attained to; and sure we are that power and wisdom will be vouchsafed to accomplish gloriously her work, and to become the greatest blessing to the civilized world.

ART. IX.-1. Correspondence between Lord John Russell and the Duke of Wellington, Chancellor of the University of Orford, and his Royal Highness Prince Albert, Chancellor of the University of Cambridge.

2. Letter of his Royal Highness Prince Albert to his ViceChancellor of the University of Cambridge.

3. Letter of Lord Brougham to the Duke of Wellington on the Royal Commission.

4. Speech of Sir R. H. Inglis, Bart., in the House of Commons, 23rd April, 1850.

IT is well observed by Mr. Dyer, in writing of Thucydides, "that the light of truth, so resplendent in his history, made it a perpetual inheritance (Tηua es ael, to borrow his own phrase), more than the profundity of its sentiments and the eloquence of its language." But Thucydides in his history often blames the Athenians and finds grave matter of censure in the records of their history, as well as an everlasting theme of eloquent praise. For this he was idly censured by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who, in his turn, receives the heavy lash of Hobbes of Malmesbury, in later and Christian days, for abusing that which was as much to the glory of the historian, as to the credit of the man and the honour of the Athenian.

It is thus, indeed, that a father may find fault with an erring child; that a lover, if there be a wise one in the world, may correct the imperfections of his mistress; that a member of a corporate body may endeavour, honestly and openly, to reform the abuses of that body; that a patriot may denounce the crimes or follies of his country; and that we, in the present instance, with strong yet gentle reproof, may rebuke the overgrown arrogance and childish petulance of the sister universities. 9.

It was with this feeling that Lord Bacon, Erasmus, Locke, Newton, and Knox, spoke and wrote. If, sometimes, the spirit of blind opposition which met them excited them too far, and caused their language to transgress the bounds of mild rebuke and Christian censure, still their purpose and intentions were good, and infinitely surpassed in virtue the resisting intolerance which met their endeavours. None can doubt, indeed, the spirit in which Locke addressed King William the Third:

If

(he said) your Majesty does not reform the universities, everything will go back again."

It is in similar if not precisely the same language that we would address the Crown ourselves:-" If the universities be not reformed (we exclaim) all will not go back again; but the present age will far exceed in its demands all that the universities can afford under the present system; and the universities will be left far behind in lingering and mouldering decay, whilst the education of England proceeds in its onward course, drawn from a thousand different sources, unmingled with the fountains of divine truth and based alone on the impure materialism of a godless philosophy; and thus education will cease to go hand in hand with religion and to be heralded by a sublime faith." Thus, knowledge will continue to exist and thrive-but to be only knowledge; and thus the state of mankind will be more perilous than in the dark ages. The acquisition of gold and the development of science will, under such circumstances, destroy Christianity, as they will uproot the more beautiful traditions of simpler times. This, however, is not the onward march of necessity preceded by the banners of civilization. It is the morbid growth of science, and the basest triumph of knowledge." "Yet it is that which must exist, if men do not fortify themselves in strong places, if they do not preserve mighty landmarks, if temples of the purest proportion are not rescued from the de vouring effects of time, the obstructions of oblivion, and the desecrations which are produced by the fallibility of human nature, acted upon by opportunity, circumstance, and change of outward forms.

r

We maintain that, if the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge do not quickly change, not in essence, but in conventionalities, so as to keep up with, or rather antecede, the necessities of the day, they will do the greatest injury both to Christianity and deep learning. Like two old dismantled fortresses that command a surrounding country overrun by hostile and invading hordes, they will be turned to the destruction of that which they were built to protect: their crazy loop-holes and decayed apertures will only serve to point the enemy's guns, and their confused fortifications, blended with excrescent buildings and incorporated external dwellings for the luxury and convenience of the enervated and corrupt garrison, will only shelter the soldiers of infidelity and schism, and harbour the antagonists of religious faith and the unprincipled rioters of depraved communism and red democracy. The figure we have just made use of possesses a certain felicity in the fact that a clever writer has already observed that the universities were

"founded at first as castellated towns for the protection and defence of the Romish Church." Now, it is curious that a corporation, which endeavours to found all its rights upon antiquity, and rests all its pleas upon, if we may so term it, the abuse of use, utterly forgets its own starting point, and is conveniently short-sighted in regarding the actual commencement of things. They boast the power of Archimedes, and assert their positive prerogative to move, or rather bid the world stop short; but, in proportion as he disavowed the possession of the spot whereon to fix his lever, they beg the question of that aucient dead-lock, from whence they would put forth their withering might to bid progression cease and the world stand still.

If the privileges of the universities be only used to resist the voice of the nation, which, by common consent, speaking through the royal mouth, bids them adapt themselves to a new phase of customs and the growth of reason as well as of scientific improvement, they are indeed fatal gifts and may be styled dopa adapa. They are pernicious, as being the cords of their own strangulation, and the sooner they are wrested from their own hands for their own preservation the better, that the life which still remains may be cherished, and the probability of a new birth and fresh germination added. Here let us observe that there is not only no necessity to change old laws, but that there are literally none to change. These have lost all their application by mere desuetude-they have become a dead letter and are utterly inapplicable to the times. We are obliged to alter customs by force of the alteration of external circumstances. The framing of a statute by the consent of the nation to obviate a confusion of precedents is not unconstitutional. It is only common sense and will always be demanded by an improving community. None can say more stoutly than we do, "Nolumus leges Angliæ mutari." In this we are like the old barons of the middle ages; but they would quickly have adopted another mode of military tactics, had they found it necessary to do so, in order to resist surrounding pressure; although they guarded their principles with their lives and cased them irrespective of armour in the citadel of their own bodies.

