The Sun. — London, England, 1858-04-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMNIONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER PRI too VATEk the chair B USINESS. at twelve o'clock. The Barnstaple Water Works bid was read a third time and passed. PETITIONS. A large number of petitions were presented praying for the abolition of church rates by Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Edward Ball, Mr.Liddell, Nir.Doe.les, Mr. Ayrton, Mr. Briscoe, Mr. Phillips, and others. Several petitions were also presented against the abolition of church rates. _ OITDE. General P. THOMPSON said he had a petition to present from the Dewsbury Debating Club, praying for the restoration of Oude. Mr. WALPOLE doubted if a petition could be re ceived from a debating club in its collective capacity. General P. THOMPSON said the petition was signed by many individuals. Mr. WALPOLE suggested the amendment of the petition, so as to make it as coming " from the under signed members of the Dewsbury Debating Club." General P. THOMPSON said the petition should be so amended. An Hon. Member said that petitions from Chambers of Commerce had been frequently received signed only by the Chairman of such bodies. CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA. Mr. HUNT presented a petition from a place in Huntingdonshire, praying that Christianity may be made he basis of the future Government of India. INCOME TAX. Sir J. V. SHELLEY presented petitions from tli inhabitants of the Metropolis, praying for such an adjust ment of the income-tax as shall make a distinction be tween fluctuating and precarious incomes, and incomes derived from realised property. CHURCH RATES ABOLITION BILL. On the motion for going into committee, Mr. PACKE moved an amendment that the bill be committed this day six months. No one respected con scientious objections, in matters c f religion, more than he did, but he apprehended that in this case the objec tion to pay ehurch rates resulted from a le.zs elevated feeling than that of conscientious scruples. He cited the evidence of a number of witnesses examined before the Church Rate Committee, to show that the principal objections hitherto advanced against church rates did not arise from conscientious feelings. He denied that there wai any general desire for the abolition of church rates, and he cited in support; of his assertion the rejec tion of the champion of the cause (Sir W. Clay) by the Tower Hamlets ; and Mr. Mialt, a great writer as well as speaker on the subject, by Rochdale. Mr. K. SEYMER seconded the amendment. Mr. HUGGESSON cordially supported going into committee on this bill. He considered the amendment came with a bad grace from the ministerial side of the house, becanie, if the present government had not been in power the future charge of the bill would have been handed over to the noble lord (Lord Stanley) secretary for the colonies. There was a great and growing feeling in the country against church rates, though the returns might not show it. Thousands who ob jected on principle to church rates paid them on account of the smallness of the sums generally levied. Church rates were undoubtedly wrong in principle. They were a grievance to the dissenter, and so far from this objection to them being made a breeches pocket question, they were contested on principle. (Hear, hear.) He contended that church rates were an occupiers tax, and that they ought not to be en forced on dissenting occupiers, and he denied that the abolition of the church rate would benefit the landed interest. As a zealous churchman, he felt humiliated when he heard it said by churchmen that if the rate was abolished the fabric of the church, in many instances, would be allowed to fall into decay. (Hear, hear.) Where parishes were too poor to pay a rate, he thon e ;ht the fabric of the church should be repaired out of the funds in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Com missioners. To take the money out of the pockets of dissenters was a disgrace to the church. (Hear, hear.) Dissenters were worthy of their consideration, for we owed much of our liberties to them. The church ought to be freed from this tax, and rest on the affections of the people for her support. Mr. PUGS (Carmarthenshire) supported the motion or going into committee. It was high time for the peace of the country this question should be settled. The sacred cause of Christianity also required that the question should be set at rest for ever. England was the only country in which these scandals could arise about repairing the fabric of the Church. Mr. S. SEYMER was anxious to give relief to dissenters to church rates, but not in the manner proposed. He thought the house ought to be very careful how they admitted the principle that no ma❑ should contribute towards anything front which he dis sented. (Hear, hear.) He wished to relieve Dissenters from the tax, but in return they must abstain from ♦oting for churchwardens, and other matters relating to the Church. Such a compromise was proposed on a former occasion by Mr. R. Phillimore, but rejected on the ground, as he believed, that the abolition of the Church-rates, as now proposed, would be the first instal meat towards separation between Church and State. The opponents of such a change were ready to meet that question openly in that house and defeat them. (Hear, heart) lie objected to its being attempted by a side wind like the present. Sir. G. GREY objected to the continuance of the de bate. The principle was confirmed on a former occasion by a majority of 53 in a house of 400 members, and it was inconvenient to renew the debate on going into committee. Lord J. MANNERS could not join the right hon. gentleman in his implied censure upon those who thought that the principle of the bill ought to be rediscussed npoi this sage. On the contrary, he believed it abao. lutely essential that that principle should be further and more gravely considered by this house than it had been upon the occasion referred to. The debate on the second reading was not sustained for any considerable period ; and, looking at the momentous in . erests which were at stake, he was of opinion that further consideration ought to be bestowed upon the principle before they settled the detalls of this measure. Its supporters, as the house should remember, declared that it was susceptible of no improvement whatever. The simple proposal they made was for the total and immediate abolition of church rates, and they would be the first to repudiate altogether the grounds upon wik.h the right hoe. baronet (Sir G. Grey) had jest expressed his r a liness to vote for going into committee. Now, it would be generally admitted, with regard to this question, that whatever idea might be popularly associated with the abolition of church rates, they could only in justice and in equity be com plained of by the Dissenters. No one would contend that any Churchman had a moral right to complain of the continuance upon that property which he had either inherited or purchased of an obligation to maintain the fobric and support the services of the church. The ques tion was one which affected Dissenters alone. Now the people of this country were jealously sensitive on the subject of the rights of conscience, and you had nothing to do but to say that any particular institution aggrieved your conscience in order to secure for your statement a most attentive and favourable consideration. His objec tion, however, to this bill—and it was one which went to the root of the proposed legislation—was, that it re lieved the consciences and the pockets rot only of Di-- 'enters, but of rich and itiguential Churchmen. (Hear, hear.) For his part, ho bad al ways held that Dissenters should not be taxed for the support of other forms of religion. He had always been ready to meet the grievances of Dissenters in the most amicable spirit, and his complaint against this bill was that it totally set aside the possibility of entering into any such amicable settlement of the question. What were the grounds upon which it was brought forward ? In and out of doors, the great allege. ion in its favour was that it was necessary in order to set free the consciences of Dis senters. No such allegation, however, was contained in the preamble of the bill. The first ground there stated was, " Whereas church-rates have for some years ceased to be made or collected in many parishes by reason of the opposition thereto." Now, he should have thought that the refusal of church-rates in these instances would have put an end to ill-feeling and litigation, and that as their number increased, so the necessity for legislation would have diminished ; but because in 500 parishes church-rates by the will of the majority had ceased to be collected, was it therefore right to enforce their abolition upon the vast majority of parishes, counted by thousands, in which the inhabitants were willing to be taxed for the support of the fabric and the maintenance of the services of the church ? He could not understand how gentlemen who in this house stand up for the rights of the majoirty could answer such a question as this in the affirmative. Then the preamble set forth that "in many other parishes where church rates have been made the levying thereof has given rise to litigation and ill-feeling." The question which the house had to consider, however, was the amount of and litigation thus produced. In how many parishes, if any, bad it been engendered ? What was the acianterbalancing advantage which the poor obtained by the continuance of church-rates ? And what would be the effect of the abolition of that system? Now, he wa s osrtainly bound to admit that if the amount of ill will and litigation were trifling, it was not the fault of those who were engaged in the agitation of this question. There had been a most extensive organisation for the purpose of this agitation, and if the crop of and litigation bad been small, it was owing rather to the sterile nature of the soil than to any want of industry on the part of those who cultivated it. In spite of that agi tation, however, he did not believe that any consider able number of parishes which heretofore had granted church-rates had since refused them; and, indeed, the re sult of the best researches he had been able to make into this