fection entitled "Nature and Care of Gout," occurring in the eighth page ! "Gout is a greater or lets degree of inflammatory affection of the ligaments and tendons, induced by diliempered excitability of tho e parts, from various caufes." See Diflertation on Gout, page 8, line 1.

3dy It is then affirmed, with a moft indecent violation of truth, that my doctrine afferts, " that lie is maintained by mechanical preffure; that life in difeafe is the confequence of this preffure being equal or unequal, and that death is caufed by the removal of this prellure altogether."

Your readers, Sir, will thank me for expofing and refuting this wanton falfhood, in as far as they mnft with the publick not to be deceived. Not a tilile of either the language of this paffage, or of the fentiment it would convey, is to be found in my Diffra tion! It is, indeed, completely repugnant to the idea of vital motion fuggefted in that publication. The ground of animal vitality advanced in that work is attributed to an innate power in the atomical and organic fu faces of matter for generating repul five motion. Not one word of vital preffure is either faid or implied in the whole Differtation.

This fame Critic, then, without the fligheft warranty (indeed, under a direct forbiddance), wrefts my opinion of gouty inflammation being only different from fimple inflammatory affection in circumliances of degree and the firucture of the affected part, imo an avowal, that all inflammations are formally as well as radically fimilar, and that nothing of a specific nature can exift in inflammatory difeafe.

The reader will find, in my Differtation on Gout, how repeatedly vitiated excitability is alluded to, as refulting from the various peculiar impreffions of noxious agents; and will fee mott clearly, that though it was my defign io refcue gout from the impuration of being a fpecific difeafe, that ample provifion is made for admitting but 100 numerous a clafs of that description, founded on fuch peculiar modes of impreflion as the different powers and qualities of exciting caufes might he capable of producing. My opinion of difeafes having univerfally a motive and not a material origin and diffufion throughout the fyfiem, is alfo grofsly GENT. MAG. January, 1805.

The multifarious intelligence your valuable Magazine is expected to record, will not allow me to prefume on cxtending my remarks on this malevolent criticism. The fubject fhall foon be refumed, more at large, in another publication. In the mean time, the advocates of the refrigerant treatment of Gont muft, at once rejoice, that no valid objection can be made against it, by even the most malignant oppofition, and deplore the pitiful iniquity of mifflating, for the obvious purpofe of furnishing a deceptious occafion for calumny.

Criticism is at liberty, nay invited, to direct its molt pointed fhafts againfi my Diflertation, provided it should keep within the pale of truth; but, if that boundary be tranfgrefled, it will ceafe to be a review of either merits or defects, and wid become, as in the infiance now referred to, a flagrant mireprefentation.

The theory and practice of Gout, as propofed by me, are quellions of experiment. An appeal has been made, to that ordeal of truth, which has been anfwered by reports extremely favourable to the eventual efiablishment of the refrigerant remedy.

No objection to either its fufficiency or fafety appeared before the publication of Mr. Edlin's cafe. My ply to that infiance refills the validity of the tel timony offered in its fupport.

The refrigerant treatment of Gout is too far advanced in popular confidence to be fhaken by factious, cafuiftic, and bear-fay oppofition; yet it ftill folicits, and will continue to do fo, correct," liberal, and benevolent information, on the fubject, whether favourable or unfavourable, fanctioned by real fignatures and refpectable authorities; fuch intelligence will be thankfully received by me, and is folely entreated for the philanthropic purpofe of rendering to mankind a benefit, as un.. queflicnable as important.

Yours, &c. R. KINGLAKE. Mr. URBAN, Rolford, Jan. 12. YOUR correfpondent Lartingtonienfis' queries upon the obfervations of the Leech worm (LXXIV. 1124), I can anfwer in part. The obfervations were written by a friend of mine, and given to me about feven years ago. The

fame

fame experiment I made foon after, and found to agree perfectly with thofe of my friend. In my prefent fituation I have no opportunity to refume the experiment, to answer the two laft quef tions propofed. My intention of printing the account was, that fome gentleman might make the like experis ment, and give fome farther account of this little animal. By the following day it is mean, the following part of that day. When I kept Lecches, they ftood in a window to the Eatt.

66

Mr. Wefton's account of the Gardener's Calendars contributed to the entertainment of your humble fervant. It would be particularly interefting to many of your readers, to fee fome pages of your Mifcellany devoted to Bibliography, particularly to En lith books, arranged in claffes, as Atro-, nomy, Philofophy, Philology, &c. and of Saxon, Gallic, Welch, and Hebrew books, that have been publithed, the latt editions, and where they are to be found. The Bibliographical Dictionary" and "Dibdin's Introduction to the Claflics" are valuable works; but English books are neglected. If Mr. Welion, or any other gentleman, would take the trou ble to prepare fome papers upon the above fubject, they would be of great ufe to direct the ftudent to form a collection of the best books upon the fubject he wishes to fludy, without facrificing his time and money upon trivial publications. The inferting the above will much oblige

Mr. URBAN,

BY

W. P.

Dec. 6.

