§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYmoved that the Lords following should be named of the Committee on the University Tests Bill, namely—Abp. York, Ld. President, D. Somerset, D. Marlborough, M. Salisbury, E. Cowper, E. Stanhope, E. Carnarvon, E. Powis, E. Harrowby, E. Morley, E. Beauchamp, Bp. Gloucester and Bristol, L. Colchester, L. Stanley of Alderley, L. Lyveden, L. Houghton.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI must draw attention to the awkward position in which the House is placed in regard to this very important question. The other day, after the debate on the Order for the Second Reading, the Bill was not rejected, but a Select Committee was ap- 628 pointed, at the instigation of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury), to consider its provisions. The debate itself was of a rather extraordinary character. My noble Friend the Lord President of the Council moved the second reading on the part of the Government in a speech of great ability. That was answered by the speech of the noble Marquess, which also displayed great ability; but which was not so much directed to the value of a Committee of Inquiry as against the Bill, and, indeed, against any measure of the sort. After that the debate was carried on almost, if not quite, exclusively by the Episcopal Bench. Different opinions were expressed by occupants of that Bench; but the Archbishop of York and another right rev. Prelate made two remarkable speeches in favour of the Bill; but not one of the majority answered those two speeches. After a brief reply from my noble Friend, the House went to a Division. A week has now elapsed, and I shall be obliged to the noble Marquess if he will inform the House what course he intends to pursue with regard to his Committee. The Bill is still on your Lordships' Minutes, waiting for a second reading. I think it is a most undesirable way of destroying a measure to refer it to a Select Committee, while it is not intended practically to deal with it. If this House desires to destroy a Bill which is regarded with favour by the country generally, it ought thoroughly to discuss it and to adduce reasons and arguments which have not yet been received into the minds of the public. Late in the Session as it is, I do not know whether the noble Marquess means to work the Committee in such a manner that there may be a chance of taking up the Bill again this year, and it certainly is very important that your Lordships should know what is intended to be done. I am told this evening that there were Peers who voted for the Committee not so much from a desire to upset the Bill, as because they thought there was no reasonable objection to inquire into the practicability of introducing modifications into it. I wish, therefore, to learn from the noble Marquess what his intentions are with regard to this Committee.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYThe first point referred to by the noble Earl (Earl Granville) is the character of the 629 debate on the Order for Second Reading. His complaint is that the debate was not sufficiently general, and that more noble Lords on this side of the House did not speak. The answer to that is a very prosaic and a very simple one—it is that the dinner-hour was approaching; and when the time arrives the Members of both Houses of Parliament give way to the not unnatural desire to partake some refreshment, and as they leave the House for that purpose, it is sometimes difficult to keep up the debate. With respect to the forms of the House I understand that a Motion such as I moved on the second reading of the Bill is, according to precedents, a mode of deciding that the House will not proceed with the Bill for the present, but will adopt another course. Last year, for instance, Lord Grey brought in a Bill on the subject of the Scotch Peerage, and it was met in the same way. We on this side of the House were not prepared to say that the principle of the measure was absolutely objectionable, but we were not prepared to adopt its principle without inquiry, and the consequence was that a Committee was appointed as an Amendment to the Motion for the second reading, and the Bill disposed of for that year.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI am nearly sure that it sat. At all events, I remember a still stronger case in the House of Commons, where the Motion for the second reading of the Conspiracy Bill was met by a Resolution, and not by a direct Motion that the Bill should be read a second time that day six months. The noble Earl (Earl Granville) wishes to know what course it is proposed that the Committee should adopt. What I should prefer, if the forms of Parliament would permit, is that the inquiry should take place, and that the Bill should not die, but that, as soon as they have obtained all the information they require, the Bill should be taken up at the point at which it was dropped. The rules of Parliament, however, require that all Bills which are not completed at the time of Prorogation shall die at that period, and as that is near I do not think it probable that the University Tests Bill will be proceeded with this year. However desirous your Lordships may be to suggest another course, 630 it is in my opinion impossible to do anything decisive in the matter until we have on record the information which we deem it necessary to have. I am extremely sorry that I failed to convince the noble Earl by the arguments I used in reference to this question. I can only say that, as far as my poor powers went, I did my best to do so. As far as I am able to remember, my arguments were directed, or they were intended to be directed not against the principle of the Bill, but to the necessity for moving cautiously. What I attempted to show was that the very constitution of the Colleges was such that, unless you provide a guarantee for the orthodoxy of those who are taught, it is difficult to go on trusting for the selection of the teachers to precisely the same conditions as are in force now; and I maintained it was necessary to examine into the conditions under which the Tutors and Professors in the University were selected, if we intended to make so vital a change as this. On these grounds I proposed an inquiry into the whole subject, with a view of ascertaining whether, upon the evidence before them, the Committee would be justified in recommending legislation in this direction; and, if so, there can be no doubt that your Lordships would be enabled to legislate more satisfactorily than you could do at present. Such a course, I submit, is a much wiser one than if we were to act in the precipitate manner proposed by the noble Earl. I propose, therefore, to prosecute the inquiry with as much speed as possible, and when the evidence has been gathered and the Committee is able to report, I have no doubt we shall be able to make recommendations which will carry out the object in view in a manner far more satisfactory than that provided in the Bill.
§ EARL GRANVILLEAs I understand the noble Marquess, it was the intention of his Motion to destroy this Bill for the present year; and the real object of the Committee is to see whether tests cannot be applied to teaching members of the Universities, although both Universities are at present entirety free from any such restriction.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI had no intention of the kind. I never said anything about applying tests to teachers. I spoke of the mode in which their religious character might be in- 631 sured. There are several points in College arrangements dependent upon this system of tests, and when you remove the system of tests altogether, it will be necessary to inquire whether their place should be supplied, and if so, how?
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he had five, and a noble Friend of his had others. He had received many letters on the subject, showing that great anxiety existed in the country touching the Bill.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNasked, whether in case the Committee had not finished its labours at the close of this Session, it was the intention of the noble Marquess to move its re-appointment next year? He remembered the case of a Scotch Bill which had been referred to a Select Committee, which came to an untimely end through the absence of the Chairman, who went off to Scotland, leaving his Committee in doubt when he would return, or whether he would return at all; and he feared this Bill would be wrecked by a similar catastrophe.
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDsaid, he differed with the noble Earl (the Earl of Camperdown) as to the facts of the case referred to, the Bill in question having been lost from other circumstances than those stated by him. In reference to the University Tests Bill, what his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury) said was to this effect—So far from desiring to put an end to the measure, his noble Friend expressed a wish that the forms of the House would allow both the Bill and the inquiry of the Committee to be proceeded with. And in the event of the Committee reporting in favour of such legislation, that the Bill should be taken up next Session exactly at the same stage at which it was left in this. The object of his noble Friend was simply to acquire information to justify the necessity for legislation on this important and difficult subject. The statement of his noble Friend, that he wished the Bill to be amended in a manner which he pointed out, should be a sufficient indication that he did not wish to destroy the Bill altogether. He (the Duke of Richmond) certainly did not vote with the noble Marquess with that intent, though he was bound to admit that their success postponed the Bill for 632 this Session; his object was to insure that deliberate action which common prudence demanded.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY, as a Member of the Scotch Committee referred to, stated that in that case the Committee met, went into certain matters which had nothing to do with the Bill, and on the next day of meeting the Members assembled on a fool's errand, to find the Duke of Buccleuch, who had moved for the Committee, had gone to Scotland, and there was no reason to believe he intended to return.
§ Motion agreed to; Committee nominated accordingly.
§ House adjourned at a quarter before Nine o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.