said, he would beg to inquire of the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland, whether the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state and condition of the Queen's Colleges, will be laid on the table of the House during the present Session.

said, he had every reason to hope that the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of the Queen's Colleges in Ireland would be laid on the table before the end of the Session. From what he had heard, however, he was afraid it would be impossible to do so till almost the close of the Session.

observed, that the noble Lord had introduced into this Bill the principle of open competition for the cadetships in the Artillery and Engineering service. He supposed by that that the noble Lord meant competition for admission to Addiscombe, and not directly into the ranks of the scientific corps, as the mere possession of theoretical knowledge was not sufficient to make a young man a good officer. He must go through a practical course of training. At present two-fifths of the students at Addiscombe were admitted by nomination. He suggested the insertion of some words in the clause which should make it clear that in future all the admissions to that College would be by open competition.

said, he understood that this question was only raised in order to obtain from the Government an explanation of the course which they desired to pursue. It was not accidental that the clause contained no special reference to Addiscombe. The Government thought they had better not pledge themselves to any particular plan of carrying out the principle, and, therefore, their object in drawing the clause was merely to lay down the general principle, leaving the details to be settled afterwards. He was quite ready to assent to the principle laid down by the hon. Member, that it was desirable that these cadets should receive instruction in the Military College in the details of the services before they received admission into the corps. From everything he knew or had heard of Addiscombe, he believed it was an institution which had admirably answered its purpose; no fault whatever was to be found with its management, and he should be sorry to do anything to impair its efficiency. He did not see any objection to the admissions being partly by nomination and partly by competition; but he thought it would be better to leave the details in the hands of the executive rather than to tie their hands by any fixed rules.

expressed his satisfaction at the adoption of the principle of open competition; but he feared that the effect of the clause as it stood would be to separate the Engineers and Artillery departments from the College of Addiscombe,

thought the adoption of the principle of hereditary right in such matters was very objectionable. It tended to create a privileged class, and was founded on a sentimental notion. If it was good for India it must be equally good for this country.

said, that the principle was already applied to the appointments in the Excise. But he did not think it a good principle, and thought that they could not have a better sytem than that which existed at Addiscombe under the present arrangement, which it was now proposed to alter. He hoped that, at all events, the system in the Artillery and Engineers at Addiscombe would be maintained.

understood, that by this clause one-tenth part of the patronage allotted to the future Government of India was to be distributed among the sons of old officers of the Indian service. Such a system had frequently been attempted, and a wish had always been expressed in the Court of Directors that the claims which Indian officers had upon the State for past services should, as far as possible, be recognised by the means of appointments for their children; but, in practice, they were invariably at a loss to determine the exact proportion in which those appointments should be allotted. They had discussed the matter over and over again, but had always been obliged to give it up. During the last eighteen years, from 1840 to 1857 inclusive, the total number of military appointments was 5,477. How had they been distributed? Why, among the sons of military, medical, and marine officers, the sons of chaplains in the East India Company's service and of the civil servants, 1,865 had been given, or two-fifths of the whole; 717 to the sons of Royal officers, 580 to the sons of clergymen, and 2,315 to the sons of professional men belonging to the middle classes. None of those appointments could be traced in the smallest degree to political motives; but the Directors, in making them, had been animated solely by the public good. He recommended the noble Lord to leave out the clause altogether, as being unnecessary.

hoped that the clause would be retained, as he thought it established a very good distribution of patronage. But everything depended upon the manner in which it was carried out. The hon. Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes) took credit for the distribution of patronage by the Court of Directors. Now it was natural that the Company should give appointments to the sons of their old friends, and they had no more right to claim credit on that account than he should have for giving appointments as President of the Board of Control to the sons of Members of Parliament. That connection now ceased, and therefore some such clause was necessary; but a provision should be introduced, making the appointments to depend on the distinction of the officers whose sons were applicants. Care should be taken to prevent the appointment from becoming hereditary.

said, that great disadvantage arose under the present system from want of some person to whom distinguished officers could apply specially for appointments. He was glad that a fund was established under the Bill by which distinguished officers would be assisted in their application.

hoped the clause would be maintained as it stood, because it would enable the Secretary of State to reward deserving officers, whether they had acquired distinction in the field or in quarters.

thought the clause was one of a most beneficial character.

said, it appeared to him most difficult to carry out this clause. About one-half of his appointments had been given to the sons of officers, and they proved themselves most competent for the duties imposed on them.

thought it was an exaggeration to suppose that this clause was introducing any dangerous principle into the administration by the adoption of this clause. They should remember that only about one-tenth of the whole number entered into this competition, and that proportion was so small as hardly to affect the general character of the service. He could not see any difficulty that could arise under this clause, except that the number of deserving claimants might be greater than the number of appointments. But that was a difficulty that had occurred in many cases. If any case of doubt or difficulty arose, there was nothing in the clause to prevent the expedient being resorted to of establishing a limited competition amongst those who were considered otherwise deserving. He thought the principle of the clause was very intelligible. No doubt the claims of the Indian civil and military servants had been fairly recognized; but it was one thing to go and ask for an appointment in the shape of a private favour, and another to go to a public body and seek for a recompense for services publicly performed.

thought the principle involved in the clause of a highly dangerous character.

suggested the introduction of the words, "who have served with distinction."

said, it appeared to him that the word, with distinction," might limit the application of the clause, so as to do injustice to individuals, by preventing the clause operating in cases where it was obviously intended to apply. A case of merit might occur which would not come under the de- nomination of "distinction." A difference might be made between "merit" and distinction," which would create much difficulty. He thought they ought to leave the clause as it stood, and allow a certain discretion to the Council.

stated that the persons to be admitted under this clause would not come in upon easier terms than those to be appointed by nomination.

proposed the following new clause as Clause 35:—

"Except Except as aforesaid, all persons to be recommended for Military Cadetships shall be nominated by the Secretary of State and Members of Council, so that out of seventeen nominations the Secretary of State shall have two, and each Member of Council shall have one; but no person so nominated shall be recommended unless the nomination be approved of by the Secretary of State in Council.

