The Sun. — London, England, 1851-05-23 00:00:00

I ta „,. s ti e t a. should be given, hut how it should be given? The ton they were now cons id er i ng was, a?, to theell:;i bility of the plan proposed by the Hon. Member for Oil -4111'i: He h a d t h ree o bj ec ti ons to th a t li o n. Member's 11( 7 11 c—first, he had doubts about the expediency . of '4,•ng education free. Prawical men were of opinion such a system was not adapted to the wants ot the d entry, or wss likely to tend to produce feelings of in rPendence among t h e l ower or d ers . Th e y t h oug ht the Zr'Prnitent sloitern was better adapted for the purpose, refully if the parents of the poorer, but not the poorst es were invited to make small contributions towards expenses of education. Fur his own part he would ,ttk a tilY see such a id ex t e nded to the ragged schools as m' make the education there free of expense; but h was of opinion that neither the necessities nor the 14t a Of the lower orders were sufficient to warrant the alo • Phoe of a general system of free education. 'I he iixt objetion to the next feature of the Hon. Member's was, c that be doubted the propriety of calling for Vber aid t o w ar d s e d u cating the people by means of t : t ,her rates. He considered if aid were to be given, it gnt to be given in a more equitable form, and the ex ;le ought to be diffused over all those who were h to bear it. The objectionable form was by : 1 43 from the Consolidated Fund, according to the t i t ! t tto at present adopted. 'With reference to the th leci feature of the scheme, that secular education only ei ° l tfld be given, he was altogether opposed to the prin it° of such a proposition. He did not see that such a to erne would give satisfaction in any quarter. He did :otitileiti:k it would give the Church of England, or any articular sect, general satisfaction. The Roman Ca they all knew, would receive no satisfaction from I to l Yetem of that kind. The mass of the people belonging w the Church of England or the body of Dissenters It euld not be generally satisfied with such a system. tee Dissenters continued to send their children to Church of England schools, for they knew that the ;.'lt mass of these schools were not teachers of doc diintles of a theological character likely to create preju t, but only gave instruction in the Scriptures. He % I ii ttul not possibly think how such a system of education that proposed by the Hon. Member was adapted to C , 11 re the end it professed to have in view. It was, t vever, said the system was proposed for the purpose ,f 4 doing justice to the poor, and discharging a debt di e t to them. But if it was the aim of all who sought o elevate the poor to implant in their minds the great Pat principles of humanity and religion, as the surest keyentive of crime, how ceuld that aim be attained by e Proposed system ? If education were confined to t etilar subjects—if carried out without religious instruc t,l°4--he very much doubted whether the tendency of , i ll th a system was to diminish vice and crime. He S ethi whether the system would be either bens l'eitl to the individual or the community. But t t was said by Honourable Gentlemen opposite, " What "e propose is that children shall be educated in the i thoo 1, and receive religious instruction elsewhere." But Le h that system be carried out, and let all be done that 1 ,, advocates wanted, what would be the result? How long were the children to remain at school? If inquiry made, it would be found that parents would not heave their children at school beyond the age of 13. All e education these children received, which was to go ,m' iern the whole course of their future life was given be ore they were 13 years of age. How then could the Ifroposed resolution be carried out ?—where could these "ildren get their religious education frem? Were these t eildren to be without instruction in the great moral I )e incipiles, and in the duty of worshipping God ? If the Principles in the resolution were carried out, the chil !roil would receive no instruction in the schools in their L'ret duty, that of worshipping the Creator. To such a 4 9 8 tera he was decidedly opposed. The only argument tf any„weight urged in its favour was, that there was a Ile cessity for it. He did not believe the necessity o usted. He believed the Government plan could be married out so as to produce general education, provided t wo things were furnished, a great deal more money, -4,1 more time. What was wanted in the first instance here good teachers. Much had been done by Go- Zernment to remedy this want. Several institutions 4 been opened for tha purpose of providing, good "cache; s. The institution at Highgate, which furnished e it hty teachers, had worked well, as also had the tYster a of pupil teachers. lie believed, therefore, that t he pre sent system, with some addition to it for pro !ling free education for the very poor, was well cal culated., in time, to afford a prospect of carrying out tie aim of a general system of education for the people. '` - le mast oppose, on principle, the present proposition; 4 t the same time he, and the House, were obliged to e Ron. Member for Oldham for bringing forward u'e subject, as even its discussion must be productive of flood. hir e ADDERLEY must vote with reluctance OR the Pestion against those with whom he usually voted— L er he - felt he could not conscientiously vote against the reepositions of the Hon. Member for Oldham.—(Hear,, at) There was an old proverb—Take care of the Pence s and the pounds would take care of themse lves — le moral of which was susceptible of a wide applica tion, If the House took care of the elementa r y q uestions, t hey would find that the great complicated questions would take care of themselves. He re g retted to differ ',, r() te the opinions express ed b y the Hon. and Learned ventlenian, Mr. Walpole, who, in expressing his dislike to free education, dealt with only a part o f t he case as if it were the whole.—(Hear.) The Hon. Member for Lancashire said he felt anxiety on the question, but would only consent to support the prep )sitious before the House le the event of no better scheme being put forward. The question then was, what chance was there of a better system 'acing carried out, and what would happen to the eonotry in the meantime?—(Hear.) All were agreed that reriious and secular instruction ought to bo coma ' , sued, and that one should be based on the other. They were also agreed that the two could not be carried out without the help of a national rate. But it also appeared that while secular education could not be carried out ex cept by a national rate, religious education could not be carried out by a national rate. So, therefore, as one half w a s impossible, the Hon. and Learned Member set 111 s face against the whole. H o would, however, show t he House that while one part could be carried out by a national rate, the other part could be carried out by a nluntat y aid. The proposition of the Hon. Member for yldham could not be controverted, that the present sys tem of e ducation was deficient in this material respect — that it ftsiliel to point out to the poor how they were to Prld their own subsistence. Now , as crime p roceeded e equently from want of employment, education would 4411 to prevent crime. If, for instance, the poor knew eegrapny, that would enable them to understand the a dvantages of colonial emigration, and, as in America, our colonies would soon have their back sett l e ments. The Hon. Member referred to the standard of educa tion as being of an improving character. He t hou g ht the standard of education was vastly too high; it was that the prizes of the Privy Council went to a higher C lass th an was expedient or proper. The money, therefore, that was spent by the Privy Counc il was l avished on a class for which it was never intended, and Who ought not to receive a farthing of it. The gigantic Plan of tbse Privy Council could not be carried out, and debts had been incurred which could not be liquidated. There was, therefore, no hope to be derived from that 1 1 :tarter. But while they were discussing the question, ap efficeent national education was going on which was only accessible to two classes—the prisoner and the Pauper.—(Hear.) The education given to prisoners Was ela borate and perfect—in Parkhurst Bridewell, and eth er p r icons for the reformation of juvenile offenders the eduoation was good. In the workhouses also, the edueatio a there was vastly superior to that given by the Poorer classes to their children. Here was a national system o f religious and secular education at the expense of the country, and the only question was, whether that !Ylite as a hould be extended to the poor outside the work house .s and prisons. It might be said that this system mixed rap religious instruction with education; but would they consent to open the doors of such places to the honest p oor outside. He confessed he was dissatisfied at teeing he poor debarred from the advantages in those Places. He approved of a national rate for general educatio t a and he thought it was highly creditable to the cour tty of Lancaster that it should have been the first to come forward with a petition to Parliament to tax then t for purposes of national education. He had the auth .ority of a distinguished traveller for stating, that no o ne could visit America without seeing the great superiorit y of the Americans over this country in point of educat. 'On. Ile had heard only two serious objections to the pre" ositions; first, that, if adopted, they would supersede the present schools. B ut th a t o bj ect i on wa s of no force, for if the present schools were inefficient, it would be a i advantuge to supersede them. The second objection se as, that it was impossible to separate secular and religious instruction, That was a mere play upon words. We acted upon the principle every day of our lives in the education of our children. We showed that the two c ould be separated without mi schief. Th e ad vantage a of the H onourable Gentlemans proposition would b plain and obvious. The ne cess ities of the case were als obvious; and he therefore approved of a plan which w ours compel the people to take an interest in their ow a schools. The S OLICITOR-GENERAL thought no subject could be more important than that of how they could best educ tte that young and numerous class now in want of educati en. Still he must say that he had never heard in the saas so debate so many errors and fallacies as there were to Iso found in the speeches of the Hon. Member who pro' )osed this motion, and in the speeches of those who follo wed him.—(Hear.) The real effect of themea sure prop ssed would be to shu t u p the religious schools h in the cout itry, and compel those who now supported t em to contrih site to schools that they abhorred.