THE

OPINION

OF AN

EMINENT LAWYER,

CONCERNING

THE RIGHT OF APPEAL

FROM THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF CAMBRIDGE, TO THE SENATE;

Supported by a short historical Account of the JURISDICTION of the UNIVERSITY.

In Answer to a late Pamphlet, intitled, "An Inquiry into the Right of Appeal from the Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge," &c.

Is ne erret, moneo, et desinat lacessere.
Habeo alia multa, nunc quæ condonabitur ;
Quæ proferentur post, si perget lædere.

BY A FELLOW OF A COLLEGE.

1,

THE

OPINION

OF AN

EMINENT LAWYER, &c.

THE dispute concerning Appeals, which at present engages the attention of the University of Cambridge, is apparently of such importance to the peace and welfare of that great body; that it could not but be expected from any one, who proposed to deliver his thoughts upon it to the world, that he should at least have taken care to inform himself perfectly of the merits of the question, before he presumed, in so public a manner, to concern himself in it.

It must, therefore, surprize the reader of a late Inquiry into the Right of Appeal, &c. to

→ Lord Chancellor Hardwick.

find, that the writer of it, whoever he be (for as he chuses to conceal his name, I shall not take the liberty to conjecture of it) should adventure to treat a matter of this consequence, without any distinct knowledge of the state of the case itself, or indeed without appearing to possess one single qualification, which is required to do justice to it. For the question, discussed, is of such a nature, that it cannot be determined, nor indeed tolerably treated by any one, who hath not a pretty exact knowledge of the History, Customs, and Statutes, of the University; and who is not, besides, at least competently skilled in the Civil and Ecclesias tical Laws. And yet this writer, as though nothing else was required of him, besides a confident face, and willing mind, boldly undertakes to decide upon it, under a perfect incapacity in all these respects. Instead of an accurate acquaintance with the Practice and Usages of the University, it appears, he had no further knowledge of them, than what a few hasty and ill-considered extracts from the Register had supplied him with. So far is he from being conversant in the Statutes of the University, that he blunders in every attempt to explain the very easiest of them. And, as to his Law, he has only skimmed the surface of it for a few frothy terms, without giving the