The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-10 00:00:00

could there be for the abolition? He did not believe that any
class in Scotland was in favour of the entire abolition of tests
in the universities of Scotland. Dr. Candlish had said he
would rather have the present tests than no tests at all. The
Dissenters wished the tests to be altered, so as to
admit their own body to the universities; but they would
rather the present testa continued than have no
security at all, for in that case, if there were no tests at
all, persons who were of no religion would gain admis-
sion to the universities. Why pass the Bill; why proceed with
the measure—a measure which would be acceptable to no one ?
Part of the education inculcated on the students was logic,
moral philosophy, Greek, Latin, and mathematics; to the two
former sciences, viz., logic and moral philosophy, theology was
intimately connected, but. it was proposed by this Bill to render
it obligatory on the Established Churchman to attend those lec-
tures as by professors of a different belief. Such a course was
eminently inconsistent, and would only serve to introduce dis-
satisfaction, if not irreligion. The system proposed was wholly
in contradiction to that pursued in Trinity College, Dublin,
and he trusted it would be discountenanced by the House.
Mr. P. M. STEWART, amid loud cries of" Divide," said,
that after the admirable speeches of the Members for Leith
and Edinburgh, the latter still remaining unanswered, he
would trespass but a few minutes on the attention of the
House. The opponents of the Bill had treated with contempt
the opinion of the majority of the people of Scotland, for the
Free Church undoubtedly comprised the vast majority of that
country, and had despised petitions presented from that eminent
body. The Government had now in their power, by passing
this Act, to offer a boon to a divided Church—to heal dissen-
sions—to afford relief when most required—and to consult the
universal opinion of the people of Scotland. Let the Govern-
ment adept some decided course; let them adopt the motto
incribed on a banner, yesterday unfolded by one of their officers
at his re-election—" Principle and no expediency ;" and thus
entail honour on themselves, and confer justice on the Church.
In the words of the Act which proposed the original test to
advance the religion of Scotland and the good of the Church,
they would at once take a better view of the case and oppose
the Bill, for which Scotland would be lastingly grateful
throughout the Church and the country.
Sir R. PEEL said he had never concealed from himself the
difficulties with which her Majesty's Ministers would have to
contend in bringing for eard any scheme for the education of
the youth of Scotland. It had subjected the Government to
charges which had been most unjustly brought against them on
a previous occasion. It had been said that theprinciples which
had been adopted as to Ireland necessarily compelled the Go-
vernment to adopt a similar principle in other parts of the em-
pire. He would ask, what were the eircumsts nces under which
these new academical institutions were founded? It was wished to
provide at the expense of the State good secular education. It is
not proposed to insist on a system of sectarian education, ner to
educate ministers for the Church in Ireland ; nor was it pro-
posed to separate religion from the education which it was in-
tended to give. Having carefully considered the circumstances
of Ireland, the Government had called upon individuals to
make provision for the religious education of the young men at
the colleges. There might be found existing, both in Ireland
and in other parts of the empire, institutions of great antiquity
intended for the education of ecclesiastics and ministers of the
Church. In this very metropolis there existed King's College
for the education of clergymen of the Establishment. In Ire-
land we find Dublin University establ shed for a similar pur-
pose. Maynoo:h also existed ter the Roman Catholics ;
and in the north of Ireland a college for the edu-
cation of Presbyterian ministers had been founded.
It was quite true that the Government had not imposed on the
professors the taking of any particular test, but then they were
told they were guilty of some inconsistency because they did
not follow the same course with respect to Scotland as they
hail pursued towards Ireland. It was not intended to alter
Dublin University or Trinity College. The Government had
been charged with inconsistency because they had not opened
Trinity College to the Roman Catholics. The Government
had desired to establish these colleges with the understanding
that the same principle must not necessarily be applied to similar
institutions. These colleges were to be founded so as to meet
the special circumstances of Ireland, and they defended the
establishment of those institutions on those grounds. A suf-
ficient guarantee and security had been provided for the integrity
of the professors. It was proposed to give to the Crown the
absolute power of appointment, and the absolute power of re-
moval, and that was the substitute for any test to be tairen.
