Showing 8 results

Draft letter (never sent) outlining his support for Prince Albert as the next Chancellor of the University, and opposition to Lord Powis as a candidate.

Ware - Will be on opposing sides in the election for the Chancellor of the University, courage of Lord Powis fighting in the cause of the bishoprics, Powis would be a stronger Chancellor than Prince Albert

Hagley - Lord Powis' address has put an end to speculations about the posts of Chancellor and High Steward, Powis most popular, Lyndhurst only a poor Baron, under no circumstances would he stand in a contest but he would accept a post if no-one stood against him, visit of Gladstone:

Includes a printed letter from James Cartmell, completed in manuscript with the latest running total in the vote for the Chancellorship.

Original letter dated 1 Mar. 1847

WW is pleased that JCH agrees that Prince Albert is the fittest person for Chancellorship: 'all people here fall in with the plan, except the Johnians who have put forwards Lord Powis, and must wait to see what he will do'. WW is glad that no one thought of Lord Lyndhurst: 'Indeed I do not see how they could, after (not to speak of other grounds) the atrocious bad faith of the heads of the party to their followers'. WW gives a brief history of an impoverished Trinity sizar, John Cartman, who WW sent away on finding his 'character and conduct not good'. He has subsequently become a private tutor and WW hopes he has mended his ways.

WW will require JCH's help in the Chancellor's election: 'Lord Powis has put himself in the hands of a Tractarian Committee in London, and they will not let him withdraw' [see WW to JCH, 17 Feb. 1847].

WW is sorry but not surprised that there is to be an election for the Chancellorship between Prince Albert and Lord Powis [see WW to JCH, 17 Feb. 1847]. 'Goulburn [Henry Goulburn] is one of the Peelites; and the manner in which they deceived and disappointed those whom they had led to depend upon them cannot fail to excite a strong feeling of indignation. And laying aside all strong feelings, I do not see how Peel and his followers can ever again be of service preserving the institutions of the country'. WW does not see 'how Goulburn can be supported by those who have hitherto supported him; since his course, as a Peelite, must be hereafter different from what it has hitherto been. I should have great difficulty in voting for him on this ground'. Further, if 'Goulburn is thrown out, it will not be an anti-Romish cry; for he has, in his letter to the electors, declared himself against the 'endowment of the Roman Catholic Clergy in England or Ireland''. However, 'I am not much conciliated by Goulburn's anti-Romish declaration, because I think it would go for nothing in the conduct of his associates; and I think, too, that it is only made for the sake of getting a few votes, and means nothing as to his own convictions'.