—(elear.) It was ass timed by those who supported the proposition of the Hot sourable Member, that nothing had been done hitherto on the subject of education. This was not the fact. For '27 years before the Government grant for education the Church of England had 550,000 children in its schoo] s; and in the nine years that had succeeded the Government grant they had added to the 550,000 children- no less than 400,000. Previous to the Govern ment grs int the annual subscriptions were 3,000/,, and since the Government grant their annual subscriptions had ittcre ased to 20,0001. As a proof that the people of Engle nd teere not unanimous in favour of what was called me re) " secular" education, he referred to what had c cc!zrred in Manchester, where, after a long diecussio u the word " secular" was omitted from the man to of a society established for promot ing edu cation. In Manchester, also. a committee had I%ee n formed, consisting of all classes of politich s, from the high es t Tory to the lowest Badice/, and of wen isters of every creed, until lately, when it was abandon el by the Roman Catholic priests, although not by the B (anon Catholic laity—and that committee pro posed to avail itself of all the schools already in existence to contril )ute to the maiutenance of schools approved of by the G svernment lospt ctor of Education. Now, he stilted. if two schools were established, giving secular education in each, and in each, too, the religious educa tion fitted,. for the children in that :.chool, would not that be a. perf rat system of education?-- (Hear, Lear.) Th e whole matter, as put forward by the Hon. Member fur would Friend, 7 crime• la great is lion. ave the )ols, as houses. ,ord st ly had 2k! not s, but shmen Ame- Oldham, rested upon falEe Fieciples. The whole mo tion rested on an error in principle, as well as in fact; for the Hon. Memb , r said ha would erect the great fabric of national prosperity on the solid basis or na • tional intellect. Now, he did not consider that as the only solid basis. Men was e moral, an intellectual, and a spiritual being, and they must educate all those powers which it had pleased Heaven to bestow upon him. All must be educate I, and one of them, and that the most important of all, must not be neglected, as it would he by a merely eecular education.—(llear, hear.) He said that the exertions of the clergy of England for the last ten years on this subject had been most CIT.' ditable to them; and so for as instruction went, the only question was whether they were not in their schools too highly instructing the children for their after occupa tions in life. But then it was said that in the Irish uni versities a secular education alone was to be given; but then those who msde such an objection ought to recol lect that these universities were intended for those whose minds were already formed, but in the schools the minds of children had to be formed. As to education in Ame rica, which had been referred to, he believed there was a great diversity of opinion amongst the different states. Religion was not, he believed, excluded from most of the schools. And then as to crime disappearing with educa-' tion, facts did not prove it to have done so. When edu cation in America was alluded to, he could not but point to Louisiana, where the penalty of death was at one time inflicted for teaching a black child to read or write. He believed the penalty was not now so severe. As to religion being taught by parents at home, be pointed to the state of the manufacturing dis tricts to show that parents were not in a con dition to impart it, and that the clergy were too few, in proportion to the population, to devote them selves to the task of teaching the children of the poor. As to religion not being taught with the. multiplica tion table, he admitted that such might be the case, but religion could well be mixed up with lessons in geogra phy and astronomy. And then as to history—let them look to the difference between a Catholic history of the reign of Queen Mary and a Protestant history of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, A member of the Spanish Cortes told him that he had been some time in England before he found out his mistake in thinking that Queen Mary was the most popular of British Sovereigns. Such was the different manner in which history might be, taught.—(Hesr.) He wished to see our national pros perity founded not only on intellectual advancement, much as he prized it, but on that which was the only sure basis—that of morality and religion.—(Cheers.) Mr. COBDEN said any one who had listened to the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend would have thought that the motion of the lion. Member for Oka ham was; not a proposition for Toting a larger sum , of money to supply a defect of education, the existence of which all were ready to admit, but that he hal coo so plan by which he proposed to withdraw the funds alreal ly applied to the instruction of the people in religic n. Oue would suppose that his Honourable Friend actual ly intended to abolish the National Church, and with draw the 5,000,0001. or 6,000,0001. now considered to , be the endowment of that Church, and that the moment , he should succeed in carrying his motion all the preee nt voluntary contributions of the Dissenting bodies wotild instantly be withdrawn. t The Secretary of State for Home Affairs admitted ttiat the present system hi id proved a failure; but grounded his oppodtion to the present motion upon the 'circumstance that some gel it le men had come from Manchester, and called on him, and had communicated to him a new local system, which he believed would succeed. If they wished to see whe tl ier the present system had failed, they had only to loort to the amount of money voted, which had remained for ;the last few years at 125,0001., notwithstanding the haat, use in the population. What, then, did the Government t fall back upon? The local system of Manchester, whtich had already failed, in the same way as the Governme eat plan, from the religious difficulty. The gentlemen se; ao came to town and waited upon the Right HOD. Barter et had done him the honour also of a visit. They told Ld m as they told the Right Hon. Baronet, that they had t I is concurrence of all the religious sects, both Rom .sin Catholics and Dissenters; but he had received a letter from them, after their return to iii ea chester, in which they regretted to inform him that ne, or, if he recollected aright, virtually the whole body • of the Roman Catholic clergy had seceded from that pla a of education; and why ? Simply because the commi etee which met in Manchester made it a fundamental priuc iple of their system that in all schools supported by pm tblic rates in Manchester the authorised version of the Is Linle should be read.—(Hear, hear.) How was it possibl , 'for such a plan to succeed in such places as Mancoester and Salford, where there were at least 100,000 Roman Cr ,tho lies, the poorest of the population, whom it would b. s the most dangerous to leave in ignorance? They were i a the same dilemma at Manchester as in that House; bt it he maintained that the little education they did get we a got surreptitiously by means of the Committee of the 3 ?rivy Council, and not by a vote of that House; and a cheat was, in point of fact, practised upon themselves an cl the country.—(Hear, hear.) There was a fundamenta 1 eva sion and fallacy about the whole of the education vote. When they talked so much of religious teaching i a this country, be asked them whether they vote( I the 125,0001. for education or religious teaching? Beca use he had always understood that it was not a vote fe r reli gious instruction. Could they vote it in the Hot iso for religious teaching if they openly avowed it? No, it could not be done; it had not been done for many y ears, and never would be done again. The Hon. and le ferried Solicitor-General had talked as if there were some great conspiracy to deprive the country of its ref .4 dolls faith, and institute schools for teaching infidelity. 1 Vhat he maintained was, that provision was already rat iC Le for religious training, on which twice as much was s r ,e nt as in any other country in the world, and he chat tlenged any one to controvert it. How, then, could it be said that he sought to exclude religion from education: 1 They had been taunted also with the use of the word s ecular; but he knew not how otherwise to express the re tcessity for supplying instruction in reading and writir tg, and teaching men to know something of their own nature, and training them in habits of thought. Ho nev, sr was opposed to the Bible or any other religious book : being read in schools, provided all were agreed upon t: ae sub! ject ; but what he did oppose was the levying of r ates or paying money out of a public fund, and then putting veto on a portion of their fellow-citizens, because if their children went to school, they would learn sometl dug to which their parents could not consent. But he had no desire practically to exclude the Bible. He sad no hesitation in avowing that his system was the sys tern of the Massachusets common schools. lie would not go with the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General to l Louisi ana, or to Georgia, or South Carolina. Massa rhusets was an old settled county, not a thinly peopled, fertile district, but one from which there was a vast e migra tion to other countries, the population bei tag of our own race, arid very much of our own habits. Why not adopt the same plan in England ? They h. td ; u now placed themselves in competition with the whole v world, and if a Manchester man saw some wor I derful piece of machinery from the United States in the great receptacle of the productions of the world, he veou ld say, what has been done at Boston may be done at Ma aches' ter. It was said that the effect of this motion would make them an irreligious people. He would meet them on that ground. He had been to Massachuset 3, and testing the religious feelings of its inhabitants L I the nnmber of churches, the attendance of the peo plc on religious worship, their support of religious teL t chers and Sunday schools, their ouservanco of the Sat ibath, or the respect paid by them to their religious tea eters, he challenged them to compare England with A [Lissa' chusets.—(lrenical cheers.) But was the reading of the Bible prohibited ? He would venture to say that there was probably not one out of a hundred schools there where the Bible was not read.—(Hoar.) But his Hon. Friend the Member fhr Oldham had no objection tto a parish using the Bible if it chose, as well as any other book. Why, then, could not England imitate Mare achu sets, which, in its earlier days, when the pilgrim 1: it?srrs came from England, practised as much inv.& atance as they left behind them? In ninety-nine out of a hun dred parishes in England he believed no one would object to the reading of the Bible without note or com ment. He believed the people of Massachueet s t o be as superior in intelligence to the people of Kent as th @ peo ple of Kent were to the people of Naples.—(lr ordeal cheers.) Why could not this system be introduce , I into England ? Was it because of the Established Chi arch ? Surely an Established Church, with a very rich e adow ment, which supported clergymen for every I iarish, must be supposed to afford the means of religious t ;duce tion gratis to the great mass of the people. It was urged that the proposed plan would supersede the ex isting school-rooms, but there was no reason why they s ,hould not be made available for carrying that plan into e eteau tion. Education was greatly needed in the agrict tltural districts, and though he did not for a moment w 'ish to faeten on the clergy of the Established Church t he re sponsibility of the prevailing ignorance, still the 3 r were interested in the promotion of secular education, for he could hardly understand how one could be a Prot ;extant without kno wing how to read. Ho knew many dish icts in which the clergymen of the Established Church h ad un dertaken more than anybody else in the cause of educa tion, and he knew the difficulties with which th, sy had to contend in obtaining the necessary support ii d some rural perishes where three-fourths of the laud was owned by absentee% lie believed it would be found th at the majority of the acres in the rural parishes were, on an average, o wne d b y a b sentee pro p r i e tors. lie wat ited to see plan e s t a bli s h e d b y w hi c h , f or th e purposes of se cular education, the parish should be able to ri ito the tphreo property.—(Hear, e a r m t ye sum laid out i n any other way. .(lie u a — r, hear.) 801. or 1001. so laid oat would do more to save pariel l from poor-rates and crim .e than n no thing more to say th an to express his great gretabib; i td edoa toll at the altered tone whiohmthaerdiscussion of this (it iestion assumed,n w as hi n e op h tie Belt withlast soar. had was n o o o w s ehj eet o and he was thankful to all who attemptedso to o assistas o aTin in the ca use of education—to whatever religion or part they m ight belong—because he saw the difficulties of taking any c ombined step, ()wine to tho in ti way those r elements which h ad a lw ays hitherto thwarted the, irgteonus en deavours; end perhaps there never w as a t i me w h en more was to be feared from that cause than the p resent. He still hoped, however, that they w ou ld st ill be ,ble to meet on this neutr al ground, out of the polo of re ligious strife and interests, for by no other means wog ad the poor of this country ever be educated.—(Cheers.) Sir R. 11. INGLIS ackeowledged with satistacti on the moderation of the Hon. Member's tone; and powe dial as he unhappily had been in the country, he hoped tb , Lion. Member would excuse him for saying that he wis` ted he had never been more powerful than in the arguae rat he had used that evening. He rose to support the po tepee& tion of the Hon. Member for Oldham, but ins t std of supporting him he had in fact proposed that th a 13 ible should be read.—(Hear, hear.) He added that he , lei sew his Hon. Friend the Member for Oldham was re at the Member to object to that, and touched bins affectiot eet ely on the shr:ulder in expectation of assent. Was that' as sent given? No; the lion. Member for Oldham loall ed as immoveable as at that moment.—(Laughter.) 1 le knew that the Hon. Member for the West Ridit 3g THE SUN, would not exclude the Bible from any school under his control, but was it fit that they should adopt a proposi- ton which would practically exclude it, together with tae catechism, and ell religious instruction?—(Hear, beer.) He would net repeat the 'arguments used by the lion. and Learned Solicitor-Geneeal, for no man could follow him on such a subject without great disadvantage. A speech more philosophical, or more tilled with religion and practed good sense, he lead not heard in that House; and he congratulated the Government on having such a cause so defended by one of their chief officers. He did net regard mere knowledge in itself as a benefit, tut rather as an unmixed evil when unsanctilied by the blessing of God. The question was not new either to the House or the country. A few years ago attention was called to the subject, and what had been the success of the two differeut parties compotfsag for public favour? The Earl of Ilarrowby, when a Member of that House, took the lead in the agitation, for the purpose of calling public attention to the want of Christian education, and a larger sum was raised by voluntary subscription than had been collected, he believed, for any other purpose. Wiest had the Dissenters done? It was only the other day that he saw it stated that they numbered one-half of the populatien of England. The assertion was ludi crous, and scarcely required comment, but assuming that they amounted to a fifth part, had they supplied a fifth part of the sum raised by general subscription for edu cation? They had not. But the proposition of the Hon. Member for Oldham was that the nation as a nation should repudiate religion as the foundation of education. —(Hear, hear) And if the Hon. Member in his reply should tell him that it would not be excluded from the general teaching of the country, he answered, no thanks to him, for he was doing what he could to exclude it. — (Hear, bear.) So far as his motion was concerned, so far did ho exclude it from the national system. He gave the Hon. Member for the %Vest Riding credit, from his own personal knowledge of him, for not wishing to be a party to support such a propcsition; but that was not the question. He did, in fact support it by voting in favour of a proposition that a nation ought to edu cate all its subjects without reference to religion. As the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General said, the people were called on in addition to all their voluntary sub scriptions, which were greater than those of any other country in the world, to support a rate, the object of which they abhorred. Was that language too strong? Was it too strong to compel a Christian parent to edu cate his own children, or the children of his neighbours, with an utter absence of all those hopes and lessons of wisdom which the Bible could give, and leave them to chance—aye, chance—for instruction in that which alone rendered knowledge precious and life valuable? If they compelled a parish to support a system which the major part of the inhabitants abominated, were they not doing that which, as far as in them lay, would bring up a generation of infidels? He regretted that his Right Hon. Friend and Colleague (Mr. Gladstone) was not then present in the House ; and he was authorised by his Right Hon. Friend the Mem ber for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Goulburn) to express his regret that he also was absent; but he (Sir R. Inglis) felt that the sentiments of both his Right Hon. Friends had been so fully and completely ex pressed in this House upon the subject, that it would be well understood that nothing but unavoidable absence had prevented them from making their statements to the House on this occasion. The Hon. Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) had asked them what a stranger was likely to think who had entered that House for a first time, and listened to the debate of that night. But he (Sir R. Inglis) would ask, could the stranger have supposed it possible that this question having no longer ago than the 7th cf June last been discussed and decided by a majority of 287 against 58 for the proposal of the Honourable Member for Oldham, they would so soon have had it again brought before them? And let the House bear this in mind, that what the Honourable Member then desired to engage the House to recog nize and admit was in the shape of a Bill, on which, even if the second reading had been agreed to, the House might hate had some locus penitenticc ou the fu ture stages; but they had now to deal with a re solution which contained the very essence of that Bill, and committed the House to the whole principle, and he did trust that there would be such a majority recorded against it that they would not again hear of the subject another year. The Hon. Member for the West Riding had alluded to the Irish colleges, in which he said the principle of the Member for Oldham's plan was embo died and in practical operation. Upon that subject he (Sir R. Inglis) saw no reason to alter the views he once expressed; but if he believed it to be an evil in the case of Ireland, it was not the fact of its having been adopted in Ireland that would iustify him in giving his consent to its adoption in England. On the contrary, in exact proportion as ho saw encouragement given to it else where, in that exact proportion was he bound to resist its introduction here.—(Hear.) With the deep convic tion on his mind that the proposition—plausible to some minds, but little adapted to catch the feelings or the principles cf the great body of the people of England— was itself of a most deleterious character, he did trust that the House would reject it now as they did last year; and that if it were again brought forward it would again be rejected by such majorities as to prove that the principle of this House was at least Christian and reli gious, and that they world not sanction any plan of education which was notlounded on the love and fear of God, our Creator and our Redeemer.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. S. HERBERT protested against persons arguing this question, and appealing to the amount of ignorance and vice that we had to repress, as though they alone were the persons who objected to ignorance and de tested vice—that there particular system was, on that question, the only system which he ought to adopt, and that, if we did not adopt it, we were conniving at the continuance of that ignorance and vice. —(Hear, hear.) There was no question that the system of education in this country must be religious as well as secular; and ho believed if the Bible wore excluded from schools we should not be able to get children to attend them.— (Hear, hear.) In this country, too, it was his firm be lief that no educational system could bo successful which was not founded upon the full development of the sys tem of each religious denomination. He himself was a Churchman, but he did not for ono moment undervalue the labours of the dissenting bodies. He knew how much we were indebted to them—(Bear) —he rejoiced to witness their activity in this field; and he hop ed the differences which had hitherto existed between the Privy Council and some of the educational societies in England would soon be put an end to. Very many of those dif ferences had arisen upon points respecting which agree ment was more easy than might be imagined; and he be lieved that everything the Committee of Privy Council had urged and desired to be adopted, they might have obtained by " recommendation," though they had failed when they insisted upon stipulations. In fact, it was contrary to our habits of self-government, and an invasion of our municipal and parochial system, to have particular stipu lations enforced from a central board, though we were willing to take them from experience, and on the high character of the gentlemen composing the Committee, if they came to us as simple " recommendations.—(Hear , hear.) In the present day there Were very numerous bodies of Irishmen in our large towns, the majority of whom were Roman Catholics; and even if it were for no other reason than this, he did hope the Government would apply themselves to the discovery of some method of increasing religious instruction which might be sup ported without doing violence to the religious feelings of the people. The Hon. Member for Oldham had stated that religious instruction would be supplied from other sources than the schoolmaster. And that was the case undoubtedly with the rich, but it was not so with the poor, for whatever education was to be had by the child of the poor man must be givers him at the school, and the school only; and if we forbade religious education at school we practically debars ed,him from all education whatever. In conclusion the Right Hon. Gentleman said that he did not think the plan of the Hon. Member for Oldham was one which the , people of this country they wou id lt s l a aecept. A Divine auth. srity had said, " Suffer little children to come unto me ;" but by this proposition practically, " Suffer ahem not to come unto me." He should, therefore, vo to against the motion. Mr. L. HEY WORTH said lie was persuaded that the voluntary principle would ultimately succeed in giving the people all the education the it was needed, and in the best shape in which it could be given. And thinking the system proposed by the Hon. Viember fur Oldham a most vicious system, ho should de eidedly vote against the motion. Mr. FOX, in reply, said th it when he took into ac count the principle with which Sir R. Inglis had started, that knowledge was an evil, he ceased to be surprised at what would otherwise have bes ea the astounding misap prehension at which the Hon.. baronet had arrived as to the opinions he (Mr. Fox) enter t ained, and the principles ho advocated. He trusted the H on. Baronet was singular, or nearly so, in that opinion, : For he believed that we could not engage in the pursuit ; of any study, nor could any science be unfolded to the mind, without a religious tendency.—(Hear, hear.) He had always understood that it was the business of the ministers of religion to see after the religious educat ion of the children of their flocks. From all the i atiormation he had re ceived on the subject of the National Schools in Ireland, he was led to believe ti at the children in those schools were remarkable for th a clearness and extent of their religious knowledge. An. i yet the reading of the Scripture extracts even was no t a matter of obligation in them. He thought, therefoi re, that he was justified in referring to the state of the l :rish National Education schools as a convincing argumen tin favour of the propo sition he had submitted to the louse. It was said that was a measure to exclude religic in; but it might as well be said that it was a measure to exclude the sun. The people of this country were est lentially a religious peo ple; and he bad no apprehension but that religion would be taught to those who neigh t receive any education whatever. Ile would develope t he religious propensities of children; but he would not do that by the same agency by which he would i mpart to them other branches of instruction, because that agency was not available for that purpose. The House then divided, and ti to numbers were— For the motion ••• 6.0 a.. 49 Against it ... 139 Majority against the net .tion THE HOP Di IJTY. Mr. EODGES rose to ask b )r leave to bring in a Bill fur a reduction of the Excis ;0 duty on hops. The amount of the duty at present v, , as 2d. per lb, with an addition of 5 per cent.; and he p reposed to reduce it to Id. per lb. He alq) proposed tt tat the duty at present owing should be paid to the full a mount. Formerly hops had not been cultivated in this country, but had been imported from Flanders. They t ad subsequently been planted hero with considerable ; success. In the year 1711 a duty of Id. per lb. was first ; laid on English hops, and a dui). of 3d. per lb on forel; in. hops. In the year 1804 Mr. Pitt had doubled the • itAy on English hops, and had at the cause time very nsiclerably increased the duty on foreign hops. From the year 1819, when the clillinity of paying the Govern ah .nt duty commenced down to the present time, the diffi lty had gone on in creasing, cod the profits of the he er had gone on di minishing to such an extent that it rues impassible for LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 23, 1851. him any longer to meet the demand. HA, therefore, moved for leave to bring in a Bill %birth would nut au end to that system of credit which even the Commis sioners of Excise, in their 16th report, had condemned. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not, consistently with his duty to the public, agree to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, though he edmitted it was less objectionable than many proposals en the same subject which had bEen brought under his notice. It did not propose to put :Again into the pockets of the hop-growers the duty they had already received; and he admitted also that the system of extended credit given to the hopgrowers at their own request was a most fatal gifr. But it was eot the way to put an end to that sys tem to bring in this Bill. It had been contended that when the protective duty was reduced, the home duty was not also reduced; bat the protective duty was in , effect a prohibitory duty, as shown by the result; for last year the consumption of home-grown hops amounted to 42,000,0001b3., while that of foreign hops was only 250,000ib5. If the proposed measure was to reduce the foreign as well as the home duty in favour of the con sumer, there might be some argument adduced in sup port of it; but the Honourable Gentleman proposed to exclude the foreign competition, and thus throw au additional burden on the consumer. He admitted there were exceptions in which the producer paid the duty; but they had been created by the producers themselves. They had brought into cultivation for the growth'of hops land that was not fit for it; but yet, since 1830 (with the exception of 1547) the duty had been regularly paid each year. The average produce from 1843 to 1845 was 30,000,000165., and the price was very high-120s. per cwt.; in 1845 it was 150 s. per cwt.; but in 1846, 1847, and 1848 they increased the growth to 47,000,0001b5., and the average price fell to 755. per cwt. That was before foreign hops were imported, and it arose from the excessive production of inferior hops. In the next year the price rose again, but then the produce in that year (1849) was but 16,000,0001b5., while last year the produce was increased to 48,000,0001b5., and the price again fell. They were thus the cause of the evil them selves. In 1848 he had received such representations of the distress of the growers that he put off the payment of the duty, and in 1819 a deputation of influential peo sons waited on him, and represented that the country , would be ruined if the payment of the duty was en forced; but he was hard-hearted enough to refuse ac quiescence in their demand, and the duty, amounting to 200,0001., was paid, with the exception of 8,000/., within a month or two of the collactiou being made. After such instances as that, the Hon. Gentleman must not be sur prised if he did not place very strong reliance on those statements of distress. The surplus in the revenue which ho counted on for next year would only amount to 250,0001., which would be swallowed up by the re duction of the hop duty; and for that reason, as well as the others ho had adduced, he hoped the House would support him in rejecting the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. Mr. A. B. HOPE said it appeared that the fact of a certain number of men having paid their hop duty was treated as a good joke by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer. They were taunted with having made a great many propositions on that subject, but why did not something of the sort emanate from the Chancellor's bench? It was also said that the hop-growers uttered more complaints than any other class; but it should be remembered that no crop was more subject to vicissitudes and the unfavourable influences of wind and weather than that delicate plant. Mr. BASS said ho had stated on a former occasion, when that subject was under discussion, that the diffi culties under which the hop-grower at times laboured were neither caused by the duties nor foreign importa tion, but the fluctuations in the amo unt of p roduce. In ( 7 00 5 . 6, 00 I 0 n , had again th e r efallen was lwhil e B37, t i h number n e 1843 they f acres had under dln i diminished i e p h t a n d 4 t no article on which the consumer paid so l ittle , in pro portion portion to the amount paid by the producer , as in the 1 0 th 00 ;es a p n e d ct in to 18 t 5 h 0 e y ac w re e s r . e S W O case of hops. Sir E. FILMER felt it to be his duty, as Member for West Kent, to support the motion of his Hon. Friend. He would defy the Chancellor of the Exchequer to find one tenant in the wcald of Kent who had not for the last two years paid his rent cut of his capital, and not his profits. Mr. FULLER also supported the motion. Colonel SIBTHORP was always an humble but per severing supporter of any proposition for the relief of the agricultural interests; but when he saw Hon. Mem bers giving their votes in favour of a Government which opposed every suggestion for that purpose, he could not reconcile himself to vote in favour of a partial measure introduced by such Hon. Members. If hi s H o n. Friend opposite was to disengage himself from his pre sent company noscitur a sociis—(Laughter) and bring forward a general measure for the relief of all classes, he should have his support, but not otherwise. Mr. FREWEN expressed his regret that his Hon. Friend the Member for West Kent did not support the motion relating to agricultural distress which had been before the House. He thought there was no part of the kingdom in which so much distress existed as in the hop districts. There was no tax so unjust as that, and it was the only one which remained unrepetled since the war. He had his doubts as to the accuracy of the prices stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer of hops du ring former years. He did not know upon what au thority the Right Hon. Gentleman had made his state ment. One house in the borough might tell one thing, and another another thing; but a good deal depended upon the quality of the hops taken. Even in one year the hops grown in one part of the country brought a much higher price than those grown in another. He had heard of so much as 6/. 