Clause brought up and read the first time.

said, the great principle involved in this clause had been already discussed: There were three modes in which patronage might be disposed of. One was by competition; another was that part which was not disposed of by competition might be given to the Minister alone; and a third mode was that which the Go- vernment proposed—namely, of dividing it between the Minister and the Council. He confessed he was very favourable to the principle of competition, believing that it had answered well as far as it had been tried; but at the same time it should be recollected that it was but an experiment, and when they were throwing open the whole scientific branches of the army, he thought that they were giving that principle every fair play. As to the suggestion of giving a portion of this patronage to the public schools, no doubt that would be very satisfactory to that portion of society who sent their sons to public schools; but he was afraid that such a proceeding would give rise to great complaints from classes who were unable to compete with the wealthy classes in obtaining the advantages of these schools, though they give their sons a good education elsewhere. As to leaving the patronage in the hands of the Minister, his objection to that was, that from the extent of the patronage it would be an enormous labour to distribute it properly. It would be very difficult, also, for any Minister to avoid disposing of part of his patronage on political grounds when he had such an enormous amount of it. But, setting aside the question as to the political use of the patronage, he did not think it possible for any Minister charged with the responsibility of distributing this patronage to investigate every case properly. There were, he understood, above 100 of these cadetships to be disposed of every year. He thought that the patronage would be better bestowed when divided among fifteen or sixteen persons than if it were all placed in the hands of one person. There had been many suggestions as to disposing of the patronage by competition, though he had not heard until to-day any proposal to deposit it in the hands of the Minister alone. If it were left in the hands of the Minister it would involve an enormous amount of labour on his part. It would, too, be difficult for any Minister, subject to the ordinary influences that beset a Member of that House, to avoid disposing of some part of this patronage on political grounds. He thought it scarcely possible for any Minister charged with the responsibility of distributing the whole of this patronage to investigate properly every case that came before him in the year. Until to-day he had not heard any suggestion made of giving to the Minister all the patronage.

, the last sentence of the clause seemed to provide two references to the Council; but be could not see why nomination as well as recommendation should be given to the Council.

thought the meaning of the clause plain; the recommendation was placed in the hands of individual Members, but there was to be a check on improper nomination by every appointment being brought before the whole Council.

said, he would not oppose this clause were he not convinced that the vesting of the patronage of cadetships in the Indian Council was the very worst mode in which it could be distributed. It was proposed to vest the patronage in the hands of those persons who were to govern India; and the evil was, that by giving them this patronage they would give them a direct private and individual interest which might be in contravention of the public weal. Although he believed the gentlemen who might be appointed members of the Council would administer the patronage as well and as honourably as any private gentlemen, yet, under such an arrangement as the clause proposed, it was impossible that they could stand indifferent between the various branches of the Indian service; for they would have a direct interest in increasing the numbers and emoluments of the military force at the expense of the civil service. The shameful state of the administration of law and justice in the East India Company's territories was well known, and was attributable to the circumstance that had a judicial service been established there would have been a considerable diminution of the civil patronage of the Directors. The Company had enjoyed the patronage of cadetships in the Native army, but they could not confer commissions in the Queen's regiments serving in India; and the consequence was that, whenever new territories had been added to the Company's dominions, the Native army had been increased instead of additions having been made to the Queen's army. He believed that if there was one cause which had contributed more than another to the mutiny in India, it had been the enormous increase of the Native army, because the patronage attached to it was in the hands of the Company. The regular cavalry, which every one knew was very inefficient, had been kept up, while any increase of the irregular cavalry, a most valuable branch of the service, had been discouraged, because the former force afforded the greatest amount of patronage. They proposed to appoint the Members of Council for life, and yet to give them retiring pensions in order to get rid of the evil of appointments for life, and now they were going to contradict themselves again. If a man's health failed, and he wished to retire, and it was for the good of the service that he should retire, yet he would, if he had this patronage, be induced to remain a little longer for the benefit of his children and his grandchildren. There was no plan which they could suggest of giving away this patronage which would not be better than this. He thought the plan of giving away the patronage by competition would be an admirable one. They could have competition on points of strength and agility as well as other things. Would this not be better than leaving the matter to blind chance—for who ever heard of a young gentleman getting a cadetship because he deserved it? If they had not competition, they might sell the appointments, for even that would be better than the present system; and the produce of the sales would prove a very acceptable relief to the Indian Exchequer. The result of the present proposal would be that they would have a competitive civil service and a patronage military service, and that all the feelings and sympathies of the governing body of India would be in favour of that service in which they exercised patronage.

thought the right hon. Gentleman had made a most unjust observation in stating that, if the officers of the Indian army had not been badly selected, the Indian mutiny would not have occurred.

explained, that he had contended that if it had not been the interest of the Company to increase the Native army to such an extent, that army would not have felt its own strength.

thought that there was no danger of too great a number of officers being appointed. It seemed to be assumed that no examination was passed at present, but the fact was that the cadets underwent a very good examination. The right hon. Gentleman said that this proposed system was the very worst that could be adopted, but he had not given them a better. He assured the House that the young men who went out to India went as well prepared as possible. As to competition, they did not find gentlemen engaged in commerce choose their servants by competition. He doubted whether the system would last long.

observed, that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe) would learn with some surprise that, in spite of his allegation that the desire of patronage on the part of the Directors had led to the increase of the Native army, that army was now numerically much larger than when the mutiny commenced.

then proposed a clause directed to the object of keeping the proportion between the nominated and elected Members the same as at first. It was clear that if they commenced with eight nominated and seven elected Members, yet this proportion would not be kept up under the present provisions of the Bill unless alternate vacancies occurred in the portions of the Council filled up by nomination and by election. He proposed by his clause to enact that in order to secure this vacancies that occurred in the nominated portion of the Council should be filled up by nomination, and those in the elected portion by election.

said, that the hon. Gentleman attached more importance than he (Lord Stanley) did to the maintenance of the exact present proportion at all times between the two clauses who were represented in the Council. The numbers would be at first eight to seven. When the time arrived that all appointed at the outset, whether nominated or elected, should have died off, then the appointments would be alternately by election and nomination; the number of elected and nominated Members would be alternately seven and eight and eight and seven, and the balance would, therefore, ultimately be as nearly equal as possible between the two. It was only in the intervening period that any inequality could arise, and during that time there was just as much chance of the elected Members obtaining a superiority over the nominated ones as of the nominated Members obtaining a superiority over those who were elected. The objection which he entertained to the proposition was, that it would be the means of perpetuating the distinction between the nominated and elected Members, which it seemed to him important should terminate as soon as possible in a body of this kind.

said, that he believed the intention of the Government and the House was that there should be eight nominated and seven elected Members. It was, as he understood, the proposition of the hon. Member to maintain that proportion. He could not see why, if the proportion was a proper one at first, it should not be maintained.

said, that the first elected Member that died would cause the numbers to become nine and six, which would be contrary to the intentions of Parliament.

said, that the second election would neutralize the inequality pointed out by the hon. Member.

could not see that there would be anything invidious in a Member of Council being appointed by the Crown to fill a vacancy caused by the death of a nominated Member, or on the other hand, being elected to fill a vacancy caused by the death of an elected Member. He did not, therefore, see any objection to the proposition of his hon. Friend.

then moved the addition of the following clause:—

"That, with a view to enabling the Secretary of State for War and the Commander in Chief of the army for the time being to have proper cognisance of the constitution and organization of our army in India, they are hereby appointed ex officio Members of the Council for India. 1. That in transferring the forces of the East India Company to the Crown, and with a view to avoid a double government of the army, the organization, discipline, and control be under the Secretary of State for War and the Horse Guards, in like manner as the existing colonial service of Her Majesty, preserving to such forces all existing rights in reference to pay and allowances. 2. That all first commissions in the army shall be open to public competition, subject to such an examination as the Secretary of State for War shall direct, reserving one-fourth part of such appointments to the sons of persons who have been employed in the military service of the Crown or of the East India Company: that the remaining three-fourth parts be sold at the rate of £400 for each infantry ensigncy or engineer or artillery second lieutenancy, and £500 for each cavalry cornetcy; that this purchase money be received by the State and formed into a retiring fund, having for its objects further efficiency in the service by facilitating early retirement; that these commissions be gazetted in the same manner as all Queen's commissions now are, being, in the first instance, recommended by the Secretary of State for India."

