The Act of Security
passed at the period of the Union between England and Scotland
contains the following clause: “And further, for the greater
security of the Protestant religion, and of the worship, discipline,
and government of the Presbyterian Church, statutes and ordains that
the Universities and Colleges of St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and
Edinburgh, as now established by law, shall continue within this
kingdom for ever; and that in all time coming no professors,
principals, regents, masters, or others bearing office in any
University, College, or School, within this kingdom, be capable, or
be admitted, or allowed to continue in the exercise of their said
functions, but such as shall own and acknowledge the civil
Government in manner prescribed, or to be prescribed by the acts of
Parliament: As also that before or at their admissions they do and
shall acknowledge and profess and shall subscribe to the Confession
of Faith as the confession of their faith, and that they will
practise and conform themselves to the worship presently in use in
this Church, and submit themselves to the government and discipline
thereof, and never endeavour, directly or indirectly, the prejudice
or subversion of the same; and that before the respective
Presbyteries of their bounds, by whatsoever gift, presentation, or
provision they may be thereto provided.”
Such is the Act of Union, aud when any attempt is made to set aside
University tests, the upholders of “vested rights” point to that
international document with a solemnity of gesture evidently
intended to imply that its simple existence decides the whole
question. Now, however it may be accounted heresy by some, we have
no hesitation in avowing our belief in the opinion of Lord Chief
Justice Campbell, that the Imperial Parliament can and may set aside
every clause of the boasted Act of Union, and of the Act of Security
to boot. We shall not enter into any legal discussion on the point,
but premising that what Parliament has done before Parliament may do
again, we shall refer to a few instances in which after-legislation
has set aside this vaunted Act as so much waste-paper.
Section IV. of the Union statute gives “all subjects full freedom
and intercourse of trade and navigation to and from any port or
place within the United Kingdom and the colonies, while, only the
other day, the Court of Session decided that no passenger-boat can
ply between Newhaven and Kirkauldy without permission from the
magistrates of the latter port.
Section VII. provides “that all parts of the United Kingdom be for
ever, from and after the Union, liable to the same excises upon
excisable liquors;” but we should not recommend any Scotchman to .
rely so far on this clause as to take a gallon of his native whiskey
across the border; or,, if he does, he need not show the Act of
Union either to exciseman or justice of the peace, unless he wishes
to be consigned to a lunatic-asylum.
Sections XI. and XIII. aver that the window and malt duties were
respectively to ce&6e in England on 1st August and 24th June, 1707,
and that Scotland was not to be charged with either. Need anything
be said on these points?
Section XVI. declares that “a mint shall be continued in Scotland
under the same rules as the mint in England.” Will any one tell us
where the Scotch mint is? Antiquarians, desirous of knowing where
the mint was, will find it in a blacksmith’s shop at the bottom of
Sonth Gray’s Close, Edinburgh.
Section XX. enacts that u all heritable offices, superiorities,
heritable jurisdictions, offices for life, and jurisdictions for
life be reserved to the owners thereof as rights of property,”
(fee.; but we know that, after 1745, “heritable jurisdictions,” and
with justice too, were swept away like cobwebs.
Section XXI. reserves the rights and privileges of royal burghs, but
the Reform Bill cut them up root and branch.
Lastly, the Act of Security stipulated for the integrity of the
Presbyterian Church as it stood in 1707, but in 1712 lay patronage
was restored.
Let those considerations receive the weight to which they are
undoubtedly entitled, and our Conservative friends will see that the
Acts of Union and Security, so far from being towers of strength,
are in reality little better than broken reeds. The subject may
afford them scope for Jeremiads on national perfidy, but in those
pages we abjure the region of sentiment, and content ourselves with
the enunciation of bare facts. The Church, however, may turn round
and say, that, although others may have given up their rights, they
are not disposed to forego theirs; if but one plank of the Union
remain they will swim upon it; and that, although lairds may have
given up their right to hang their tenants, and decayed burghs have
ceased the manufacture of Members of Parliament, they will cling as
with the grasp of the last enemy to their hold on college and
school.
To this view of the matter two or three words may be said in reply.
The prospect of a privilege being defended in time to come depends
very much how such privilege may have been defended in times that
are past With the sweeping plenary powers that the clause above
quoted gave the Church, she ought to have laid all her enemies
prostrate at her feet; but, instead of holding the reins with a firm
hand, she has allowed Dissent to become rampant* and now implores
public aid to decimate such portions of its adherents as are more
peculiarly obnoxious to her prejudices. With power over every
college and school, professor, teacher, and even janitor, why did
she not make one and all of them subscribe the Confession, and make
hebdomadal compearance within the precincts of the parish church?
Why was not old John Brown of Haddington transfixed when he began to
teach secessive students? Why was the predecessor of the Right
Reverend James Kyle, Bishop of Germanicia, allowed to open the Roman
Catholic college of St. Mary's at Blairs? The presentation of the
Confession would have made the first professors in that
establishment decamp as rapidly as rats are said to flee at the
sound of the bagpipe. Why, too, have the Elizaethan turrets of the
Free Church College been allowed to rise from the earthen mound of
Edinburgh? or the towers of the Episcopal Trinity College been
permitted to fling their shadows over the solitudes of Glenalmond? A
vigorous discharge of artillery might have sent Principal Cunningham
over to America and W7arden Wordsworth back to the cloisters of his
native England. Why not also claim jurisdiction over secular
seminaries ? Why, for instance, allow Professor Dick of the
Veterinary College to fulminate against the Church so loudly, when,
by a skilful application of the Act of Union, he could be brought
within the range of the fire of the Edinburgh Presbytery, so as to
prohibit and discharge him from giving his students a single
prelection on the horse, normal or abnormal—ay, and until he
subscribed the tests in the presence of the judicatory now named ?
Alas! the truth must be told. With the exception of the Universities
and the parish schools, the Church has allowed all other places of
learning to slip through her fingers. There have, indeed, been
mutterings about certain High-churchmen in Elgin and Cnmpbelton
having blown the dust from the Act of Union and sought to claim
power over the burgh schools in virtue of its enactments, but,
somehow, the zeal of provincials is always quenched by the cautious
metropolitan leaden of the General Assembly, and nothing has been
heard of these meditated feats of discipline for some time past
Universities and parim schools, then, are the only institutions
where the staff of the presbyters has been wielded. And even with
them truth again compels us to state that the “statutory duty ” of
the Church has been performed with singular laxity.
In the case of parish schools, of which we shall probably have more
to say afterwards, the tests have been rigidly enforced; but as
regards Universities, they have been exacted with great
irregularity. St Andrews and Aberdeen (which, like England, has two
Universities) have kept a sharp eye on professorial presentees; but
Glasgow and Edinburgh, and particularly the latter, have been remiss
in the extreme. The Act of Union was obviously pointed at Jacobites;
but what could the descendants of the Covenanters have been about
when they allowed Professor Aytoun to enter the portals of the
University singing the “ Lays of the Cavaliers," whilst more than
half-a-dozen prelatkt professors were there before him (one of them
in English order) ready prepared, in all likelihood, to swell the
chorus of—
Hey for the boots and
the thumbikins!
Bat and the gallows tree,
And bang the Whigamore loons
Where Whigamore loons should be!
Where slumbered the
tests when fine old Christopher North marched with stalwart step sod
eagle eye to the*chair of moral philosophy in 1820? Echo answers,
Where? Men thought that they had slept the sleep of death; but men
who thought so were as men who dreamed, for, in 1848, a Mr. MacDoull
was presented to the chair of Hebrew, and forthwith the Church came
forth to battle, and ordered Mr. MacDoull to subscribe. Mr. MacDoull
could have subscribed the Confession of Faith, but, being tainted
with the Free Church schism, he could not conform to the workup of
the Established Church, and so lost the appointment; the sacrifice
being so far made up to him by the Crown afterwards conferring on
him a chair in one of the “godlees colleges" in Ireland, which
establishments are so unhappily constituted that sin- | cerity in
religious belief does not form a bar to admission. The apology
tendered by the Church for this act of intolerance was, that the
Hebrew tongue being the original language of the Bible, the Hebrew
chair was theological; on the same reasoning, Greek having been the
language of the New Testament, Greek should be reckoned a branch of
theology.
But what shall we say about St Andrews and Aberdeen, who have been
found faithful amongst the faithless? Of them we shall only say that
they resemble shepherds who would put on dogs collars of such
circumference that the animals could doff and don them at pleasure;
and yet, seeing this, the shepherds would wink at the mal-practices,
provided the collars proved irksome enough to certain offensive
members of the species. Let us look at the St. Andrews and Aberdeen
lists. They comprise the names of gentlemen holding Oxford and
Cambridge honours, who must have subscribed Anglican creeds before
coming forward to subscribe Caledonian tenets (presuming all the
time that they did so, of which in one recent case there can be no
doubt); and therefore of what earthly use are the Scotch tests? They
are as expansive as rubber where Episcopalians are concerned, the
identical due whose exclusion was aimed at in their creation; while
they contract like the mailed glove of Coeur de Lion when a Free
Churchman or United Presbyterian comes forward, and yet both these
sectaries are Presbyterian to the backbone.
The ire against the two kinds of Nonconformists referred to is
founded on an apprehension that they look on the Scotch
establishment with an evil eye, and that they do not regard it with
placid composure is at once conceded; bat then what form of Dissent
is at bottom friendly to the sect that happens to be established?
There are degrees in Dissent just as there are degrees in
everything; but the simple fact of separation from the State Church,
by whatever party, implies hostility, passive, it may be, for a
time, but still nascent. Presbytery holds temporalities possessed in
the first instance by Roman Catholics, in the second by the
Episcopalians, in the third partly by Free-church-men; and which,
fourthly, according to the view of a large section of religionists,
ought never to have been held by any community under the emu It may
suit the Church to regard prelatical Dissenters as more aristocratic
and less noisy than Presbyterian separatists, but the hostility of
the one party is not a whit less dangerous that it is more
insidious. The Scotch Puseyitee are rapidly carrying off the higher
classes from the Scotch establishment; as a real branch of the
Church of Christ they ignore it altogether; and had they power
equivalent to their will, the whole organisation, stock, lock, and
barrel, would be annexed to the Anglican Church. Upon no other
theory can we account for the pertinacious assumption of dw title “
Church in Scotland,” which has of late been so extensively used.
Poverty is said to make people acquainted with strange associates;
and truly when Scotch Presbytery directs its best smiles on the
northern followers of the Bishop of Exeter, the signs of the tune
may indeed be reckoned eminous. We tell the Church in all candour,
she has little need to be eclectic in her treatment of her enemies.
Much has been said in and out of Parliament ebout the religious
character of the Scotch Universities, but on this point we may
safely leave our readers in the hands of the Royal Commissioners who
visited the colleges in 1830, And as they embraced amongst their
number several sound Churchmen and Conservatives, their deliverance
will be less liable to challenge on the score of laxity. In their
report the Commissioners state: “There are few national institutions
of long standing which have been more powerfully modified by the
circumstances of the country than the Universities in Scotland; and
they have undoubtedly been gradually adapted, in an eminent degree,
to die particular demands upon them, arising from the circumstances
of the people for whose benefit they were designed. These
Universities are not now of an ecclesiastical character, or, in the
ordinary acceptation of die term, ecclesiastical bodies. They are
connected, it is true, with the Established Church of Scotland, the
standards of which the professors meet acknowledge. Like of cherse
minaries of education, they may he subject to the inspection of the
Church on account of any religious opinions which may be taught in
them. The professors of divinity, whose instructions are intended
for the members of the Established Church, are, in their character
of professors, members of the Presbytery of the bounds, and each
University returns a representative to the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotland; but in other respects, the Universities of
Scotland are not ecclesiastical institutions, not being more
connected with the Church than with any other profession. They are
intended for the general education of the country; and, in truth,
possess scarcely any ecclesiastical feature, except that they have a
certain number of professors for the purpose of teaching theology,
in the same manner as other sciences are taught . . . Neither
constitutions, endowments, nor provisions, for public instruction,
are founded on the principle that the Universities are appendages of
the Church."
In corroboration of these views we shall glance at the subjects
taught in the Scotch Universities; These are divided into four
faculties—arte, medicine, law, and divinity; and the number of
chairs for each may be represented tubularly as under:
Arte and medicine, it
will thus be seen, predominate much more than theology; and the mere
fact that the licentiates of the Church are taught in the
Universities no more makes them ecclesiastical institutions, than
the equally pregnant fact that surgeons and physicians being
educated there makes them medical institutions; or than that
advocates and writers being nurtured there transmutes them into
legal incorporations. Nothing can be more dissimilar in character
and working than the English and Scotch Universities. No students
reside within the walls of the latter, no teste are required of
pupils at entrance, and Jew or Gentile may equally came off academic
honours; and all that is wanted to complete their emancipation is,
that the same freedom that breathes in the benches should be allowed
to circulate amongst the chairs.