question was, that during 1857, while church-rates had been had pbreoposed and carried in no less than 70 parishes they been op posed and defeated in no more than 24 throughout and litigietigoirde. d But, whatever might he the ill willaccount to abrogaa t he sy st em ought they simply on that altogether, and without inquiry ? Could any one sap tha t . poor-rates, highway did not g ive rise to ill-will and litiga tion ? In 1856 he found that nolessthan 1.14,000/. was expended in litigation in consequence Luc system of poor-law management supported hOf yease Surely, therefore; it was necessary to penet;:e e at (Hear.) more into the surface before they abro ga t e d the systemlitt le of church-rates on the grounds submitted. He should next proceed to ask what were the results which fiswed from the maintenance of the system of church -rates.. It was impossible, he should contend, that any. nne could possess an acquaintan ce with the ' various rural parishes` th r oughout the country and no?feel that an immense amount of temporal as well as spiritual good was effected by means o f a ee l s_ which, without the necessity of posing the smallest charge upon the poorer classes in the community, provided for the support of the fabric of the THE SUN, LONDON THURSDAY E V ENING, - church and the due administration of the ceremonies of t rates, while those should escape with impunity whose religious worship. His chief objection to the bill under j only plea was that they had not paid the tax within a l , diseussiou, then, was that it proposed—without creating ! given time. (Hear.) The proposition is also open, it any substitute for it whatsoever—to abolish at once a appears to me, to objection in point of practice, inas system which secured to 10,000 parishes in England the much as it has sometimes happened that in districts in continuance of a state of things such as he had described, which church-rates have not been levied for a long period and which he f e lt assured every hen. member who had at I the inhabitants at length come forward perhaps under heart the spiritu a l welfare of the poor must be anxious i the leadership of a clergyman who is a Dissenter, or a to uphold. (Hea r .) The hon. member for Sandwich had member of the Established Church who has the interests observed that th e Church of England was essentially the of his parishioners at heart ; it is found that the church Church of the r ich man, but from that proposition ho is out of repair ; a rate is consequently proposed,—it (Lord J. Manners) begged entirely to dissent. Ho be- may be by the Dissenters,—in vestry, and is levied with lieved it was the Church of the poor man, and it was the gecera! assent of the whole body of the inhabitants. bee iuse he was of opinion that it had a jut claim to (Hear.) Surely, if you keep up a church-rate at all, you that character that he stood up in his place in the house ought not to prohibit the occurrence of such a proceed of Coemeons to raise his voice in favour of a system ing at that—(hear)—and lam glad therefore to find that under which the fair obligations of the realised property the right bor. barontt does not propose to adhere to the of the nation to contribute to the support or the fabric suggestion which he formerly made upon the subject. of its houses of religious worship wore maintained. The (Hear.) With respect to another proposal of my right argument drawn from the considerations which he bad hon. friend, which is to the effect that those who might just urged was one, he mig ht add, which was not a pp li- be exempted from the p a y ment of church-rates cable to the case of the poorer classes belonging to the upon the ground that they were not members of the communion of the Church of England alone, but one Established Church, should be deprived of the right of which might also be relied upon on the ground that it voting at the election of churchv ardens, I can only say was a fact perfectly notorious that members of th e Die- that I think it also is open to serious objection. I have seeding body avail d themselves in considerable numbers always felt very strongly that in acting upon such a of the services performed in places of religions wors hip principle as that you would be taking a course which connected with the Church of England, and that they would tend to eeparato altogether from the Church a would regard it as a great religious grievance if in con- great body of persons, who, although they may not be sequence of any legislative enactment they should be regular attendants at divine service, yet upon certain precluded from the enjoyment of that privilege. (Hear.) occasions, such, for instance, as when a marriage takes There was scarcely a country clergyman of the Este- place in their family, resort to the church. (Hear.) blished Church who was not practically aware that the Now, that any such result as that should be produced Dissenters in his parish looked up to him not only for would be in my opinion a great misfortune. (Hear.) E upp)rt and advice in temporal matters, but also for aid For my own part, I think if yen entail any disqualification in connection with their spiritual wants. (Hear ) He at all of this description, it ought to be one extending had had, indeed, a letter from a clergyman residing in not to the right of voting at the election of churchwar the country, in which he stated that he had upon various dens, but to the dispo-al of the money which may be occasions during a period of 21 years officiated at the raised by means of a church-rate. You might yore fairly burial of members of the Dissenting body in his parish, say to a man, "If you claim your exemption from this and he (Lord J. Manners) should wish to know how it rate you cannot come into vestry and vote upon pies was proposed, if church-rates were abolished, to continue tions relating to the mode in which the money obtained to Dissenters the enjoyment of those privileges. (Hear.) from it is to be expended." I could, however, consent The question raised by the bill was whether property to the imposition of no other disqualification than that should continue to be bound by those obligations with to which I have just adverted. (Hear, hear.) If we can respect to the support of the fabric of the Church which possibly come to any agreement with respect to the ' had been imposed upon it before the Conquest, or should amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire, that, be relieved from them by the adoption of a principle I think, would be the wisest course to adopt. lam told which would not only set free the consciences of Dis• that there has been a large majority of the House of centers, but eaee the pocket of the landlord. (Hear, Commune in favour of the proposal for the total obeli hear.)] He spoke of the landlord because he it was tion of church-rates. Teat is a statement which is un whe would undoubtedly receive the benefit of that re- doubtedly true, but at the same time I have heard many mission which it was the object of the bill to accom- men say, that while they were prepared to vote fort ha- relish. (Hear, hear.) He bad not come to that con- abolition, rather than maintain the Existing system, yet elusion without the aid of experience, and in support they were disposed to give a favourable consideration to of his opinion upon the point he might state any reasonable proposition by which a compromise of that a member of that house had assured the question could be effected. I therefore cannot quite him that if a proposition for the total abolition concur with those who think that the majority, in fa of church-rates should pass into a law he should feel hirevour of the total abolition of this tax, without any provi - self authorised to make arrangements for a corresponding sou being made to substitute some other means of increase in the rental paid by the tenants upon his pro- securing the maintenance of the fabric of the church in perty, and should put the amount than realised in his its place, is quite so concluove as some hon. members own pocket. (Hear, hear.) The result of such a propose _seem :seem to imagine. (H e ar.) Be that as it may, however, tion, in short, would he, either that the landlord, being I think we shall do well to take into our earnest consi a pions and conscientious Churchman, would undertake deration the amendment of the hon. member for Hert fordshire. (Hear, hear.) to provide for the maintenance of the fabric of the church , reimbursing himself for any outlay which he might snake Mr..NEWDEGA.TE said be should not oppose the in that respect by the imposition of an addii.ienal burden motion for going into committee upon the bill, but that upon his tenants, or, being a person who was lax and in assenting to it he mutt not be supposed to waive one careless in such matters, or a dissenter , would permit iota of the claim which, he contended, every poor man the necessary expenditure for the support of our places throughout the country possessed to the enjoyment of of religious worship to be thrown upon somebody else. the advantages of being present at the service of th e (Hear.) And who, he would ask, was that somebody else Church of England. (Hear, hear.) likely to be in nine-tenths of the parishes of England ? Mr. PACKE said, after the appeal which had been Why, in all probability, the very man who would be least made to him by the noble lord the member for the city of competent to bear the burden which would thue be thrown London, he begged to withdraw his amendment. neon him—namely, the clergyman of the parish. (Hear.) (Cries of no, no.) Under those circumstances, while reserving to himself Mr. BRIGHT said he thought those who were in the right to give an impartial consideration to any propo- favour of the passing of this bill had some ground for sition which might have the effect of relieving the c n• complaint against the hon. member for South Leicester sciences of dissenters from the grievance of which they shire (Mr. Packs) for the course he had just proposed to complained, while it made due provision for the main tenance of the fabric of the church—he should entreat take. He (gr. Bright) had listened—he would not say the house not to lend its sanction to a scheme the ope- to exactly the same arguments—but to much the same ration of which would be to free the property of the speeches from