The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-23 00:00:00

BURGH SCHOOLS IN SCOTLAND.

Mr. DUNLOP called the attention of the house to the
position of the teachers in the burgh schools of Scotland,
under the law as recently declared by the decision of the
Court of Session, in the case of " The Presbytery of Elgin
v. the Magistrates of Elgin ;" and asked the Lord Adyo-
cate, whether he intended to introduce any measure for
relieving such teachers from the jurisdiction of the Church
courts, to which they have been thereby declared subject,
and generally to free the burgh and parochial schoolmasters
from the necessity of signing the test of conformity to the
Established Church.
The LORD ADVOCATE admitted that the observations
of his hon. friend were well-founded. In consequence of
the decision of the Courts of Scotland the subject had been
more than once under the notice of the house. In the pa-
rochial schools in Scotland, no one not belonging to the
Established Church could be a master. That rule only ap-
plied to county schools, the burgh schoolmasters not being
subject tothat test, and it was supposed with regard to them
that the rule had fallen into disuse. By a recent judgment
this had been found not to be the case. For three succes-
sive sessions measures had been brought forward to throw
open the schools. On two occasions they were successful
in that house, but unfortunately they were wrecked in ano-
ther place.: Without giving any direct pledge, he might
say that he intended to propose to the Government a scheme
for education in Scotland, but It would depend whether he
had better success than formerly if the measure could be
introduced this session.
CONSULAR SERVICE.

Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR rose to call the attention of
the house to the report of the Select Committee of 1858
on the Consular Service, and to ask the Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs what steps had been taken to carry
out the reccmmendations of that committee. The com-
mittee that sat on this subject recommended the adoption
of a system of consular education and promotion, Oriental
seeretaryshir a (for which they had the excellent example
of Russia), and consular studentships, by means of which
young men, through a preliminary system of training,
might be fitted for the efficient discharge of their duties.
They also recommended that no man engaged in trade
should be a consul, and that fees should be abolished.
They also recommended that the number of vice-consuls
should be gradually diminished, and that encouragement
should be given to consular students to qualify themselves
for the discharge of their important functions. It was
recommended and adopted, that, in lieu of notarial fees,
the consuls should have a fixed salary proportioned to the
scale of expenses in the country in which they resided, and
that a tonnage tax of one penny should be imposed on
British and foreign shipping clearing out from any port.
France had adopted a similar principle, but she exacted a
larger sum from our vessels. The hon. and learned gentle-
man referred to the minutes of the Board of Trade of 1859,
and complained of the Government setting aside the recom-
mendation of a committee of that house in relation to the
duty on shipping for consular purposes; also as regarded
the privilege of consuls to trade. He would only call the
attention of the house to one other point in the report of the
committee, namely, that in which they recommended that
young men should be taught the Oriental languages in
order that they might be fitted for consular duties.
CLEARANCE OF BRITISH VESSELS IN THE
PORT OF CHARLESTON.

Mr. W. E. FORSTER asked tho Secretary for Foreign
Affairs whether he had any objection to lay upon the table
of the house a copy of the recent correspondence between
her Majesty's Minister at Washington and the United
States' Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, relative to the
clearance of British vessels in the port of Charleston, South
Carolina ?

Mr. MONCKTON MILNES begged to state, as chair-
man of the committee referred to by the hon. and learned
gentleman, that it was not the intention of that committee
to levy tonnage dues on shipping for consular purposes.
And he must express his regret that the recommendation
of the committee had been overruled by the Government, a
course of proceeding which he conceived was very disre-
spectful to this house and detrimental to the public service.
Mr. STEPHEN FITZGERALD said that, as a mem-
ber of the committee alluded to by the hon. gentleman, he
could not allow that occasion to pass without making some
remarks upon the observations of the hon. gentleman. The
hon. gentleman complained that the recommendations of
the committee of that house had been overruled by a sub-
committee. Surely it was the duty of the Executive Go-
vernment to attend to the organisation of the public ser-
vice, and he could not admit that the sub-committee, as it
had been called, did overrule the decision of the committee
of that house in one single item or particular. So far from
over-ruling the decision of the committee of the house, the
whole object of the sub-committee appointed by Lord
Malmesbury was to give effect to its recommendations as
far as possible. It was time the sub-committee made a re-
commendation on the subject of the tonnage dues. And
why ? Because important evidence was brought before them
on which they felt bound to recommend a plan to the Secre-
tary of State. He should consider a Government wanting
in their duty who should not take so important a subject
into their early and serious consideration. (Hear, hear.)