« VorigeDoorgaan »
said, by the master and the major part of the sidence in it, till he shall produce such proofg fellows.
of good behaviour, as shall be satisfactory to On being asked what I had to say in my the master and major part of the fellows?" defence, I requested that a written copy of
In the affirmative, the accusation might be given to me. Upon
The Master which the master desired me to withdraw,
Mr. Castley. that the matter might be put to the vote.
Mr. Stockdale. About half an hour after, I was called in Mr. Plampin.
Mr. Costobadie. again, when the master read to me the following words :
In the negative, The question being put, whether Mr. Frend Mr. Newton.
Mr. Whitehead. should have any charge delivered to him in Mr. Warren.
Mr. Otter. writing, and it being urged, that Mr. Frend And agreed by those, who answered in the had seven days notice by a summons from affirmative, that he may be allowed a month the master, of a meeting, for the considera- from this time, to settle his affairs in coltion of his pamphlet, and that the charge lege, the other four not dissenting. was sufficiently implied in the resolutions, I then withdrew. that had been read to him, it was carried in the negative.
It was not likely such arbitrary measures
should be complied with, and though the Being asked then, what I had to say in my thought necessary to comply with the com
bishop of Ely is visitor of the college, it was defence, I replied that, without an accusation, mon forms on such occasions, and to appeal it was impossible for me to defend myself
, to him from the injustice of the master and but that I should be exceedingly sorry, to the six fellows. The appeal was accompanied have been guilty either intentionally or unin- with the following letter. tentionally of several things, contained in their resolutions. I then retired.
My Lord; About a quarter past nine I was called in The unstatutable proceedings of the master again, when the master read to me the fol- and certain fellows of the college, have put lowing words:
me under the necessity of troubling your The question being asked, whether Mr. lordship with the appeal which accompanies Frend should be again called in, and inforin- this letter; and I Hatter myself that your ed, that the meeting still persist in not deli lordship will see the propriety of my request, vering a written charge, and that if he will that your lordship would suspend the execunot proceed on his defence, the meeting will tion of the sentence, against which I appeal, proceed without it.
until the matter, now at issue, has received Agreed to.
your lordship's determination. I then said, that I presumed I must consi
I remain, with great respect, my lord, der the resolutions as an accusation, and
your lordship's very obedient therefore requested that the passages in the
and humble servant, pamphlet might be referred to, with the sta
W. FREND. tutes which I had offended against, and that Jes. Coll. Cumb. April 17, 1793. I would then proceed on my defence. I then retired, and heard nothing more from the
THE APPEAL. meeting, which broke up about eleven, till
To the honourable and right reverend the next morning, when I was summoned
James, lord bishop of Ely, visitor of Jesus into the parlour between nine and ten.
college; the humble APPEAL of William The master was going to read something to Frend, M.A. and fellow of the said colme, but I requested to see first the proceed lege, ings of yesterday. I then retired, and on my return the master informed me, that my re
Sheweth, quest was not granted. I urged, that I had a That at a meeting of the master and ten material objection to propose, but the master fellows of the said college, held on the third refused to hear any thing, saying, that if I of April
, the master and a majority of the had any thing to say in my detence, 1 ought said fellows supposing the appellant to be the to have said it yesterday. "I replied, that I publisher of a pamphlet, intituled "Peace and was ready to proceed in my defence yester- Union,” concurred in the following Resoluday, but was desired to retire, when I had re
tions : quested that the passages of the pamphlet 1. That several passages in the said might be referred to, with the statutes which pamphlet have a tendency to prejudice the I had offended against, but was never called clergy in the eyes of the laity. in to make my defence. He silenced me, 2. That several passages in the said and read the following words from a written pamphlet have a tendency to degrade, in paper in his hands :
the public esteem, the doctrines and rites of Is it the opinion of this meeting, that Mr. the church of England. Frend be removed from the college, that is 3. That there is a tendency in the said from the precincts of the college, and from re- pamphlet to disturb the harmony of society. VOL. XXII,
4. That the said pamphlet tends more To the honourable and right reverend particularly to hurt the credit and interests James, lord bishop of Ely, visitor of of this college.