the hon. member's lips year after year country from obligations to which it had for centuries upon this question of church-rates as the one they had been liable, and which had been imposed upon it for the hoard that day. The hon. gentleman was not a young promotion of the spiritual welfare of the poor and the free and unfettered worship of Almighty God. (Cheers.) member ; he knew when he came down to the house he Lord H. VANE said he should not trespass upon the was going to object to this bill being proceeded with ; attention of the house by entering into a discussion of the he bad moved an amendment with that view, which the various topics upon which the noble lord Lad touched, house had discussed for the last three hours, but all that but he wished at the same time to state briefly the time would be wasted if he was now permitted to with opinions with respect to the important subject under conk ideration which he entertained. He was not prepared draw it. The truth was, it was found to be convenient to deny that the question was beset with difficulties, but to some members not to have their names recorded in a as the position in which it at present stood was extremely division on this subject—(a laugb)—and therefore it was unsatisfactory, he trusted the house would concur in that the hon. gentleman sought to avoid going into the framing a scheme by which it would be placed upon a lobby. But be (Mr. Bright) would advise the supper better footing. It was, he believed, a fact that under tern of the bill to go to a division on this question. the operation of the existing arrangements church rates, owing to various causes, were never levied in one-tenth (Cheers.) That, at least, was the course he himself was of the parishes of England, while in the case of one- prepared to take. With regard to the observations which seventh of the remaining nine-tenths the property of had fallen from the noble lord immediately below him Dissenters mainly contributed to the impost. Be that, (Lord J. Russell)—whom he was happy to see sitting however, as it might, there was no doubt that the Dia- in that very wholesome part of the house—(laughter)— senting body was taxed to a considerable extent for the he did not think the noble lord could have well consi meintenace of the fabric of the church, and he might dered the points which he had placed before the house. observe that he did not concur with the noble lord who He (Mr. Bright) did not know whether or not the had just spoken in the opinion that the effect of a change amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire could in the system under which that result had been brought be brought forward at all, because it proposed to lay a about would be to throw the burden of the church rate charge on property, which was very like imposing a new upon men who would be unwilling to provide for the tax, a thing that was more in the province of the proper support of our places of religions worship. The Chancellor of the Exchequer. ekt all events, if the (act was, he believed, that the Burns which were now bon• member did move such a resolution, those who paid by resident and absentee landlords, and other volun- were in favour of the bill would know how to meet tary contributors, for the repairs of our churches were it. (Cheers.) In fact, the noble lord, who was one very large, so that the noble lord need be under no ap- of those who were only half-way between the wrong prehension that the landlords would evade the duty and the right of this question—(a laugh)—seemed to which attached to them in that respect. He quite agreed forget that those who contended for the abolition of with those who thought that a certain portion of our churctaratesi understood their own !nee, and that they churches should always be open free to the poor ; but were likely to understand it a great deal better than the then he was of opinion that nobody should be allowed noble lord and those who acted with him. He (Mr. to have a pew without paying for it a certain sum, which Bright) and those who supported the bill before the might very fairly be applied to the maintenance of the house had studied this question all their lives. They fabric of the church. lie might add that he saw no had submitted much too long to the impediments which resson why facilities for creating endowments should had been thrown in the way of its settlement, and had I not also be afferded. (Hear, hear.) seen themselves constantly treated with injustice and The CHANCELLOR of !he EXCHEQUER—AI- humiliation, They had not taken up this question for though I entirely concur in the opinions which have been the purpose of getting up a debate on two or three Wed so clearly expressed by my noble friend near me (Lord nesdays in a session. They were determined to get rid J. Manners), I cannot resist the conviction that this of church rates—(cheers) ;—and if any one thought that question has now arrived at a stage at which it is desir- b e proposing to make the owners pay towards the repair able that we should fully discuss any practical measure of churches instead of the occupiers, or by calling on which may be submitted to us for the soiution of the them to make humiliating declarations of their religious difficulty which it involves. (Hear.) Having that ob- opinions, he would settle this question, he was very ject in view, I feel there would be some advantage in much mistaken. Why, some hon. members now ap astenting to the motion for going into committee, though P •iched the discussion of this question as they would I cannot, for my own part, give utterance to any very have done some 30 or 40 years ago. He was amazed at -anguine hope that the labours of the committee will the extraordinary want of observation shown by hon. have the effect of materially improving the proposition gentlemen when they fancied that any of those palliatives embodied in the bill under discussion, or of removing could do anything towards settling this eics:ion. There those objections which have been urged against it by was only one way of settling it. If those were a ma many hon. members upon both sides of the house. By jorhy who did not want to abolish chersh-rate, the ques going into committee, indeed, we may have the benefit tion would not be eettled ; but if, on the ether hand, of being afforded an opportunity of considering those they who supported the abolition were in the majority suggestio ns which were made upon a former occasion in an well in that house as throughout the country, of reference to the subject by the right hon. gentleman the which no man could doubt, let them have the settling of i member for Morpeth, one of which is especially worthy it. (Cheers.) With regard to what might be done in "an of notice—l mean the proposal which he submitted to other place," the noble lord the member for the City cf our consid erat i on l ast year to provide for the commute. L on d on we ll k new t h at the gent l emen w h o sa t i n t h a t ) tion of church-rates by effectin g certain alterations in "other place" did not always take as much notice of the laws of mortneain. (H ear .) There is, however, an the resolutions of the H o us e of Commons as the noble amendment which stands upon the er i'e the name o f lord would wish them to do. (A. laugh.) Those gentle the hon. memb er for Hertfordshire (Mr. ' Puller), wh which men in "another place" hied been the people in the appears to me to be well entitled to the attention of the drawing-room, h while they in the Commons bad been house, and which cannot, I believe, in ;accordance with the the forms of the house, be moved in committee. (Hear.) the peoplewaiui whicht he eleitchen (Laughter.) Thatl Boras about Now, with all respect for my hon. friend the member for the treatment the h ( a t i lr. Br . igh d it iu sh , o , u u "another er e ' teri' '' Leicestershire (Mr. Packs) I cannot help thinking that (Cheers.) He woul y d remin r d ec t e h l e ve noble lord the member paee it is of more importance that the house should have an for the City that there were many tmore than eersone zealous opportunity of discussing the amendment which I have about this question o ( f church rates there were just mentioned than that we should, by putting his about the Oaths Bill— laugh)—and although it might motion that the house resolve itself into a committee on happen that those in place"" a anotr gsi h reject this this bill this day six months, merely repeat a division bill once, twice, or thrice, it e we desiribl g e t tobear in w hich has been taken in a similar form upon previous wind that they would never have an opportunity of re occasions. (Hear.) I trust, therefore, that my hon. jectieg it unless it passed the House it f Commons, friend will withdraw his motion, in order that we may (Hear.) He was therefore anxious that it should pass be afforded an opportunity of taking into consideration the Commons. The house was not to suppose that it . the amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire, was Dissenters only who desired to see church-rates which, I repeat, is well worthy of our notice, and which, abolished. The hon. member for North Warwickshire I beg the house to observe, cannot be discussed except it talked about the "Dissenting interest." lie (Mr. Bright) be brought before us at this stage of our proceedings. was not one of the Dissenting interest. (A. laugh.) But t if be were a Churchman he would use much s t ronger l Lord J. RUSSELL—I quite agree with the right hon. anguage on this question than he had ever done. (H ear , hi gentleman opposite that it is desirable the hon. member an )lt was in the interest of public honesty, of public for South Leicestershire should withdraw his motion, morality, of public order, and of religion itself that be and that we should attempt at last to arrive at come asked the house to abolish this unjust and irritating settlement of this question. It is, I think, quite obvious system. (Cheers.) If he were a Churchman he should ei r r congregations,ef ( Che (Cheer,.) e nor ) be ashamed of hon. members who opposed this bill. from a consideration of the prospects which, according They They d no f evidently ith ien n r ot the f he a e i z t h eeal lo i no eloquence t et h nh e ce i to the reports I have seen in the public press, her Ma je:ty's Pri•ne Minister holds cut to us that this