Y inferting the inclofed ctter in your excellent Magazine, you will oblige, Yours, &c. P STATUTE.

To a Member of the Senate. «SIR, Temple, Dec. 20, 1804,

Your letter to the Heads of Colleges in the Univerity of Cambridge, which appeared in the Gen. Mag. fvol. LXXIV. p. 714) excited in my mind a ftrong inclination to examine the ftatutes of that learned bod. I have not, however, till lately, found an opportunity for that purpofe; and, as I am now confirmed in the fentiinents which I entertained upon the firft perufal of your letter, I fhall trouble you with a few remarks; left the opinion which you, as a Member of the Senate, have circulated through ruittake, fhould be confidered as an undisputed truth.

"The admirable method which you have adopted in examining the Statute de Studiofis Medicine, has thrown fo much light upon the value of Medical Degrees in the Univerfity of Cambridge, at this time, that the publick muft be anxious to fee your remarks upon the manner in which the fiatutes, in general, are obferved. The difference between making decrees, and interpreting ftatutes, which you have pointed out, is excellently defined; and would be deferving of ferious a tention, upon the fuppofition that the two powers are actually vefied in the Heads of Colleges. It appeas, however, to me, that your opinion, with r gard to their privileges, is er neous; and, therefore, I propofe, firi, to pout our your error respecting the power of making decrees; fecondly, o make fine obfervations on the privilege of interpreting fiatutes; thirdly, to relate what has actually pafled, fince the date of your letter; and to concinde with a few general remarks.

Firti: with regard to the power of the Heads of Houfes to make decrees. You fay, that "the fiatmies have conferred on the Herds of Houfes / two very important privileges; the one, that of interpreting thole fiatutes, the meaning of which is doubtful : the other, that of making fich orders or decrees for the better regulation and difcipline of the Univerity, as they may think proper." Now, Sir, I fhould be glad to know, upon what ftatute you found this opinion; for it appears to me, that the power of niaking new laws is vefted in the Senate.

Id folum pro ftatuto habeatur quod de confentu majoris et fanioris partis regemium et non-regentium fuerit fiatutum." Stat. aut. p. 1.-In the year 1592, "It is granted by the Senate, that the Vice Chancellor, with the Mafters and Prefidents of Colleges, may have power to make a. ftatute." P. 115. After the fift body of fiatutes was given to the Univerfity by Queen Elizabeth, the decrees of Chancellor Cecil were confirmed by the Sunate. "Conceditur ut ordinationes pollint veflrå auctoritate et decreto ut itatuta approbari." P. 130.-In Queen Elizabeth's fecond body of ftatutes, the exprefsly vets the power of inaking new laws in the Chancellor aud Senate. Cancellario, cum confenfa totius academia, licebit nova ftatuta fancife." P. 253. In 1613, King

James,

James, after diving certain directions to the Chancellor, favs, 'Our will and pleafure therefore is, that you publish these our letters to the Body of the University, and endeavour to pafs a grace to the effect aforefaid,' p. 280: and accordingly we find that a grace patled the Senaje to confirm thefe directions. P. 371.-In 1625 the Heads appear to have attempted to make a fiatute by their own authority; but, fearful of the validity of this decree, the very fame regulation was made a part of the fiatutes by the Senate. P. 481.-Thefe quotations are, I truft, fufficient to prove that the Heads of Houfes had not the privilege of making decrees before the time of Elizabeth; and that, by her flatutes, that power is exprefsly vefied in the Chancellor and Senate; and to completely justify me in afferting, that the Heads of Houles do not poffefs the power of making any new fiatute, decree, or law what foever; fince it is obvious, that whatever is to be entered upon the ftatute book, to form a part of the flatutes, and to have the fame force and effect as a ftatute, is pofitively and abfolutely a ftatute, let it be called by whatever title it may. It appears, therefore, that though the Heads of Houfes may, in matters of trifling concern, have if fued orders for regulating the behaviour of fcholars, the two very important privileges' which you have conferred on them are reduced to one.