Most true it is that the Church has struggled hard to impress an
ecclesiastical character on the Universities, but she has signally
failed in the attempt. Not content with having her own system of
theology taught in these institutions, she has laid an embargo on
the office of principal, and held to it so firmly that only one
layman (Sir David Brewster) has yet been able to obtain the
appointment ; while in days gone by there was scarcely a chair
vacant for which clergymen did not apply, and often obtained over
and above their enres of souls. Larin, history, logic, astronomy,
chemistry, rhetoric, botany, (fee, have at one time or other been
held by reverend pluralist. In one notable instance the incumbent of
Moffatt, a parish some forty miles distant from Edinburgh, held the
chair of botany, teaching the knowledge of plants during the winter
session, and inculcating the lessons of the Gospel during the other
moiety of the year. Nonresidence having always been deemed more or
less offensive in Scotland, the parents of the unbaptised and the
expectants of matrimony complained of this irregularity; and, to
prevent a rising storm, the reverend gentleman accepted a charge
within six miles of the city, and was then allowed to continue his
studies in phyto-botany in peace. A clerical opponent was also the
procuring cause of the great excitement which took place at the
induction of the late Sir John Leslie to the chair of natural
philosophy in the University of Edinburgh; but the signal success of
the layman, in this instance, produced such a revulsion in public
opinion that scarcely a case of clerical pluralism has been
permitted since. Indeed, the Low Church party, headed by Dr.
Chalmers, co-operated with the liberal portion of the community out
of doors, and imposed ecclesiastical penalties on such clergymen as
should venture to hold a college along with a Church living.
The progress of a student from the benches to a chair will still
farther illustrate the non-ecclesiastical character of the Scotch
Universities. Let us suppose our neophyte to be a Unitarian, and
that he selects as his alma mater the metropolitan school of
learning. He enters the secretary’s office, and demands and pays for
a matriculation-ticket; he then waits on the professor whose
instruction he is to receive, and, in a similar manner, asks,
receives, and pays for a class-ticket; and in due season presents
himself amongst the other students without preliminary examination
as to attainments, or one word being said about his anti-Trinitarian
tenets, which, if he says nothing about them, will remain unknown,
or, if known, will pass unchallenged throughout the session. If our
alumnus has been a student of medicine, and distinguished himself in
the department of anatomy, and the chair of that science should
become vacant some years after he has finished his studies, he may
reasonably aspire to its possession. If a Crown appointment, he
besieges Members of Parliament; if a civic, he bombards the town
council; and, after a determined struggle, He receives his
presentation. Armed with this document, and backed by the college
baillie, he attends the first meeting of the Senatus Academicus,
and, his credentials being laid on the table, he is admitted in due
form. The Church knows all the time that he is a candidate, it knows
that he has received the appointment, it knows that he has been
inducted, and yet does not so much as lift a little finger during
the whole process. Once settled in his chair, what amount of
religion does the new professor hear of? At. the opening of each
session the principal delivers an address (generally literary),
which is preceded by a prayer, Latin or English, as the taste of the
very reverend functionary may determine ; and positively this is all
the religion that a student or professor may or does come in contact
with in the metropolitan institute. But- how would it fare with a
party such as has how been described, had his lot been cast in the
more northern seminaries, where subscription is demanded at the
point of the bayonet? If our candidate were a second Joseph
Priestley, and held his principles firmly and intelligently, it
would fare ill with him; but if he is a man of the world, he
stumbles into the meeting of the Presbytery as if by accident, lifts
a pen mechanically, and, as if in a fit of absence,, subscribes his
name. The poor man is signing so many papers at this particular
crisis in his history that really it is no wonder if he is
afterwards somewhat oblivious as to the fact whether he signed this
given paper or not. He has ugly reminiscences of grave-looking
gentlemen in black who offered to tender certain explanations, which
he declined; he signed as a matter of form, and thought no more
about it His brother professors have done the same thing, and the
ink lies light on their consciences, and why should its gall
penetrate his ? He troubles himself no more about the matter, and
neither does the Church. “A piece of humbug,” says the professor
elect; “but I am not going to lose a chair that I have fought so
hard for.” “It is our statutory duty,” says the Church, “and we have
done it” True, good mother; but when the new professor adheres not
to your religion, but to another, or, mayhap, to no religion at all,
what steps do you take to follow up your “statutory duty?” We pause
for a reply.