Jesus college, Cambridge. 5. That in publishing the said pamphlet, My lord, Mr. Frend is guilty of an offence contrary to
We have received from Mr. Frend a copy the laws of the college.
of an appeal, which he has made to your And in consequence of these resolutions, lordship, from a sentence of amotion prowithout having pointed out the exceptionable nounced against him by the master and mapassages in the said pamphlet, or the statutes jor part of the fellows, for publishing a have offended, or having even permitted him The spirit and contents of the pamphlet cunto speak in his defence, the master and six of sidered, we had reason to think that in the the tellows agreed, on the subsequent day, 10
sentence pronounced, the lenity of the colremove the appellant from residence in the lege was as conspicuous as its justice. But college, as appears from the following words, since Mr. Frend has not thought proper to which the master read to the appellant in the acquiesce in it, we beg leave, in few words, to meeting:
vindicate our proceedings from the objections Is it the opinion of this meeting, that Mr. which he has made to them. Frend be removed from the college, that is
As Mr. Frend, in the introductory part of from the precincts of the college, and from re
his appeal, represents the master and fellows, sidence in it, till he shall produce such proofs as only supposing him to be the publisher of of good behaviour as shall be satisfactory to the pamphlet in question, we shall lay before the master and major part of the fellows? your lordship, in the first place, the evidence
which was adduced to us in proof of that fact. In the affirmative,
Mr. Bowtell, the bookbinder, and his boy, The Master. Mr. Bayley.
were the first called in. The boy said, that a Mr. Mathew, Mr. Castley.
parcel of books came to Mr. Bowtell by the Mr. Plampin.
Mr. Stockdale. St. Ive's carrier, that Mr. Frend came and Mr. Costobadie.
unbound the parcel, dividing it into two bunIn the negative,
dies, which, by Mr. Frend's orders, he carried
to the two booksellers, Merrill and Lunn, for Mr. Newton. Mr. Whitehead.
sale. Mr. Bowtell confirmed that Mr. Frend Mr. Warren, Mr. Otler.
was at his house on this business, and that it And agreed by those who answered in the
was on the 12th or 13th of February. The affirmative, that he may be allowed a month, boy added, that he did not carry any books to from this time, to settle his affairs in college, Merrill's or Lunn's for a considerable time the other four not dissenting.
before or after. Lunn's servant was then To prevent the execution of this sentence, called in, he confirmed the bringing of the passed in so irregular and unstatutable a man
bundle by Bowtell's boy to Lunn's shop, and ner, the appellant humbly requests the inter- said that it consisted of Mr. Frend's book position of the visitor on
called “ Peace and Union, &c." He farther grounds :
said, that that morning, April 3d, he brought the said pamphlet were produced. 1. Because no exceptionable passages in twenty copies of this pamphlet from Mr.
Frend's rooms, at Mr. Frend's request, for 2. Because
no laws of the college, against sale, one of which pamphlets he produced. which the appellant has offended, were
This is a detail of the evidence given to us pointed out.
in support of the fact of publication, by which 3. Because the appellant had no opportu
we were fully satisfied that Mr. Frend was tunity of vindicating himself from the sup- pamphlet. The fact of publication being
to be considered as the publisher of the posed charges.
4. Because it does not appear from the thus established, the first ground of objection statutes of the college, that the master and taken to the validity of our proceeding thereon six of the fellows, or any other number less is, that no exceptionable passages of the than the majority of all the fellows, are com
pamphlet were produced. petent to inflict any punishment on a fellow,
It is true, my lord, that we declined pointmuch less one not expressly warranted by the ing out particular passages, because our disstatutes.
approbation was founded not merely on de5. Because the sentence of removal from tached passages, many of which are, in our the college is not only not warranted by the apprehension, of a tendency highly criminal statutes, but is clearly inconsistent with that and dangerous, but also on the general tenour which requires the constant residence of the and tendency of the whole composition. If master and fellows.
your lordship should deem it necessary, that W. FREND.
passages should be distinctly pointed out, we
shall have neither difficulty nor repugnance in The master and five fellows answered the obeying any order which your lordship may above appeal, and delivered a copy of it to be pleased to make upon us to that effect. Mr. Frend.