What was the case in Scotland? There were certain acade-
mical institutions which were immediately connected with the
Church. In these institutions the ministers of the Church
generally received their education. The proposed Bill ad-
mitted that the academical institutions of Scotland were con-
nected with the Church. It was especially provided in the
Bill that nothing should extend to interfere with the chairs of
divinity in any of the universities of Scotland. The Bill re-
cognised a material distinction between the collegiate establish-
ments of Scotland and those about to be instituted in Ireland.
It would be found that an engagement had been entered into
at the Union that the professors of those universities should
make a certain subscription implying compliance with the
doctrines of the Church. Could there be a doubt as to the
meaning of the requirements of the Act of Union? It was ex-
plicitly laid down that the professors of these universities,
before their appointment, should subscribe to the " Confession
of Faith" as the confession of their faith. The Right Hon.
Gentleman admitted the binding force of that engagement.
He said he would not attempt to quibble it away. The Right
Hon. Baronet, after having alluded to the tests established in
1711 by an Act of Parliament passed in the reign of Queen
Anne, and showing the consistency of resuming tests which had
been in disuetude for 130 years past ; and speaking also of the
disruptions that had taken place of late years in the Scottish
Church, continued to say that the Government had been told
that no tests had been required in the new institutions in Ire-
land, and ;`the objection might be further urged, that there
were good grounds to abolish that principle in the English
universities. He had contemplated the proposed schemes for the
education of the youth of Ireland, and had thought it might be
a great benefit. The Bill for the Scottish universities pro-
vided that all the professors of divinity should be subject to
the tests. The Government had been assured that the Bill
would meet with general concurrence on the part of the people
of Scotland. If it had been otherwise, the Government, per-
haps, would not have been perfectly willing to have agreed to it.
What petitions had the people of Scotland forwarded in favour
of the measure ? He believed there had been one or two peti-
tions, but these did not contain the opinion of the people in
favour of the repeal of these tests.
Mr. HUME—There have been no petitions against—all in
favour.
Sir R. PEEL—The Hon. Member says none against. Since
the Bill had been brought before the House the General As-
sembly of the Church of Scotland had met, and it had declared
itself not in favour, but against the Bill, and prayed that the
Act of Union should be maintained. He (Sir Robert Peel)
was not prepared to set aside the Act of Union entered
into with the reople of Scotland. He was not pre-
pared to set aside the guarantees of the Act of Union with-
out great consideration, especially as the people of Scotland had
not expressed themselves against it. Was there a general desire
among them that these tests should be removed, on the
grounds that they were against the sense and interest of the
people, then he should hold it to be a matter worthy of serious
consideration. But even then such a step should not be
slightly regarded. They ought not on slight grounds to inter-
fere with that which constituted the basis of a national compact.
—( Hear, hear.) They had desired to extend the benefits of
academical education to Ireland, and it had been objected to
that measure that the danger was the principle with regard to
the appoMtment of professors which it contained would be
extended to Trinity College, Dublin, and to the English and
Scotch universities. There was, however, a great distinction
between those institutions established for the purposes of aca-
demical education, and institutions established for other pur-
poses—institutions set apart for religious instruction, and of
great antiquity—( Hear, hear)—guaranteed by particular
compact, founded for the purposes of theological education and
the instruction of the ministers of religion, who were to exercise
spiritual influence over the people. He did think it necessary to
apply a different rule to these institutions to that he proposed
for the Irish academical institutions. He would not consent
to alter the law so that the professors and instructors of youth
in the principles of religion should be exempted from those
tests which were guaranteed by the national compact, and
whirls the opinion and feeling of the country required.—
( Cheers, and loud cries of " Divide.")
Lord J. RUSSELL thought it was hardly necessary to argue
the question further.—( Loud cheers.) He had been taught to
consider that religion was a matter of principle, and that it was
necessary to maintain it as useful and beneficial to the State.
He could understand the tenacity of the Hon. Member for the
University of Oxford (Sir R. Inglis) in support of the tags
and privileges of toe universities, and he could comprehend the
motives of those who looked upon those tests as cobwebs and
snares to entrap the unwary. Those who entertained such
opinions about the injurious nature of tests, as well as the Hon.