There is a homely proverb, that carpet-bags keep out cats and honest
men; and the Scotch University tests seem to partake much of the
same character; not that we mean to insinuate that those who sign
are dishonest. We blame the country for allowing such a law to
remain in the* statute-book; we account it a crying offence that the
State should place such a stumbling-block in the way, and that the
Church should have the power of making the tests the only avenue of
admission to the Universities. When such legislation is tolerated,
men will shelter themselves-under conventionalities, and should not
be blamed. But, on the other hand, whilst not condemning* those who
sign, we desire to have every sympathy with those who cannot
conscientiously do bo. We believe that Faraday is either a
Swedenborgian or a Moravian; and we should reckon it a national loss
if, through the operation of this wretched law, he should be
precluded from accepting a professorship of chemistry in Scotland.
That eminent men are lost to Scottish education through this cause
there can he no question; but, apart from this, is it nothing to
save men from die appearance of disengenuousness, and mental
reservations, and the whole catalogue of ills that follow hard on
all operations where hand and heart do not move, simultaneously?
These tests are exacted partially, or, where exacted wholly, they
are inoperative; of what use, then, are they? Why should they longer
cumber the ground ? They should be swept away. The Church may and
should look after her teachers of theology (amongst which we are
agreeable that the rabbis of Hebrew should be included), but she
should leave arts, law and medicine to look after themselves; they
are old enough to do this, and can walk: erect without
ecclesiastical leading-strings. Public opinion is waxing strong on
this question. County meetings may induce Conservative members to |
make soporific speeches in Parliament about the "revolutionary
tendency of removing time-honoured land-marks,” and, amidst the
supineness that marks the discussion of Scotch questions in the
Legislature, the ruse may for a time succeed; but the strong voice
of public opinion will ultimately prevail. Almost every burgh in
Scotland has petitioned against the tests, and the majority of the
Universities have done the same. And whilst -there is strength
without there is weakness within. These Church gates set up at the
entrance to the Universities are waxing old and feeble; the timber
is decayed, the hinges are worn to spindles, the locks and
stanch-irons are rusty, and the bolts and bars are starting from
their sockets.
Let the Church be wise in time, and anticipate a crisis which,
sooner or later, is inevitable. The ‘Conduct of the Romanist
prelates in the matter of the Irish Colleges has done more to retard
the progress of Catholicism in this country than anything which has
happened since the Revolution. Thousands who would have turned a
deaf ear to the clamours about the Papal aggression have chimed in
with the agitations regarding that movement, simply because the
position which the Pope and his bishops have assumed in reference to
that question has created an impression that Popery is essentially
intolerant and bigoted. And is intolerance changed because it
assumes the title of Protestant? The genius of the Scotch tests is,
that no man can teach literature, science, law, medicine, or
divinity, unless he is not merely a Presbyterian, but a Presbyterian
as by law established. This is die spirit and letter of the statute;
why has it not been carried out?—or, if partially carried1 out, why
not enforced? When a law is not carried i into execution, it must be
owing to want of will or want of power. Either horn of the dilemma
warrants the demand for abrogation. Those who do not exact the tests
should not seek the continuance of a law which, by their own
practice, is in abeyance; those who exact knowing that what they
exact is a mockery, a delusion, a pretence, and yet, knowing this,
take no ulterior steps to vindicate their authority, are equally
unwarranted in insisting on the perpetuation of a system which has
the form but not the power of insuring conformity.
On thi3 subject we are entitled to demand the sympathy of England.
Oxford and Cambridge are defended by trenches and bastions which no
Presbyterian has or can, as presently constituted, surmount. Adam
Smith never could have been an English professor of political
economy, Robertson an English professor of history, Reid an English
professor of metaphysics, Black an English professor of chemistry,
or Brewster an English professor of natural philosophy. Our fences,
on the contrary, have been trodden down, and natives of the sister
kingdom freely admitted. No verbal construction of tests can be the
cause of this, for the Scotch formula is as stringent as may be.
“I promise," says the entrant, “that I shall follow no divisive
course from the present establishment in this Church, renouncing all
doctrines, tenets, and opinions whatsoever, contrary to, or
inconsistent with, the said doctrine, worship, discipline, or
government, of this Church.” The bulwark is bristled over with
spikes, but the defenders of the citadel have been remiss in their
duties, and the battlements have been scaled times without number.
The Church, then, should be generous, and not seek from the Kirk
what she will not give in return. England should disdain to
appropriate the stinted pasturage of the north so long as she keeps
her own rich meadows to herself. |