10s. being paid in Sussex, but the average price was only 31. 7s. The planters in the weald of Kent must have lost at least 1/, per acre on an average. One great claim which the hop planters had on Government for a reduction of duty was founded upon the precarious nature of the crop. When the hop growers got the lowest price for their hops, they had the highest amount of duty to pay; and he therefore hoped that the Government would take the case into their ear liest consideration. He (Mr. Frewen) doubted if a single landowner received, in the rape of Hastings, one quarter of his rental for 1850. Mr. COBDEN could not understand the tactics of the hop-growers and their advisers in this matter. They called for a reduction of taxes, and they opposed a revi sion of taxation. The hop duty brought in only 300.000/. a year, and yet a little army of tax-gatherers were employed to collect it. Such a thing was not know except:in Turkey. The fact was, that come great brewers did not wish to have the tax repealed. If the hop-growers of Kent and Sussex were resolved to get rid of it, they should demand its total abolition, and not make two bites of a cherry. Mr. PLUMPTRE said the penny a pound reduction would be a great relief to the growers ; as an East Ken grower he was prepared to accept it. Mr. HODGES replied. The House then divided, when there appeareq— For the motion... •• •• e. „ Against it C F a at o l Brookeo tc tiMeu to r s h ra p r t ra e y . et alterations Lords extract m ds i latelysoB f i ° t i eeon:fTreasuryoeany ny p° memorialpermission rEa t is t s h i n 1 for pp Majority o e postponed his . o r notice copy r o e f si t e : h c , ti : O. ng r 6 d l er Baja in i lll l l : U'U' o jsl : luEEn le o tt s e ' r from the Treasury, t sanctioning the ° the ft Woods n KSi 'land Tgardens by the or aeore l rs; . and also application made Commissioners hrsem on to f the rido \i‘rnokdesnasinndg tlo'no;sirtsd.efnosr. Lord SEYMOUR said there was no Order in Coun cil on the subjecn therefore the Government enlcln produce it. The pleasure of her Majesty was ed° known, and the gardens . were th r r e o:n it o h p a ea d . Id ho no more enjoyment Mr. HUME said it required an order from the Trea been known The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the siHon.xxi months .G o cn e t n oh t sß l e aD m gE n o n st hwaa wast m h e i g s ro t e a i mistaken. Mr. t for equestrians in the Park than now exist e d, h e did not, think any inroad would be made upon Kensington-gar dens. The Exhibition had realised the expectations of every one. Colonel SIBTHORP denied that it had. Oa the contrary, the tradesmen of the metropolis had been grossly insulted, and a gross wrong practised on them. In these days every thin g was sacrificed to new notions. The Honourable Member for the West Riding was the poor man's friend. Thera Lord deliver tLe poor from such friends. Liberty, pperty, and . everything was trampled under foot for the purpose of obtaining popu larity. He (Colonel Sibthore) had never looked upon that building, the Exhibition, and never would do. England had patronised the foreigner, and condemned her own people. The fools stepped in and stepped out of the building to see trumpery and trash, and omitted to pay their tradesmen's bills. It was a desecrati o n o f their religion. Nobody h ad a higher respect than he had for the most Reverend Prelate at the head of the Church of England; but he must say that ho regretted to see the part which that most Reverend Prolate had taken in the opening of the Exhibition. lie was not ashamed to say that he (Colonel Sibthorp) had done everything in his power to check the Exhibition, which he believed w ou ld prove a great curse to th is country i . n a moral, social, and, what was of more importance, In a religious point of view. Lord C. HAMILTON differed from the Hon. Mem ber for the West Riding when he said that the Exhibi tion had realised al t h e expectations entertained of it, for he felt that the great object they all had in view was still to be attained —he meant such arrangements as should facilitate the admission of the multitudes who had hitherto been debarred visiting it by the high prizes of admission. Mr. L ABOUCHERE assured the Noble Lord that the point to which he referred had not escaped the attention of the C om missioners. That v er y morning the Com missioners, in conjuction with representatives from the different railway companies, had been engaged in con sidering the best means of affording .to the multitudes the opportunity of visiting th e © r Exhibttion without in convenience and without danger.to the public peace. He would not enter into a contest with the Hon. and Gallant Member for Lincoln as to the . merits of the Exhibition. For his own part ho believed it would prove not only a source of national pleasure to the people of this country, but of great benefit throughout the civilized world. Mr. LUSHINGTON said that he had been requested by some of his constituents at Kensington to state their dissatisfaction and disgust at the admission of equestrians into Kensington-gardens. The motion was then withdrawn. THE KAFIR WAR. In answer to Mr. lIUME, who had a motion for a copy of the dispatch stating the estimate of the expenses of the Kafir war. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as a matter of course, some uncertainty attended any pre sent estimate. The report of commissariat officers esti mated the expense at 400,000/. if the war continued for six months; but as he hoped it would not last so long, led to rely so confidently en the continoince of the present terns of renewal that the result, paradoxical ae it might sound, had been arrived at, that a twenty-one year:' leave was often of the swine valve in the market as the fee simple of the estate. Ia that cast: it would be the proviece of the Comm ra issieners to dete the die trice where in consequence of an invariable usage the lease would be suffered to run out on one-third instead of one-half of the entire. term. Property in houses did not stand on the same footing as property in land; but it . was proposed to place it in a nearly equivalent posi tion. From the deteriorating nature of hours property it would be hardly feasible to make an addition as a re newed rent of half of the present value of tile property at the termination of the lease; and, therefore, it vi .-, proposed, with respect to house property, to give the right of perpetual renewal on the present amount of the fines, but to impose on the lessee an adAitional rent, -- equal to half of the new right he would thus have HOUSE OF LORDS, ,May 0 2. acquired, and so to divide the advantage as in other eases The LORD CHANCELLOR took his stilt upon the Wool- in equal proportions between the lessor and lessee. But sack at Five o'clock. there was one species of property which it was not pro- PETITIONS. posed to put on the same footing as any of the others to The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a petition which he had referred, and that was the property in from Newark against Papal aggressiot e. tithe-rent charges. It was proposed, with respect to The Duke of ARGYLL presented several petitions tithe-rent charges, to let them run out. The Commis from places in Scotland to a similar purport. sioners were of opinion that that property stood in quite Earl FORTESCUE presented several petitions from a different position from any other description of pro places in Devonshire against Papal Iggression; also a party, inasmuch as iu the cases of tithe-rent charges petition from Barnstaple in favour of'. the Copyhold Ea- there had been no improvement in past times, and there franchisement Bill. was no future opening for improvement. There was in Lord STANLEY presented a pet ition against the that case no plea of lands being intermixed with other Episcopal and Capitular Estates Mena gement Bill from freeholds; and in general there was no circumstance of the Dean and Chapter of Wells (as we understood). association or attachment which connected a person with PROPERTY-TAX MI ,L. a tithe-rent charge, or with property in land. With re- On the motion of the Marquis of LA NSDOWNE this spect to manorial rights, he had to observe that they could hardly be looked upon a • Bill was read a third time and passed. s a very fitting ecclesiastical EPISCOPAL AND C APITULe in ESTATES appanage. In that case it was proposed to let the leases MANAGEMENT BIL L. run out, or to have them put up for immediate sale. Pro- The Earl of CARLISLE, in moving the second read- visions were introduced for facilitating the enfranchise ing of this Bill, claimed their Lords! lips' indulgence. ment of copyholds ; and any money arising from sales, The Bill was one of a most complicat ed nature, on a exchanges, or enfranchisements would he vested in the subject to which he had not until rec eutly directed his Church Estate Commissioners ; first, for the purpose of attention, and one the provisions of va, hich were sure to satisfying the exigencies of the Act; and next, for the militate against the interests of powerful parties. purpose of being applied to the common fund for eccle siastical purposes. He had not yet made He had, however, the encouragement tc 'know that it was any re oneference to the case of timber. There was, perhaps, no which was unconnected with par: - .y politics, and he hoped that after giving it a second re ading their Lord- species of ecclesiastical property which suffered from ships would consent to refer it to aSe le" Committee— the existing arrangements more than timber, for it fre (Hear, hear, from the Tore' benches> —carefully consti- quently happened that the lessee had no right to cut tuted, when its provisions might be ma turely considered, and that the lessor had no right to enter to cat. The con and he hoped that it would not De thought sequence was that the timber on the Church estates was that by consenting to this sec oad reading any generally found in a very bad and wasteful condition. peer would be pledged to any t:. an of the provi- It was therefore proposed that, on the payment of the sions of the Bill, or to any princip /e, except that it proper value, the timber should be entirely reserved to would be advisable to introduce a be' ;t er management of the lessee. There were in the Bill provisions for fecal- Church property, so as to make it r lore profitable and tating arrangements between the lessor and the lessee, more available for ecclesiastical purposes.