Member for the University fur Oxford, could well defend their
opinions ; but as for the Government, it neither held one opi-
nion nor the other. They (the Government) told them one day
there was no need of religious tests, that they were utterly useless;
and the next day they came down to the House and told them
that tests were absolutely necessary for the maintenance of
religion in Scotland, and that in the language of the Lord
Advocate, they should not, by any means, act on latitudinarian
principles. He put it the House whether Ministers ought not
to assert one principle or the other—(Loud cheers)—whether
they were to act on one principle in dealing with the Irish
Colleges Bill, and on other pi incip'es when dealing with English
or Scotch universities?—(Loud cheers.) It was not sufficient
for them to be told that such a course of proceeding was to
serve the particular interest of the Ministry.—( Hear, hear.)
lie had heard an old story of two knights who met each other
on different sides of a shield, one side of which was black and
the other white; they fought a desperate battle in support of
their opinions respecting the colour of the shield, the one
knight maintaining that the shield was black, and the other
asserting it was white. But the Ministry did something more
than this. At one time they maintained that the shield was
black, at another they declared that it was white. They sup-
ported one or two other principles alternately, so that it was
impossible to know what they really meant on any matter
involving the religious interests of the country.—( Cheers. )
Ile believed that these tests only entangled scrupulous persons,
and furnished no guard against infidelity. That such tests did
not fulfil the object for which they were intended, lie need only
refer to three notable examples—Lord Bolingbroke, Mr. Hume,
and Mr. Gibbon—all of whom held important appointments
under the Government. These tests did not prevent these men
holding these appointments. They were good Tories and
Churchmen, though entertaining their well-known opinions on
religious questions.—( Hear, hear.) But the tests under consis
deration did not exclude from the universities those men who
held different doctrin s to those rf Presbyterianism. They
excluded those who agreed with all the leading doctrines of the
Presbyterian Church, but who differed upon points of Church
Government only. Ou this ground the tests shut out professors
of natural philosophy and mathematics. If any man, a teacher
of mathematics, did not hold with the policy of the present
General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, he was excluded
from all chance of filllng a professor's chair. He happened to
knew the futility of these tests, having attended the University
of Edin iurgh, and been present at the lectures of the celebrated
Dugald Stewart. The class that attended the teachings of
th oat great philosopher was cast osed of all denominations. At
the
close of the session a Committee was formed to draw up an
address to be presented to that celebrated man,
which was cemposed of a Presbyterian and a
Member of the Church of :England, while the
party who drew up the address was a Roman Catholic—then
Lord Killeen, now the Earl of Fingall.—( Hear, hear. ) It was
said that the clergy of the Church of Scotland had not peti-
tioned in favour of the Bill. 1 his was not to be wondered at,
as they were, in fact, the excluding body.—.(hear, hear. )
Suppose they were to ask the Primate of Ireland, or the clergy
under his care, their feelings on the expediency of the May-
nonth Bill—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear ")—what would be the
result ? Why, he doubted if there were five or six of the clergy
would support that measure, or even the New Colleges Bil—
-1 Cries of " Hear, hear.") The appealing to the clergy of
the Church of Scotland was, therefore, no sound
criterion to guide the House in legislating on this question.
Bat really after all, without entering into the question any fur-
ther, he was disposed to ask the House to establish either one
or the other of the principles he had enumerated. His Hon.
Friend the Member for Oxford (Sir H. Inglis) said the Go-
vernment had a general policy, anti that they had made an ex-
ception to that policy in favour of the Irish colleges. But let
themadopt cne principle or the other, and do not
let the country ask what it was. It would be
niost injurious that the opinion of the country
rshould
erestingpbleacealtogether shaken—that
there should be no
plebeyf
England that House. If they adopted
a vacillating course, the
people
ildered, but when they came to their senses)
would be a
sehses.l
they
could
I
first b
uid con-
demn demn the conduct which had letl them into- this painful di 1
1,.-a-Aral. He had, therefore, to appeal to the House, as he be: