[After the preceding letter and explanatory note were prepared for
press, we received other two: communications on the same subject and the same side. They follow, in the order of their arrival.] Sm—As a member of the majority at the last three elections for the Uni- versity of Oxford, I beg leave earnestly to protest against the conclusions at which you arrive and the tone you employ in your article upon the late con- test, in last week's Spectator.
I submit that the majority of a constituency ought to be considered as re- presenting its prevailing spirit, rather than the minority; that the conduct of the intellectual and respectable portion of a constituency ought to be con- sidered before the whole constituency is condemned ; but that, at any rate, no judgment upon a whole body is fair or tenable which is founded only upon the acts of the lesser part of that body, or which proceeds to punish the larger portion for the misconduct of the smaller.
Now, in 1847, 1852, and 1853, the University has returned Mr. Gladstone to Parliament by decisive majorities : in the last contest, I speak from good authority when I say that the numbers ready to vote for him, if there had been any occasion for their support, were much larger than those who actu- ally recorded their votes. Christmas time and the expense kept many away who would have been ready to come in case of need. Now, I am not going to vindicate the conduct of the minority on the last two occasions, which, I am sorry to say, I think very discreditable to themselves and to the Uni- versity; but I really wish to know, why they are to stamp their character on the University, rather than the larger, far larger portion, who are deter- mined to retain their distinguished representative, and have steadily sup- ported him on three separate occasions ? Every constituency contains un- worthy elements; but if the better elements have also the superiority, it seems to me hard to say that the constituency is altogether unworthy of its privileges. But if you will look to the table published in the Morning Chronicle of Monday, or even to the lists of the rival committees, you will see in how overwhelming a proportion all the intellect and distinction of the University is in favour of Mr. Gladstone : with scarcely an exception, every eminent Oxford man has refused his countenance to the endeavours made to lower the standard of University representation ; and at present the standard is not lowered. Now, will you tell me why these men are to be disregarded—why they are a less fair sample of Oxford than other and lower minds, especially when at present they are in fact predominant, and are happily able to com- mand the representation ? And if this is so, why is Oxford a place, as you say, for which no great statesman can sit? Is not the support of such men as have brought in Mr. Gladstone worth something ? Is it nothing to sit as the chosen representa- tive of such an array of names of great ability and high character? Will not Mr. Gladstone speak with an authority greater even than his own dis- tinguished abilities could command, when it is remembered that some of the best men in the country—some of the brightest ornaments of our literary, legal, theological, and political world—have picked him out, and sent him into the senate as the man by whose voice they wish to be heard there ? I protest, I think it hard upon those who wish to send a great man to Parlia- ment, and at present are able to do so, that they should be told by a generally candid and often friendly paper such as yours, that it is high time they were disfranchised altogether, and that no great man will henceforth demean himself by representing them. I have some hope, Sir, that you will allow you have been somewhat un- just to us, and that at any rate you will permit this protest to appear. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A LATE FELLOW.
Previous page