—(Hear, with a view to promote any improvement which would hear.) It was admitted that the pin 'sent management require an unusual outlay. But with respect to the ordi of that property was unsatisfac e try both to the nary valuations, they would be taken at the termination, lessors and the lessees. It was ; stated, upon high not as at present, of every seven years, but at the termi authority, that these estates might be let on terms nation of every twenty-one years. He could not but more advantageous both to the ('%! [lurch and to the think that that alteration would be productive of mate lessees. The Committee of the Hon se of Commons had rill benefit to the lessee. It would afford scope for the reported that the system of fines 'et as equally unpro- improvement of property, without depriving the Church fitable to the Church and to the le asee, and militated of any ultimate advantage which might accrue from that against the improvement of the props rty. It had long been improvement. That provision rescued the Bill, in his expected that some legislation woe tel take place on this opinion, from the charge of alienating the property of subject, and this expectation had la aterially interfered the Church. He believed, on the contrary, that a greatly with the formation of agreements 1 etween the Church increased income would be secured to the Church by and the lessees. In 1849 a Commis ;ion had been ap- the measure, while it would give great scope for pointed to consider the subject. In 1850 the Commis- the accomplishment of the most desirable Church sioners, who were the Earl of Hari haerhY, the Dean of purposes. Those were the material provisions in the Canterbury, the present Solicitor-Ger oral, Mr. Archbold, Bill with regard to the relations between the Church and Mr. Jones, presented two reports , and the Bill now and the lessee, and he looked upon them as the on their Lordships' table embodied tl ite recommendations most important portions of the measure. It cone of those two reports. The tenure of the property held Prised, however, other arrangements not wanting in on lease from the Church, in which he believed there importance upon the general management of Church had been very little variation, at lea tt since the days of estates. These arrangements were proposed chiefly Queen Elizabeth, was by lease for th ne3 lives, renewable with the view of giving effect to the intention of the at the termination of one life; or on lease for terms of Legislature that bishops, and deans, and chapters should years, either for 21 years, renewable a t the end of every h a ve fixed instead of fluctuatin g incomes. That inten -7 years; for 30 years, renewable at Val ) end of every 10 tion had hitherto been very imperfectly realised; fur years; or for 40 years, renewable ae the expiration of some bishops had received less than had been intended every 14 years. There were some can ea in which the for them, and others had received more. Tee estates Church had the power of granting le saes for 90 years, would be vested in the Church Estate Commissioners, but that was under special Acts of ,Parliament. The and the bishops would receive the fixed incomes allotted rent received under these leases had :always been very to them by law, until under the operation of the Bill an small in amount, and a l mos t nominal', and the fines re- endowment of land equivalent to the incomes so fixed ceived in renewal constituted the mi ii n portion of the could be settled on them. In order to provide for the property of the Church. It appeare d that on leases fur immediate wants which would arise tinder the Bill, a lives the system had always been to :,s sess the fines upon Power would be given to the Commissioners to borrow a calculetion of 5 per cent. or upwa. tt Is, that is so as to money on debentures. He repeated what he had stated secure to the lessee 5 per cent. or ups re n•ds on the money at the commencement of his address, that he submitted he paid down as his fine. In the ca se of leases for the Bill in order that it might receive a fell and fair terms of years, the intention had been: to give the lessee, consideration. If the Bill were read a second time he when ho paid down his money, interest t as high as 7,8, proposed that it should be referred to a Select Cow or 9 per cent. In the most ordinary case, which was a inittee, by whom its details would be duly considered. lease for 21 years, the custom of most dioceses had been It was not for him to presume to give advice to the Right to make the fine equal to a year and a half's purchase of Rev. Prelates as to the course which they miget think the annual value of the property tee be let. That was Proper to pursue upon that occasion; but he could not giving the lessee 7 per cent. for his m ()nay. Their Lord- help stating his belief that it would be impossible to carry ships were aware that the landed pro; :i, erty of this court- through Parliament as it was at present constituted, or try generally sold for about 30 years' purchase, which as it was ever likely to be constituted, any measure for enabling the heads of the Church to run cut their leases gave a purchaser not much above 3 1 sir cent. Were he to get 5 par cent. he would give or '.y 20 years' par - and to enter into the full enjoyment of the whole of those estates. Ile should say, too, that ho very much doubted, chase; if 6 per cent. 16i years' pure iaase; and if 9 per cent., only 11 years' purchase. It w could seem , ther e- even if such a measure could be carried, whether it fore, that there was ample oppor ;unity for making would be fitting fur bishops and other ecclesiastical dig these estates reduce a much la rger income to the nitaries to be involved in all the labour and difficulty of p, clergy, and at the same time to put the property on a letting and managing landed property. lie believed that footing more conducive to the well-t nderstood interests the Church would receive a large increase of income of the lessees. Of course, very diffe rent views had been from the passing of that measure; he did not like to entertained as to the principle whirl i ought to regulate commit himself to any precise calculation as to what the final adjustment of this species iif property. Some might be the amount of that increase; but he should contended that it should be dealt with as though the state that persons peculiarly conversant with the subject Church had the right and power to ru:a all the leases out, had estimated it at double or treble the sum at present and at the end of subsisting terms to come into the full received. Under those circumstances ho would respect and undivided enjoyment of the whole , property. In the fully submit to the Right Rev. Prelates whether they contrary view, it was assumed by (Abe era that the lessees could better consult for the promotion of the important were entitled, if the aid of Parliament; were called in, to interests committed to their care, than by giving to the a perpetual renewal upon the same terms as those to Bill a careful and courteous, but at the same time a most which they had heretofore been accustomed. Let it be searching and scrutinising consideration. He felt con remembered in what position the parties respectively fident in the purity of the motives with which the Bill stood. The bishops and other ecclesiastical dignitaries had been brought forward; he felt confident in the nature could not afford to renew, for t hey had no other of the measure itself, and in the advantages it was cal means of subsistence. The lessee of ten could wait, and culated to produce; he felt confident, too, in the charac it was often his interest to do so, for the church digni- ter of those to whom he had the honour of submitting tary might be in infirm health and not expected long to it; and he had, therefore, no hesitation in calling upon remain in the enjoyment of his office, and might be their Lordships to give it a second reading.—(Bear.) tempted to renew on disadvantageous terms; and their The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said he felt Lordships would agree with him in thinking that no class much pained at finding himself compelled to cast any of men ought to be less exposed to uncertainty and pre- disparagement upon a measure which had been proposed cariousness of income than those who. filled places of by her Majesty's Government, with a view, he was sure, ecclesiastical dignity. Therefore without the aid of Par- to promote the best interests of the Church, and which lisuaent it would be impossible to effect an arrangement had been brought under their notice with so much eta which should materially increase 010 income of the dour and ability by the Noble Earl. He felt convinced Church by taking away from bishops. or other ecclesi- that the Commissioners on whose report the Bill was astical dignitaries the temptations which they now had founded had been animate d b y a sincere desire to ensure to renew. The recommendation of th a Commission was the spiritual welfare of the community at large. But ho 3 compromise between the extra me views which was compelled by a paramount sense of duty to with he had stated, and this was the objet tof the Bill which hold his assent from what appeared to him to be the he then had the honour of introduci 3ge which the Com- to their Lord- l e ad in g p rinci p le of the measure. He considered, like ships. The main ground of compromi s many of his Right Rev. Brethren around him, that the mission recommended was to give to lie lessees a perpe- Bill as it then stood would be tantamou nt to an alien ation of the remaining property of t he Chu . rch They tual right of renewal. This, he admitted, was a very barge concession, but he did not see lin what other pos-their predecessors, and I had received that property fren ... they felt bound to transmit it, if possible, to . their sum si tie way they could materially improve the income of cessors. The right of perpetua renewal which it was sue Church than by making some terns with the lesseee , , Proposed to give to the present lessees, appeared to him who had many ways of making their wishes and just claims felt in Parliament. It was proposed , therefore, to differ but little from the right of unlimited pos that leases should have a perpetual right of renewal. session, and the heads of the Church, by giving that Jives. This had Ile would deal first with leases for J right, would, in his opinion, be abandoning the tr us t