir J. Johnstone, Sir J. Wortley, John S.
Emlyn, Viscount Knightley, Sir C. Wynn, C. W. W.
Estcourt, T. G. B. Lennox, Lord A.
Farnham, E. B. Lincoln, Earl • TELLERS.
Fitzroy, Henry Lockhart, William Young, John
Flower,lSir J. Lowther, Colonel Baring, Henry

—'-The Sussex Stakes of 25 sovs. each, for 2 yrs old (10 Subs.)
—A Sweepstakes of 50 says. each, for 3 yrs old (6 Subs.)
—A Sweepstakes of 100 sovs. each, for 3 yrs old
(4 Subs. )—The Molecomb Stakes of 50 sovs. each,
h ft (29 Subs.) The Duke of Richmond's Plate of
1001. (1 andicap)—and the Anglesea Stakes, of 15 sovs. each,
for Gentlemen Riders (12 Subs) ; in all, eleven races. Friday
will be a field day for the gentlemen jocks, the only races for the
professionals being the Nassau Stakes of 50 sou. each (24
Subs)—The Chesterfield Cup (19 Subs)—and a match be-
tween Lady Anna and Lady Trampolina, for 100 each. The
other stakes are the March Stakes, of 10 sovs. each (54 Subs),
which is sure to produce three races—The Bentinck Stakes, of
5 soya. each, with 50 added (26 Subs)—and the Maidstone
Stakes, of 15 sovs. each, with 50 added. Taking them as they
now stand, the stakes to be run for exceed 30,0001. ! This,
however, will be greatly reduced by forfeits, but at a moderate
calculation the gross sum to be paid will not be less than
20,0001.

THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE.
(From George Cruikshank's Table-Book. No. VII.
When walking the streets of a great city, nothing has
struck us so forcibly as the general neglect of means for
the preservation of lire from the ravages of fire. There
is scarcely a street in London but has given frightful
testimony to the horrors of death by burning ; and yet
there seems to be such universal apathy upon the sub-
ject, that nowhere can you find that any earnest, perse-
vering endeavours have been made to secure the co-ope-
ration of neighbours for mutual preservation. The Le-
gislature has interfered for the protection of property from
tire, and made the erection of party-walls compulsory. Ts,
has done nothing for the protection of life from the same
fearful destroyer.
The streets have been tunnelled from one end to the
other of this great metropolis, to ensure the comfort of
the in-dwellers—it was a gigantic thought to drain such a
mighty city !
Water has been brought from distant places, and
conveyed through conduits and pipes to the dwellings of
the most humble. Earth had to be delved, and rocks
blasted, to effect this tremendous work !
Gas, subtle and treacherous as it is, is brought safely
to our doors, even into our houses.
We walk as it were upon a mine; but such has been
the perseverance of man, such the triumph of know-
ledge, that the mighty power is made subservient to his
will, to be used as a blessing and a security.* But the
subjugation of gas was the labour of nearly 200 years! t
And the conquest was worth the struggle!
When such vast things have been done by co opera
tion for the comfort of the community, is it not wonder-
ful that nothing worthy the name of exertion has been
tried for the preservation of life from fire, when the
means must be so insignificant in point of cost and diffi-
culty, although so greatly conducive to the security from
that most horrible of deaths—death by fire ?
We feel that in devoting the pages of the Table-Book
to the consideration of this subject, we are discharging a
duty we owe to our fellow-creatures, and, therefore, offer
no apology for the plans which we here put forward for
the remedy of the evil of which we complain. Our designs
may be imperfect or objectionable, but they may suggest
to others better and more practicable modes of escape
from the horrors of conflagration. The simplest and
surest escape is a continuous balcony erected in front of
the upper windows of every house. This is so obvious,
that it is unnecessary to advance one word in favour of
the plaa. We shall confine ourselves simply to the ob-
jections that may be urged against it.
Ist. The facility that balconies are said to give to
robbery.
To us nothing can be more futile than this objection.
Stronger fastenings to the windows would as effectually
secure the second ior third-floor windows as locks
and bolts do the street-door. Even were this
objection tenable, we consider that less is to
be apprehended from the burglar who filches
the contents of a jewel-case or a drawer, than
from that fierce assailant that devours a man's sub-
stance, and suffocates him with reekings of the feast.
The destroyer which bursts into the chamber, and curls
about the bed and breathes its smoke into the nostrils,
until the head grows dizzy, and the heart faint, leaving
the wretch, thus made conscious of its desolating pre-
sence, scarcely time or thought for flight. Bewildered
as he is, he knows not where to seek a refuge ; his mind,
unaccustomed to revert to any means for safety in such
an emergency, has to forni its plans, and not to will the
execution of those often considered and relied on. Were
the balcony understood by the household to be the escape
from fire, impulse and the instinctive love of life would
generally guide the inmates of a burning house to their
place of refuge.
The plan which we annex seems to remedy the ob-
jection as originally stated, and to render fire ladders
unnecessary.
The sketch represents a balcony extending in the front
of the upper windows of a house, and having two move-
able ends, secured by a latch, and attached to a spring
which communicates with a bell. In the case of fire, the
end, being unfastened, falls to the edge of the adjoining
balcony, and at the same time rings a bell. The end
being released falls inwards, and thus opens a communi-
cation with the adjoining house. The bell would pre-
vent any improper use being made of the balcony, and
if so constructed, would serve as an alarum.
2d. The formation of a continuous balcony would be
impracticable where houses were of different altitudes.
In such case we would propose the erection of " Fire
Galleries," made in the form of a balcony, but having
iron shutters between each window, in order that persons
seeking refuge might be protected from danger, should
any flames issue from the adjoining windows. Ten or
twelve persons might remain uninjured for a length of
time in one of these fire-galleries, or until such time as
the fireeladders could be brought to their rescue.
A ladder of iron placed in the front of the house, and
so constructed that a person might descend between it
and the wall, would also afford a safe mode of escape.
We repeat that we do not put forward these plans as
pre-eminently advisable, but the Legislature that compels
the formation of party-walls and sewers, ought to make
the erection of some such simple and effective escape
compulsory upon the landlord of every house in the
metropolis.
As we are upon this subject, we shall not hesitate to
speak of another matter of gross neglect, where the life
of woman is more particularly at stake. We allude to
the construction of fenders. How often is the public
heart wrung by statements of some glad and lovely
creature being reduced to a mass of hideousness by the
ignition of the dress which was to have lent adornment
to her beauty, even by the unexpected opening of a door!
Could not the frequency of such calamitiesbe diminished
by adopting some other form of construction for the
fender? We would suggest the introduction of a perpen-
dicular ornament rising from the centre.
We will now add an extract from a letter which
we have received from our worthy friend, " The Old
Sailor :"
It is a fearful thing in a dismal and dreary night,
when the gale is howling above, and the breakers are
roaring below, to be lashed helpless to some cleat or
mast, or shroud, whilst the wild waves beat over the
sufferers, whose hopes have been driven away by the
threatened death that appears inevitable. Dreadful are
the feelings as the ship writhes upon the rocks which
grind her stout timbers to mere powder—horrible to
witness the raging of the ocean as it seems to deride in
mockery the cries of the despairing crew and passengers.
Alas ! from thence there's no retreating.'
The ship must be their coffin, and the billowy ocean
their watery grave. Those who have not experienced
such visitations, can never form an adequate idea of the
horrors that rush out of the blackness of darkness to
torture the spirits of the afflicted, as they behold first
one, and then another, washed away, and, for a few
seconds, struggling in the white foam of the sea against
the destruction that ensues. Even should the weather
be fine when a wreck takes place—it may be after a
storm—or, striking on the rocks that the leak may still
overwhelm the sinking craft in smooth water—the keen
agony is the same—and, oh ! to hear the piercing shriek
as the last death-pang separates time from eternity, its
thrilling sounds are never to be forgotten.
" Now, much of this might be prevented, and that, too,
by the simplest means. The Chinese are far before us
in this matter. When their large junks go to sea, each
passenger takes his own merchandise under his imme-
diate care ; and it is rarely, if ever known, that they
neglect to carry with them three pieces of stout bamboo,
formed into a kind of triangular seat ; sometimes they
have four pieces fixed in a square. These being
hollow, will not only float, but will also sustain
great weight ; and a friend assured us that he was
eye-witness to the wreck cf one of these large
junks, when crew and passengers clapped these pieces of
bamboo round their bodies under their arms, and threw
themselves into the fickle waves. The burning rays of
the sun came down with fierce intensity 4 but John
Chinaman was prepared even for that. Like Paul Pry,
the everlasting umbrella was at hand—it was promptly
hoisted, and away they went for the shore, conversing
as freely as the noise would admit; and truly ludicrous
was their appearance, resembling a fleet of gigantic
mushrooms broke adrift from their moorings,—but all
were saved.
" And what does this simple contrivance suggest?
The facility of preserving life. Let every article on
board our ships be made of a thoroughly floating nature;
chairs, stools, tables, mattresses, and boats. Nay, more
—every individual, male and female, should furnish
themselves, the men with waterproof waistcoats, the
ladit s with pelerines, which may be b!own and distended
by the breath. We have seen some of this kind covered
with black satin, that look quite handsome; and, when
their uses are taken into consideration, invaluable in
the time of peril. When we hear of the melancholy
occurrences that have taken place in steam. boats, we
would ask, why are they not all constructed in com-
partments with double bottoms, and especially at the
most probable point of collision—the bows ? It is, in-
deed, a matter for serious contemplation."
We trust that none of our readers will consider the
small space which we have devoted to this subject as
misapplied—imperfectly as we feel we have executed the
task thus voluntarily. undertaken : but having the ad-
vantages of illustration at command, we have preferred
the risk of disappointing a few of our good friends, who
look to our pages for mirthful sentences alone, to incur-
ring the self-reproach of having maintained silence upon
a subject which we feel to be important, as affecting the
good of many of our fellow-creatures, and which could
not have been so clearly put forward without the eluci-
dation of our pencil. G. CK.

