The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL/PARLIAMEN T.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 28.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
ABOLITION OF UNIVERSITY TESTS.
Mr. MONCRIEFF moved that the University of
Scotland Bill be read a second time.
Mr. F. SCOTT was in hopes that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would have stated some grounds to
the House for suggesting the approval of this measure,
and he regretted that, in the absence of any grounds
being advanced, he was compelled to give it his opposi-
tion. This, however, was no new question to the House
or to the country. It appeared to him a great misfor-
tune that a Bill involving a principle in which the
people of England and. Scotland took so lively an interest
should be submitted to the House without sufficient
reasons being shown for its necessity, The petitions in
favour of a repeal of these tests were few and scanty, and
the number of signatures attached to them were insigni-
ficant when compared to the extent of the community.
On the other hand, the petitions which were opposed to
the repeal ought to carry great weight with them, not
so much on account of the number of signatures,
as from the standing and influence of the peti-
tioners. He considered that the House ought to
be very careful before it sanctioned any measure
so subversive of the Scotch Universities and
the position of the Scotch Church, and detrimental
to the education of the youth of Scotland. At the time
of the union a contract was made to the effect that no
professor, minister, or other functionary should be ap-
pointed in connexion with the universities of Glasgow,
Aberdeen, St. Andrew's, and Edinburgh, who should
not subscribe the confession of faith of the established
religion, and their intention of conforming to
the Presbyterian Church. Now he contended
that a treaty ratified in so solemn a manner
should not be set aside but for strong and convincing
reasons. He perfectly admitted that university tests
were not at all times rigidly enforced, but the object of
imposing them on the professors and instructors of
youth was to give some guarantee to the people of
Scotland that their children would be imbued with
sound religious principles and be brought up in the
faith of their forefathers. There was no nation
Of religionists who did not think it of the
greatest importance that the teachers of youth should be
attached to the purest form of worship recognised by the
great mass of the community. The practice of imposing
tests had existed 150 years in Scotland, and its bene-
ficial effects had daring that period been thoroughly re-
cognised. In what country was the education of the
people more moral or religious? Where was there
found among the lower orders more signal instances
of moral worth, and what people had more distinguished
themselves by their advance in life in all quarters of the
globe? Ile considered that no institutions were more
valuable than the parochial institution in connexion with
the Church, by which the people received education. In
1826, in consequence of some relaxation of these tests,
and the rigid interference and control on the part
of the municipal authorities of Edinburgh over the
university of that city, a royal commission was issued to
inquire into the course of education adopted in the
University of Scotland. That Commission was com-
posed of the Earl of Roseberry, the Earl of Aberdeen,
Lord Medwyn, Chief Justice Hope, and other distin-
guished persons, and after considering the
subject of university tests they unanimously
agreed that they should for the future be
rigidly enforced. The report of that Commission, com-
posed of these able individuals, was directly opposed to
theproposal of the Hon. and Learned Member. The
Hon. and Learned Member, when he brought forward
his Bill last year, argued that the Universities in Scot-
land were not founded with the intention of their
being mainly devoted to the education of the
clergy—that they were not appendages to the
Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and that there was no
necessity for a professor in those Universities entertain-
ing any religious opinion or notions whatever. Now he
contended that, inasmuch as the Universities of Scot-
land wore not founded mainly for the education of the
clergy, as the English Universities were, the legislators
of Great Britain ought to take great care that religion
was carefully instilled into the minds of the laity, and
that the youth of the country should have a sound
moral combined with a religious education.—(Hear.)
There was, in fact, in England no parochial system of
education whereby the schoolmaster was appointed to
act in co-operation w th the parish authorities ; whereas
that was the case in Scotland, and there was an in-
timate connexion between the Universities and
the Church. Now, the object of this Bill was
to sever that connexion, and he wanted to know upon
what ground it was proposed to make the change. Was
it that the Church had unduly exercised its authority,
or was it that the Church had not rigidly enforced the tests?
