1843 THE PLUCKY SEVEN. 313 tiny have been taken in such a crowd and in such a tumult?). Mr. Everett was introduced and, being admitted in dumb show, took his seat among the Doctors. A small number of Masters of Arts afterwards protested, but, of course, to no purpose, except to extort a declaration from the Vice-Chancellor 'that neither he nor any one near him was made aware that a scrutiny had been demanded,' till the candidates were brought in for presentation, when it was obviously too late, 'Placetne vobis' having already been put. This June was marked by a sad event, the death by drowning of Dean Gaisford's third son and Dr. Phillimore's youngest son, while bathing at Sandford Lasher Pool. Gaisford sank from exhaustion, fright, or cramp, in the rough water of the Lasher, and Phillimore went down while gallantly striving to assist his friend. A monumental tablet was placed in Christ Church Cathedral, with an inscription by Dr. Gaisford. There was also erected a memorial of them on the spot where they were drowned. At the Henley Regatta, this June, the Oxford and Cambridge eight-oared boats being about to start, one of the Oxford crew was taken ill. The Cambridge men would not allow a substitute;-so 'the plucky seven' started, with all the odds against them, with four rowers on one side and three on the other (the bow-oar being vacant'). To attempt the thing was audacious, to succeed in it (as the Oxonians did) was unprecedented in the annals of boating,—but 'possunt quia posse videntur.' The Margaret Professorship is subject to the absurd form of re-election every second year; this year, 1843, there was a strong apprehension that a muster of hostile Bachelors and Doctors of Divinity (who are the electors) would attempt to negative Dr. Faussett's re-election. So strong a meeting, however, of his D.D. and B.D. friends and supporters at tended, that the expected attempt was not made. Alas! poor divided Oxford! In July, the Vice-Chancellor declined to receive an Address (deprecating the proceedings as to Dr. Pusey's sermon), signed by more than 200 Members of Convocation. In September, Mr. Newman resigned the Vicarage of St. Mary's and, with it, Littlemore Chapelry. His published sermons were not only unobjectionable, but excellent; his private teaching had long been distrusted, and pains had been taken at some Colleges to prevent Undergraduates from attending his Services, by making the College Chapel hour coincide with his Sunday Evening Service at St. Mary's. He was obviously preparing for a farther flight Romewards. Mr. Garbett (in October) made a good remark in a published letter,that Romanism (spontaneous Romanism he calls it) would naturally arise from studying Scripture through the Fathers, instead of studying the Fathers by the light of Scripture! Nov. One of the earliest 'perverts' was Mr. Seager, of Worcester College. It was said that he went to Oscott 'for a literary enquiry;' that, after dinner, controversy was started by Dr. Wiseman, and was kept up till four o'clock next morning, when Mr. Seager 'cried for quarter !' Can we wonder that he, who thus rushed into the snare, should not have escaped. The account further added, that ‘at 8 a.m. of the same morning he was baptised!' That act of baptizing converts from our Church is justly considered the most arrogant of all Romish proceedings; as ignoring our Church, our ministers, their orders and ministrations altogether. Only conceive such men as Newman, Manning, Oakley, Faber, &c., thus renouncing, or rather denouncing, the Church of their fathers, and condemning, as not Christian, their own previous ministrations! 1843 AGITATION AND RIOTS. 315 While Oxford and the Church were thus kept in hot water by the Romanising Tractarians, Ireland was 'agitated' by O'Connell, and Wales by what were ridiculously called the 'Rebecca' riots! The anxious state of things in Ireland may be understood from the fact that at this time 34,000 troops were kept there by Government! IN May, 1843, Mr. Macmullen, Fellow of Corpus, commenced an action in the Vice-Chancellor's Court against Dr. Hampden, Regius Professor of Divinity, for damages caused by his not being allowed (as required by the College statutes) to proceed to the Degree of B.D., or rather for not having been allowed by Dr. Hampden to argue on subjects of his own choice, as an Exercise for that Degree, in the Divinity School. The fact was, that Dr. Hampden, knowing, as every one did, Macmullen's Romish tendencies, required him to dispute on certain searching questions, and that he refused to accept them. By-the-bye, 'dispute' was not the proper term; it was rather a 'dissertation,' to be approved or disapproved by the Professor. June 21. The case of Macmullen v. Hampden was heard in the Vice-Chancellor's Court. The importance of the proceeding was at once shown by the introduction of regular 'Counsel' on both sides; a thing of rare occurrence, ordinary cases being conducted by the Proctors of the Court. Dr. Twiss appeared for the defendant (Dr. Hampden), and Mr. Hope, of the Chancery Bar (himself subse 'MACMULLEN VERSUS HAMPDEN. 317 quently a 'pervert') for Macmullen. After a long, dry argument on both sides (the advocates sticking to the points of law, and cautiously avoiding all theological questions), the Assessor (of course) took time to consider the matter. Near the end of Act Term notice was given that (as was allowed by the statutes) the cause Macmullen v. Hampden was transferred, by appeal, from the Vice-Chancellor's Court to the Delegates of Appeal in Congregation.' In the following Term, November 29, Counsel were heard on the case before the Delegates of Appeal, sitting in the usual Court in the Apodyterium. After much talking and lengthened addresses (which actually lasted from 10 a.m. till 7 p.m.), the Court deferred its decision, taking more time to consider the arguments, &c.! Jan. 4, 1844. The judgment of the Assessor, which had allowed the libel (on which Macmullen brought his charge against Hampden) to be good in law, was reversed by the Delegates of Appeal in Congregation.' The libel therefore, or charge, was dismissed. 'Solvuntur tabulæ !' But more work seemed to be cut out for the lawyers, in the shape of a further Appeal from the Delegates of Congregation to the Delegates of Convocation. This, however, was not followed up by the plaintiff, no difference of opinion being there to be expected. So Mr. Macmullen, who had brought the action for the recovery of five pounds (the ground of the action, as what he would have received extra from Corpus, if he had been allowed to graduate as B.D.), had multiplied his loss by expenses of many times that sum. It was believed, however, that his party did not leave him alone to pay his Counsel, while Dr. Hampden had to bear his expenses unaided. April 18. Macmullen, having failed in his lawsuit against Dr. Hampden, submitted to resume his Exercises for the |