rates; and who, if they be worldly-minded, rapacious, and gourmands, as very commonly represented, must assuredly and in the nature of things, be in the way of suffering as many mor tifications and disappointments, as any set of people perhaps in the whole compass of his Majesty's dominions.

I have already quoted Mr. William Cobbett, (I beg his pardon; I believe, if it is not, it has been, William Cobbett, Esquire) and I shall here add one more extract from his celebrated Political Register; "The discussion of this subject will have one good effect, it will convince all reasonable men that the Clergy are not so pampered as they have been represented to be :their ease and luxury have been the standing theme of envy and of abuse for many many years. The big-bellied Vicar and his half-starved parishioners have been exhibited to the passing crowd in St. Paul's Church-yard every day, except Sundays, for forty years past. The picture might with great truth be reversed; a halfstarved Clergyman amidst a crowd of big-bellied, rosy-gilled farmers, is to be found in one half of the parishes in the kingdom."

This was in the year 1802. Just at present it

must be confessed, if there be any difference, it is, that they are all half-starving together, or if not literally so, grievously low in pocket, and sadly tormented with pains arising from emptiness of purses.

I am a perfect friend to toleration. I think no truly conscientious Dissenter from the established Church should be persecuted for his opinions, but in every way possible protected by the laws. I am however, I must confess, much given to think, that there is no religious community, less tolerated or more illiberally treated than the established Church. But I shall forbear to enter into particulars. I am only astonished that those who profess to be attached both to her doctrines and her discipline, do not, with greater warmth and spirit resent the indignities to which she is subject; and which, as far as I can judge, from a good deal of observation, have no foundation whatsoever in fact. Before I part from this subject however, I would wish to recommend to the perusal of those who are in the way of judging too hastily of the Church. and Clergy, Dr. Shuttleworth's late work on the subject, and the review of it in the Christian Remembrancer, January, 1822, in which passages

are to be found, particularly illustrative of the cases I have ventured to bring forward, of mortification and self-denial, on the part of so large a proportion of our fellow-subjects. The Essay in Swift's works, entitled, "Some Arguments against enlarging the Power of the Bishops," (anno 1723) contains also many things to the same purpose and effect.

UNIVERSITIES.

THERE is great confusion of titles in our English Universities, though Cambridge is certainly much more simple than Oxford. (I beg pardon, I mean only respecting titles.) At Cambridge, every head of a College, except those of King's and Queen's, is a Master; and this is well, for Kings and Queens of course can have no Masters. But at Oxford there are,

Deans, (or at least one)
Presidents,

Provosts,

Wardens,

Rectors,

Masters,

and

Principals.

As, I believe, they take place in the University and amongst themselves according to the date of their degrees or appointments, there is not much hazard of confusion; but it must be difficult, I should think, (to speak academically) for Fresh

men, Lions, Tigers, and other such strangers, to know or to recollect distinctly, which is a President, which a Rector, which a Principal, &c.

There is a ludicrous instance of misnomer upon record in one of the Colleges at Oxford, whose head is a Warden. In remote times, when the public roads were bad, and travelling equipages not often seen, it happened that in a College progress, as it is called, when the foundation members go in form to inspect their estates, a heavy coach and four with various strange looking outriders, was seen at noon day, entering the streets of London; the people that were passing, anxious to know what such a retinue could mean, enquired of one of the College servants, who it might be that was travelling in such array. The servant forgetting how far he was from the walls of the University, replied with proper academical respect: the Warden and Fellows. The London pedestrians, knowing nothing of such titles, understood him to say, the Warder and Felons; and as there can be no greater sight to a London mob, than a parcel of atrocious culprits, fettered and hand-cuffed, and in bondage of a jailor, a crowd was soon collected around the travellers, and great was the