in ie arguments their pastors. bill will, if it should go up to the House of Lords, b e They believed their churches q would fall into ruin if this rejected by that assembly. Now, that is a result which hill were to pass. He had never said anything half so would be extremely unsatisfactory— (hear)—and I should severe of the members of the Established Church as that. wish, therefere, to see whether some plan or another (Cheers, and a laugh.) They had been brought up to might not be devised by means of which we would be think that this question was associated w ith th e ex i s • enabled to arr i ve at a settlement of this question, which tence of the Established Church, an d, th ere f ore, i t h a d would pr event the occurrence of the result to which I become a matter of sentiment rather than of argu be one Hertfordshire w hi oh s eems have alluded. The amendment of the /lon member for meat with them. He had no doubt if church-rates t e , e w m e s li t e o u m tit e le u d n t d o er ou th r osecircU ms t ances to were abolished to-morrow, all the parish churches in would be better to confine he will, perhaps, permit consideration ; but the country would eventual:y which himetheh the ob b lu e ! ! s e rf s t h t i o o h him that proposesth a t i t hear)state o fl u r e t p h a e i r interest than theyofbe in a much better th w e er e Churche t ipresent.tself he (Hear,would to attain to those for under the existing system, andt church-rates are levied ask the house to pass this measure. (Cheers.) They who that he should not en- brought it forward understood their wants, their claims, dcavour to embrace other and ant' the scope of his resolution. (Hear.) new objects within and their rights ; and they knew, from what had taken merit provides for the repair of .)So far as the amend- place in that house for years and years, that they would for the maintenance of churchyards, existingi 1 9h urches , and get what they wanted. (Cheers.) There was on the Tree limits to which I refer ; but when the honies within the sury bench a Secretary of State who had written an ad• to make " provision for the building of o . eir tne c m hu b r er h seek s minable pamphlet and made several able speeches in fa. PoPulous places" he travels, in my opinion, beyond tells()abolition of in se your ll of the church-rate'. (Hear, hear.) T osa who supported the existing system saw eontinual limits. (Hear.) The building of new churches is carried defections from their side, while those who 'opposed it out by means of the dioc e sa n fund, and co ns tit utes an had as constantly accession to theirs ; and if there wee object which, however desirable it ma y be to make pro- any Bill , passed to extend parliamentary franchise and vision for it, is total l y se p arated from tha t which we to redistribute the seats, they wh e supported ;church ought to have now in vie w, and which mi g ht more pro- rates, and who were already ' in a minority on the .goes ly -if indeed, it should be necessary to legislate with tion, would per - ,dwindle down to a small fraction. (Hear.) respect to it at all—be made the subject of a distinct pro- Why should those who supported church-rates go on posal. (Hear.) With this exception, I, for one, am cer- using the some arguments year after year in favour of a tainly disposed to look with considerable favour upon system which thefeeling of the country had al the amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire. ready condemned gen era ltb should the hon. member for (Hear.) But, suppose that amendment should not be Newdegate—(load laughter) —he meant the hon. mem accepted by the house, what course do you then pro- her for North Warwickshire (Mr w erte)— whom pose to take ? The observations which have fallen from he always honored for his sincerity,. be . my right honourable friend the member for Morpeth in session after session on this subjeCt, whnicah i f n o g u speeches (i o lit - the course of this discussion tend I must admit, to de tie reepon-e in that henie, and none whatever n in s the away to a great extent with the objections which I country ? (Cheers.) He was glad the right hon, baronet entertained to a proposal which he submitted to the the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey) went so far with hou se some year s ago, and which was to the effect that the supporters of the bill as to desire that it should we should be prohibited by legal enactment from into committee. He (Mr. Bright) would Fay to him, go raising- church-rates in those districts in which they and to every member in the least disposed to assist them "PPcned net to have been levied certain • . " G with us as far as you case ; the further fora polled. o you go That, I think, is a propositi on which is open to strong the pleasanter you will find the road ; and let u s , with objection upon the score of • • principle. It is hardly fair, out further delay, procee d at once with this bill, the fate in my opinion ' that certain parishes should be subjected, of which has been irrel.ragably decided." (Loud cheers.) as it w e r e , to a , penaltya because their inhabitant s bad . Mr. STEUART followed in a brief speech , but such cemplied with the 1w by levying the ecesFary church. was the impatience of the house to proceed to a division that the observations of the hon, member did not reach the gallery. T: .e SPEAKER put the question in the usual way, that the words of the original motion for going at once into committee—ehich words were proposed to be omit. ted by the amendment—should stand part of the question. The " Ayes" made the custemory response ; but either through in, ttentien or miss pprel ension, the opponents of the bill expressed no dissent ; the SPEIKER declared that the "Ayes" had it ; the mace was immediately re moved from the table in the ordinary way, and the house, which was very fall at the moment, went at once into committee without a division, amid some little laughter. The result was that Mr. Puller was precluded from mov ing the amendment which stood on the paper in his name on the motion for going into committee. Sir A. ELTON moved the insertion of words "delay ing the comine , into operation of this bill for threeyears." Sir J. TR OLAWNY said he was desirous of adopt ing every feasible suggestion calculated to put an end to the existing system ; but he thought if the hon. baronet had read the evidence of Dr. Lushington he would have thought it necessary to propose this amendment, for Dr. Lushington bad expressly laid i; down that churchwardens were bound to go on disposing of any funds in their hands for the repair of the churches which had been raised for that purpose. The parochial autho rities, in fact, had nothing to do but to use the existing machinery in their hands to meet the state of things con templated by the hon. baronet. Besides, the amendment was the less called for when hs (Sir J. Trelawny) found that in places where it had been left to them as voluntary matter the Dissenters had contributed liberally towards the repairine the fabrics of the Church of England. Mr. ROEBUCK wanted to know why the hon. baronet proposed to post - :one the operation of the bill far 3 years. This question of the abolition of church-rates was not a new one. He (Mr. Roebuck) had been in Parliament for a (Fatter of a century, and it had been familiar to him as a member of that house for the whole of that period. What good, he asked, could be derived from keeping open the sore, and from not at once putting an end to all the irrita tion produced by the levying ofchurch-rates? (Hear, bear.) If the thing was good, why not do it at once ? Whenever a change in the law was made great advantage resulted from its coming into immediate operation. The best thing they could do in this case was to bring the abolition into operation at the very earliest moment—(near, hear) —and therefore ho opposed the amendment. Sir G. GREY thought it would be very inexpedient to adopt the amendment, fer if the proposed change was to take place it was very undesirable that it should be poet pined for so long a period. (Hear, hear.) The usual practice was to make a church-rate at Easter and if the bill passed ieto a law and came into immediate operation it would be necessary that some provision should be made to secure the proper application of the rates made at Easter in the present year. Mr. WIGRAfeI thought the amendment proposed by the bon. baronet would be an improvement to the bill. He was persuaded that the only possible way in which the churches in the country could be maintained would be by an unanimous effort on the part of the great body of churchmen—(hoar, heat)—and time ought to be allowed for them to make the necessary preparations if that responsibility was henceforth to be borne by them alone, and the more so in caoes where the churches had fallen into considerable dilapidation. Sir J. TRELAWNY said he could not believe that the members of the Church of England would not them selves readily make efforts to meet all the cases to which the attention of the Committee had been pointed. [ Che hon. baronet made some reference to the amendment before the Committee having been conceived in "the old Protectionist spirit," but the exact terms in which he did so did not reach the gallery, and the expression is only given hers in a general form because the subsequent speech of Mr. Gladstone to some extent turned upon it ] Lord LOVAINE said it was pretty clear to him thet if this measure became law, by the end of three years afterwards the qu -stion would be one, not sof shurch rates, but of tithe,. Mr. PALK reminded the Committee that if this bill passed into a law the 350,0001. hitherto raised for the maintenance of the churches would be lost to the Established Ch urc h . Th ey h a d no more r i g ht t o d ea l with this 350,000/, provided for the maintenance of the Church, than they had to deal with the interest on the national debt, or any other similar charge ; but they had a right to deal with any law that pressed injuriously upon the consciences of Dissenters. This fund was as much the property of the Dissenters as of the Church, and if it was dealt with in an unjust and inconsiderate spirit injustice was done both to the Church and to Dissenters. The Dissenters, he admitted, bad a perfect right to object to all those embellishments of the Church that were hurtful to their consciences ; but un less they wished to be branded as spoliators of property which they had no right to touch, they were bound to fine some substitute for the means now provided for repairing the edifice of the church. He would, on the bringing up of the report, propose a proviso, which in the mean time he would read to the house. are many arrangements connected with the repair of churches that are not settled by the rate of a single year. (Rear, hear.) It appears that the levying of church.