But we humbly conceive that the whole
pamphlet (to which we refer, and which we a majority of the fellows; for a majority of have annexed to this answer) being submitted the fellows being present at the meeting, and to your lordship's view, will remove the ne- the major part of that meeting having concessity of any such selection at present, and curred in the sentence, such sentence is valid, fully justify the propriety of having declined and to be considered as passed by the whole to make any such selection at the time of the meeting, tho' some of the members present inquiry.
should have refused their assent to it, and The next ground is, that no laws of the col even expressed their dissent from it. If there lege against which Mr. Frend had offended, should be any doubt of this, upon the face of were pointed out.
the statutes, we beg leave to refer your lord. In cases of discipline, we apprehend that ship to bishop White's interpretation of them, it is not necessary to point out particular which is of equal validity.* statutes; because if the matter is referred to the visitor, the college avails itself not of one, but of the whole body of the statutes,
Bishop White's Interpretation of the words and also of the general design and intention
De majore parte Sociorum, in the Statutes
of Jesus College. with which societies of that kind are instituted. The college, we submit, hath, quatenus De majore parte sociorum quomodo accia college, an inherent right, independently of pienda sit, tam in dicto statuto de electione any express or particular statute, to take officiariorum, cap. 12, quam etiam in statuto cognizance of and punish offences, contra de electione sociorum et forma ejusdem cap. bonos mores, committed by its members; and 5 et denique in statuto de scholaribus in colamong those offences we believe nga "rson legio exhibendis cap. 9, de quibus omnibus will have any difficulty in ranking the publi- idem dubium movetur, ita judicamus. Nication of this pamphlet.
mirum cum in statutis vestris observemus reThe 3d ground is, that Mr. Frend had no quiri alias universaliter majorem partem omopportunity of vindicating himself from the nium sociorum, ut in quibusdam rebus et supposed charges
negotiis arduis, cap. 3. 25, 26, 27, 28, memoIt will appear to your lordship from the ratis, alias simpliciter et indefinite majorem course of the proceedings, that three distinct partem sociorum, non adjecta voce omnium, opportunities of defence were given to Mr. ut in electionibus sociorum, scholarium, et Frend, which he declined to accept, but upon officiariorum dictis capitibus 5. 9. et 12. cumconditions demanded by himself, to which que præterea unicuique dictarum electionum the college acceded, so far as they conceived suus certus terminus ultra quem differri non those conditions to be founded in justice. debeat in iisdem statutis limitetur, cum deThe first time that he was called in, instead nique in dicto statuto, de electione sociorum, of entering upon his defence, he demanded a expresse et signanter dicatur, magister conwritten charge. The second time that he vocabit omnes socios ejusdem collegii tum in was called in, he would not enter upon his academia præsentes, absentium nulla habita defence, but insisted upon his former demand, ratione aut mentione facta, eademque esse though he was told that the charge, which videatur reliquorum duorum statutorum ratio: he demanded, was contained in the resolu- his igitur omnibus diligenter collatis et pertions which had been read to him, of which pensis, tam verba illa dicti capitis quinti, de he had taken a copy. It was then resolved, electione sociorum et forma ejusdem, illi electi that if he would not enter upon his defence censeantur et pro electis reputentur, in quos without some other charge than that con- magister et in ejus absentia præsidens sive tained in the resolutions, the meeting would locum tenens et major pars sociorum consenproceed without his defence. On being serint, quam illa capitis noni, dictos vero called in a third time, this was declared to scholares per magistrum et majorem partem him: but instead of attending to it, he made sociorum toties eligi et admitii volumus, et other new demands, which were, that as by denique illa capitis duodecimi, illi pro electis the resolutions read to him, he was accused officiariis habeantur in quos magister vel in of certain offences, the passages of the book, ejus absentia præsidens et major pars sociorum in which he had offended, and the statutes expresse consenserint, ita interpretamur, ut against which he had offended, might be intelligantur, et intelligi debeant, non de mapointed out to bim; which were refused on jore parte numeri sociorum pro tempore existhe grounds above stated to your lordship in tentium, sed tantum de majore parte sociorum our answer to the first and second articles of tum in academia præsentium quando elecobjection.
