with gold lace. The second is a black silk gown, with full sleeves; it has a tippet attached to the shoulders. With both these dresses is worn a square cap of black velvet, with a gold tassel. "The Gentleman Commoner has two gowns, both of black silk; the first, which is considered as a dress-gown, although worn on all occasions, at pleasure, is richly ornamented with tassels. The second, or undress gown, is ornamented with plaits at the sleeves. A square black velvet cap, with a silk tassel, is worn with both. "The dress of Commoners is a gown of black Prince's stuff, without sleeves; from each shoulder is appended a broad strip, which reaches to the bottom of the dress, and towards the top is gathered into plaits. The square cap of black cloth and silk tassel. "The Student in Civil Law, or Civilian, wears a plain black silk gown, and square black сар, with silk tassel. "Scholars, and Demies of Magdalen, Postmasters of Merton, and Students of Christ Church, who have not taken a degree, wear a plain black gown of Prince's stuff, with round full sleeves, half the length of the gown, and a square black cap, with silk tassel. "The dress of the Servitor is the same as that of the Commoner, but it has no plaits at the shoulder, and the cap is without a tassel." University Officers, distinguished by their Dress. "The dress of the Chancellor is of black figured damask silk, richly ornamented with gold embroidery, a rich lace band, and square velvet cap, with a large gold tassel. "The Proctors wear gowns of Prince's stuff, the sleeves and facings of black velvet; to the left shoulder is affixed a small tippet. To this is added, as a dress, a large ermine hood. "The Pro-Proctor wears a Master of Arts' gown, faced with velvet, with a tippet attached to the left shoulder. "The Bedels are those who walk before the Vice-Chancellor in processions. There are three called Esquire Bedels, and three Yeomen Bedels. The Esquire Bedels, who carry the gold staves, wear silk gowns, similar to those of Bachelors of Law, and round velvet caps. The Yeomen Bedels, who bear silver staves, have black stuff gowns, and round silk caps. "The dress of the Verger, who walks first in processions, is nearly the same as that of the Yeoman Bedel. He carries a silver rod. "The Vice-Chancellor seldom walks out without being preceded by a Yeoman Bedel, with his staff. "Bands at the neck ase considered as necessary appendages to the academic dress, particularly on all public occasions.” Such are the authentic regulations of the great University o Oxford, of which his Grace the Duke of Wellington is Chancellor. While we accord to these institutions of Oxford and Cambridge much that is wise, and judicious, and venerable, we cannot but think that there is something that savors of weakness, or prejudice, or superstition, if not of all three, in some of their laws and customs. Their literary and religious taste and costume are very similar.— But whence, we must ask, the beau ideal of all this consecrated and by-law-established foppery? Can we find it in the canonicals of the ancient schools of the prophets and philosophers-in the sacred vestments of the high priest Melchisedec, or in those of the house and lineage of Aaron? Or are these the meretricious decorations of the mystic lady of the Papal throne, who was "clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones, and pearls, bearing a golden chalice in her hands"!! I blame not Kings and Queens for royal robes and vestmentsthe bridegroom or the bride for a wedding garment; but to see students of nature, of the philosophy of the great universe— Bachelors and Doctors of Divinity, in apparel so theatrically vain and foolish-scarfed and cassocked, gowned and tasseled, hooded and sashed, caps the climax of learned folly and sainted pride. With the change of fortune into learning, one might say with Pope of these University fashions "Learning in men has some small difference made, . "What differ more (you cry) than crown and cow!!" Or, cobbler-like, the parson will get drunk, The rest is all but leather or prunello." These great seminaries commenced, one might say, in the dark ages, when men venerated robes, titles, and livery, more than wisdom, learning, or grace. They were in good keeping with the spirit of the Popedom-with its grimace, genuflexions, and gorgeous ceremonials during the 12th and 13th centuries. They were, Alfred the Great, we learn, coming to the throne of England, and finding the nation sunk into the greatest ignorance and barbarism, not being able to find one man south of the Thames who could interpret the Latin service, invited scholars from all parts of Europe, and establishe sundry schools; and if he did not absolutely found, certainly repaired ani invigorated Oxford College in the last quarter of the 10th century. indeed, Papal institutions, and the Protestant Reformation laid its corrective hand upon them as light as possible. Their sympathies with their mother have, therefore, always been in harmony with the spirit of the 5th commandment. Hence the reverence and venera tion of some of her greatest masters for the secular glory and mystic theology of Rome are all predominating in some of her colleges, and indicate a strong desire to return to the bosom of Holy Mother. The "Oxford Tracts" are, therefore, all backward to the gates of the mystic city. True, the spirit as well as the forms of the English hierarchy, so far as it is a state or secular religion, are more Papistical than Protestant, and savor much more of Rome than of Jerusalem. And yet no one can obtain any honorable degree, from Bachelor of Arts to Doctor of Divinity, at either of her Universities, who does not vow a bona fide allegiance to her doctrine, discipline, and govern ment! How illiberal, exclusive, and proscriptive the spirit of a University that knows no merit, that recognizes no genius, no moral worth, no literary eminence, no public service outside the pale of Queen Victoria's church! True to herself alone, she engrosses all her chartered powers; and while indebted to the whole government of the whole empire for protection and support, she honors and rewards ecclesiastically only according to her Thirty-nine Articles and her Rubric. Bishop Wilberforce, son of the great philanthropist, who, by the way, is likely to be an Archbishop-a very respectable lecturer, though a very insipid, monotonous, and uninteresting speaker, addressed a most imposing audience, last summer, at the University, on the necessity of humility in the pursuit of science. On hearing of this discourse, pronounced in the presence of such an audience, I could have wished that his Lordship had applied the doctrine to that portion of his hearers that advocate the engrossment of all literary and scientific honors to bona fide subscribers to the royal creed. But the Lord Bishop who addressed the Cambridge clergy and literati at its grand commencement last July, gave a very conclusive reason for this provision. His sermon had but three points:1st. England is the greatest nation in the world. 