said, that if the Commander in Chief and the Secretary of State for War were appointed members of the Council, that must be done with a view to place the army of India under their control in the same way as was the army in the Colonies. That at once opened and decided the relation between the army in India for local and the army for general purposes. A more difficult question he did not know, and he should be sorry at the present moment to pronounce a decided opinion upon it. It had been already stated that it was the intention of the Government to refer the question of the re-organization of the Indian army to a Commission which would sit during the recess. He hoped that the result of these inquiries would be before the public next Session, and then, but not until then, it would be desirable to enter upon the full consideration of this subject. In the meantime, he thought the Committee would not be prepared to sanction a proposal to transfer the Indian army to the War Department and the Horse Guards without a fuller inquiry than had yet taken place. He could not assent to the proposed clause.

asked if the noble Lord would have any objection to lay on the table of the House before Parliament was prorogued a copy of the Commission directed to the Commissioners for inquiring into the reorganization of the Indian army?

said, that before that time he would take an opportunity to give some explanation of the subject into which the Commission would have to inquire.

then proposed the addition of the following Clause:—

"Whereas by an Act passed in the 37th year of the reign of King George III., chapter 140, it was provided that from and after the passing of that Act no British subject should by himself, or by any other person employed by him, lend, or be concerned in lending, any money to any Native Prince in India; and whereas certain claims against the revenues of the kingdom of Oude in British India, for money advanced by British subjects whose representatives are in England, previous to the passing of that Act, to Nabob Asuf-Ood-Dowlah, the then sovereign of Oude, for the purposes of his government, are still outstanding; and whereas the kingdom of Oude was on the 1st of January, 1856, annexed to the territories of the East India Companies, and it is expedient that such claims should be investigated and adjusted: be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for the Council by and with the consent in writing of the per- son or persons making any such claim as aforesaid, to refer any such claim to the auditor of the accounts of the Council, or other person or persons to be from time to time appointed by the Council, with the approval of the claimant for that purpose, and to direct such referee or referees to investigate such claim and all matters relating thereto; and such referee or referees shall have power to examine any person in Great Britain, who shall appear before him or them in support of such claim, and any person or persons who shall be tendered by or on behalf of such claimant for that purpose, and also any officers and servants in Great Britain of the Council, as he or they may see fit, in relation thereto, and for such purpose, by writing under his or their hand or hands, to summon before him or them any such person or persons, officer, or servants, and also by writing under his or their hand or hands, to require the production of any accounts, books, papers, and documents in Great Britain, relating to such claim, in the possession or power of the said claimant, or of any other person or persons indicated by him, and also any books, papers, and documents in Great Britain, relating to such claim, in the possession or power of the said Council, their officers or servants; and such referee or referees shall report to the Secretary of State his opinion as to the justice and propriety of such claim, with such remarks and observations in relation thereto as he may think fit, and the Secretary of State shall thereupon make such order therein as to him shall seem just and proper, and such order shall be binding and conclusive upon the person or persons making such claim as aforesaid, and upon all persons claiming through or under him or them,"

He should not have brought forward this clause if he did not believe in the justice of the claims referred to in it. The claim to which he particularly referred was that of Colonel Frith of the Bengal Artillery. It was a claim arising out of the military service of the Company, and by which the East India Company had chiefly benefited. By a treaty signed in 1781 the East India Company undertook to withdraw their own troops from Oude, and to permit the then Vizier of Oude to garrison the country with his own troops, but commanded by a British officer appointed by the Governor General. Colonel Frith received that appointment at a time when the revenues of Oude were in a dilapidated condition. Under these circumstances Colonel Frith, at the instigation of the English Resident at Lucknow, pledged his credit to raise a sum to pay the troops he commanded. In two years £30,000 was admitted by the Resident at Lucknow to be due to Colonel Frith on account of those advances; and this liability was admitted by the Vizier, who gave the Colonel a lien upon the revenues of Oude. There could, therefore, be no doubt of the debt being due. In twelve months after the giving of this lien Colonel Frith was paid £10,000 pounds, and an attempt was made to induce him to settle the remainder of his claim for a wholly inadequate sum. He declined. The then Vizier of Oude died. The regular order of succession was interrupted, and a person whom the East India Company preferred to the heir was raised to the musnud. When he ascended the throne a treaty was signed by which the new Vizier promised to pay the debts of his predecessor. But in the following year that treaty was abrogated. Another was signed, in which the East India Company released the Vizier from the liability to pay his predecessor's debts, and, at the same time, acquired half his territory. He (Mr. Fagan) contended that after thus releasing the Vizier from the liability to pay his predecessor's debts, and at the same time seizing upon a large portion of his territory, the East India Company became morally bound to repay Colonel Frith the advances which he had made to the previous Vizier. The question was whether the tribunal for the settlement of such claims should be the House of Commons, or some authority directly under the Secretary of State. He thought there was great inconvenience in making the House of Commons the tribunal, and, therefore, he made the proposition embodied in the clause.

said, he thought it would be the opinion of the Committee that it would not be desirable for him to go into the details of the question which the hon. Member for Cork had brought under the notice of the Committee. The case was one of very long standing, and one, he (Lord Stanley) believed, of some hardship. It had more than once been debated in that House; but it would be impossible to do justice on either side, unless it were gone into at considerable length. He was quite ready to admit that which he thought would be sufficient for present purposes—namely, that there were various claims, some of which were undoubtedly valid, against the former Government of Oude, and that the transfer of the revenues of Oude to Great Britain did carry with it a liability for such debts of the former Government as were fairly and justly contracted. Following on that first admission must necessarily be the one that it was expedient such claims should be investigated. But then arose two further questions—first, in what manner, and before what tribunal, it was desirable to have them investigated; and next, whether it was desirable to insert anything in respect of their adjustment in the Bill then before the Committee? Now, though the settlement of such debts might be a very important subject, it was one which had no intimate connection with a Bill for the home administration of India. The two questions were in fact entirely unconnected; and he could not think it would be a convenient practice to insert in a Bill which related to one subject clauses which related to another and totally distinct subject. Again, it was quite clear that whatever tribunal it might be advisable to establish for the settlement of a claim such as that which the hon. Member for Cork had spoken of, ought not to be established for the trial of that single case, but should be one before which all cases of this nature might be conveniently and satisfactorily tried. A considerable number of persons had claims against the Government of Oude, and the greater number of these persons were Natives of India. Obviously, then, those claims could best be investigated by a Commission on the spot. Such a Commission it was proposed to appoint. That idea had been entertained by the Government of India, and would, he expected, be carried out without any great delay. Such a tribunal once appointed, to it must be referred all claims against the Government of Oude, whether made by Europeans or Natives; and he did not doubt that the party whose claims the hon. Member for Cork had advocated would be able to have justice done him without the intervention of an Act of Parliament. Under these circumstances, he (Lord Stanley) could not consent to the introduction of the clause proposed by the hon. Member.