"Secondly, The power of interpreting thofe ftatutes, the meaning of which is doubtful, is, by Queen Elirabeth, entrusted to the Heads of Houfes. Si quid dubii vel ambigui in iftis ftatutis et fanctionibus nofiris oriatur, id per cancellarium et majorem partem præfectorum collegiorum explicabitur et determinabitur; quo rum determinationi et interpretationi reliquos omnes cedere volumus.', P.271. -But, in the exercile of this power, no arbitrary conttruction fhould be admitted; no private intereft fhould be attended to. It can never follow that, becaufe the Heads have the power to interpret doubts, they can call black white, and enter any new laws what foever in the statute-book, by denominating them interpretations. Suppofe that doubts fhould arife refpecting the meaning of the following words in the, Statute-book, p. 433: Cum literæ variæ Procancellario accipiantur, placoat vobis, ut aurei quinque quotannis

ei allocentur;' and that a majority of the Heads met and determined thus: • Whereas doubts have arifen refpecting the meaning of the words,' aurei quinque quotannis,' in the 438th page of the Statute-book, we the underwritten, having confidered the faid words, are of opinion, and do determine, that whofoerer fhall, at any time, have difcharged the office of. Vice Chancellor, fhall, for the remainder of his life, receive annually. from the University Cheft the fum of 500 guineas, as a remuneration for his trouble. It never can be fuppofed, that this would become a part of the fiatutes. The Senate certainly would. not fubmit to fuch an interpretation: and yet the words, aurei quinque quotannis,' would bear fuch a confiruction, full as well as the words,

rem medicam difcet,' will bear the interpretation now put upon them. Should the Heads of Houfes be under no controul whatever, in exercising the privilege of interpreting ftatutes, the whole body of ftatutes might, in time, be changed, and the laws of the Univerity be abrogated, by the authority of the Heads of Houfes alone: a fuppofition fo monfirous and abfurd, that it requires no refutation. When the Heads of Houfes exceed the boundaries of their privilege, by iffuing decrees, which are in fact new laws, under pretence of their being interpretations, fuch decrees cannot derive their authority from the flatutes, fince they are not fanctioned by them: and I fhould, therefore, imagine, that they cannot be binding upon the Senate, as not refting upon any conflitutional' foundation. It would, perhaps, be difficult to point out the beft method of preventing the evils that might refult from an attempt of the Heads of Houfes to force their own decrees upon the University, under the form and title of interpretations; but it is evidently incumbent on the Senate, to be particularly careful not to permit the Heads of Houfes to encroach upon their undoubted rights, if they with to preferve the power of making all new laws, which is vetted in them by the fiatutes.

Thirdly: As, poffibly, you may not have been refident in the Univer fity, fince the date of your letter to the Heads of Houfes, it is necellary that I should inform you of the measures which have been actually taken, rela

tive to Medical Degrees. On the 16th of June, the Vice Chancellor and a majority of the Heads figned the following regulation, under the title of an Interpretation: • Whereas doubts have arifen refpecting the meaning of the ftatute, Studious medicinæ fex annos rem medicam difcet, ejus lectionis auditor affiduus; anatomias duas videat; bis refpondeat; femel opponat, antequam baccalaureus fiat;-We, the underwritten, are of opinion, and do determine, that the faid ftature is to be thus interpreted; that is to fay, that, according to the true intent and meaning of the faid ftatute, no person can be admitted a candidate for the degree of Batchelor in Phyfic, who has been habitually engaged, within the period of time prefcribed by the faid fiatute, in the practice of any ttade or profeffion whatsoever.'

"Contrary to every maxim of legiflation, and to the uniform practice of the Univerfity, this new law has been made to operate against those who had refided their terms before its promulgation; and, in confequence thereof, Mr. Cope of St. John's college, and Mr. Thackeray of Emanuel college, both men of unexceptionable conduct and of liberal education, have been prevented from proceeding to their degrees, after having refided the ufual time, and gone through thofe exercifes which were required in their refpective colleges: the latter of them, becaufe he has practifed as a furgeon within the precincts of the University, though no objections had been made; the former becaufe he has been emploved within the period of the time prefcibed by the ftatute, in the ifland of Malta, although it was exprefsly intimated to him by the profellor of phyfic, that he was at liberty to practice wherever he pleafed.

"Thus we find that two men, who had been led to expect the honours of a degree, from the known laws and eftablifhed cufion of the University, have been rejected; although other firgeons have been admitted under the fame profeffor of phyfic, who uniformly prevents the ftatute from being complied with in its moft effential parts; and under the very fame Vice chancellor (Doctor Davy), who was fo active in procuring the enactment of the new regulation.

The injury done to thefe rejected candidates has been the fubject of much

converfation in the University. The members of the Senate confider their privileges as deeply affected by the decifion; for it is not merely a queflion whether A. and B. fhall be admitted to their degrees or not, but whether the power of conferring degrees in general refts in the Heads, or in the Caput or Senate; and whether the privilege of making new laws is given by the ftatutes to the leads of Houfes, or to the whole body of the University. Should the Senate be convinced that their privileges have been infringed, it will become a question in what manner they are to fhew their difapprobation and obtain redrefs. We remember, that in the year 1800, when the members of the Senate thought themfelves aggrieved, they oppofed all University bulinefs until the caufe of complaint was removed. But this is a tiep which no confiderate man would wifh to see adopted if it can be avoided.

"If the Heads of Houfes are not only to make the laws, but to determine exactly who fhall be admitted to their degrees, and who fhall be rejected, there is no longer any occation for the Caput or the Senate. It never could be the intention of the framers of the ftatutes, that two fuch men as Mr. Cope and Mr. Thackeray should be excluded from medical degrees; nor can it ever be proved that they are lefs qualified to act as physicians from their having had extenfive practice in furgery.

"Upon looking back to former interpretations, I find that the Heads of Houfes have fometimes put a fenfe upon words directly oppofite to their literal meaning: but then their conftruction has always been favourable to candi dates for degrees, and therefore has met with no oppofition..

"In 1575, when they wished to favour particular perfons, they begin their interpretation of the flatute by faving, The will and reafon of the law is, that worthy men, and no others, fhould be admitted to degrees. And again, two years afterwards, when the Heads withed to extend the dif penfations, following the mind of the legiflator rather than the bark of words,' they fay, cum omnes leges quibus pœnæ vel præmia decernuntur perfonarum meritis feu fundamento nitantur, cumque in bene conftitutis civitatibus femper fuerit ufurpatum, ut non magis poenarum acerbitas re

fringetur

fringetur quam præmiorum favor amplificaretur, certe academicas leges, que literarum et literatorum hominum præmiis font pofitæ, hâc communi carere æquitate nefas ellet exiftimare. Quamobrem, &c.' P 328. In the year 1628, when the Heads wifhed to stant leave of abfence to the Batchelors, they interpreted, Studuerint in academia, have ftudied out of the University, p. 331.-But here, alfo, the interpretation was an indulgence, and confequently was not difputed. The circumftance of thefe interpretations having met with no oppofition, cannot be brought forward as an argument in favour of any right in the Heads of Houfes to make fuch interpretations; for, as they were indulgences, no one was aggrieved by them; and, therefore, it evidently was not the intereft of any one to obje& tọ them and no inftance can be found, where any Member of the University has been excluded from a degree, by any law, ftatute, interpretation, or decree, made after Ire had kept his terms. The will and reafon of the law fill are, that worthy men, and no others, bould be admitted to their degrees; and we cannot fuppofe that the body of the Univerfity will allow any ex post facto regulation to operate against two men who have uniformly conducted theinfelves with the greatest propriety; nor can we imagine that the Caput and Senate will filently permit their own privileges to be trampled under foot, or fuffer their degrees to be fubject to fuch caprice and uncertainty as would be disgraceful to thofe who are placed as the guardians of learning, and by fubjecting them to a fufpicion of being guided in their moft folemn acts by the interested views of individuals, niuft lower them in the eftimation of the public, and ultimately effect the ruin of the Univerfity.

Yours, &c. P. STATUTE.

young gentleman who was compelled, by fevere illness, to relinquish the profecution of Oriental ftudies in purfuit of health, by a voyage to China, where, it is evident enough, he has not proved deficient in that fpirit of induftry, refearch, and reflection, which he acquired at the College immediately on his arrival in India. I will not prefume to fay how far Mr. Elliot's obfervations are worthy of political notice, though I certainly may venture thus to ftimulate the youth of the prefent day in the early profecution of folid acquirements, at a period when the fafcinating example of fuper-excellence on the nimic ftage might otherwife allure many a fond parent from the requifite attention to objects of real utility, which alone can qualify their children to act well their parts on the grand theatre of Life.

Yours, &c. JOHN GILCHRIST, "To John Gilchrift, Efq. Calcutta. My dear Sir, Canton, Jan.25, 1804.

My health as yet has not permit ted me to refume my ftudies in any material degree; but I hope foon to be able to profecute them with effect.

"I take this opportunity of tranf mitting to you a copy of an Arabic and Perfian infcription, found on a tomb fituated at a fhort diftance from this place, and given to me by one of the Muffulman agents here.

He

"He informed me, that it was the tomb of one of the Prophets, companions or difciples (Us, hab) fent here by them for the purpofe of propaga ting the Moolman religion. farther informed me, that many of the Chinese profefs the Moohuminaden faith; that they have Musjids (Mofques) of their own; and, moreover, that feveral of their literati ate well versed in the Arabic and Persian languages, two of whom he himself

had feen.

"This laft circumftance appears curious; and, if true, which I believe it to be, may furnith a more direct channel of communication with the Chinele Government than any we are acquainted with, their being only one of the fupercargoes (young fir George Staunton) who poffeffes any knowledge of the Chinese language. I beg you will have the goodness to get the accompanying papers tranflated, and tranfinit a copy of it to me, either in the Hindooftanee or English, as you pleafe.It will be very acceptable, if

you