§ Sir G. Sinclairwished to repeat a question he had put the other night to the hon. the Under Secretary of State, which he thought might have been answered, though he had not given any notice. He begged leave to ask whether her Majesty's Ministers did or did not appoint Mr. Candlish, of Edinburgh, to be Professor of Biblical Criticism for the University of Edinburgh, and whether that appointment had since been cancelled, and if so, on what grounds.
§ Mr. Fox Maulesaid, if he had had to complain the other evening that the hon. Gentleman had asked him a question without any notice, he thought that that hon. Gentleman had been more uncourteous now, for the hon. Gentleman had asked him a question on Wednesday night totally and entirely distinct from the question he had asked to-night, and of which the hon. Member had not given any notice. If the House would permit him, he would simply state the facts of this case to the House, and the position in which it at present rested. The noble Lord the Secretary of State, and her Majesty's Government, had been most anxious, on the occurrence of vacancies in the deanery of the Chapel Royal, to make those va- 973 cancies efficient for the purposes of education in Scotland, instead of continuing them as formerly under the name of prizes in the church, and giving them to the distinguished members in the church. The first vacancy was given to Dr. Lee, the principal of the University of Edinburgh, which was an endowment to that Chair, which met of course with general approbation. On the next vacancy occurring, his noble Friend the Secretary of State, had consulted how it was best to bestow it, in a similar manner; and having referred to the report of the commissioners appointed by the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir. R. Peel) to inquire into the state of the universities in Scotland, he found there that these commissioners had unanimously recommended that there should be established in the University of Edinburgh a professorship of biblical criticism. In order to endow that chair his noble Friend had considered this a fair opportnity, and selected Mr. Candlish for that appointment, who, whatever remarks might otherwise be made on him, on all hands must be acknowledged to be the best fitted by talents and theological learning in that particular branch for the discharge of the duties of such a chair. Before the appointment took place, and before any communication had been made on the authority of her Majesty's Government to Mr. Candlish, that the appointment was to take place, Mr. Candlish had, in the face of an interdict, performed certain duties in one of those seven parishes of Scotland to which attention had been so painfully directed. It was quite true, that the interdict was of more than twelve months' standing, and that it was not directed against Mr. Candlish himself, but against the general body of the Assembly, and that it had been broken by several eminent ministers. The parties who had obtained that interdict had obtained it ex parte, and in the absence of those against whom it was directed, and had not had the manliness to apply to the Court of Session to bring the matter to an issue. Under these circumstances, it would scarcely be expected, that his noble Friend should proceed in Mr. Candlish's appointment as the Regius Professor of the University; and until the further proceedings in this case should be known, it could not be expected that his noble Friend would make any declaration what- 974 ever as to his further intentions. It was sufficient to say, that all further proceedings in this matter were at present put a stop to.