said, he had himself spoken several times on cases of this kind. He had heard, from the predecessors of the noble Lord, declarations, though not so explicit as that of the noble Lord, as to the necessity of a tribunal to try such cases. However, that tribunal had not been established; and the noble Lord had not pledged himself or his Government that it should be. He (Mr. Bright) did not think a Commission would be the most suitable tribunal—he rather thought it should be a tribunal composed of the Indian Judges. He was rather of opinion that the Government of India was afraid that if such a tribunal sat, the claims would be very numerous, and that very large sums of money would have to be re- funded. He believed that the hon. Member for Cork would do well not to press his Motion, but he (Mr. Fagan) was entitled to a pledge on the part of the Government that such a tribunal should without delay be established. The noble Lord might introduce into the Bill then before the Committee a clause for the establishment of this tribunal.

rose for the purpose of preventing any inference that the case of those claimants on the old treasury of Oude was one in which great injustice had been done by the East India Company. He (Mr. Gladstone) was bound to express his belief that the claim brought forward by the hon. Member for Cork was not one to which the Government were bound to lend an ear. It was one which had been heard long ago, and resisted by the East India Company. He thought that the resistance of such claims was a most meritorious act on the part of the East India Company. He was averse to the revival of claims against the treasury of India which had been long ago urged, and which ought never to have been put forward.

had passed no opinion as to the merits of the claim now before the Committee. He had confined himself to saying that there ought to be a tribunal to decide such claims.

said, that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxford University seemed to have misunderstood the case which he had brought forward. The case which he had brought under the notice of the Committee was not one of that class to which the right hon. Gentleman referred.

agreed with the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) that there ought to be some tribunal to settle these claims.

said, that he would propose the clause of which he had given notice on the bringing up of the Report.

said, he would take the same course in respect of his clause.

rose to move, pursu- ant to notice, "That the Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the City of Aberdeen be heard by themselves or by their Council; upon their Petition against the Bill." At present there were Faculties of Arts in the two Colleges of Aberdeen, the Marischal and King's. Now, very considerable endowments had been left to the former College, by private individuals, on the faith of its maintaining a faculty of Arts. However, one of the clauses of the Bill now before the House would defeat the expectations of the donors; and in the language of some of the petitioners whose petitions he had presented to that House, "confiscate the endowments." The clause to which he referred, was that which would deprive Marischal College of its classes in the faculty of Arts. This would violate the terms of the private endowments, and occasion great inconvenience to a large number of the citizens of Aberdeen. Many of the youth would have to go daily from New to Old Aberdeen. Formerly this would not, at the outside, involve a walk of more than a mile and a half; but that was before the growth of the city. Many of the students and fellows now live at a distance of nearly three miles from Old Aberdeen; and these gentlemen would be obliged to go and come that distance daily in order to attend the classes in the faculty of Arts. The Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council wanted that no undue advantage should arise to either College from this Bill. They approved of the general objects of the measure; but they disapproved of the suppression of the faculty of Arts in Marischal College. That they thought wrong; as did also all the great bodies in the north-east of Scotland. He had that day presented a petition from the aggregate representatives of all these bodies, in which they prayed the House not to sanction what they called "the confiscation of the endowments of Marischal College, Aberdeen." At a numerous meeting held in Aberdeen, and at which the heads of the principal bodies were present, as also graduates and students of King's College and Marischal College, Aberdeen, it was determined to resist, so far as the law would justify such resistance, the clause to which he was now more particularly directing the attention of the House. The learned Lord Advocate had, on a former occasion, spoken of this objection as a "local prejudice"—a local feeling. A noble Lord, (Lord Elcho) who had spent forty-eight hours in Aberdeen, represented that the feeling was the other way. Was that to be believed after such a demonstration as the meeting to which he (Colonel Sykes) had just referred? A feeling manifested so generally, by so many different bodies, could scarcely be called a "local prejudice;" but even if it were, ought there not to be a concession to the wishes of so large a number, when such a concession could cause no wrong to any one? He felt that the petitioners were not asking too much. The learned Lord Advocate had cited authority in support of this clause; but was the opinion of the Gentleman to whom he had referred in support of the proposition to weigh against that of the whole north-east of Scotland? That part of Scotland was entitled to the highest consideration on the part of the learned Lord; and he would remind him of the old aphorism "that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones." He (Colonel Sykes) held in his hand the Aberdeen Herald. In one number of this paper he found the report of a meeting of the learned Lord's constituents, many of whom were graduates of King's College; and in that report he found it stated that those constituents elected him on the understanding that he was favourable to their views. That was on the 26th ult.; but, there was another expression of the same sort in the paper of Saturday last, which stated that

"All throughout it had been obvious that the main prompters of the Lord Advocate's firmness or obstinacy had been the professors of King's College. Forgetting the pledge given in his name to the great body of his constituents, the graduates of King's College, as Lord Rector, he had become the agent of the Senatus."

Now, he (Colonel Sykes) did not take upon himself to say whether this statement was true or false. It was not for him to determine whether or not such a pledge was given by the learned Lord when he was elected Provost; but there were the names of the parties who asserted that it had, and therefore he repeated that it behoved those who lived in glass houses not to throw stones. It was said, however, that the proposed measure was for the public good; that the limitation of the Faculty of Arts to King's College, Aberdeen, would occasion a great saving of money, and admit of improving the status of the remaining professors. But he was told that an arrangement could be made under which there would be no necessity for any additional expense as far as the Faculty of Arts in each College was concerned, and that the mere question of a Government grant would relate entirely to the establishment of the University or the governing body. If that were the case then he asked the learned Lord why he opposed himself to the universal wish of the people, when there would be no advantage to the public and no improvement in the statute of education in the north of Scotland? The graduates of the learned Lord's own College said to him, "we desire the Faculty of Arts to be preserved in Marischal College, because it will establish our honourable emulative rivalry, and will do the same good to education that is done in the College at Oxford, where one competes with the other, or at Cambridge as between St. John's and Trinity? Under these circumstances, therefore, he thought there was no occasion whatever for persevering in the clause to the extent which the learned Lord insisted upon. He came to the simple question whether the learned Lord and the Government would permit the Lord Provost, the Magistrates, and the Town Council of the City of Aberdeen to be heard at the bar of the House, that the House itself might hear from their lips or the lips of their Counsel, the real state of the case, which he feared he had so inadequately and imperfectly endeavoured to explain. In the hope that the Government would consider this point, he begged to move that the Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of the City of Aberdeen be heard by Counsel at the bar of the House.

