OXFORD AND ITS- REPRESENTATIVES.
24th January 1863. Sra—I trust that in the exercise of that liberty of speech which you have so often allowed me in your columns on other occasions, you will not refuse me an opportunity of attempting a reply to an article of your own, which, to speak plainly, I cannot look upon as characterized by your usual fairness and good judgment. Itis not often that I find an article in the Spectator on any subject to which I have given much consideration of which the most I can say is that I agree with the greater part of one paragraph ; yet such, unluckily, is my position with regard to that in your last number headed "The Oxford Nuisance." Most of the strictures contained therein would be perfectly just if Mr. Gladstone had been rejected by the University ; but as he has been elected, I cannot see how they bear upon the case.
If Mr. Gladstone had been rejected for the man of straw who was set up against him, it would be fair to say that the University is " utterly opposed to the community in sentiment," that it " stands confessed as incapable of appreciating the motives" which have led to the formation of the present Ministry, that it "-does not understand the juncture," and " is incapable of estimating a political necessity." If Mr. Peroeval had been elected, " men of the statesman class, enjoying any prestige with Parliament or with the nation," might indeed " learn to eschew the seats for Oxford University" ; and you might indeed say that its Member " holds its seat on pain of forfeiture should he act as a statesman." On the hypothesis that Mr. Gladstone is not the chosen of Oxford, and that Mr. Perceval is, I would willingly indorse your strongest expressions against the University. Bat-it so happens that such is not the case: Mr. Gladstone is elected ; and t- by tha eleotion the University has surely proved that it is not "utterly opposed to the community in sentiment," that it does "appreciate the mo- tries" and " understand the juncture," and is not incapable of esti- mating the political necessity" referred- to. By reelecting one of the first statesmen of.the age, it has given the most practical of. proofs that " men of the statesman class '= need not " eschew the seats for Oxford University" ; it has shown that their " fit occupants " are the greatest men of the day, that the "proper representative of Oxford " has some " business in office," and that '.the aspirant to office has " some " business in the seats far Ox- ford." I cannot conceive what more demonstrative proof can be required that- the party which wants " a lay saint in leading-strings.--a church- warden of the,pliant class," though still "considerable in numbers," makes altogether a false boast when it "professes to bathe only genuine 'Oxford.' " It has set up its candidate for acceptance, and "genuine Oxford" has pre- ferred to adhere to the " first-rate type of the English gentleman," and has again " contributed to the national. councils a mind statesmanlike and en- larged." It may be answered that Mr. Gladstone was opposed, and was only elected by a comparatively narrow majority. But a,corporation must be judged by its formal acts; the fact of an opposition proves that there are some members of the corporation who merit all your strong language; the fact that the opposition was unsuccessful proves that the corporation itself does not merit it. Be as severe as you please on the party and the individual; say that the Derbyite faction in the University has " conducted itself according to the lowest party tactics," " used fraud and equivocation," &c.; point, if you will, to an erudite Doctor, a Venerable ecclesiastic, a Right Honourable
'
Major as examplesef the "vulgar," the " immoral," and the "ungentleman- ly' : but do not fix those harsh epithets on the constituency itself, which has the misfortune to number those "sickly sheep" among its members, but whichhas emphatically shown that their presence does not necessarily
infect the flock And poison all the rest."