If this BiH was proposed upon either of those grounds,
he was prepared to controvert the position. Had the Church
rigidly enforced in all cases these tests he could have un-
derstood the motive for introducing the Bill; but as the
Church had wisely, and judiciously, and graciously exer-
cised its authority, the House ought to hesitate before
it adopted this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) But he might be
told that the Church was not so powerful as it was for-
merly, and its followers were on the decline. Well, if
that really was so. why introduce a measure which could
have no other effect but to still further weaken the
Church?—(Hear.) On all grounds then he opposed the
principle of this measure.—(Hear, hear.) Then, as re-
gards the professors, were they to reduce the qualifica-
tion of those officials? Certainly not, and as the pro-
fession of Christianity, as taught by the Established
Church of Sootland,was considered the main qualification,
he could be no party to its abolition in the manner pro-
posed by the Bill.—(Bear, hear.) But were these' tests
peculiar to the Established Church ? He believed not,
for all the doctrines of the Christian Church required
that their collegiate teachers should subscribe to some test
of one sort or another, anti if this were not so, he
wanted to know what security there would be against
the teaching of irreligion and the growth of scepti-
cism.—(Hear, hear.) It was for this very reason
that not only Scotland, but every other Christian
country, insisted that their university professors should
give tome guarantee of their religious belief, and if the
House determined to alter that system as regarded
Scotland, he was convinced her Universities would
rapidly decline.—(Hear, hear.) If this measure were to
pass a very great injury would be inflicted upon the
Universities, because it would admit professors into their
chairs who were followers of no religion at all, and as the
present was not the time for abolishing any of the oaths
established by law, he demanded that the Bill should
be thrown out.--(Hear, hear.) The Protestant religion
of the country was not so free from attack as to make
the passing of such a Bill safe, and ho would
undertake to say that nothing was more cal-
culated to promote scepticism and irreligion than the
abolition of the tests enforced by the Universities of Scot-
land.—(Hear, hear.) Recent events had served to bring
to light the enemies who were prepared to assail the
Church of England, when the opportunity for doing
so shall present itself ; and he could assure
the House that those enemies were comparatively feeble
when compared with the enemy which this Bill, if it was
passed, would raise up against the Church of Scotland.—
(Hear, hear.) It was one thing to relax the tests, and
another to repeal them altogether; and since the Church
had displayed a sound discretion in the administration
of the testa, ho protested against any change being
made in the system.—(Hear, hear.) He should there-
fore_ move as an amendment that the Bill be read a
second time that day six months.
not • MONCRIEFF said the subject of the Bill was
new to the House, for as far back as 1343 the
matter
therefore didunderwent a full discussion, and ho
motion for the
thenot think it necessary to preface the
(Hear, hoar.) second reading with any remark.—
Ile would, however, now explain the
grounds upon
that the Government
he proposed it. He was sorry
to the adoption did not see their way
former Governments of this measure, because
of those Honourable had agreed to it, as well as some
Gentlemen who now odcepicd the
Ise Treasury bench.
favour
rderstood that 52 petitions had
favu
been presented in
not
the Bill, and 48 against
it, but these latter did come from the people of
Scotland, but the Church, whileacthe former came prin-
cipally from your councils n
conclusively corporations, a fact
which showed pretty conclu that the people of
Scotland were not opposed s_VY
wish to maintain
Ile knew, indeed, that they"hanl3olll.7-(llear, hear.)
these tests; they did not value them, but, on the .
_ and as the
con-
trary, they wished to see theta abolished,
away
writ.hhe Chureh could not enforce them it —a
him that this Bill, if passed, would endanger
to tell
He proposed to do
stabi-
lity of the Church.
practical evil, for a religious test which was/ t
so reli aigrer
disregarded was worthless.—(Hear, hear.) I ocouuslyd
only be enforced for the sake of caprice, while it ex
eluded those from the Universities whom the framers ex-
eluded
the tests had no desire to exclude.—(Hear, hear.) Bust
the tests were: worthless because the
Churcho
had net the power to enforce them, nor had it
any control' over the professors. (Hear, hear.)
All classes of religionists attended the Universites
of Scotland, as there was no domestic or religions
discipline observed such as was to be found prevailing in
the English Universities, and when the student left the
university he was beyond the control of his professor.
Now, what was the origin of these tests? Why they
were established by two Acts, one passed in 1690, and
• the other in 1703, and it would seem the object of these
Acts was to exclude Episcopalians from the Universities.
That was certainly the object of the first Act; while in
1708, when the union between the two countries was
under discussion, it was urged that England being
a supporter of Protestantism, the union would injure
the Presbyterianism of Scotland, and the second Act
was passed to meet that objection.—(Hear, hear.) It
was clear, therefore, that the object of both Acts was to
exclude Episcopalians, and the Acts provided that all the
professors appointed to Scotch Universities should declare
their adhesion to the Presbyterian institution of the coun-
try. Well, then, the object of this Bill was to modify that
law, which had never been rigidly enforced, and which
was openly violated by the Bolingbroke Act shortly
after it was enacted.—(Hear, hear.) What had
been the effect of the law? Why it had produced
more miserable bickering s and dissensions in
Scotland than anything else, and he was at a
Tia to understand upon what ground this remedy for
w sa
uSa_a evil could be resisted.—(Herr, hear.) The
se,
a iniolo . placed the Church of Scotland in
mow... il not whom with the people, but its
nothin-ajtur of differed with the Church in
at leastth vet law law.—(Hear, hear.) The law ex-
cludednotwithstandineMf °f
is the people from the Universities,
et he insisted it L." they were sound in doctrine,and
eft+, was .
4 - ghoy wore the h sot just to maintain those tests.
barb
ee.• is raibiej•ethey were of no ti_._ remains of a less enlightened
tarei,.,z, :le— WO, e . :at injuries '"uwhatever, but, on the contrary,
, ,e, a, ' you , err : to abolish th the
s People, and the House
' eet, wits ittird' i : 3 necessary t "n•---(llear hoar.) But it
t o p
. ..._., g irreligion
wad ,these tests for the
1r . -I-i '4: e" scilt4Vi • -RC - ' "'aerie '
in ir •
~ft ; test 0 that? ri
-Attalla scepticism; but did
- is": .4,.. .i professors Would unot, oman f
4r 141i-,•.4 e , ha y o
.our
" e obtained
eft . i..,),.-• •
& .
- .