-rates is considerably in arroar of the making of church-rates ; and an Act of the Legislature declaring that no church-rate should henceforth be levied or made would undoubtedly have an effect which the hon. gentleman does not desire—viz., the effect of breaking up arrangements partly carried out, but not yet completed— arrangements on the faith of which schemes have been sanctioned and liabilities incurred. (Hear.) Then with regard to the prolongation of the religious war in which the country is said to be involved, surely a great deal too much has been made of the horrors of this religious warfare. (Hear.) I do not thick it is half so aggravattd as appears to be supposed. (Hear.) In the great propor tion of parishes where church-rates are made they are levied with general satisfaction, or at leant no osten-i -ble symptoms of dissension. (Hear.) I think the people of England, who generally contrive to solve awkward problems by the exercise of practical good sense rather than by theory, have attained the desirable object of solving even the problem of church-rates in such a roan• ner that, though it does not obviate everything disagree ' able, yet removes all really unfriendly symptoms ; for I commonly see that after there has been a motion for a church-rate, an amendment against it, and a poll, the meeting generally breaks up in good humour. and with a vote cf thanks to the chairman. (Hear.) It is all very well to ta:k in Parliamentary speeches about religious war being perpetuated in the country, but I must say that it would weigh upon my conscience if I did not sanction as far as I can the short continuance of the preqsnt system proposed in the amendment of my hon. friend. (Hear.) But, though I think it fair on the whole to support the amendment of my hon. friend, it is more a prudential question for the hon. baronet to consider than for me; because, iif the church rates are abolished, it should be done in a manner to mitigate as much as possible the pressure of the charge. If it were not that I am actuated by these feelings, I should be disposed to say, leave the bill as it is and let it shift for itself. (Hear.) After a few words from Sir J. rIIELAWNY in explana- tion, Mr. DILL WYN (amid cries of "Divide") said it was unfair to charge those who were opposed to church-rates with being unfavourable to the connexion between Church and State. Mr. HENLEY said the right hon. gentleman the mem ber for Oxford University had so completely expressed his views in what he said regarding church-rates if abol ished being a direct present to the landlords that he would not add a single word upon that subject. With regard to the payment of church-rates being hurtful to the con science, he would mention a case that came under bis own knowledge. He happened to have the management of an estate not his own, and it came to his knowledge that one of the tenants felt the payment of church-rates to be against his conscience. On hearing this he (Ar. Herley) directed the agent to ascertain the average amount of the church-rate for the last seven years, add it to the rent, and ask the tenant to pay the rent ; but, from whatever cause, the tenant did not think it right to accept the offer. (A. laugh.) With regard to the amend ment which would suspend the operation of the act for throe years, he could not give his assent to it, as he saw no advantage that would be derived from the postpone ment, while it would be adirect admission of the principle of the bill. (Hear.) He was against the change being made at all, and could no more consent to it three years hence than now. (Hear, hear.) They had heard a great deal about the peace and good feeling of the country being interfered with, but did any one believe that if the operation of this bill were to be suspended for three years it would be all peace I (Hear.) During the whole of these three years they would have parties arrayed against each other, and perpetual attempts made to upset the act. (Hoar, hear.) It would be equally ohjectionaWe in its tants upon the country. It was natural for people to postpone action upon a thing that was not to occur for a considerable time, and nothing would be done in the ' country on this matter, because nobody would believe in its reality. (Hear.) There would be great inconvenience caused in various ways by the delay, and, as he saw no advantage that would flow from it, he should be com pelled to vote against it. Sir A. ELTON would not press his amendment, and i asked leave to withdraw it. _ _ Lord R. CECIL entered his protest against the prin ciple which he understood to have been laid down by the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxfordshire as one that would be most fatal if acted on by a party defend ing conservative institutions. He understood him to say that when a bill was brought forward which he did not like he would do nothing to mitigate its pro visions. Now, in his opinion there was nothing to pre vent him voting for an amendment in a clause and after wards voting against the clause on the whole bill. Mr. HENLEY said the noble lord had misunderstood him. (Hear, hear.) He gave his reasons for disliking this particular amendment, but had not said a single word that could be construed into the meaning now stated by the noble lord. (Hear.) He would support any amendment that he thought reasonable in any bill, Lord R, CECIL did not wish to attribute to hiaright hon. friend anything that he was not willing to accept, but he certainly understood him to say that if be did not like a bill he would not vote for an amendment upon it. (No, no.) Mr. SPOONER (amid cries of "Divide") said he would not consent to do that in three years which he was not willing to do now. The poor of this country would be the chief sufferers if church rates were abolished. Mr. BRIGHT said, if the noble lord intended to com pel a division, it was desirable that he should offer souse explanation as to the reasons for the vote ho should give. He was free to confess that, if there were any disposition oe the part of hon. members opposite to accept the solu tion of the question proposed by this bill, he should not raise any difficulty upon the point whether it should come into operation in 12 months or three years hence, (Hear.) He did not believe the difficulties into which the Church of England would be plunged by the abolition of church rates would prove to be so extensive as some hon. members appeared to imagine ; but in the settlement of a long disputed question, it there were any concession which would facilitate that end without interfering with the efect of the settlement, it would be advisable to make it. The tone in which the amendment had been spoken of on the other side, however, did not lead him to believe that the adoption of this amendment would be at all an approach to a settlement of the question. The right hon. member for Oxford University had gone round and about the subject, but he bad not come at it —(a laugh)—and h e had eat down without eiving the house to understand that he was more favourable to the principle of this bill than he had been to preceding bills having the same end in view. The right hon. gentleman did not say that at the end of three years he would sup port the bill, nor did the noble lord (Lord R. Cecil) hold out any hope that at the expiration of that period he would be less opposed to the bill than he was at the pre sent time. Indeed he (Mr. Bright) did not see how it could be otherwise, for all the arguments of the sup porters of church-rates were based upon principles which were not affected by time. (Hear.) He did not perceive how any one who favoured church-rates could bo per• suaded by the amendment to change his views. If be believed the adoption of the amendment would at all tend to a solution of the question he would advise his hon. friend to accept the amendment, but as he did not entertain that belief he thought it better the clause should be passed in its original shape. (Hear, hear.) After a few words from Sir TI, WILLLOUGHBY and Mr. WIGRAM, which were almost inaudible amid loud calls for a division. The amendment was put and negatived without a di vision. Lord R. CECIL moved as amendment in chute 1, before the words England and Wales, to insert " in any city, Parliamentary or municipal borough in." Sir J. TRELAWNY said, he could not consent to the proposed amendment. Sir G. LEWlfii.