All we have to do with is to sweep away a mass of moukish superstitions and forms to suit the present era, and to interpret the motives of the various founders and donors of the universities as best we may, not considering so much their actual expressions, or even modes of thinking, as the spirit of their gifts and the broad fact that they gave in order to assist the growth of science, the preservation of learning, the prevailing religion of their day, as interpreted by the then existing State

and the earlier doctrines of Christianity. Let us at any rate be certain that any alteration from their original wishes and death-bed intentions, which may be within the scope of the Commission, is not half so fatal to the accomplishment of their pious desires as the perversion which has so long taken place through the selfishness, the sleepy indolence, and the idle rapacity of those who hold these great trusts in hand, and would defend the legality of their appropriation by the shallowest pretences, and most ancient saws and instances, at the expence of each succeeding generation.

;

We do not go so far as an ingenious gentleman of the present day, who could find nothing better to do than to write a work to prove that, had Shakspeare lived at present, he would have written the "Tempest " as an Opera. That is a different question for there may be still found a majority to prefer the original drama in their hearts-as men really honour a vestal more than a harlot; though alas! the weakness of habit may lead them to avoid the chaste society of the one to fly to the corrupting attractions of the other. Shakspeare wrote for all ages, and a change of language will alone erase the tables he has left to inform mankind. Besides, a great and brilliant genius not only keeps pace with, but is ever in advance of, the age he lives in. When such a man ceases to be valuable, common consent hands him over to oblivion; whilst, perhaps, what remains of him is taken and moulded by successive authors to their own purposes. It is not so with institutions and bodies corporate and politic: they being constituted for a perpetuity must be interpreted by successive ages and constantly remodelled by the talent of the day. They, too-that is to say, those connected with education, science, and improvement-must of necessity be in advance of their age, or they will prove an injury instead of a blessing. Had the founders of colleges had a view of the present day, it is certain that those pious men would have altered the mode of their gifts accordingly, and suited them to successive ages. It is the duty of successive governments to do that for them.

Those who would oppose a friendly commission of enquiry into the state of the universities resemble in their conduct the Chinese, who sought during so many centuries to evade civilization by non-contact. We might almost believe that such men are afraid of an exposure. Why do they not invite investigation? Is not the manner of it sufficiently dignified? It is proposed by the Prime Minister and recommended by one of the Chancellors of the universities, while the other is equivocal in his sauction. The Duke of Wellington is evidently cold and cautious: his age is opposed to reform. We question, if any

great reformation would ever be brought about, advocated or even approved by octogenarians, however great and distinguished they had been in their day. The opinion of Prince Albert is firm and manly. He recommends the Commission in plain and sensible terms. He says at once, that the universities cannot resist the Commission: which is of "vital importance to the best interests of the nation," and valuable as giving the universities an opportunity to vindicate their own righ

teousness.

...,Who, then, is the champion of obstinacy, the opposer of enlightenment and true liberality? Lord Brougham! Yes: the defender of Oxford and Cambridge abuses supplies all the fervour of a renegado to a cause which his presence makes ridiculous. He says "Leave them to themselves; let them chalk out their own improvement; let the genius of reform preside over an Oxford Convocation, or rise up prepared to legislate from the common room.” He speaks of their desire to improve of what they have done! We know not if the title has yet been conferred upon him; but we recommend this queer enthusiast to the title of honorary degree of D.C.L. It is a pity that he was not included in the last strange batch who have acquired this title. We will not condescend to answer either Lord Brougham's law or his argument: indeed, of the latter he manifests none, and he rather talks of than displays the former: he is, indeed, a kind of scarecrow in the hands of his former opponents a stuffed prisoner that they parade in front of their ranks an odd galvanized proselyte that moves its arms and legs in accordance with the shocks of a scholastic battery.

But the secret, perhaps, lies in the fact that the Commission is not his own suggestion; or, perhaps, like the Compère Mathieu of the Abbé Dulaurens, having doubted all, he would die in the arms of the Capuchins. However, it seemed farcical enough, when Lord Brougham stalked forth from the groves of Academus, where we never suspected him of having hidden, to forbid the bans of the royal inquiry. Alas! why did not the French nation grant him the honours of citizenship? Was he not sufficiently volatile and fickle to please them?

But, let us leave this new Quixote who will scarcely, we should think, be accepted by either university to splinter a lance in her behalf, and whose apostate vehemence has something in it of portentous import, and reminds us forcibly of a condition of one of Merlin's prophecies, in order to dwell for a moment upon the true old original leaven of Sir R. H. Inglis, Here is none of your mock bigotry; but the real undoubted muddy source and fount of bastard learning is at our feet. This is un

VOL XXVIII.-0