always, upon good grounds , been thoug t a most objec- committed to their charge. The Noble Earl h a d, tie/table arrangement. It exposed both parties to the however, to a certain extent, relieved him from the greatest amount of uncertainty, and rendered insurances uneasiness he should otherwise feel at finding that necessary. It was therefore proposed to convert all measure read a second time, when he had told them he leases for lives into leases for an equivalent term of considered that those Noble Lords who might support years. There were special cases which might render the second reading would not be pledged to any thing it undesirable to substitute a term of years in all cases of 1 more than a fair consideration of th e w h o l e o f th a t sub this description of tenure , and power wou l d t he re f o re be i ject. If he could feel assured that that were the case, he gto leave the tenure undisturbed in theao cases, iven to the Commissioners , whom it was propo sed to ' should feel very considerably relieved. B u t he had been oint app , informed that, according to the usage of Parliament, ouly substituting a term of years for the last life. Thus, when a measure which had been read a second time was radually, all leases would be under the same category referred to a Select Committee, the Committee could of leases for years. How were these to be dealt with? not deal with its principle, and was merely empowered He would take the instance referred to by the Com- to consider the clauses by which that principle was to be missioners by way of illustration. A farm or estate, carried into effect. Now, if that were the case, he should worth 1001. a year, was to be let on lease for 21 years, feel it his duty to express his opposition to the second and, at the expiration of the first seven years, the reading of the measure. lle pert*, ctly agreed with the lessee would be entitled to have a lease for seven years Noble Earl that matters could not and ought not to re more to be added to the fourteen remaining unexpired. main as they were at present. He believed the exisiting It had been ascertained that the septennial payment of a system was vicious in principle a nd objectionable in prsc• fine o f a year and a half's purchase, or 1501., was equi- tire, and that it had no other recornn3endation than that lent as nearly as possible to a rent of 251, a year, to com- it had been in operation for a period of 300 years. mend, as it was said, in prasenti. If the lessor should Nothing could give him greater pleasure than to support choose to run his lease out he would for fourteen years a measure which would contribute to the improvement of without any dimi receive no flue whatever, but at the end of fourteen years the management of Church property would become entitled to the full enjoyment of 1001.; nation of that property; but he could not censientiously and it had been ascertained that the payment of 1001. a feel that that was the character of the measure then year to commence fourteen years hence, which was the under their consideration. extreme eteht of the lessor, would be equivalent to 631. The Bishop of LONDON • said he hoped some Noble Ice of the House would es computed year. The present receipts of the lessor might bo Lord acquainted with h C how far the e e e llouse would pledge itself to computed to be equivalent to 25/. a year, and his extreme Plain to ilemot`heewßill by supporting its second reading. rights to about 63/. a year, a difference which gave an the hh principle . t b'ected to the principle ot giving to lessees ample margin for adjustment; and the Commissioners id the e entirely r bt ef °perpetual renewal. He believed that lessees proposed to divide the advantages in the following way had no g such right equitably, legally, or morally. The —the; henceforth the septennial fine should be paid to lessees had no right to demand more then the value of the Clutch calculated at the same rate of interest as at their interest in the property. That interest might, he presort, but only on a part of the annual finable value, believed, be easily estimated, and to it, or to its and at the end of the now existing term an annual rent h d they any legitimate claim. Ho • . a m ount 0 only, a wailed it to b should be thenceforth paid to the Church equal to th understood that if ho assented to the second e reading of other half of the annual finable value. To apply the the Bill he did not pledge himself to the same instance which he had already given—instead of . . 1 laid down • 'that . adoption of the renewal of PrillelP o in it upon subject. N paying as now a fine of 150/. upon the r more desirous than he was of seeing the ' ° one was his letoe, the lessee would have to pay 751. as a fine he Church made available for the rem propel arty of the upon half the annual value, and for the other half but that oval of spiritual des years, titution; measure would diminish the would lave to pay 501. at the end of fourteen when his interest would has® expired. Other equivalent of the means of pro viding for that destitution in by which future times. The heads of arrangements were proposed as alternatives, the Church held their proper' either a rent of smaller amount might commence fi at an and rent country, and they had no rightforor to give up that property. might be respectively increased or diminished, - referred to a Select see the whole of that subject whole night be resolved into an immediat© rent to co . in 1 whom it would be, Committee of their Lordships, by mence et once. But the upshot of the whole transaction , . annual value of the impartially considered. But he hoped their Lordships was, tint the lessor, out of the whole . wouldpause a before w o uld bo eauivalent to 441. re they sanctioned the principle of a properte, would receive what i right to a perpetual between 251., which renewal of leases of Church property. a year, that is, just the precise mean_ and ' `the eDuke of RICHMOND said he thought that Bill was equivalent to the present receipts of the . Church, ! extreme rights. He was much more against the lessees than against the lcs -651., which was equivalent to its . be in making a SM. But he second reading knew tin difficulty which there must was ready to assent to the the result of th . that the calculat on upon so nice a question,but of the. Select o measure on the distinct understanding . _ t might be stated thus—thet the Church In- 1 Committee would not be debarred from the right arratigenen • • 'nto the whole stead of running out the whole lease would practically , of instituting a full and fair Inquiry i F 1 d run out ;he leases only so far as half of the annual value I subject. The lessees of Church property in_ e , ng an of the property was concerned; and insttad of renewing I wore not by any means placed in eo favourabL a ro- Ireland. Tee Act the fine at its present amount on the whole annual value, ! sition as their brother lessees in . contained a clauto it would renew, on half the annual value, half of the pre- 1 of Parliament in force in Ireland. renewal - scrip fire; and thus the Church would gain exactly one- 1 under which the lessees• could insist to n nv a e of half of its extreme rights, and the lessee would come ' the leases. That was what ought into ession of one-half of his extreme claims. It was in this country, and then they would not have had those pees proposed to employ the agency of the present Church constant discussions ueen that subject. There were Bill to which he very rruch Estate ..I,ommissioners, appointed by the Act of last see- many details of the oh- Estate they ought ' sion, fot the purpose of ascertaining the precise rights of jetted; but lie thought t h at their eons. _not to refuse to fine, or the proportion of the fine to the value of the pro- take the whole question into ,,u consideration. perty it each particular instance. They would also be I The Duke of BUCCLI. te said it appeared to him di ni ,- cr;e • who that those ecclesiastical g i.._ . Were so deeply invested with a further discretion. It appeared from I ! interested in that matter ought to be allowed to be I the evidince taken upon the subject that there were cer heard by counsel against the Bill. He had himself Min disricts, and more eepecially in the north of I presen ted a petition the other day from th e D ean an d England where, either from some extreme notion of an Chapter of Westminster, praying that that privilege old right or from invariable usage, the lessee had been 1 he proposed taking v. vo'e for 300,0001, Ehe 7a3 appointed in that hope, he would have to ask for un ad ditional vote. Mr. HUME said his communications from the Cwe led him to htlieve that the expense would be upwards of 1,000,0001. Mr. ADDERLEY askod from what revenue the two commissioners wouli be paid who had been sent out? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he proposed they should be paid by this country. The nomination of the Committee: on the income-tax was postponed till this day. On the order of the day for considering the Lodging house; Bill, Lord ASHLEY said he proposed referring it to a Select Committee. The other orders of the day were thFat disposed of, and The House adjourned at 20 minutE,ll past Ono might be granted to them. It was a very convenient thing in that as well as the other House of Parlia ment to get through a second reading by referring a Bill to a S'elect Committee. He could understand the s p.. pointment of a'Select Committee to consider the ma , nagereent of episcopal and capitular estates, and then to refer that Big to such a Committee. That would be the course which he thought might be more satisfacto rily adopted. It appeared te hire, without meaning to go into the details of the Bill, that it was the com mencement of an interference with the property ot the Church which ought not to take place, and a destroying of that independeece which the Church ought to possess in this country. At such a moment as the present, too, when they were stemming the aggressions made upon the Church, he considered the introduction of such a measure was most unwise, as it seemed a measure cal culated to injure the independence of the Church. He fully agreed with the Right Rev. Prelate that the Bill was but a temporary remedy for a temporary evil, when it ought to be of a more comprehensive nature to be really useful. The Earl of HARROWBY (who spoke in a very low tone) was understood to observe that the question they had to consider was, whether they would go into Com mittee upon the general subject of Church property of that description, or refer that particular Bill to a Select Committee? The mode proposed—namely, that of re ferring the Bill to such a Committee, was the usual ono adopted for dealing with such matters, and doing so did not commit any party on the general principle