—l hope the co mmittee will deal with this question with a determination, if possible, to get rid of the grievances which the present system of church rates give rise to. It is difficult to find out is what those grievances consist. (Hear, hear.) All the infor mation I have leads me to think that the essential grievance of the present system is not that there is a compulsory tax levied for the support of the fabrics of the established church, but because it is levied upon property a hich involves in its operation persons who differ from the tenets of that church. It is not a statu tory rate - it is a common-law rate, dating from a period anti o .dent to the Reformation, where there was no dif ference of opinion upon religious matters. Since that evert differences of religious opinion have sprung up, and discards have arisen from the imposition of church-rates. The rate is a voluntary rate. It is competent fo: the majority of a- vestry to refuse it, and that power has been exercised in a large number of parishes, amounting, I believe, to about 10 per cent. of the whole number of parishes, but comprising about one-half of the whole population of the kingdom. It is in large towns where the greatest discords have prevailed, and the result has been that under the operation of the present system church-rates in those towns have practically been abet lished. It is also in large towns th a t t h ere i s t h e grea t es t accumruulation of property, and where are to be found the greatest facilities fcr raising subscriptions in order to maintain the fabrics of the church. At present it may be said that there are two distinct systems in operation under the existing law. In large towns the parishes have f n: the most part practically abolished church-rates and subsii uted voluntary arrangements, which have bean found to answer well. But that state of things only ap plies to towns. In rural parishes for the most part church-rates are made without opposition—(bear, hear) —and even where there have been objections raised they have been overruled by the majority of ratepayers. In 90 per cent. •f the parishes of England and Wales the churches are supported by church-rates. That is the way in which the present system works, and it appears to me it would be not a compromise, but a reason able and practical solution of the question, if the house would adopt the plan that was proposed by my right hon. friend the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey)—viz., to ab dish church-rates in those towns or parishes where practically they had ceased for a series of years, say four or five years, and in those towns where church rates continued to be levied to allow those who differed from the established church, upon a mere declaration or statement of that fact, to be exempted from liability on account of them. By that means church-rates would only be compulsory upon members of the established church. (Hear, hear.) It would satisfy a real want and would overcome a real difficulty, for in rural parishes no obj' °Lion is now made , a nd the facilitiesrds which the aggregation of wealth in large towns affords for raising voluntary subscriptions in lar g e towns do not exist small rural parishes. I am not prepared to share the fears of those who think that if church rates are abolished our churches will be permitted to fall to the ground. (Rear.) I believe that funds would be raised by collection, eubscriptlene, and other modes which in large parishes would meet the wants of the church, hut in poor, small, and remote/parishes, if you do not allow the ratepayers to tax themselves, you will introduce a system far less fair and equal than the pre. Mr. AYRTON spoke to order. The hon. gentleman was not in form in introducing another amendment in addition to the one before the Committee. Mr. PALK did not intend to move another amend ment He only meant to read a proviso which he gave notice be would move on the bringing up of the report. Sir. G. GREY was not prepared to say the bon. gentleman was out of order, but it would be very incon venient to bring before the Committee at present any proviso while there was an amendment undisposed of. Mr. PALK would not now bring the proviso before the committee if it was not the general wish. With re gard to the amendment, which would suspend the opera tion of the bill for three years, be thought the delay might give time fur the preparation of some plan for maintaining the fabric of the church. There were large funds in the possession of the Church, and it was pos sible tlat luring the delay these might in some way be made available, or voluntary meats might be provided for maintaining fabrics which, apart from religion alto gether, were on architectural and scientific grounds worthy the support of the country. (Hear.) Mr. GLADSTONE—I cannot help observing that whatever may be the merits or demerits of the amend ment proposed by the hon. member for Batb, it has received no answer from the hon. baronet (Sir J. Tre- lawny) of any weight or value. The hon. baronet accused my hon. frier d of acting on the principle of the effete and extinct system of protection. I must say I ca❑ see no ground or colour for such a charge ; I see a great deal o what used to be considered one of the cardinal articles of protection in the bill of the hon. baronet himself, for a very prominent doctrine of those most versed in the articles of protection was, that a great part of the claim for protection rose out of the burdens on land, and that some at least of the local rates ought to be remitted and a present of them made to the landlords. (Hear, hear.) And undoubtedly this bill, if it passed, will offer the first instalment of that relief from the burdens on land. (Cheers and laughter.) The bill, indeed, presents a very remarkable instance in which the principle of protection that has been long dead has undergone a galvanic revi val at the hands of a gentleman from whom it could have been least expected, in that with respect to the whole of the rural parishes of thecountry he has proposed to make over to the landlords a large and distinct pre sent of several hundreds of thousands a year. (Rear, and laughter.) I wilt illustrate what he has now eaid by a case in point. A gentleman--a friend of mine, whose name, if I were to mention it, would elicit from every one an expression of respect and approbation-- applied to his tenants—not in a tone of dictation, of which he is incapable, but as between friend and friend —and expressed his wish that they should support the granting of a church-rate in the parish ; on which one of the tenants said "It is surly impossible you can wish us to support a church-rate, for if the r at e i s re fu se d it will be 171. a-year in your pocket in this township alone." (Hear, hear.) Meat is tru e i n thi s par ti cu l ar case is equal y true in other cases. The church-rates, it abolished, will go into the pockets of the landlords. I hope, therefore, we shall not again hear it said that the principle of protection is involved in the opposition to this measure. (Hear, hoar.) The hon. baronet pro needed to say that, however magnificent the churches might be in the rural parishes, it would be unfair to the Dissenters to continue, even for a period of three years, to tax them for the maintenance of those fabrics. There is a fallacy in that part of the reply of the hon. baronet, because in so far as regards many of the opponents of this bill, they have not the slightest desire that any Dis senter should be taxed against his will for the main tenance of the fabric of the church, (Hear, hear.) Ido not ask whether a case can or cannot be made out to ' show that the Dissenters might justly be expected to pay. I say, as a matter of equity, of prudence, and considera tion, that I believe it to be for the interests of the Church and the country that Dissenters should not be called upon to pay church-rates ; and, believing that to b) the sentiment of an immense majority of the house, I protest against th e assum p t i on in vo l ve d i n th e s p e ech of Vie right hon. baronet, that whoever supporta an amend ment like that before the house does so because he thinks it is right that for three years more Dissenters ought to be taxed for the support of the fabric of the church. (Hear, hear.) My belief—and it is founded on expe rience—is that th er e a re lar ge numb e r s of Dissenters in this country whose position in regard to the Church is an anoma!ous one, because it is neither complete rela Wang union nor complete religious separation, and i that I there are ma n y o f t h ese Di s senters w h o do not n the smallest degree object to the payment of church-rates. (Hear, !rear.) So far as my local knowledge goes of that portion of the country which of all others is perhaps the least inclined to the payment of chuich•rates—l mean the principality of Wales, I may say that there are Dissenters there who would be per fectly satisfied pith an exemption in their favour from c impulsory payment. (Hear, ilea %) However, that is not the questi on nog before Ps. I only wanted to point out that the hon. baronet has, unintentionally I am sure misrepresented the views of those who support the amendment now before the House. The real question as regards the amendment appears to me to be something different from that which the hon. baronet has appre hended it to be. I cannot say I think that even with this amendment the bill would be one which it would be wise or just for the Legislature to adopt. At the same time I frankly own that the amendment of my hon. friend is not only proposed in a spirit of good faith—be• cause no man would for a moment impute to him the possibility of taking any other than a straightforward course—but that it is a proposition which it is more for the interest of the friends of the Bill than for its op ponents to accept. I cannot doubt that this amendment will improve the prospects of the Bill, for I cannot but be of opinion, already expressed by an hon. friend, that it would bo a considerale!e mitigation of the change. On 1 the whole it appears to me to be an amendment couched 1 in a spirit of equity and fairness—not intended to defeat the Bill, but a tiuly straightforward, candid proposition. Though it is true you make your arrangements for church -rates from year to year, it is also true that there APRIL 22, 1858 sent. lam favourable to the principle of the amend ment proposed by the noble lord, but it seems to me that its terms would not carry out that principle. It is at once too wide and too narrow. It would exclude many cases which the noble lord would wish to inc:n.le, and it would include many places which ought to be ex cluded. For instance, the 'wish of Chelsea, and other large parishes in the neighbourhood of London not in cluded in any Parliamentary borough, would not fall within the terms of the amendment. On the other hand, small Parliamentary boroughs, or parishes included in such boroughs, where no objection had been made to church-rates, would be deprived of the power of volun tarily rating themselves. I think the best plan is that of my right hon. friend to which I have referred, and which I believe would be found the best and most satisfactory solution of this long-vexed question. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BALL begged to assure the committee that if he believed the abolition of church-rates would be injurious to the Church of England he would not give his support I to any measure having that object. • He, however, be lieved the removal of that ground cf difference between Dissenters and Churchmen would tend to augment the numbers of the latter, and to diminish the number of the enemies of the church. (Hear, hoar.) The question had now reached a stage in which it would be desirable for the government to devise some fair and reasonable inetbod of settling it, and if there was a disposition to relieve the consciences of Dissenters he thought the lat ter ought not to refuse all concession on their parts. (Hear, hear.) 1 Mr. PACKE, in reference to a remark which had fallen from the right hen. baronet the member for Rad nor (Sir G. Lewis), cited the ease of a church situated in a parish where a rate had been refused, which was falling into decay, there being no means of raising the necessary funds for its repair. Mr. SPOONER observed that the effect of the amend. ment would be to take away all power of voluntary rating from large towns. It was true that in those large towns many parishes had refused church-rates ; but a time might come when the vestries would repent and would desire to make rates for the maintenance of their churches ; but the amendment would leave them no power to do so. Sir G. GREY —I cannot support the amendment of the noble lord, although I agree with him in principle. What I wish to do is to remove a sense of injustice which exists in all cities and towns, without at the same thne causing a feeling of irjustice in the minds of a large body of members of the established church in the coun try. The amendment of the noble lord is sound in principle, but if adopted its terms would not carry out the principle. In nearly all large towns and cities of late years district churches have been built, which are quite independent of church-rates, those funds being applicable to parish churches alone. I think the experience we have had of thoBo district churches teaches tie that even if church-rates are abolished in large towns the parish churches will not be allowed to fall into decay. (Hear.) I should advise the noble lord not to press his amend ment upon this occasion, but to consider whether upon the next stage of the hill he cannot propose words which would more effectually carry out the principle which he has in view. I think the plan I suggested would be the best mode of dealing with the matter, but lam not wedded to my own words, and if he can devise any arrangement by which the same end can be attained I shall be happy to give it my support. (Hear, hear.) Mr, HENLEY thought he should be justified in put ting to the hon. member for Birmingham a similar ques tion to that which the hon. gentleman himself had put to the right hon. member for the University of Oxford, and in asking him how far he considered the amendment proposed would settle the question with him. At the same time it had been clearly pointed out by the right hon. gentleman (Sir G. Lewis) that the words of the amendment would not carry out the object that the noble lord had in view. He should be glad to kaow from the hon. members who had charge of the bill whether the passing of any such measure would make the slightest approach to a settlement of the question ? He should like to know also from the hon. member for Birmingham whether any reciprocity would be held out on that side of the house such as would induce hon. members on his . (Mr. Henley's) side to assent to the general prop osition i of the Bill ? Mr. BRIGHT said that the progress of the discussion had shown so much difference of opinion between the supporters cf the bill and those who would stop at a half-way house like this that it was scarcely worth while discussing a proposition which seemed like one of those straws that men clung to when they were going down. (A. laugh.) Upon his side of the house each a proposition would not be entertained for a moment. (Hear, hear.) Movements like those -of opposition to church-rates were very contagious. If a parish within a borough were exempt, the adjoining parish without the borough would become the focus of a much stronger agitation. (Hear.) He doubted whether the town of Braintree, which had immortalised itself by its opposi tion to this impost, would be exempted by the amend ment of the noble lord, which he should think met the ♦iews of no human being who was honestly opposed to church rates. He would tell the right hon. gentleman that the amendment would not mitigate the hostility entertained to the impost on his side of the house. (Cheers.) Mr. GLADSTONE—The sentiment of the committee, or at least a large portion of it, appears to be that there is much substantial reason in the proposal of my noble friend, but that the form in which it is presented to us is inadmissible. (Hear.) My right hon. friend (Sir. G. Grey) embodied his views in a bill when he was the organ of the Government, but as an independent mem ber, s there is, I think, in the proposal of my noble friend much that might become the basis of an arrange meet of this question. (Hear.) At the same time Ido not think that we have to-day made much progress to wards any practical result. Motions have been with drawn one after the other, and the progress of the de bate does not give my noble friend much encouragement to take the sense of the committee upon his motion. The proposition, however, is of great importance, because it appears to have the sanction of the Government, and I do not think it can ever be refused or extinguished by a vote of this house. lam certain that my noble friend will be doing a public service if he puts us in a condition to give a poeitivejudgment upon his proposal. (Hear.) There appears to me to be great common sewie in it, and to say the least it oilers a less hopeless prospect of a practical result than any other plan that has been sub mitted to us. I do not think that a question of this kind can be settled by a bargain in this house. (Hear, hear.) But there is a spirit of moderation abroad— a desire for peace—and a disposition to forego ex treme views where practical results can be at tained, which, independently of any baigain in this house will insure practical success and permanency to any plan which appears to be founded in moderation and good sense. (Rear, bear.) Sir J. TRELAWNY must adhere to his principle, and could not agree to the amendment. Lord R. CECIL, baying met the usual fate of those wh ) attempted to reconcile opposite parties, and baying drawn down upon himself the combined censure of the hon. member for Birmingham and the hon. member for North Warwickshire, had no alternative but to with draw hie amendment. (Hear, hear.) The amendment was then withdrawn. On clause 1, declaring that from and after the passing of the Ao'. no church-rate shall be made or levied in aoy parish in England or Wales, Mr. LYGON moved that the Chairman report pro gresp. (Cries of "Hear, hear," and "Divide.") Mr. WIGIL.A.III (who rose amid calls for a division) thought that the motion was a reasonable one, because if the clause was passed church-rates would be abolished throughout th- country. Mr. MALINS (who was greeted with cries of "Oh!" and " Divide !") reminded the house that he had never yet addressed it upon the subject of church-rates. (Laughter.) He wished to see the question settled, but it was in vain to attempt to maintain the present law, and some compromise, it was clear, must be entered into. The proposal of h is noble friend would not settle the question, and the suggestion of the right hon. baronet (Sir G. Grey) that he should reconsider the subject, and make a proposal at a future stage, seemed to be worthy of his noble friend's consideration. Lord J. RUSSELL—As the house has been favour able to the principle of the measure, I think it is only fair to the proposer and supporters of the bill that we should divide to-day upon this clause, which contains the principle of the bill. (Cheers.) I am ready to accept the clause for myself, and I think it fair that we should come to a division upon it. (Cheers.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I con cur with the noble lord. It appears to me that there is sufficient time to come to a division to-day, and that would he the fairest, as I think upon reflction it would be the most eatisf.ictory, cuurle to all parties. (Clier.3.) The committee then divided — For reporting progres s Against it .......... Majority against reporting progress —242 When the numbers were announced the clock pointed to 10 minutes to 6. No division upon the first clause eould therefore take place, and further proceedings upon the bill were consequently necessarily adinuned. WAYS AND MEANS. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the house resolved itself into committee of ways and means, when a resolution was agreed to au thorising the raising of a sum, not exceeding 2,000,000/., on the issue of Exchequer bonds. A bill founded on the resolution was afterwa rds brought in and read a first time. The Ex.lige Duties 13111 was also read a first time. S'r E. KERRISON brought in a bill on Ceunty Management. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE brought it; a bill to amend the Patent Law Amendment Act (18r./2). The house adjourned at six o'clock. REGIMENTAL ESTABLISHMENV3.—The estim a t e d t o t a l charge of the regime n t al entablishments of her Majesty's land forces at home and ah:oad from the 14 April, 18'58, t, the 31st Marcb, 1859, is 4,259,888/., including 3 762,1741. for the pay and allowances of 222,238 MOD of all ranks, 93,024/. for annual allowances to field offi cers, captains, and riding masters, 31,572/. for agency, and 371,343/. for clothinr'. [ADVERTISEMENT.]--The Recent Changes of Tempera tute.