The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-20 00:00:00

SCOTLAND.

EDLYI4I7IOB, Nov. 18.
There is now some prospect of an adstment of
the disputes between the trustees of the Royal Insti-
tution for the Encouragement of the Fine Arts, and
the Royal Scottish Academy—as Mr. Lefevre, brother
of the late Speaker, has been in Edinburgh for the
pm.pimiLf.te.tintizcvld.eue. ilnuddreerfotZnfatoeflicially to
the secretary
of theb7:47, has for some weeks past been seriously
unwell.

The Hebrew chair litigation is dragging it. coarse
through the law courts. To-day the Lord Advocate
iLloth&e.d before the Lord Ordinary that interdict
his client (Mr. :Maodonall) from com-
riW7sis elms be not greeted. Meanwhile the
thumb has resolved that the professor-
elan. shall ham no trouble with their students, u
they Imo appointed Dr. John Forbes, of Watson's
nstitatioe. Edinburgh, to superintend the Hebrew
snails of eesdidates for the ministry.
At a mods( of the Free Church Commission,
had hit mobs Mr. Sheriff Speirs, convener of the
empsdttou oaMee, reported that none had been
Citlilnc. last assembly, in May ; in other words,
tt e recommendation of the committee of the
Hem of Comatose has had no effect in causing the
refuting proprietors to relent

Ste D. BREWSTER AND UNIVERSITY Tears.—Taking
advantage of the present discusaion of the question of Scotch
university tests, eassed by the election of a dissenter to the
Hebrew chair of Baiaburgh College, we stated in the Daily
News of Nov. 9, In iThastration of the operation of these tests,
that the general ed established church held Sir
D. Brewster to be to hold oilloe as principal of
Bt. Andrews—lda asemter.statement of not basing signed
montani aide' ollsommats of the free church, being, as we
essegvek Aas technicality, which, were the law carried
oat. woad Ea Wald him. A oorrespondent very strangely
V tubs aim at this, and calls it " most incorrect," and
bb " offirMvs" to Sir David. The exact re-
tinae was intimadoL The gist of our remark was, that the
test laws were at this memment suspended over the head of
Sir D. Brownie, naraiMg him save a mere techni-
cality; hence the maiimisa at was, in connexion
with Mr. Madman me, to indicate the immediate neces-
sity of legislation in order to preserve, not dissolve, Sir
David's embolden with St. Andrew's. In writing mainly. for
the B public, we avoided quoting the mysterious
if the Scotch eoclesiasticid courts, and rather
gar tin in our own words, expressly stating at
lier that warn not quoting literally. But as this has
bra Opera te, we shall shortly rehearse the matter. It
being Modems that Sir D. Brewster had joined the Free
Church, the poomeot St. Andrew's sought to eject him.
The ease woe to the /Intern Assembly. That
nmemible Inds " that while they are/011g resolved
to weer and osoinsin sernipoirod, the jurisdiction of the
aired inc and / • the emansereities, it is inexpedient, in
de ennstiose, $o take soy hoer step in this case than to
Wirer the alma declination made to government by the
ammo* in 1843 " that /Or David had, by signing the
deed of deminion, ceased to be a member of the church of
Scotland). The passages in Belies were those that we had in
view. Ma church is 'to assert and maintain unimpaired
her jurisdiction." What is it? By the act of union
no penal* is capable to be admitted, or continue in
the marmies of his fanctions, but Inch as shall inter a/ia
sobsedle that he will conform himself" to the worship
risdFla nes in this church, and submit himself to
government and discipline thereof, and never en-
deavour,. directly or indirectly, the prejudice or subver-
sion el nie ; and that before the presbyteries of the
bounds, by gilt, presentation, or provisim he
ray be thereto provided. Such II the jurisdiction of the
ern* by law. Does Sir David conform or not conform ?
In taking the first step for asserting its jurisdiction, the
elm* ammo that Sir David signed the deed of demis-
Air; end, as ft was endsestood art every free church
Wahl! sod Air had signed that document, it was rap-
wed dud bbd dons so too. But it turns out that he did
nee. Whet Omar Then are other ways of proving his
sasmairser beau whoeription of the deed and if the
sitar& andlsrasie tea any of these, Sir David's denial of
s=berme mabsleatially so far us the gram-
ma ebeage (that ofhaving joined the free church)
anowned. s MOM 111111111110Wity, , as we formerly took the
eteeproniag it Our position, therefore, is, that Sir
ensagin ammieseilstion, might be proved to be a
!ace I that hag so, the statute, tf enforced lite-
ray. Wilt dank Mr bls dike ; but regarding kin as
bong =geed • *rigid is 1842 as he is in 1847, we think
Or taw St gneselisokil be repealed. A doctor in civil r
ewe Itermnitsti rimming to a similar conclusion, wrens
blateltdilmisly. We -peer way to take a comma NNW
view etas statler,tad as wrn be intelligible to the gene-
rality dream.