of the measure. After having referred to some of the details of the Bill, and replied to some of the observations made upon them by the Bishop of London, the Noble Earl asked their Lordships whether they were prepared to reject the only means which just now presented them selves for providing for the great and growing wants of the Church? Lord STANLEY said it appeared to him that there was a very general concurrence with regard to that measure upon two points ; first, that the various com munications and correspondence which had taken place relative to the matter had directed public attention to it, and then that the inquiry which both Houses of Parlia ment had made had led to the almost universal consent that some legislation ought to take place on the subject; The public mind had been so excited on the question, and the public attention so much called to it, that it was better for the interests of the Church, and thoee con nected with its property, that they should come to some determined course of management with respect to that particular description of property. On the other hand, there was a general feeling that the question should not be approached without giving to alt parties concerned full notice of the matter, as if it were a private Bill af fecting property in which they had an inteseet. Ad should have no hesitation as to the course which he should pursue were the question before them one simply to affirm or reject the principle of the Bill. But the question was a much narrower one — that of voting for referring the Bill, or not, to a Select Committee. He did not think they were either affirming or rejecting the principle of the Bill by referring it to a Select Committee; a n d h e conce i ve d that the Right Rev. Prelate had somewhat underrated the power of a Select Committee when he supposed that the principle of the Bill would be affirmed by such a reference, end that the objects to be effected by it were to be carried out. The objects of the Bill, as stated iu the preamble, was to the effect that it was " for the im provement of the present system of management of the real property of the Church of England, so as to render it more conducive to the spiritual welfire of those be longing to the Church, and for correcting the fluctuating annual value of the said property," &e. Now, it was not natural to suppose any of their Lordships would ob ject to .any proposition for making the property of the Church more conducive to the spiritual welfare of her children. But the investigation of the protein mill in vited to the consideration of two vary material subjects, and these were the respective righte of the lessors and the lessees. There was another very important part of the question—namely, in what manner were they to deal with the property and the episcopal revenues so as to carry out that proposed portion of the system, the allot ment ot a fixed income to the bishops? Is had been fully felt that there was a great variety in the amount of the of bishops, and also ot a b , .fy of men whose duties were equally important. And within the last few ysars efforts had been made to equalise the revenues and the labours of their respective sees; and no doubt it was desirable to do so as far as possible. lie believed that the correctly expressed object of the Commission was nut to obtain a fixed ineoette for the bishops, but a more equal average one. Ile - did not assent to the doe triue that Parliament had laid it down as a principle that a fixed and not an equalized income was desirable. If he understood the proposed Bill properly, the whole of the income was to be taken under the management of the Commissioners, to be by them after reconverted into lauded property. Now that appeared to him a very complicated arrangement, and one which required great consideration as to its details. With respect to the condition of the lessors and lessees after that Bill should have passed, ho understood the Right Reverend Prelate objected to giving the tenant a right in per petuity. The tenants of the Church had at the pre sent moment no indefeasible right to the renewal of their leases; but their Lordships wero bound to consider what was the practical result of the existing tenure of that property. He held it to be the case, that the lessee had the prescriptive right on the lessor, although he had no legal claim for his lease. The difference between the value of freehold property, and that held under the Church by the existing law, was easily ascertained. Anxious as he was to improve the property of the Church, and sensible as he was of the proposed benefit, be could not, looking to the equitable rights of the lessees, agree to sacrifice them at once, as if the Church was in full possession of the whole property, and had nothing to do but io run out the lives and come into its enjoyment. • That which could not be obtained without an Act of Parliament ought not to be obtained without giving some equivalent advantage to the other party whose in terests were effected. If ho could be shown how the pro perty could be increased to a similar amount without altosring the relations in which they at present stood, he would approve of that in preference to any other mode. There was now a portion of the value of the property in abeyance, which was to benefit either the lessor or the lessee. That increased value, however, should he divided between them. The Bill, moreover, proposed to do away with leases of lives renewable for ever. Now, although in agricultural property leases of lives were not found to be an advantageous description of tenure, yet, when the leases were renewable for ever, it was like a freehold. They contemplated, therefore, making a very serious alteration in converting freehold into mere personal property. In such a case they took away civil and political rights. He should be unwilling to reject that which was said to be the principle of the Bill, hut there were words in the preamble which threw some doubt upon his mind. There was allusion made to cer tain Commissioners, and when they went on to say from the recommendations of those Commissioners such and such things were to be done, it seemed like binding themselves to the principle of the Bill. Ile did not think it was desirable to reject that Bill, but ho believed it was desirable their Lordships should consider that ,,r question as fairly and as deliberately as possible. .F io considering not only that Bill, but any ether preposition brought forward on the part of the lesse: , s h , h be taken —a eth e er wo this t theprinciple of which would neither affirm or reject o e m s i c t e t o e n e, d to re w ad h i i n ch g s c u o U gg r s e e s t m t i ht t h n e o t N b o e b t l e l‘ m l a o r e (i t u i a s d ys of :he Bill. They could not refer the Bill to aSelect . Committee without its having received a second reading, Mat ho would venture to suggest was, whether it opposite,ab i advisable t, for the present —to the matters stated in the preamble of might be referred pint P a o ge l ! o e n c e t o h m e the Bill, and other 'ewe which e t t h e e i t shouldsshould u l b a t. 7 admitted made i its report.w as a d f c u t : i h t might not be are advisable attets connected with the subject, and meantime the the reports of the Commiseioners m ad! itself could remain standing over without prejudice subject, was t he course which hi, ventured to recommend upon and important one, and one which required the tallest and fairest deliberation.—(llear, hear.) Earl FITZWILLIAM 6aid there would he very t u h n a t t i s t u h b e i on ,idera,ble danger in adopting the proposition withwehi his Noble Friend concluded. thought - A.l he might ven ture to affirm that if that proposal were agreed to their Lordships would not pass any Bill on that subject during the present session of P ar li ament.— (" Hear, hear " from the Government side). T hey all knew how th at question t a question had been hung • up for consideration; and ha thought their Lordships would agree with him that it would not be desirable to take a course, which would have the effect of postponing all legislation on the i 'cot for an i n d e fi n i te space of time.—(Hear, hear.) If the interests of the lessees were to be injured by that Bill then ho wou ld say let them take those interests intr.) consideration. He bel ieved the lessees had very strong claims upon Parliament, whatever might he done on the question. They had strong claime, inasmuch as ,thesenrewlitoved.elri)e the legal trustees of the property llbe o ' f landed re- ' the system leases of all the troubles If and with reference to which, speaking for himself, found t o be not at all to the last twelve months. - that he s - &proved of inconsiderable. He could not s u a n y doubtedly, every clause iu the Bill, _Mrt but he did some parts to which objections;hehotheae not postponement of legisla tion he ought to vote for C and should therefore time on that accouat, vote for the second reading with t he view of the Bill b e i ng referred to a Select Committee . ANSDOWNE T he m ar quis , felt it incu m b en t on him to make a f ew remarks with reference to the course which the Noble Lord opposite had advised their Lord shipsonthis question. to p u rsue He believed that the N o bl e Lord had stated most correctly a ll th a t h a d passe d .` at former periods on this subject. But he thought that the Noble Lord, en r( consideration, would see that course proposed to he taken by his Noble Friend near h i m was perfectly cousistent with the objections which the Noble Lord and other Noble Lords entertained to the provisions of the Bill. The course proposed by his Noble Friend was for their Lordships to read the Bill a second . time without pl e d g i ng t h emse lves to any one provision of it, beyond that stated by the Noble Lord himself, and to which reference was made in the pre amble—viz , that the present state of Church property veto not such ac ought to be coetinned, and that it was desirable fur the Legisla ure to interfere, with a view ( if Putt leg it en a better footing with respect to the in terests of those who own that property, and with due consideration of the interests of those w h o gal under them. Beyond that he believed nothing would be affirmed as the principle of the measure. Any details which the Nettle Lord might wish to amend might be considered in a Select Committee; and tes the object tsf the Noble Lord was the same as hie cwii—to have the Bill considered_ho need not remind the Noble Lord that before a fseleil Committee could do so, the Bill must be read a second time by their Lerdthhes. He wished the Committee to have the opportunity of coesi deetee the report, arid the evidence on which is was founded, and, at the same time, the provisions of the Bill itself. He asked their Lordships who had had CI.