• It is calculated that the consumption of gas in London
amounts to eight millions and a half cubic feet every twenty-
four hours.

t About 1660, Dr. Clayton first made coal-gas, which he
burned as it came from small holes pricked in a bladder.
See " Notes taken during the late War in China." By
aptain Cutaway.—Table-Book, p. 91.

MEMOIRS OF SOPIIIA DOROTIIEA, CONSORT OF
GEORGE 1.-With the exception of Mary, Queen of
Scots, no illustrious personage has excited so muchin-
terest and sympathy as the subject of this memoir. Her
whole life, as relatedin these pages, is a perfect romance.
The dreadful hatred of the Countess Platen towards her
Royal Highness, the devilish acts with which she pur-
sued her to ruin, and the cold-blooded and cruel murder
of Count Konigsmark by the same fiendish hand, makes
us believe we are reading some recital of the cruelty of a
female Borgia, rather than those of a German lady of
the last century. The true features of the drama are
now for the first time published, gathered from various
German documents, and from the diary of the unfor-
tunate Princess herself, written during her long confine-
ment in the fortress of Ahlden. Independently of the
interest these memoirs must excite on account of the
ill-starred Princess, whose persecution they set forth, a
vast number of contemporary portraits are given, which
add great value to its pages. The politic, yet weak-
minded Elector of Hanover ; the Platens, those devils in
human shape ; the corrupt Bernstorf ; Madame Schii•
lenburg, and others of the ugly harem. of George the
First ; Frederick Augustus, the Sardanapalus of the
North ; and last, not 'mit, the handsome and notorious
Count Konigsmark, figure most prominently in this in-
teresting history,—.Weekly Chronicle.