The opposition, as I remarked in my former letter, did not prooeed from within the University ; it was agreed on " at a meeting of friends of the late Administration" ; it was concocted in the purlieus.of the Carlton Club, perhaps over the same festal board whence the worthies of that assembly sallied forth to give Mr. Gladstone the first taste of their opposition. The University, so far from " choosing to enjoy the opportunity of raising a sec- tarian squabble," was dragged into the contest by a pressure from without; to the "genuine Oxford,' resident and non-resident, the contest was incon- venient, irksome, abhorrent ; but genuine Oxford did its duty, and has tri- umphed. That a single vain and. restless person chose to take advantage of a legal technicality to prolong a vexatious and fruitless contest, is his blame, and•not that of the University. The University has shown that venerable person that his ways are not her ways : Mr. Gladstone, her " fitting repre- sentative," scholar statesman, orator, occupied a place in her esteem,
whence, better than the scholar, statesman, and orator of old, " Antont gladioe, potuit conteconere,"
he may be protested against at East Brent—he may be cursed with bell, book, and candle, at Promo Selwood—but he is again returned to the great eouncil of the nation as the worthy representative of the first of ha constituencies. The majority was, I confess, comparatively small ; the 124 of January is a sad- falling off from the triumphant, 360 of'July. But remember the charac- ter of the constituency, the cost and trouble of attendance ; remember that Mr. Perceval's committee, in the field beforehand, with lavish payment of travelling-expenses, dragged up every possible man ; Mr. Gladstone's, when his return was secured, sorupled to scour the countryfor voters merely to swell a majority. And it was only human frailty if some of Mr. Gladstone's old friends did look rather coldly on him on the strength of the " coalition." You speak of the unanimity of the country as displayed in the recent eleo- dens : ie not-a difference to be made between the Whig- and the Peelite
llli-
niaters ? The former went bads to their constituents in appearance (though I think only in appearance) occupying their old position ; the latter went in appearance (though I think only in appearance) occupying a, new ono. The only important Peelite reeled:ions were those of M.r. Sidney Herbert, Mr. Gladstone himself, and Mr. Cardwell; in which latter case I will give all praise to the City of Oxford, though not, with you, at the expense of the University. Instead of a "contrast" between the two, University and City have both done their duty alike—only, happily for the latter, Arohdeaeon Denham does not occupy a. house within its precincts.
You seem almost inclined to disfranchise the University ? Why ? Be- cause it elected Mr. Gladstone ? or because it elected him by too narrow a majority ? I do not suspect you of the former, and the latter surely were somewhat hard measure. For my part, I would preserve the University fran- chise, if only to keep Mr. Gladstone in Parliament. Now, Sir, yourself, from a high region of philosophy, can see better into the realities of things, and I would fain flatter myself that I have caught a little of the same spirit; but be- lieve me, it is no slight effort of discrimination, no small triumph over preju- dice, to appreciate independent statesmen like the Peelites, above all, to appre- ciate Mr. Gladstone. What will the ordinary voter say to a man whom he can- not call "Blue" or " Yellow," " Conservative " pure or " Liberal " pure ? what is to be made of a "Liberal" who did not follow Lord John, of a "Conservative" who did not follow Lord Derby ? What will the country parson say to an ardent Churchman who stands up manfully for the rights of the Jew and the Papist ? What will one part of the University think of a man who declares that the University needs reform ? how will another face one who does not look on Lord John's pet Prussian or Coburgite scheme as the beet way of reforming it? It is not every man who can get over all these opportunities for prejudice and party-spirit; But the University of i
Oxford, as a body, has done it, and thereby shown that the " prestige " from "associations of learning, piety, and highborn refinement," are not "unduly borrowed," but that they have a. very "practical influence on the conduct of the constituency." Is there any other constituency more likely to elect Mr. Gladstone ? To judge from my own non-academical kinsfolk and acquaint- ance, I should answer, No. Should he go to the Protestant merchants of Liverpool, to the squires and yeomen of Hereford, Berks, or Ayr, to the in- dependent citizens of Peterborough, or the enlightened burghers of Hert- ford ? Should he seek his luck among the mariners of England who so dis- creetly choose the representatives of Plymouth ? should he endeavour, a third statesman, a second genius, to create a new oasis in the howling wil- derness of Metropolitan representation ? Shall be for such broken reed learn to "eschew the seat for Oxford University," which, while a Lewis is twice rejected, while a Cardwell only succeeds at the third time of asking, while a 'Palmer has to retire from a hopeless contest, while even a Macaulay is a representative of penitent not of constant admirer; has stuck faithfully and steadily by him ? Old Oxford, the generation dying out, disgraced it- self by substituting Inglis for Peel ; young Oxford, the genius, the learning, the energy of the University, has effaced the shame, by thrice returning Gladstone as the man of its choice : may the result of the fourth struggle, whenever it comes, be to give him a worthy colleague !
