APPENDIX. But even fuppofing ( what there is no mannes of teafort to believe)that the IteO?or of Pdoeaid thepnalty, a, well as refiored the fcholar, What s this prove ? Only that the Vice-chancellor of Oxford? in ?y84. went beyond his authority? and did an a&ion, which he could not warrant by ttatute. I hall not take any notice ofyour calling a thing ufua!, which has been once done? but youliy tber? is one precedent for reProring th? febolaf, and there doth not appear to be one or the det'ainin him. Really', $?r, I have no opportunity of fearchmg the univerfitj Regifiersi nor if I had, lhould I think it worth my while to take fo much pains ibout this matter: But allowing thi? to be true, that there is one ?retedent for refioring the fchclar, and none for de- taining him; ?all one inllanceof a Vice-chancellor', having flretch'd his power, aimoil two hundred years ago, be extended to all his fucceffors, and ax- gued into prac"tice? I mutt make one more remark upon this cat?; which is, that Thomas Wy?, take it which way. you pieaCe, was not rooted without the Vice.chan eellot's order: I prefume that you have, iu your care, appea!'d to the prefent Vice-cha-i?cellor ? and if h? thought himtill pofleffed of any fuch power to d/f- penfe with llatules, as hisprecedeffor in ? 5'48, did, he would have itTued the fame order ?o the l'rovo? of Oriel to reProre Mr. Seaman: but if he has fuch a a power, and ferules to exert it in your behalf? he is, at lea!t, equally culpable with the-?/ov0fi, and ought equally to fhare your relentments; initearl of which, Mr. Fire.chancellor receives nothing but the higher '? entomiums at your hands, and Mr. 1'royoff nothing but the feverel! reproaches. H ?' You
�
