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

dean was pieced.--( Hear, hear.) The Honourable and
Learned Member had remarked that English gentle-
men properly drew a distinction between the universities
of Scotland and the universities of Oxford and
Cambridge, but he begged to remind the House that in one
most important particular alone there was a marked similitude
between the collegiate institutions of the two countries. He
alluded to the fact that the Church of Scotland drew its mi-
nistry solely from the Scetti h universities. The Government
were under solemn engagements to that Church by the Act
of Legislative Union between the two countries, and it was
useless to tell him that the late separation in the establishment
had dissolved their engagements. It was no such thing, and
therefore Government could not, consistently with their duty to
the psople of Scotland, allow this Bill to be read a second time.
list new, turning to the constitution of the Scottish Church,
he was prepared to show that the principals of the universities
in Scotland exercised a general superintendence over the stu-
dsnts rtelmitted into these colleges. They observed that no
doctrines of a noxious tendency were inculculated ; and the
'louse ought also to remember that the great majority of the
professors of the university were also meebers of the Esta-
blished church of Scotland. He reecated it, that the profes-
sors exercised a salutary control over the members of those uni-
versitic3 ; and if Dissenters were admitted to these honours.
there we; a power existing to prevent any evil, and, at the
same time, to allow them any liberty to which, as, subjects of the
British empire, they were entitled. In that stormy period of
Scotland's history, when every interest was in a state of dis-
order, within the wails of the universities all was peace. It
would be remembered that professors were nominated
by certain municipal authorities, as in Edinburgh and
tdesssow. In the first city the members of town council
h the rower of nominating the principals of the colleges ;
aid as in gartled the Church of Scotland it was urged by the
Eight lion. G ntleman the Mernlier for Edinburgh (Mr. Ma-
c lay) that it was in a minority. He should be disposed to
(Fiestion that statement. The Church of Scotland, he thought,
w, re in nembers greater than the followers of the Dissenting
Chu-ehcs. D.. had been stated that very great names were op-
posed to the prevent system of Church establishments, and those
of Dostors Cnalinet s, Cunningham, and Candlish had been
cited in support of that assertion. As far as those gentlemen
were concerned, they had not expressed themselves opposed to
the present law, they were in favour of the extension of it.
On the motion that the Bill be read a second time, and after
st,aerzers had been ordered to withdraw,
:sTre J. S. WORTLEY said that he regretted that no Gen-
11:man on the opeosite side had risen to reply to the remarks
of the Right Hon. Baronet and the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member fur Edinburgh. He had heard with the deepest
pain the speech of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh ( Mr.
Macaulay), and it was with net a little astonishment that he
had listened to one observation which had fallen from that
Hon. Member ; and he could scarcely believe his senses when
he heard the Church of Scotland denounced as a factious as-
semblage—as a branch which ought to be cut off. What was
the state of Scotland? r as well known that Scotland was
in a state of religious ensien, and he was grieved to find
that sorne of the Memoers of that House were ready to lend
their asdstance to the foinsntas ion of that difference which was
already unhappily so great. Ile believed that the indiscreet
language of several of the members of the Free Church had
led to this spirit of opposition. The spirit of the Church of
Scotland was entirely opposed to those principles which occa-
sioned division. It should 'be recollected that they were not
ab ,ut to impose any new tests, but simply to preserve the old
ones, and he believed that this was the time to abolish any of
those means by which the conduct of the universities in Scot-
land was secured. The corporation of Edinburgh appointed
twelve out of the twenty professors, and it was well known that
the whole tendency of the popular excitement in Scotland was
towards the Free Church. Now it should be recollected that
the whole of those tests were regulated by the senatus aeade-
micas, It was of little cons.,equerice whether the officers of 'he
several colleges were appointed by the popular voice or by the
professors. He was one of that party —he believed it was a
great party in that House—who felt that it was necessary for the
i'hurch of Scotland to be connected with the State.—
( Meer, hear)—and he wished to know how the Church
was to be supplied unless the universities were under
redulatione which would enable them to supply the churches
with ministers of principles similar to those on which the
church was conducted ? It might be presumptuous in him to
differ from the Right Hon. Gentleman in points of history,
but he should remind him that it was not fhe Act of the year
100, before the Union, but that of 1712, which regulated the
ministerial characters of the professors of those universities.
T hat was the Act which transferred the patronage of those
churches to the heritors, and it was necessary, therefore, to be
easeful that they did not deprive the Church of Scotland of one
of those securities which had been given by the last Act for the
government of the Church. The universities of Scotland
were even now more open than any other universities in the
kingdom, and there was, therefore, no reason to allege for the
transference of that government on which their peculiar
character depended. That was the real question. It was
not to be overlooked that the object of this motion
was to transfer the patronage of those churches and
those universities to the hands of those who were their
greatest enemies. He felt assured that in the late seces-
rethere was to be found an immense number of persons who
I seceded simply from attachment to their ministers. The
ree Church of Scotland had shown the utmost readiness to
carry out the views of the body in an active interference with
the academies of the country. In one instance, when a college
in connexion with the Free Church, and when it was stated
th it 30,000/. were wanted, no less than 20,000/. was subscribed
by a few individuals. He was no opponent to the Free
Church, for he thought that the establishment of this
Church was likely to excite a generous rivalry, such
as had been exhibited in England in consequence
of the discussions at Oxford. From that discussion a new
spirit had arisen, new churches had been built, new schools
established, and all would allow that an impulse had been dif-
fused over the whole Church. Ha was no opponent to the
Church of Scotland, or to those who were seeking to establish
a better system of ecclesiastical polity. He wished to see a
g ,nrraus rivalry among the several portions of the community,
bet he must assert that this attempt to popularise the govern-
ment of the to :irersities was uncalled for.

Sir G. GREY felt called upon to express his surprise
at the course which the Government intended to pursue
on this question. Pressed as they were by the arguments
of lain Hight Honourable Friend in opposing:these tests,
not a single argument of the least consequence had been ad-
duced to support their continuance. He was sorry to say that
there was a total disregard-of principle on the part of the Govern-
ment. He wished to know what circumstances had occurred
during the last year to induce the Government to change
their minds to such an extent as they did upon the present
Bill ? The Right Hon. Gentleman, in opposing the Rill,
had resorted to such shifts that he could not adequately de-
scribe them. He had stated, however, that in all the univer-
sities these tests existed.

Sir J. GRAHAM—In all the universities except Edin-
burgh.

Sir G. G7'..EY replied that Sir D. K. Sandford, professor of
Greek in Glalgow, was admitted through an Episcopalian pro-
test. The Hon. Gentlemen said that no evil resulted from
these tests ; but the reason why they did not result in evil was
because they were never brought into actual operation. He
hoped, however, that they would not allow sectarian collegiates
to be tolerated in these counts ice. He would on these grounds
give the Bill his Roost oordial support. If the bond of union
betw,en Church and State in Scotland was the system of
patronage which existed, he should like to know how long
tho integrity of the Church would continue, as the great ma-
jority or the patrons were Episcopalian Protestants? This
was a sample of the expedients which Hon. Gentlemen were
obliged to resort to. He hoped the Government would not
look to the opinion of the Gene al As,embly alone in this
matter, but that they would re-consider the course which they
had determined to adopt on this question, and remove for ever
sectarian education from the colleges and institutions of the

country.
1:01117..T INGLIS hoped that he would be acquitted
of eriv ,h;reTect, ;f h said that the speech of hi [fin.
Fri,tla had ocly one nrgumen, of any value which called for
let .ittemtioa. If it was true, said the Right Hon. Gen-

tleman, that the Church, as established in 1767, and by the
subsequent Aets in 1712 and 1742, was not the same Church
as now estnblist ed, he would ask, where the Church wan to
which the St; to was allied, and which required these Acts ?
The argument of bis Right Hon. Friend proved too much.
Ile could never conceal from himself that it was his duty to
promote the right of the Church to which he belonged, and
in Christian charity he was equally bound to support the
Church as at present established in Scotland. The question
use not .whether they would impose tests, but whether they
would preserve those which had been considered necessary
for the preservation of the Established Church of Scotland.
To say that. this was persecution was a very different reading
of t. e weird to what he had been accustomed to. He thought
it was net fair for the Right Hon. Gentleman who made the
motion, and the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, to
taunt the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir James Graham) with
treating Ireland on a different footing in respect to collegiate
education. Has opinion was that the two countries were placed
in different circumstances. There was no analogy whatever be-
t seen them. He would certainly now look upon the
Free Church of Scotland, which had withdrawn itself from the
Establishment not from a difference of creed, but on a point of
Church government, as not deserving of any privilege what-
ever. lie thought the Church of Scotland should continue to
receive that proteceon which it deserved, and that the vote this
night would 'show, in a marked manner, what was the feeling of
the House on this important question.
Mr. PRINGLE did not like the House to come to a deci-
sion upon the Bill without affording him an opportunity of re-
cording his opposition to it. The Governmeat who had thought
proper to establish those institutions imposed those tests, and
he considered that it was only due to the Church of Scotland to
fence it round by such provians. He did not consider, how-
ever, that the members of tee Free Church, any more than
Episcopalian Protestants, were bound by them. The object of
these tests wan to prevent the subversion of the Church.
They were not of much use in themselves, but
they were indirectly of great benefit.—( Hear, hear.)
He he seven petitions to present tonight which he had not
the oopertunity of producing. He thought that if the whole
Church were oonstilted on the matter, they would express their
opinions in the same terms as were exhibited in the language
of thong petitions. These tests had been in existence for 150
years, aatl during that period there was no clamour raised—
there was no complaint urged, and it was only within these
last two yeave that they were inclined to force from their
educational colleges all religions tests. Why should the Church
of Scotland alone be deprived of that right which belonged to
the Church of England ? What would be the con-
sequence of pissing this measure? It was his opinion
that if it passed, in the town council of Edinburgh
every election would be more or less dependant on the reli
gious communion of the persons appointed. The students hi the
universities would be influenced in the same way. This mea-
su-e was not directed against the principal establishments in
Scotland—it went. much further, it was intended to affect the
supposed system of education generally, and it would strike a
blow that would be generally deprecated. He was entirely
against any measure that would tend to sever sound religion
from sound education.
Mr. C. BULLER said that the test that was proposed to be
continued by the Hon. Gentleman who had Just sat down
ought to be the first to be abolished. The test which Sir D.
Sanford took was, that the would practice and conform to the
worship in us in the said church. He would like to know what
better plan was there that the most subtle enemy of the rights
of conscience could devise to keep out all the members of
other Churches, than to extract from persons a declaration that
they would practise the worship of a Church to which they
did not below,. Ihe argument now in favour of the ab-
sence of tests in the Irish colleges was, that they would create a
sectarian system of education, and would work out religious
distinctions. Was that state of things peculiar to Ireland
pro; thanks to the Government, who had placed Scotland in
One same pp ition as Ireland in that respect, the same argu-
ment could be applied to,
with Scotland also. He saw great
regret the course which the Government had taken upon this
subject. In truth, it was an attempt to impose new tests.
The great body of the clergy of the Free Church of Scotland
hail petitioned against the imposition of tests, and now was
the time to conciliate that Church. By passing this Bill they
would effect that conciliation, and the cost of that conciliation
would merely be the abolition of a few tests.
The LORD ADVOCATE said the Bill was intended to re-
peal a part of the Act of Settlement. The Bill proposed to
abolish tents without any proposition for new ones in their stead
being made. He was not aware that any body of the Dissen-
teis of Scotland had expressed an opinion in favour of this Bill.
The resolution of the Free Church did not do it. The leading
members of that Church were not in favour of this Bill at all.
He did not think that it had been shown that any practical
evil had resultest from the imposition of the tests at present in
oree. If no evil luta resulted from these tests, what ground