2d. Its greatness is founded upon its Protestant Hierarchy. And, in the 3d place, its Protestant Hierarchy is founded upon its Universities-especially upon the single University of Cambridge, that of Oxford having gone back from its once Protestant faith. Therefore, the practical application of the subject was;-England and its church must look well to the prosperity and glory of the University of Cambridge. This is as good philosophy as was that of another Bishop, who, when asked on what did the heavens rest, answered, 'On the earth;' and when asked on what did the earth rest, answered, ‘On the back of a huge tortoise.' A third question brought him to his senses:-And on what does the tortoise rest? Answered, 'I presume upon itself.' I am disposed to think (and I hope there is nothing in it either irreverent or even disrespectful) that his Grace the Lord Bishop, if asked on what did the University of Cambridge rest, must have been as much perplexed as the philosopher who builded his universe upon a mere presumption; for certainly he would not say that the University was founded upon the Church or upon the State, being the basis of both. As little could he say it was founded upon itself. We American citizens think that England would be much more glorious and respectable if she would abolish her hierarchy and her spiritual Lords, and divorce her Colleges and Universities from their present irrational, proscriptive, and intolerant attitude, and thus make them national and popular, rather than aristocratical and hierarchical institutions. I visited a much more rational and useful institution at Huddersfield than either of these mammoth institutions, in view of its age and patronage, of which I may say something again. Meantime I presume I have been sufficiently copious in my notices of the two great English Universities; and shall for the present say, Adieu! Affectionately your Father, A. CAMPBELL. REFORMATION.-No. V. Is endeavoring to present the basis upon which, in our judgment, the reformation of the existing religious communities should rest, we have stated, by implication at least, two truths which we wish now to consider in their direct relations to each other. These truths are: 1. That the Christian community should be united by the ties of a common Christianity. That there should be one faith, universally received as evangelical, and one all-pervading family-affection, -a bond of perpetual peace. In other words, that all who profess faith in Christ should be united together as one body, having Him alone as their head, and acknowledging a common standard of doctrine and of duty. 2. That, on the otherhand, each individual mem ber of that body, must for himself, at his own responsibility, and at his own peril, in the exercise of the right of private judgment, determine this faith, ascertain this doctrine, and render this obedience. When these truths are thus placed side by side, they may appear irreconcilable with each other, at least to a mind disturbed and hesitating, in view of the endless dissensions and bitter controveries of the religious world. This contrariety, however, can only be apparent; for there can be no real inconsistency or incompatibility between any two truths in the universe. And that these are truths, is admitted clearly and definitely, at least in theory, by the whole Protestant community. The first, indeed, is an express declaration of scripture; and the second is a necessary implication. For no one can act for himself, unless he first think for himself. And Christianity itself is denuded of all its sanctions and obligations, when man, to whom it is individually addressed, is denied permission individually to believe and obey it. We candidly confess, indeed, that if the history of Protestantism were to be taken as an exemplification of the true nature and tendency of these principles, which, as we have stated, are among the original and essential features of this portion of Christendom, we should be constrained to admit them as fallacious. For how would it be possible to reconcile with these truths the sectarian antipathies, discords, feuds, and animosities that have prevailed among Protestants; the divisions, heresies, and endless wars and fightings that have characterized every portion of this wide-spread reformation from Popery? It would seem, almost, at first view, as if, in seceing from Rome, and rejecting that unity which the latter boasts under the sovereign Pontiff, Protestants had plunged into a hopeless state of division; and that the very claim of private judgment itself had been the means in practice, of placing unity of faith or any other unity forever beyond their reach. Could it be shown that such a result was the natural effect of these principles, in their just and legitimate application, there would be no longer any question of their fallacy, or that a blind submission to human dictation in matters of religion and conscience, should be regarded as the only safeguard of Christian faith and Christian unity. This, however, cannot be shown. On the contrary, it is not difficult to perceive that these divisions have originated from unlawful restrictions of the rights of conscience, and from an intolerant bigotry, which sought, under false pretences, to wrest from the people the privileges of which we speak. And it must surely, by this time, be evident to the whole Protestant world, that it is utterly impossi |