tionem fieri debere contigerit. As to the 4th objection, that it doth not Proviso semper, quod in omnibus dictis appear from the statutes of the college, that electionibus requiratur præsentia majoris partis the master and six of the fellows, or any totius numeri sociorum pro tempore existenother number less than the majority of all the tium. Proviso tamen insuper quod si quis fellows, are competent to inflict any punish- sociorum legitime monitus sive vocatus ad ment on a fellow, much less one not expressly capitulum venire noluerit, aut neglexerit, vel warranted by the statutes : We answer, that cum se præsens fuerit in capitulo sine the present sentence was virtually passed by venia discesserit, habeatur pro illa vice et
The last ground of objection is, that the My lord; Mr. Mathew put into my hand sentence of removal from the college is not yesterday, by your lordship's order, the anonly not warranted by the statutes, but is swer of the master and certain fellows of the clearly inconsistent with that statute, which college to my appeal. The same motives requires constant residence of the master and which led them to condemn me, unheard, in fellows.
this college, instigated them to make part of In answer to this we must observe, that a cabal to prosecute me in the vice-chanthe statutes confer a power of total expulsion cellor's court, and I have been under the neitself, for such acts of misconduct, as are more cessity of appearing in that court four days; particularly criminal and offensive. But altho' where, after a strict examination of fifteen it were true, that the sentence was not ex- hours, the facts have not been proved which pressly marked out by the statutes, yet we they have misrepresented in their answer, contend, that it was perfectly competent to and on which, after a few minutes conversathe college to pronounce it under that general tion, they took on themselves to pass a senand necessary authority which it possesses in tence wholly irrelevant and unjustifiable in all cases of discipline, whether specifically law and equity. described in the statutes or not Temporary My accusers are expected to finish their amotion is a punishment well known, and is charges on Friday next, and I shall be called frequent in the practices of all colleges for ' upon for my defence in the course of next week. offences either moral or academical. It is Your lordship is sensible that a person who analogous to the canonical punishment of has for the last three months laboured under suspension ab officio, which is chargeable with the pressure of every thing which malice and plained of in the present case, since the mi- been wearied by the fatigue of observing the nister is thereby restrained from discharging wretched tricks which my accusers have used those duties which he has solemnly bound in attacking me, is incapable of sitting down himself to perforin. It is analogous to most immediately to reply to the master's answer, punishments in civil society, which induce, in a manner worthy of your lordship’s notice, for the time they last, a disability of doing and I shall therefore presume so far on your several acts which the guilty person would lordship's patience, as to delay the reply till I otherwise be under an obligation of perform have completed my defence before the uniing. A similar inconsistency to that which versity. As the annals of the university do is now complained of, occurs between two not present an instance of a persecution atof our own statutes: the statute De Refec-tended with so many circumstances ot' malice tionibus, cap. 19, says that the fellows shall and ingratitude, and so contrary not only to not be absent from dinner or supper in the the principles of the Christian religion, but hall, nisi ex causâ rationabili
, per magistrum to every maxim of law and justice, I trust that et seneschallum approbanda. 'And yet the your lordship will, with your usual kindness, statute De Malis Moribus, &c cap. 8, re- accede to the request of a much injured man, quires that a fellow, for certain offences shall and one, who is with great respect, my lord, be put out of commons. This objection we your lordship's very obedient and humble cannot help observing is somewhat extraor- servant
W. FrexD. dinary, coming from a man in Mr. Frend's Jes. Coll. Camb. May, 15, 1793. situation, since it goes to the lenity of the
The bishop did not condescend to answer sentence; for the statutes would have warranted the college in punishing him, hy total this letter, but by his secretary, allowed three expulsion, for an offence of such magnitude as
wecks, to commence on May 22nd, for the that of which he has been guilty. We have drawing, up of the reply. Before the expirathe honour to be, my lord, your lordship'stion of that term another request was made most dutiful and most obedient servants,
in the following letter : W. PEARCE,
My lord; I am sorry to be under the neW. MATHEW,
cessity of making another application to your J. PLAMPIN,
lordship, to request farther indulgence with J. CostoBADIE, respect to the time of making my reply to the Tuo. BAYLEY,
paper delivered to me by Mr. Mathew. A THOMAS CASTLEY. plain statement of facts will, I Hatter myself,
convince your lordsh.ip that my request is not The prosecution in the university now took wireasonable. up the attention of the appellant, so that
The vice-chancellor's court was broken up having only cursorily looked over the answer, last Thursday, after having sat eight days, he wrote to the bishop to excuse himself from during which, my attention was necessarily replying to it immediately.
taken up with the proceedings; and the fa
tigne I underwent might have borne down quoad res explicandas in illo capitulo tanquam men of much stronger constitutions. On Frinullus de numero existentium.