said, he thought his hon. and gallant Friend ought to have offered some explanation as to the legal right or legal difficulty upon which the House required instruction, that it could not obtain from members of its own body. So far as he had been able to follow the observations of his hon. and gallant Friend, they appeared to be nothing more than a repetition of the argument which he had already brought forward on the subject; and he (the Lord Advocate), appealed to the House whether that argument involved any legal question or difficulty at all; or whether it did not resolve itself entirely into a question of the expediency or inexpediency of that union of the two Colleges of Aberdeen which formed part of the present Bill. In discussing that question, he was sure it would be impossible to find in that House a more able advocate than his hon. and gallant Friend; and he was as certain that the opponents of the measure would find none so zealous in promoting their cause—but he contended that no ground whatever had been laid for a Motion of this description. One word with regard to the observations which his hon. and gallant Friend had made respecting himself (the Lord Advocate) personally. Now, he thought his hon. and gallant Friend altogether misunderstood the information which had been put into his hands; and that the ancient proverb, which he had quoted, about people who lived in glass houses, did not at all apply. In the first place, he (the Lord Advocate) had never thrown stones at his hon. and gallant Friend, or anybody else, during the time he had been in office; and, in the second place, he begged to tell him that he did not live in a house of glass, if his hon. and gallant Friend meant by that he was liable to a charge of inconsistency. When he had the honour of being elected Lord Rector of the University of Aberdeen, he was asked his opinion upon the question of the union of the two Colleges; and, in reply, he stated that he had not turned his attention to the matter, except in a very cursory way; that his present impression was in favour of the union of the Universities, and the separation of the Colleges; but that opinion was formed without anything like an adequate consideration of the subject. That was a very distinct and at the same time, a very sincere expression of the opinion which he then entertained with the light he then possessed. He had occasion subsequently, however, to study the subject a great deal more maturely, with a view to be examined as a witness before the Commission appointed for the visitation of Aberdeen University; and then he came to an opposite conclusion, though not without some difficulty, as he had experienced in his evidence. Still in the end, he certainly did come very decidedly to an opposite conclusion, and he left it to his hon. and gallant Friend to say whether, having so come to an opposite conclusion, it was more honest to act on that conviction or pretend that he was of the same opinion still?

said, that as the Bill stood, the clause was not at all necessary. He thought it better to leave the appointment of the President of the University Court in the absence of the Rector to the Court itself

said, that the fault of the University Court was that it was too small—in Edinburgh, consisting of only eight members, and in the other Universities of only seven. And when, moreover, they considered that the Rector, being generally a person who was chosen from among distinguished literary men, would be non-resident, it was highly important that some one should be appointed who was a constituent member of the Court to act in his stead. He would not have the Assessor, who was one of the Synod, but some person to act for the Rector in his absence, to be vested with his powers for the time being. He therefore highly approved of the clause proposed by his hon. Friend.

said, he had given notice of a clause which proposed that the Rector should appoint a Vice Rector, who should in his absence exercise all the functions of Rector, and preside in the University Court. By way of Amendment to the clause of his hon. Friend, therefore, he would have to leave out the word "Assessor," and insert "Vice Rector, not being a Principal or Professor in any University." He was of opinion that it would scarcely be decorous for the Rector's Assessor to be elevated to the position of President over all the other members of the University Court, some of whom were his superiors in rank—and if they did not allow the Rector to appoint a Vice Rector who should preside in his absence, it would lead to this: that the Rector's voice would be practically lost in the University Court; or the students, when they had to elect a Rector, instead of choosing a man of eminence, who on account of his attainments and position would be an honour to the University, would look out for a man who resided on the spot, and would be able to attend and give his vote at the meetings of the Court. Any such result as that was most undesirable; and if the Rector had the power conferred upon him to ap- point a Vice Rector, there could be no such object or motive in the election.

opposed both the clause of the hon. Member for Wigton (Sir W. Dunbar) and the Amendment of the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Dunlop). He objected to the latter that the Vice Rector would only be a conditional or contingent member of the Court, acting in the absence of the Rector, but disappearing altogether when the Rector happened to be present; in his opinion a most undignified and anomalous position for any gentleman to be placed in. It appeared to him also that either proposition would have the effect of throwing too much power into the hands of the Rector, who already possessed the right to nominate one Assessor; for his part, he thought that any member of the University Court was just as well qualified to preside in that Court as any other person, and that, therefore, it was much better for the Court itself to elect its own chairman in the absence of the Rector. The members of the Court were invariably the best judges of the person who was most competent to preside over them; and his objection to the proposals of both hon. Members was, that they would create an anomaly, and place the person proposed to be Vice Rector in a very singular and disagreeable position.

said, that he should oppose the clause. The whole question, as he considered, was settled by a compromise in the Act of 1853, the effect of which was to abolish by far the greater proportion of those tests which had existed from the very foundation of the University. That Act was certainly an arrangement between contending parties, and, as he thought, proceeded on very sound grounds. It was an arrangement in which he entirely concurred—namely, that every chair that could be properly and distinctly called a lay chair should be entirely exempted from those tests, or in other words, that it should not be indispensable that they should be taken by persons seeking to attain a chair; in fact, that candidates should not be compelled to take any religious test whatever. That Act also proceeded to define what were lay chairs, and what in all future time should be considered not lay chairs. There was an express clause in the Act to this effect—that the words "chairs of theology" should, for the purposes of the Act, be taken to be chairs of Biblical criticism, Church doctrine, &c., in any of the Universities or Colleges, and the office of Principal of the same should be filled by a theological professor, with the exception of Marischal College and the University College of St. Leonard's, so that the Principals in those two Colleges were to be principals of lay chairs, and on that footing the tests were abolished as regarded the lay chairs in Scotland. He should not have thought that his hon. Friend would have been the man to come forward, so soon after this arrangement, and propose to disturb it, unless some particular reasons induced him to take that course; and the only one which he (the Lord Advocate) could find was, that in the case of Aberdeen this difficulty was created, that whereas, formerly, there were two Colleges, the Principal of one of which held a lay chair, and the Principal of the other held a theological chair; those two colleges, being united by this Bill, his hon. and learned Friend assumed, though on what ground he knew not, that the Principal of the united University would necessarily be the holder of a theological chair. The hon. and learned Gentleman said that the Marischal College being added, as it were, to King's College, the Principal of the new University would necessarily come in the place of the present principal of King's College. He (the Lord Advocate) was quite at a loss to understand how his hon. and learned Friend arrived at that conclusion. In one sense both the Marischal College and King's College would be extinguished, in another, they would both be kept up; they would be equally merged and united into one University. What represented one would equally represent the other; and so far from adopting the construction put upon that merging into one University by his hon. and learned Friend, he should rather feel inclined to contend that the Principal of the United University would not be the holder of a theological chair, because he was not one of those provided for under the Act of 16 & 17 Victoria. However that might be, he thought that no sufficient reason had been alleged for disturbing the arrangement of 1853, and he could not help thinking that, if that arrangement were disturbed, it would give rise to much unpleasant discussion.