—lt is very important that such changes as have recently taken place in the temperature of the atmos phere should nob be treated with indifference. The pub lic shou'd be watchful of the effects which they frequently have on the body. The skin and the nervous s ystem suffer severely—Erysipelas, blo!ches, boils, rheumatism, colds, sore throats, and the many other complaints of this nature being generated through the above cause. When symptoms of the above diseases show themselves they should be promptly attended to. Holloway's pills and ointment are wonderful remedies, and eradicate the above attacks, immediately they show themselves. Sold by all medicine vendors throughout the world, and at Prof .ssor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS-APRIL 21. CHURCH RITES ABOLITION BILL. Question proposed, " That clause one stand part of the bill;" —Whereupon motion made, and question put, " That the chairman do roport progress, and ask leave to sit again." The committee divided ; ayes 104, noes 346. AYES-104. Adderley, C. B. Forde, Colonel Mills, Arthur Alexander, J. Forester, Col. Morgan, 0. Annesley, Hon. Hugh Gard, B. Mowbray, J. R. Baillle, H. Goddard, A. Naas, Lord Bernard, T. Gurney, J. H. Neeld, John Bathurst, A. A. Hall, General John Newdegate, C. Bentinck, G. Heathcoate, Sir W. Nisbet, R. P. Boldero, Col. H. G. Henley, J. Ossulston, Lord Bovill, W. Hill, lion. R. Packe, C. Bramston, T. W Hodgson, William Palmer, R. Bridges, Sir B. Holford, R. Pevensey, Viscount Bruce, Major Hopwood, John Repton, G. Burghley, Lord Ilornby, W. Robertson, P. Cairns, H. liorsfall, T. Holt, P. Carden, Sir R. W. liotham, Lord Scott, Major Cartwright, 11. Aunt, G. W. Shirley, E. Cecil, Lord .R. Ingestre, Viscount Smyth, Col. Child, Smith Jolliffe, Ll. Spooner, R. Close, M. King, J. Stanhope, J. Cobbold, J. C' Knatchbull, IV. Steuart, A. Codriugton, Sir C. W. Knight, I. Tollemacho J. Cole, 11. A. Knightley, R. Trefusis, C. Cooper, E. J . Langton, W. G. Trollope, Sir J. Cubitt, Nit, Lefroy, Anthony Vance, John Dalkeiih, Earl Long, W. Verner, Sir W. Dobbs, W. C. Lopes, Sir M. Waddington, H. Du Cane, C. Lovaine, Lord Walcott, Admiral. Duncombe, A. Lyall, Lieorga Warren, S. Duncombe, ilon.W E. Macartney, George Whiteside, J. Dundas, G. Macaulay, Kenneth Wyndham, General Ba Pre, C. M'Clintock., John Wynn, Col. East, sir J. Malins, Richard Wynne, W. Egerton, Sir P. Manners, Lora J. Elm , ey, Viscount March, Earl of TF.LLEEII. Farnham, E. Miller, Taverner Wigram, Loftus T. Fellowes, E. Miller, Stearne Lygon, Ilon.r. NOES-316. Adair, U. Farquhar, Sir M. O'Connell, D Adeaue, H. Fenwick, H. O'Donoghoe, The Agnew, Sir A. Fergus, John Ogilvy, Sir J. Akroyd, E. Ferguson, Colonel Paget, C. A lcock, T. Ferguson, sir Robert Paget, Lord C. Anderson, sir J. Fitz william, C. Pakington, Sir J. Antrobus, E. Foley, J. 11. Palk, L. Ashley, Lord Foley, 11. W. Palmerston, Viscount Atherton, W. Foljanabe, Francis Patten, Col. Ayrton, A. Forster, Charles Paull, Henry Bagshaw, Robert Foster, W. 0. Paxton, Sir J, Bag well;John Fortescue, Hon. F. Pease, Henry Bailey, Sir J. Fox, W. J. Fechell, Sir G. Bailey, C. Freestun, Colonel Pennant, Col. E. Baines, Rt. Hon. M. French, Colonel Percy, J. Ball, E Gallwey, Sir W. Perry, Sir Z. Baring, 11. Garnett, William Philips, R. Baring, Sir F. Gaskell, J. Pilkington, J. Baring, T. Gifford, Earl of Pinney, Col. ',taring, T. G. Gilpin, C. Portman, W. Barnard, Thomas Gladstone, W. Potter, Sir J. Bass, M. Glyn, G. Powell, Francis Baxter, W. Glyn, G. Price, W. Beach, W. Goderich, Viscount Pryse, E. Beale, S. Greenwood, John Pugh, D. Beaumont, W. Greer, Samuel Puller, Christopher Beecroft, G. Gregson, Samuel Ramsden, Sir J. Bennet, Capt. P. Greufell, Charles W. Rawlinson, Sir H. Berkeley, lion. II F. Grey, it. Raynham, Viscount Berkeley, I. Griffith, C. Rebow, J. Bethel, Sir It. Grogan, Edward Ricardo, J. 13icldulph, Col. R. M. Grosvenor, Earl Ricardo, 0. Biggs, John Gurney, Samuel Richardson, J. Black, Adam Hadfield, George Ridley, George Blackburn, Peter Hall, Sir Benjamin Robartes, T. Blake, J. Hamilton, Lord Claud Roupell, W. Bland, L. 11. Hamilton„o. A. Rushout, Capt. G. Bonham-Carter, J. Hamilton, Capt. Russell, Lord J. Bowyer, G. Hanbury, Robert Russell, 11. Brady, J. Hanks T. T. • Russell, A. liraintey-Moore, J. Hanmer, Sir John Rust, James Brand, lion. 11. Hardeastae, Joseph Salisbury, Enoch Bright, John Hardy, G. Schneider, Henry Briscoe, John Harris, J. D. Scholefield, W. Brocklehurst, J. Har Wigton, Marquis Sclater, George Brown, W. 'Lessard, Michael Scott, F. Browne, Lord John llatchell, John Sumer, H. Bruce, Lord E. Hayes, Sir E. Seymour, Danby Brusse, 11. A. Headlam, T. Shafto, It. Buchanan, Walter Heatlicote, G. Shelley, Sir J. Buckley, Gen. Henchy, D. Sheridan, H. B. Bu ler, J. W. Heneage, Geo. F. Sibthorp, Major Bury, Viscount Herbert, S. Smith, J. B. Butler, C. S. Hodgson, K. Smith, V. Buxton, C. Holland, E. Smith, A. Byng, G. H. C. Horsman, E. Smith, Sir F. Caird, J. Hudson, G. Smollett, A. Campbell, It. Ingham, It. Somerville, Sir W. Cardwell, E Jackson, W. Stanley, Lord Carnac, Sir J. R. Jermyn, Rt. En. Earl Stanley, W. Cavendish, W. Johnstone, H. B. Stapleton, John Cay, ley, E. S. Johnstone, Hope Steel, John Charlesworth, J. C.D. Johnstone, Sir J. Stirling, W. Cheetham, John Jolliffe, Sir W. Stewart, Sir M. Chohneley, Sir M. Kendall, N. • Stuart, Lord J. Churchill, Lord A. Kerrison, Sir E. Stuart, Colonel Clark, J. Kershaw, J. Start, H. Clay, James King, L. Clifford, C. C. Kinglake, A. Clifford, Lt.-Col. H. M Kinglake, J. ichael Sykes, Sullivan, dolonel Talbot, C. Ciive, George Kingscote, Capt. R. Taylor, S. Cobbett, J. H. Ktnnaird, A. C o drington, Gen. Kirk, W. Tempest, Lord A. T. Thompson, General Colebrooke, Sir E. Knatenbuil-Hagnessen Thornely, T. Collier, R. P. Coningttam, W. W. Legit, L a b Knox, ou e C ti o ci l e ß , Langton, a. G. Laslett, W. Legit, G. C. It.t.Wdon.H Thornhill,Tit,w. C on yngham, Lord F. Langston, J. H. W. Tollemache, F. Cowper, W. F. Towline, G. Corbally, M. E. Trail, G. Cox, Truman, C. Craufurd, E. H. J. Lennox, Lord H. G. Turner, J. A. Crawford, R. W. Leslie, C. r. Tynte, Col. K. Crook, J. Levinge, Sir It. Vane, Lord H. Cross, R. A. Liddell, H. G. Vansittart, W. Crossley, F. Lindsay, W. Verney, Sir H. Dalglish, R. Locke, Join Villiers, C. Darner, L. D. Lowe, K. Vivian H. H. Dashwood, Sir G. Luce, T. Walpole. S. Davie, Sir H. R. F. Macarthy, Alex. Wegnelin, T. Deasy, R. M`Cann, J. Welby, W. Diodes, William MacEvoy, E. Western, S. Denison, W. H. Mackie, J. Westhead, Joshua Dent, John Mackinnon, W. Whatman, J. De Vere, S. IL Maguire, J. F. Whitbread, S. Dill wyn, L. L. Mangles, R. D. White, James Disraeli, B. Marjoribanks, D. Whitmore, H. Divett, E. Marsh, M. Wickham, H. Dod, J. ' Martin, C. Willcox, B. Dodson, J. Martin, J. Williams, Sir W. Duff, M. Massey, W. Willyams, E. Dunbar, Sir W. Maxwell, J. Willoughby, Sir 1 , 0, Duucombe, Thomas Dielgund, Lord Willoughby, J. Dundas, F. 3lellor, John Wingfield, R. Dunkellin, Lord Mills, T. Winnington, Sir T. Dunlop, A. Moncreiff, J. Wise, J. Dutton, Hon. R. H.' Montgomery, Sir G. Woodd, B. Ebrington, Viscount Moody, C. Wood, W. Edwards, Henry Morris, D. Woods, Henry Egerton, Edw. C Napier, Sir C. Wyld, Janice Ellice, E. Newark, Viscount Wyndham, H. Elton, Sir A. 11. Newport, Viscount Wyvill, M. Estcourt, T. Nicoll, D. Young, A. Evans, Sir De Lacy Neel, G. Evans, T. W. Norris, J. T. Ewart, W. North, Col. J. Ewart, J. North, F. Ewing, Crum O'Brien, P. Trelawny, Str J. Martin, Y. Country Markets. EDINBURGH HAY AND STRAW bI9.RKET APR L 20. Supplies of all kinds these last six days large. Oat straw, from 10s Od. to 12s Od per kemple of 16 'One trou ' • wheat do., 8s Od to lOs Od ; barl e y d o ., 'Ts Od to 91 Od. Hay from 10d to 12d. EDINBURGH MEAL—APRIL 20. There were in the market to-day 6 sacks oatmeal, each weighing 2801 b imperial, which sold at 40s Od and -5* DALKEITH MEAL MARKET—APRIL 19. There were in the market to-day 24 bags of oatmeal, 0 0 barleymeal, and 0 pot barley. Sales ready. Oatmeal, per sack of 2801bs First. Second. Third. imperial Bs.rloymeal, per ditto -s Od —s Od --s OA Feasemeal, per ditto Flour, new, per ditto —s Od —s Opt — a 01 Pot-barley, new, per ditto —a Od Od - 11 °6l DIIBLIN—ArniL 20. White wheat, 27s 01 to 29s o(l7r4ditto, 24s 01 to 26' 64; ditto new, s Od ; barley, malting, 14s to 1830 d; grind' ing, —s to —s ; ma, old, 13s to 15s 6d; ditto, new, "": 5 0 t to —s Od ; oatmeal, 13s to 15s 6d; bare, new, 14s to 1 011 04 ; rapeseed, 233 Od to 25s Od per brl ; bakers' flour, 1. 3 . 61 to 108 Od per cwt; Indian corn, 333 01 to 34s 6d P 430 lbs. BRISTOL SUGAR—APRIL 21. There has been but little offering in the market this week, except Barbadoes, which have met a ready sale st full prices, especially for the finer and grocery description. , for which there is a good demand. Rum is in fair reques t s and all offering bas been taken at full rates. I.—APRIL 21. the close of the market Wallaend, !go. COAL MARL Prices of Coals per ton a, s. d. Tonneld Moor Butes 12 9 gd• Huddle W. Hartley l7 0 14 6 Whitworth Holywell .... ... Wylain Horton Wallaeud, &c. Shincliffe 'lough Hall l6 9 south Kelloe 17 6 n Wayne's Merthyr 20 0 Birchgrove Graigola ..,20 v Ships at market, 19 ; sold 16. THE STATE PROSECUTIONS OF THE PRESS.—Subeorir tions have been entered into at Manchester in aid of tb• defendants in these prosecutions, and the committee report a fair amount of success both among the middle and working classes. Efforts making in the surround' ing towns are also said to have been well responded to• BIRTHS. FOLKESTONE—On the 19th inst., Viscountess Fo of twins, boy and girl. LAKELLES—On the 20th inst., at Harewood Hail* Leeds, the Hon. Mrs. Eg,remont Lascelles, of a daughter. MUNDY—On the 18th inst., at Hollybauk, Hants, the wife of Major R. M. Mundy, of a daughter. WARD—On the 20th inst. at Blackheath-park, g rit ' Ward, of a daughter. MARRIAGES. CosioLD—Duruis—On the 20th inst., at Eton, in th e College Chapel, John Patteson Cobbold. Esq., eldest soli of John Chevallier Cobbold, Esq., M.P. for Ipswich, t o Adela Harriette, second daughter of the Rev. Geo..'" Dupuis, Fellow of Eton College, and rector of Creetta St. Mary, Suffolk. DEATHS.at Prideaux, Cornwall, fo ci ' L C O Enntally°lldriOhsevngedth, Lewis in e t Coker, E sq ., o f Biceste r ' House, Bi c ester, Oxon, late Brevet-Major 29th ltee'' FATteodY:EI.LD—On the 20th init., at his residence , , 4° ' Warren-street , Fitzroy-square, the B,ev. W. Fallofeild, M.A., aged 70. FOWLER—On the 20th inst., at Victoria-terrace, 1 3 , 0 „ °. wa t er , George Fowler, Esq., formerly of CulloulPl' Davon, author of several works on Russia and the Ea° HAGGARD —On the Ist ult., on board of H.M.S. "firaicif off the coast of Brazil, of yellow fever, Henry "V" il k e tt Haggard, Commander R.N., eldest son of the late S O " Haggard, LL.p , of Doctors'-commons, aged 36. WiLsoN---On the 19th inst., at the Grove, Shropfh lr " John Edwards Wilson, Esq. rrltrOt LONDON: Printed and Published by MIIRDO YO w", 4 0. of No. 112, St ran d, P r inter, at The Sun 0 11 i 0e . 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the cou p of Middlesex, Thursday, April 22, 1858. adm intro num corn Bad teal SIO one Gall 33,i Are Pen hon C ligh thoi Mat di at Plat A pia< loaf Ass of 8 fish hai poll cur anr. the Ot j ~,' ;~