day I appealed to the university, and on SaThe above is the interpretation referred to. turday the proctor, in the name of the uni--Frend.
versity, inhibited the vice-chancellor froid
putting bis sentence, which is founded neither The absence, it is presumed, of his secrein law nor evidence, into execution. I must tary, put his lordship to the trouble of writnow prepare myself to appear before the de- ing an answer to the above in the following legates, and not being by any means reco words: vered from the fatigue of the last business,
The bishop of Ely received, by yesterday's your lordship will, i hope, have the goodness to allow me a longer time to prepare the reply post, Mr. Frend's reply to the answer of the to be laid before your lordship.
master and fellows of his college to his apIt is an unusual thing that an Englishman sires Nir. Frend will deliver a copy of the
peal against their sentence. His lordship deshould be thus employed in two different reply to the master and fellows for their concourts, on the same subject, and I was once
sidcration. in hopes that my persecutors would have permitted a decision to take place in one court
June 20th, 1793. before they proceeded to attack me in ano In obedience to this order, as the master ther. But as they were resolved to harass was absent, a copy of the reply was given to me to the utmost of their power, I have only the president of the college. to commit myself to your lordship’s protec
REPLY. tion, and to request that, as to this moment I have not been free from vexation, and am My lord; The answer to my appeal is signnow scarce able to take pen in hand, I may be ed, I perceive, by the master and five only of indulged with longer time, or, if it should be the fellows, who agreed to remove me from agreeable to your lordship, I could wish to be the college from whence I conclude that the permitted to delay my reply till the merits of sixth fellow being fully sensible of his error, the cause, now pending in the university, have in acting in so unwarrantable a manner against been fully and finally discussed by its dele. one of his society, refused to be any farther gates. I have the honour to be, with great connected with those by whom he had been respect, my lord, your lordship’s very obedient misled. I am not surprised that the five feland humble servant,
lows should praise themselves for their lenity;
W. FREND. since they had sent to your lordship an acJesus College, Camb. June 3, 1793.
cusation very different from the resolutions
entered into at the meeting of the 3rd of The bishop, in return, answered by his April, and had besides been most of them secretary, that he did not think it consistent part of a cabal, to deprive me of my degrees, with a proper attention to the college, and and to banish me from the university. It is the nature of the business referred to him, to no wonder that they should talk of lenity, comply with the request. His lordship was, who regard as of little moment the inconvetherefore, put to the trouble of receiving ano nience which a man of letters must feel, by ther letter.
being deprived of the calm repose requisite
for study, and of access to the rich repositories My lord; As the circumstances already of learning in this place: but their language mentioned to your lordship bave prevented in my opinion is insolence in the extreme, and me from giving more than a cursory glance adus insult to injustice. at the answer to my appeal, I am by no ineans I have said that the master and fellows supcertain what time or trouble will be requisite posed ine to be the publisher of a certain for the reply. But if I am not in the mean
pamphlet, and they have now laid before your while called upon by the university, I shall lordship the evidence by which they were do my utmost endeavours that it may be with guided. It is the boast of Englishmen, that your lordship hy the end of next week. I the accused person should be confronted have the honour to be, with great respect, with the witnesses, but, as in this instance a my lord, your lordship's very obedient hum- different conduct was pursued, it is no wonder ble servant,
that the pretended judges should not only fall June 5th, 1793.
into error, but should present with the utmost
confidence such error to your lordship. After this the appeilant went into the country for a few days, and on his return to college oath, that in the evidence laid before your
I do declare, and am ready to attest upon drew up, in a couple of days, his reply, which he sent, accompanied witli the following let- lordship, there is an absolute falsehood.
The master and the five tellows confess, letter, to the bishop:
that no exceptionable passages were pointed My lord; Inclosed is my reply to the an. out, and, in excuse, refer to the general tenor swer of the master and five fellows of this and tendency of the whole composition. What college. Had I, on the receipt of it, read it may be their ideas of the tendency of any twice over, your lordship would not have been work, it is not necessary for me to inquire. I troubled with any requests from me for time do not conceive them to be competent judges to consider it. I remain with great respect, of my writings, nor ever intend to govem my lord, your lordship’s very obedient hum- myself by their notions of composition. In ble servant,
W, FREND. the most wretched inquisition that the world June 14, 1793.
has ever seen, such a pretext for punishing a