could not exactly allow the interpretation of his reasons just given to be accepted of the House without explanation. No doubt what he had stated was to the difference between the chairs in Marischal and King's College, was a strong ground for the Motion he had made, but he was sorry he could not put the same construction upon the effect of the Bill of 1853, which had been put upon it by his right hon. and learned Friend. All the Principals of the Universities alluded to in this Bill held theological chairs, except the Principals of St. Leonard's and Marischal Colleges; and if the Principal of the United College was not to be the Principal of the Marischal College, it could not come within the exception mentioned in the Act. He denied that any arrangement had been made in 1853 of such a nature as to preclude him or any other hon. Member from coming forward with this Motion. He had made a similar Motion in 1853, when the Bill was in Committee; but when the Minister turned round and said that they had agreed to make those two exceptions, he thought it better to take what they could get. He certainly assented to that arrangement, but he did not consider that it was to be a permanent settlement. He had always advocated this change, and as he saw a better chance of carrying it now, he should certainly press it. He believed that all parties thought that it would be a wise and liberal change, for the Professors in question were really nominal Professors of Theology, and did no duty as Professors of Divinity. The only effect of retaining the present system would be to exclude from the chairs as Principals of the University the very best men.

could not agree to the clause. The truth was that there was in the University of Glasgow a College which had been endowed with property, which was of course divided among the professors and members of the College. Some sixty years ago, the Crown claimed the right for many additional Professors to participate in those endowments, but when the question came before the Court of Assizes, it decided against such right. It was held that the Crown had the right to appoint Professors of the University, but that it had no right to add any additional Professors to the College. The Professors of the College were appointed in the College, and divided amongst them its revenues; but the Professors belonging to the University, although they possessed all the other rights, had not the right of participating in the special property of the College. It might be disputed whether that was so, legally or not; but at all events, the question having been raised again, and its being for the law courts to decide what rights they possessed and what they did not, it would be quite contrary to the practice of Parliament to interfere by a Legislative enactment. As he understood the purport of this clause, it took away the property of the College and divided it among all the Professors of the University. If that was not the effect of it, he really could not tell what it was. He should suggest that the words "and College" be left out.

said, that no part of the reform of the Scotch Universities was more important than that contemplated by the hon. Member for Greenock with respect to this matter. It had been shown that, in consequence of the discussions arising out of this distinction, proceedings of the most discreditable character had taken place. The University had divided itself into two parties, taking opposite sides of this questions; and so bitter was the feeling that the members of different parties would scarcely condescend to meet each other. The course proposed by the hon. Member for Greenock was in exact accordance with the wishes and opinion of the people of Glasgow, who took the deepest interest in the University. Although, as was said, the question was still sub judice, it might be tied up for twenty years longer in the Scotch Courts and the House of Lords, and it was most important to the welfare of the University of Glasgow, that such a state of things should be put an end to altogether. He contended that the printed records of the University would show clearly that originally there never was any difference whatever between the University and the College; and the deeds which endowed them contained expressions that rendered it quite obvious that they were regarded as synonymous, the founders recognizing no such distinctions. He should, therefore, second the Motion of the hon. Member for Greenock.

said, that inasmuch, as the clause was not to interfere with existing rights, or with any emolument heretofore given, he had great pleasure in acceding to its introduction. He could not assent to any clause which interfered with existing rights, or the emoluments connected with the College, or which would have the effect of deciding by a single stroke of the pen a question upon which legal proceedings were pending. On the understanding, therefore, that the clause had reference to placing the Professors of the University and the College on precisely the same footing as respected all the functions and duties appertaining to the office, he gave it his cordial assent, and hoped that it would have the effect, concurrently with the equitable determination of the pecuniary rights of Professors, of putting an end to the heart-burnings complained of, perish all ill-feeling, and promote the interests of the University.

proposed an Amendment on Clause 7, which relates to the election of the Lord Rector of the University by the students, the object of which was to give a vote in such election to the professors. He thought the Committee, in wholly confining the election to the students, had made a mistake. It was well known that in times of election discipline was relaxed, and more than usual license allowed. He thought that if the Professors presided over them on such occasions, and took part in the election, it would be conducive to good order.

thought that, considering the votes of the Professors would make little impression, from the smallness of the number, it would only be an unnecessary interference with the students, which would lead to no other result than that of creating ill feeling. If the election of the Rector was left to the students, that of the Chancellor was left to the Professors, so that there was no loss of influence by their not being permitted to interfere in the election of the Rector.

also thought this an unnecessary Amendment. There must be a certain degree of license in carrying on an election, and the Professors had better take no part in it. They might make any regulation they pleased for the purpose of preserving order and the regularity of their proceedings, but the students ought to be left in full, free, and unfettered exercise of their electoral rights.

then moved an Amendment, the effect of which was to make the Lord Provost of Edinburgh for the time being, one of the assessors of the University Court of the University of Edinburgh.

reminded the House of the petitions that had been presented upon this subject.

was understood to say, that the people of Edinburgh were much excited upon this subject. He hoped that when they ascertained the real state of the case, their wrath would be considerably abated.

proposed—after the name of Alexander Hastie—to insert the name of the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Dunlop). The Commissioners already appointed were eleven in number, four of whom were Peers, five lawyers, one country gentleman, and one magistrate. It appeared, then, there was only one of the Commissioners who represented the town people. He thought that the hon. Member for Greenock had greatly distinguished himself by his valuable suggestions and Amendments during the progress of the Bill, and he was quite sure that the addition of the name would tend to give the people of Scotland much confidence in the proceedings of the Commissioners. He hoped that the Lord Advocate would not refuse the insertion of his name.

begged to add his request to that of the hon. Member for Dartmouth. He believed that the hon. Member for Greenock had the full confidence of the people of Scotland.

said, the composition of a Commission of this kind was a step of great importance. He was quite aware of the merits of the hon. Member for Greenock, and of the great and many services which that hon. and learned Gentleman had rendered. Nothing would give him greater pleasure than to acknowledge those merits by adding his name to the Commission, if he could only be assured that no further effort would be made to extend the number of the Commissioners. In giving his assent, therefore, he begged it to be distinctly understood, he did not wish to extend the number of the Commission beyond twelve.

was sure that no attempt would be made to add another name to the Commission. He, however, did not think that the Dissenting portion of the people of Scotland were properly represented on the Commission. All classes in Scotland would be extremely satisfied with the name of Mr. Dunlop on the Commission; and, under the circumstances, he did not think that any other name ought to be proposed.

concurred with what had fallen from his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, that no name could be more satisfactory on the Commission than that of Mr. Dunlop. He thought, however, that another name should be added to represent the Dissenting interest.

