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 affirınative, the accusation might be given to me.

Upon
The Master.

Mr. Bavlev. which the master desired me to withdraw,

Mr. Mathew.

Mr. Castley. that the matter might be put to the vote.

Mr. Plampin.

Mr. Stockdale. About half an hour after, I was called in

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.

Mr. Otter. should have any charge delivered to him in Mr. Warren. writing, and it being urged, that Mr. Frend And agreed by those, who answered in the had seven days notice by a summons from aflirmative, 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 inform- 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 lordslıip'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 defence, I 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, 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,

3 B

2.

4. That the said pampblet 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 pounced against him by the master and mapassages in the said pamphlet, or the statutes jor part of the fellows, for publishing a against which the appellant is supposed to pamphlet intituled “ Peace and Union, &c.” 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 fellows agreed, on the subsequent day, lo

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. Otter.

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

the following

called “ Peace and Union, &c." He farther grounds:

said, that that morning, April 3d, he brought 1. Because no exceptionable passages in twenty copies of this pamphlet from Mr. the said pamphlet were produced.

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 ditficulty 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 inake 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

Bishop White's Interpretation of the words one, but of the whole body of the statutes, and also of the general design and intention

De majore parte Sociorum, in the Statutes with which societies of that kind are institu

of Jesus College. ted. 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 ng rson legio exhibendis cap. 9, de quibus omnibus will have any difficulty in rankiæg the publi- idem dubium movetur, ita judicamus. Nication of this pamphlet.

mirum cum in statutis vestris observemus re- The 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 proeeedings, 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 difterri 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 con written 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 admitti 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 semel præsens fuerit in capitulo sine the present sentence was virtually passed by venia discesserit, habeatur pro illa vice et