NEWS OF THE WEEK.
1. SURPRISE for the public and the House of Commons seems to have been prepared in anticipation of Mr. Heywood's motion for
'the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the 'Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin. The idea has been a standing object with Mr. Heywood, who has made it his
'study; but its data were too well known, and its merits also, to -have the freshness of novelty. University reform had come 'Co. be Among the desiderata of the remote future, not easily attainable without some previous up-turning of affairs; and the
.improvements instituted at both the English Universities, partial as they were, especially at Oxford, lent some colour to he arguments of those- who insisted that external coercion would be unnecessary. It was therefore with some admiration
at Mr. Heywdod-'s perseverance, rather than any expectation of tangible results, that the public saw his notice of motion ; and long after the debate had begun it continued with the languid manner of a " discussion " that was to end in itself. Lord John Russell startled the House out of its doze by announcing the 7inisterial intention of issuing a Commission—not indeed to in- zrestigate the many particulars set down in Mr. Heywood's bill of indictment, but to inquire generally ; and not to include Dublin in the present investigation. At the first blush this seems a very dif- ferent affair from Mr. Heywood's suggestion ; but we doubt Whether it will be less productive in the end. Mr. Heywood pro- posed an inquiry with certain defined objects, of which several Were stated in his motion, including even such minutiae as the con- dition of libraries. But his plan may be set aside as one that the Rouse would never have adopted. Lord John's proposal looks harm- less and vague enough, and the more so since very feeble powers are to be granted to the Commissioners. Instead of investing them with authority by an act of Parliament, theyare only to have a Royal war- rant to receive the voluntary statements by officers and members of thaUniversities ; a species-of authority which it will be quite possible for.very contumacious men to resist—and there are such, at least in both the parties represented by Exeter and Gorham. It is a Commission to hear what the Universities may have to say if they please. But little doubt is entertained that Ministers intend to follow up this proceeding with a bill—an instrument which would be needed to effect any improvements that might trench on the College foundations. It is to be supposed that even the most con- tumacious of University men will be glad to lay their own case before a Commission acting as the harbinger and pioneer of a prac- tical measure, and therefore the Commissioners are not likely to be hindered by an obstructive disposition. We incline to think that Ministers exercise a sound discretion in not seeking a contest on the preliminary step. A contest there must be, and it cannot be avoided; but there are manifest advantages in deferring it to the inevitable stage. At the very least, it saves the necessity of forcing men both among influential classes at the Universities and in Parliament to commit themselves against improvement, when inquiry and deliberation might bring them over to the more reasonable view. The inquiry into official salaries is fairly instituted by the nomi- nation of the Select Committee of the Commons, according to the Ministerial list. The composition is noticeable : the Committee includes a number of men selected with considerable show of im- partiality. from various sections of the House, yet upon the whole we anticipate that it will prove very well disposed towards the men in office. The members not Ministerial are not very obsti- nately hostile—perhaps less oppugnant to the official party than to other sections : divide the Committee across and across, in any direction, and you will see that Ministers are likely to command a majority against any one class of opinions. If so, the ultimate settlement of the official salaries will be decreed by the Cabinet, &e Committee merely countersigning the edict.
The Lords have .undestaken a cognate reform, on a miniature
scale, in adopting the report of a Committee to recast the salaries of the officers of their own House. The plan is to substitute mo- derate fixed salaries for exorbitant fees; a reform which has the further advantage of preventing the abuse of service by deputy. One instance was mentioned, of an officer who has 8001. a year for the labour of receiving it, and pays out of it 150/. to a deputy who does the actual work—" and very well too" i. Sir Charles Wood has resorted to the undignified expedient of a compromise in backing out of the difficulty created by Sir Henry Willoughby's victory over him last week. Sir Henry proposed a shilling scale of duties on certain documents, in lieu of 2s. 6d., the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposal. Sir Charles accepts that duty for sums not exceeding 50/., alters it to ls. 6d. for each additional 25/. above 50l. and under 2001., and restores his own scale above 2001. Sir Henry appears willing to let the poor Minister off with that lame arrangement. Ministers and the faithful Commons have been labouring away at the Australian Colonies Bill ; several Members not usually very cordial in support of Ministers goodnaturedly lending a hand to shape their ebauche ; and the Colonial Reformers contenting them- selves with keeping their principles in view. The ultimate effect will be to make the bill somewhat less bad than it was ; good it cannot be. One trait of the debate was painful in its exposure— the willing greediness with which Ministers caught at any sug- gestion. Mr. Roebuck, for the nonce, is their deus ex machin&. But successive improvements only disclose the endless flaws of a measure which must breed confusion over all the colonies that it is to cover ; raising boundary disputes, questions of convict disci- pline, land squabbles—questions of every kind, without effective settlement of any. The authors of the measure are evidently in the dark, not only as to what they are doing, but even as to their own intentions—if they have any. Self-confessing humbleness marks their demeanour in presence of their charitable assisters. The rejection of Mr. Page Wood's Affirmation Bill is not a Min- isterial defect, but it augurs ill for any new attempt atgetting in Lord john's colleague Baron Lionel de Rothschild. No y that has attempted these relaxations of obsolescent spiritua ctation has yet spoken in a sufficiently, decisive tone : a finishing-stroke to the order of restrictive oaths only awaits that show of resolution. The Protectionists have ventured on another demonstration in the House of Lords,—as if they had not already demonstrated their total incapacity as a party, to the perfect satisfaction of the public. They made a grand howl on the subject of prices ; and Lord Lans- downe having said that the existing state of things is exceptional, Lord Stanley tried to trap him into an admission that low prices are bad. This is very idle work. Lord Lansdowne is a hearty frank man, who does not mince and watch his words in the puny fear that they should be snapped up and twisted ; and he has deserved that his own interpretation should be received without demur. The actual state of prices is exceptional: the reaction on famine prices, the newness of free trade, and extraordinary fine seasons, have produced a plethora of abundance, illustrated by the fact that France is now exporting corn to this country. Nor are prices so low as they have been for a time even under protection—witness 1834. The complaint is idle ; it is also ludicrously impolitic : the Protectionist candidates for popularity and power exhibit them- selves incessantly as lamenting over abundance.