On one point I wholly agree with you, namely, that the reelection of i Ministers is an unnecessary ceremony. It belongs to a past state of things : when a Minister was the mere nominee of the Crown, and not the indirect choice of the nation, such an appeal was highly desirable ; now, cessante ratione, cessat etiam lex. If I mistake not, the first form of the law ex- cluded Ministers from the House of Commons altogether,—a proceeding how alien to our present notions I need not point out. This was modified into a capacity of sitting by reelection. But now even this seems throwing an unnecessary power of stopping public business into the hands of a single constituency. The electors to whom a candidate " of the statesman class" presents himself, should consider that they are electing not only a Member, but a possible Minister, and, if they object to him in the latter capacity, should not elect him in the former. For official seats, that is, for Members of the House of Commons who aro not the choice of any portion of the people, I cannot say that I am prepared, though I am quite open to argu- ment.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant, E. A. F.
[Our able and eloquent correspondent admits that the remarks he objects to would have been just had Mr. Gladstone been thrown out. In proportion, therefore, to the effort required to prevent this result they are justified,—that is, in exact proportion to the number of voters which the " Counter-Coali- tion" has polled, to the low principle of its cohesion, to the vulgarity and trickery of its methods of warfare, to the utter insignificance of the person whom it opposed to a statesman eminent in his qualifications for office, emi- nent in his qualifications for a University representative. Oxford has been hardly saved from the disgrace of rejecting Gladstone and electing Perceval. This we do consider a stigma upon the University. But we go farther. Apart from the qualifications of the two candidates, Oxford had to pronounce upon a new development in politics, to which no thoughtful men ought to be indifferent. Strong feeling on one side or the other—either in favour of or against the principles of the fusion of parties, and the abolition of the watchwords of the last twenty years—was to be expected from a consti- tuency at once claiming to be firmly grounded in principles and learned in facts. Instead of strong feeling and bold outspeaking, indifference has been the characteristic of the Oxford constituency. Little more than half the voters have taken the trouble to poll ; and though allowance is to be made for the inconvenience and expense of a journey to Oxford, and for the reluct- ance to encounter these' not to insure a victory but to swell a majority, still a large margin is left, for an indifference to a great political crisis which does not speak favourably. for the civil and national vitality of the Oxford Convocation. Then, again, Mr. Gladstone polls fewer by a hundred votes than in July last, and Perceval more by two hundred than Dr. Marsham. In other words, Mr. Gladstone's recent political conduct has alienated a por- tion of his supporters; and this portion pronounces against the formal and conclusive act by which the leaders of the oldparties have expressed their conviction that the old watchwords are to be no longer symbols of mutual hos- tility, but that they can honestly cooperate with each other for the common weal. And this alienation is not adequately measured by the diminution in the gross poll ; for the Liberals have as a party supported Mr. Gladstone in the recent contest, and materially helped to increase his poll. Let E. A. F. take the trouble to reflect how many of Mr. Gladstone's original supporters support him now from pure political motives, and how many from sympathy in his theological opinions. Take away the Whigs and Radicals, who vote for Mr. Gladstone with a reluctance due to his theological and ecclesiastical bias and his original opposition to University Reform by a Commission, and those Conservatives of whatever shade who support him solely on account of these tendencies, and how many will remain who like the man, admire his talents and his knowledge, respect his honesty and openness to conviction, and heartily approve his political conduct? That remnant would exactly measure the amount of laudation to which Oxford is strictly entitled on the ground of Mr. Gladstone's reelection, and the amount of confidence that may be placed in her sympathy with the facts which makeup the recent advances of the English nation in material prosperity, intellectual enlightenment, and a practical sense of justice. We decline to look at Oxford matters either through " Puseyite ' or " Commission " spectacles, though the loan of each is occasionally pressed upon us. We therefore cannot look upon Mr. Glad- stone's thousand supporters in the recent contest as a sure and certain pledge of an advance made by Oxford of late years in political wisdom and religious breadth—of her gradual emancipation from slavery to obsolete prejudices and from persistence in unfair restrictions. The party who would call them- selves, par excellence, Mr. Gladstone's supporters at Oxford, may prove by their future conduct—and not less by their administration of University affairs than by their votes at elections—that in this contest they. have sup- ported the progressive and enlightened statesman, and not only the theolo- gian of their own party. They could do nothing that would be of greater credit to themselves or of greater service to Oxford University; and no journal would hail the demonstration of this fact with more cordiality than the Spectator.—En.]
Previous page
