most of the members had not had an opportunity of duly
considering the evidence, and there was no advantage in
carrying an abstract resolution. The object would be
answered by the discussion, and by the assurance given
that the government would take the subject into consideration.
—Mr. NAPIER concurred in this recommendation.
—Lord PALMERSTON added his request to the
same effect.—Mr. COLLIER offered to withdraw his
motion; but, leave being refused, the question was put,
and the amendment first, and then the main resolution,
were agreed to without a division.

On Wednesday, June 28, the motion for going into
committee on the Mortmain Bill was resisted, on the
ground chiefly that no members of the government, or
law officers of the crown, were present to assist in its
discussion.—Mr. HEADLAM, who had charge of the bill,
explained his motives in bringing it forward, and stated
that he had not ventured to undertake that important
responsibility until two successive governments had
declined to do so.—The propriety of proceeding at once
with the measure was debated for some time, and a
motion proposed by Mr. Mowbray for postponing the
bill until after some other orders of the day had been
disposed of, was carried to a division, and adopted by a
majority of 74 to 55.—Mr. NAPIER, on behalf of Mr.
Whiteside announced that the Property Disposal Bill
which related to bequests and assignments made by the
inmates of Roman Catholic convents, would not be
proceeded with during the present session. The motion
for the committal of the Mortmain Bill was then
renewed and agreed to.—Considerable discussion and
several divisions took place upon successive clauses of
the bill, which were, however, ultimately adopted, with
some amendments, up to clause 6 inclusive. The chairman
was then ordered to report progress.

On Thursday, June 29, in answer to a question from
Lord D. Stuart respecting the recent Treaty between
Austria and Turkey, Lord John RUSSELL stated that
the government had received intelligence that a
convention (to which they were no party, and of which
they had not yet received a copy) had been entered
into between Austria and the Sublime Porte for the
occupation of the Danubian principalities by Austrian
troops, whether or not the Russians should withdraw
therefrom; that was, if the latter voluntarily quitted
the principalities, the Austrian troops would occupy
them; if not, they would enter that territory for the
purpose of driving the Russians out. He added, that
the government had received no official information that
the Emperor of Russia had consented to accept the
ultimatum of Austria.

The adjourned discussion on the third reading of the
Oxford University Bill having been resumed, Mr.
HEYWOOD moved a clause, enacting that it shall not
be necessary for any person upon taking the degree of
bachelor in arts, law, medicine, or music, in the university
of Oxford, to make or subscribe any declaration,
or take any oath, save the oath of allegiance, or an
equivalent declaration cf allegiance.—The motion was
seconded by Mr. E. DENISON, and opposed by Mr.
HENLEY, who said the clause was avowedly only a
step to further demands, and, if conceded, it would
make the university cease to be a place of religious
instruction, as a university, and be productive of the
greatest mischief.—Mr. NEWDEGATE likewise opposed
the clause.—The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
it was his intention, and that of Lord J. Russell, to
support the clause, believing that, after the unmistakeable
decision of the house, he was thereby doing the
best for the university. He could find nothing in the
clause to prevent the university from administering,
as before, a religious education to the children of
members of the church of England.—Mr. Serjeant SHEE
supported the clause, which, upon a division, was
carried by 233 against 79.—Mr. WIGRAM, observing
that by the clause as it stood a dissenter might hold a
fellowship and acquire a part in the government of the
university, thereby exercising a control over the instruction
of the university, moved to add a proviso, that no
person taking such degree should be capable of holding any
office, &c., involving a power of government or administration
in the university or colleges without previously
subscribing such oaths and declarations as were now
required, the university authorities having power by
statute to alter such proviso.—Mr. HEYWOOD and Lord
John RUSSELL objected to this proviso, which Mr.
Wigram withdrew, and the clause, unaltered, was
added to the bill.—A clause moved by Mr. J. PHILLIMORE,
that no member of the university shall, on
account of his rank, take his degree or pass his examination
sooner than another undergraduate, was likewise
agreed to.—An addition to clause 18 of the words,
"heads of colleges and halls, being professors, shall vote
only for heads of colleges or halls," moved by Mr. E.
DENISON, was agreed to.—The CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER proposed to insert in the clause relating to
schools, after the words "for the abolition of any privilege
or right of preference or election to any emolument
within any college," the words "other than fellowships
or studentships."—Mr. Roundell PALMER said,
these words were opposed to the principle of the clause,
and would take beyond its benefits the great schools—
Winchester, Westminster, and Merchant Tailors'. The
next attempt would be to apply the principle to Eton;
and he called upon all Etonians to resist the amendment.
The house ought to legislate upon the sound
principle of looking to the interests both of the schools
and colleges, and should not give the colleges power to
take into account their interests alone.—Mr. LOWE
supported the motion; arguing at great length against close
fellowships, close schools, and the principle of awarding
fellowships on any other principle than that of merit.
However, he was glad the proposed alteration did not
take place in his time, when interest ruled; for then,
Mr. Palmer, Mr. Cardwell, and himself, would have
been sent to New College, and all three would have
been ruined.—Sir William Heathcote, Mr. Henley,
Sir Thomas Acland, and Mr. J. G. Phillimore, opposed
the amendment; Sir William Heathcote remarking
that Mr. Lowe's objections did not apply to the
case, as the most stringent rules as to capability might
be made under the clause.—On a division, the house
rejected the amendment, by 139 to 129—giving a
majority of 10 against the government. The clause was
added to the bill. The bill then passed, and the following
new title was substituted for the original one—
"An Act to make further Provision for the good
Government and Extension of the University of Oxford,
of the Colleges therein, and of the College of St. Mary,
Winchester."

Mr. M. GIBSON called attention to the Proceedings of
Admiral Plumridge at Uleaborg and Brahestadt, in
the Gulf of Bothnia, and, disclaiming any idea to cast
odium or reproach upon the officers of the service, called
upon the First Lord of the Admiralty for an explanation
of the policy of the proceedings. He entered into a
detail of the circumstances attending the burning of the
stores at those places, which he stated were private
property, the tar being intended to be shipped for the
use of the British dockyards, by contract with a house
in the city of London. He was of opinion, he said, that
our officers and men had been exposed unnecessarily to
acts of war which, if successful, could be of no advantage
to this country.—Sir J. Graham said, the despatches
relating to this subject did not arrive until that morning;
and, when published in the next "Gazette," the
house and the country would be able to form an opinion
upon it.

On Friday, June 30, Lord PALMERSTON stated that
he intended to move the discharge of the order for the
second reading of the Police Bill, the nature of which,
however, he believed had been misunderstood. He
announced that he should introduce another measure on
the subject.

Lord J. RUSSELL, in a committee of supply, moved a
sum of £263,000 for the Educational Estimates, which,
with a balance of £80,000, would make £343,000. He
entered into a statement as to the principles of our
national education, and as to the system of instruction
pursued, and described the progress which had been
made. One person in eight, he said received instruction,
and he admitted that this was by no means a
satisfactory state of things. He recognised the value of
voluntary efforts, but deemed that these needed
assistance, and that the education of the people should
not be left to the voluntary principle only. But he