7 NOVEMBER 1868, Page 2

The London University had reason to complain for many years

that it was ignored by the Times. It has certainly no longer reason to complain of this since it made advances to Mr. Lowe ; but then, on the other lewd, every time it appears in the Times now, it is, unfortunately, in very obscurantist colours. The annual Committee of the London University Convocation seem to have much gratified Mr. Lowe's editorial friends by recom- mending to the Vice-Chancellor of the University,—Mr. Grote, the historian, on whom it devolves to decide the form of the election,—not to allow any public address from the candidates to the electors, nor any questioning of the candidates by the electors. 'Ile precedent alleged is, of course, the starched dignity of Oxford and Cambridge, where the practice of suppressing oral address has repeatedly been found most inconvenient in its con- sequences, while it is especially unsuitable for the imitation of a University with as yet so little corporate life, or unity of form, as that of London. Not so, however, thinks the Times, which on Thursday had a great panegyric on the system of private elections as conducive to the comfort and dignity of candidates, who are thereby supposed to be saved frotn the degradation of " soliciting " the electors. As if the frank explanation of a can- didate's views to men of culture and learning anxious to be more familiar with them, were a degrading process of " solicitation" ! What Mr. Lowe's allies in the Times must mean to object to is evidently not solicitation, but publicity. Why not propose at once that by the etiquette of the University no candidate should be eligible who had issued an address at all, or whose views had been explained at all in any public speech within a year (say) of the election ? If a speech on nomination is a degrading act of solicitation, so is any speech made anywhere with a view to enlighten the contemplated constituency. We need scarcely say that Mr. Grote, the Vice-Chancellor of the University, has decided to give the candidates and the electors an opportunity of free oral communication on the day of nomination, if they choose to avail themselves of it. Those who dislike publicity will naturally stay away.