did not think that a better or abler man could be appointed on the Commission than the hon. Member for Greenock, and believed that the advantage of the measure would be better secured by the presence of his hon. Friend's name. He, however, concurred with the hon. Member for Glasgow in thinking that the Dissenting interest of Scotland ought to be better represented on the Commission. He had himself, received many representations from Scotland on this subject which he was unwilling to urge at the present time upon the Lord Advocate, knowing the difficulties he had to encounter in forming this Commission upon perfectly fair and impartial grounds. The only name upon it that was supposed to represent the Dissenters was that of Mr. Alexander Hastie. They ought not to forget that Scotland was as nearly as possible divided into three sections—namely, the Established Church, the Free Church, and the United Presbyterian body. He thought the best arrangement was at once to accede to the proposition of placing the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Dunlop's) name on the Commisson; but, upon the understanding that the Lord Advocate should take the opportunity between this and the third reading, of communicating with the Dissenting interest, and of putting another name with that of Mr. Alexander Hastie, to represent that same interest.

said, as several hon. Members were suggesting names, he would put in a claim for the country gentlemen. They all concurred in the propriety of inserting the name of the hon. and learned Gentleman in the Commission, but there was another name he should wish to see upon the Commission—namely, that of Colonel Muir, a gentleman who was formerly a Member of that House. He, however, thought upon the whole it was better to leave the responsibility of the names of the Commissioners upon the Government, and for the House itself to abstain from proposing any names.

said, it appeared to him that the number of the Commission ought to be thirteen. There was one gentleman whose name on the Commission, he knew, would give the greatest satisfaction to the Dissenters of Scotland. This was a gentleman who was well qualified to act as Commissioner, and who was, moreover, a medical man, by no means an unimportant consideration, when it was remembered that there was a large body of medical students deeply interested in the government of the Universities. He therefore proposed that the name of Dr. John Browne, jun., be inserted as a member of the Commission.

said, he was not certainly aware of its being intended to propose his name as a member of the Commission, and he offered his thanks to the hon. Member who made the Motion, and to his other hon. Friends who supported it. If he had been aware of such a course being intended he should have used his utmost efforts to endeavour to dissuade his friends from persevering in it, as he well knew the delicacy of those affairs. His great anxiety had ever been to see the Commission so framed as to avoid every occasion of jealousy or doubt. He was much gratified at the expressions of kindness with which his name had been received; but, so far as his personal feelings went, he should have preferred that his name had not been proposed.

then moved the appointment of Dr. John Browne, jun.

appealed to the Lord Advocate to assent to this addition. If the Commission went out as at present constituted, it would create great dissatisfaction.

put it to the House, whether he had not assented to the number of the Commissioners being increased to twelve by the addition of the name of the hon. Member for Greenock, upon the understanding that the Commission should not be further increased. He felt, therefore, quite justified in resisting this last addition.

said, he would certainly support the learned Lord in resisting the Motion. If the learned Lord were obliged to yield to the addition of one named, and then to the addition of another, they would be increasing the Commission to an unnecessary length.

said, if the House went to a division, he would support the proposition of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, for the appointment of Dr. John Browne, jun., than whom no better man could be found for the situation of Commissioner.

then moved the following clauses:—

"If Her Majesty shall be pleased at any time within the duration of the Commission, to grant a charter for the foundation of a National University for Scotland, the Scottish Universities named in this Act, or any of them, may, if they shall think fit, surrender to the Commissioners the powers of examining for and of granting degrees, with or without the exception of degrees in theology, and to become Colleges, one or more, as the case may be, of the said National University."

Clause to follow Clause 15:—

"No such surrender or consent as is herein-before mentioned of any Scotch University named in this Act, with a view to becoming a College or Colleges of a National University for Scotland, shall be valid, except it be signified in writing by the Chancellor and by the University Court of the University concerned therein, nor except it be declared by the said Court that the said surrender or consent respectively is given with the approval of the Senatus Academicus, and likewise of the University Council."

proposed to insert in page 9, line 35, after the word "provided," the words, "That a faculty of arts, being such as shall afford a course of education sufficient to qualify students to be examined for degrees in arts, shall be maintained in each of the said King's College and Marischal College." The hon. and gallant Member said, he had received a telegraphic despatch from Aberdeen, showing that the Bill, as it stood, would be a breach of the articles of union, one stipulation of which was, that the Universities and Colleges of Scotland should remain as they were at the time of the Union for ever.

remarked upon the petitions that had been presented from certain rural labourers and other working people, expressing their belief that this proposed system of educating the people would prevent them from enjoying the advantages of those establishments. The Lord Advocate stated that those persons were ignorant of the merits of the measure; but the advocates in Aberdeen had expressed the same opinion, and the country gentlemen from all parts were also remonstrating against the union of the Colleges; and, lastly, the students of Aberdeen expressed a strong opinion on the subject. And now, in opposition to those united opinions, what authority was there on the other side. They had had the opinion of the Chancellor of King's College in Aberdeen; but that learned functionary had not expressed any desire for the recognition of this principle. If the House should determine otherwise, he (Lord Haddo) should regret it, but he would take it as an additional proof of the influence of the learned Lord Advocate in that House.

should remind the noble Lord and his hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Sykes) that an important alteration had already taken place in the measure before the House, and the dis- tinction between the Amendment and the clause was therefore very much narrowed. Now, except as regarded the local situation of the building of the two colleges, they were entirely amalgamated. The effect of the clause itself would leave the Commissioners themselves to determine, upon full inquiry, whether it was necessary to have a duplicate set of professors in arts, &c. As far as regarded this question, he thought it better to leave the matter in the hands of the Commissioners. The proposal of the hon. and gallant Colonel really did nothing to meet the evil. The clause he proposed would fail to carry out the object which he had in view.

proposed to add the following proviso:—"Provided always that it shall not be lawful for the Commissioners to apply any portion of such money to the salary of any Principals or Professors required to subscribe religious tests, and not included in the provisions of the Act 16 & 17 Vict., c. 89." Under this clause power is given to certain Commissioners to apply and appropriate, at their own discretion, monies to be hereafter granted by Parliament for purposes connected with the Scotch Universities. The object of his proviso was to prevent the Commissioners granting any part of these monies either for adding to the salaries of the present theological chairs, or for endowing new ones. According to an Act of the Scottish Parliament passed in the reign of Queen Anne, every principal or professor in a Scottish University was required to be a member of the Church of Scotland. But the provisions of that Act had been repealed, so far as the secular chairs went, by the Act 16 & 17 Vict., c. 89. So that at the present time it was only the theological Professors in the Scottish Universities who were required to subscribe tests; and his object was to prevent the theological Professors getting any of the money that may hereafter be granted by Parliament. At this moment two-thirds of the population of Scotland dissented from the Established Church. They were connected with the Free Church or the United Presbyterian Church, or one or other of the smaller religious denominations; and he (Mr. Baxter) objected, in their name, to any portion of the taxes of the United Kingdom being applied for the endowment of Professors who were necessarily connected with the Established Church to which these Dissenters did not belong, and from which they derived no benefit. But he had another argument, and one which, he had no doubt, would have even more weight with the House of Commons. If they passed this Bill without the proviso, they would have ecclesiastical controversy and struggle over the whole length and breadth of Scotland. They would have the Established Church coming to Members of Parliament, and begging them to carry the vote for these theological purposes; and, on the other hand, they would have a large non-conforming majority striving to secure the rejection of these votes. If they did not make a stand now, they would have a new Maynooth question—a second edition of the Regium Donum controversy—a controversy of bitterness and angry feeling both in Scotland and in that House. He cared not whether Members were Dissenters or Churchmen. He asked them whether this is the consummation they desired? He asked them whether they did not desire to see Ecclesiastical debates taken out of that House? If that were so, he begged them not to add another subject of Ecclesiastical controversy; and he begged the Scotch Members, a great part of whom opposed the grant to Maynooth, to preserve their consistency in this matter. He might appeal to men of all religious opinions not to take a course which would inevitably be but the beginning of strife. When he moved upon this subject in the Committee upon the Bill, the Lord Advocate took two objections to the course he proposed; and, first, that he proposed to fetter the free action of Parliament. Now, he (Mr. Baxter) proposed nothing of the kind. He proposed merely to fetter the Commissioners, the great body of whom are not members of the Church to which the majority of the people of Scotland belong. The second objection taken by the Lord Advocate was, that he should consistently have struck out all religious endowments already existing in the Established Church in connection with these chairs. That, however, was not then the question. They were not at that moment called upon to consider whether there should be an Established Church in any part of the United Kingdom. They were only called upon to discuss and decide whether the Church of Scotland should be further endowed by a vote which would be disputed every year in that House by Gentlemen who object to these votes, which would set one denomination in Scotland against another, and would be the means of reviving disputes which all wise and good men desired to see buried in oblivion. He had heard, to his great amazement, since he entered the House that night, that it was to be objected to his proviso; that it was very different from the proviso that he nearly carried on a previous occasion. He understood that some hon. Members had said that they were prepared to vote against endowing Professors in Theology, but not against endowing all Professors who were required to take religious tests which could include the Professors of Biblical Criticism and other matters which were not theology. But in the 16 & 17 Vict., he found the following definition of Chairs of Theology:—

"Which, for the purpose of this Act, shall be taken to mean Chairs of Divinity, Church History, Biblical Criticism, and Hebrew."

So that his Motion is precisely the same in every respect as that for which these hon. Gentlemen voted on a previous day, and which, he understood, some of them would oppose this day. He submitted that they ought at once and for ever to get rid of these questions. He cared not whether the Commissioners were or were not likely to endow such professors. He asked the House now to stop in a course which could not, he was persuaded, be beneficial even to the Church of Scotland.

said, that it appeared to him that the proposition of his hon. Friend was neither more nor less than an abstract declaration of voluntaryism. That might be very well were this a question of the voluntary principle; but there was nothing in the Bill that affected that privilege either directly or indirectly. He did not think that on looking through the Bill (with the exception, he was afraid, of the alteration just made in the constitution of the Commission) they could find any part of its provisions which could by any ingenuity be said to be hostile or un- fair to any religious denomination. On the contrary, it appeared to him to have been the laudable intention of the Lord Advocate, and in that he had been successful, to make the Bill, as far as he possibly could, a fair and equitable law as regarded all sects and denominations of religious denominations. What was the case before the House? They had a Bill which altered materially the present government of the Universities; and it appointed Commissioners to carry out such reforms as these Commissioners might upon inquiry find necessary. It also gave them power to administer the funds which might be provided by Parliament, amongst other things, for increasing the salaries at present attached to the Professorships and other officials in the Universities. If the Commissioners under the Bill had power to give money over which they had control to the Professors, amongst whom were the theological Professors, then he could understand what the Amendment was practically in point, but such was not the case. The Commissioners had no other power whatever than to recommend what they might think proper to Parliament; and they did not in that House know what their recommendation might be until it was on the table, and whether they might recommend the theological Professors for additional remuneration or not. Even supposing the Amendment of his hon. Friend carried, it did not at all control the Commissioners, because the Commissioners might still make that recommendation on behalf of the theological Professors. The real fact was, that the power still remained in Parliament. The theological Professors were not even named in the Bill. No funds were provided for raising the salaries by this Bill; and even if the Commissioners were to recommend the theological Professors as requiring additional remuneration under this clause, their Report would have to lie on the table of the House, and might either be assented to or dissented from by them. The money that would be required for meeting the recommendations of the Commissioners, and for adding to the salaries of the Professors, must hereafter be voted by Parliament, and then would arise the time when the Motion of his hon. Friend would be very apposite. But it is not so at the present moment, for it had nothing to do with anything contained in the Bill. When he saw that no practical object is to be gained by this Motion he must look for some other. He did not know whether the object of his hon. Friend was to commit the House or get the principle of maintaining the theological chairs in the Universities in connection with the Establishment. That proposition he did most thoroughly object to. He believed that theological Professors must be maintained in the Universities; and that being the case, and not seeing that there is anything in the Bill that warranted or had any reference to the matter alluded to in the proposition of his hon. Friend, he should feel it his duty to oppose it. He did not see any advantage in introducing into the Bill an element which had no proper connection with it, and which could only be regarded as a slur upon the able body of men who now filled the theological chairs. At the same time, he must admit the grave difficulty that there was in the way of calling upon Parliament to vote money for the purpose of theological chairs when tests were still required. He saw every year a growing indisposition to vote grants very analogous to these, as in the case of Ireland. He himself was strongly opposed to such grants, and he did not know very well that he could defend the application of one principle to Ireland and another to Scotland. Therefore he thought that if a Vote was to be proposed in that House for the additional endowment of the theological chairs it would meet with great opposition, and be open to very serious objection. But seeing that, and admitting the whole force of the abstract proposition involved in his hon. Friend's Amendment, he still could not help being very anxious that the position of the divinity Professors in Scotland should be improved. He believed it was generally admitted that theological teaching was inseparable from the University system of Scotland, and he believed that it is equally admitted that if there were to be theological Professors at the Universities—theological Professors useful to all denominations, for it is not only the students belonging to the Established Church but to all denominations in Scotland that they taught—it was necessary, for the safety of the students, that the persons who bad charge of the theological teaching should be subjected to some test for the security of the students over whom they presided. He thought, then, if that was admitted, as he believed it was generally, that it was essential that the chairs, if they were maintained at all, should be maintained in their efficiency, so that the respect due to their position might be kept up. Now, seeing the difficulty that there was in the way of a grant of public money in aid of these Professorships, he did hope that the Commissioners, in concert with the Government, would be able to derive some means out of existing funds applicable to such purposes, to raise the condition of their Professors without having recourse to tax the public funds. He could only say that he thought this would meet the exigency of the case. He was quite sure that there was no body of men who, from the zeal and assiduity they had employed, were more worthy of the respect of all denominations in Scotland, than were the theological Professors. He was sure that there were no body of people who more deserved public sympathy and support in the position they had to fill.