The Sun. — London, England, 1853-05-27 00:00:00

.119 consilert..Lien of t.ll lean - Is.' gentleman v' l repetition in that house by Mr. Du when it v proposal by the 'hon. and —,ch, in the first 'Ace; was only the mea,-,are repeatedly proposed and rejected So long ago as IS4O it was brought forward abe, and subsequently by Mr. Page Wood, supported , only by twe - ' tty ,Tid the n measu :)re inia resisted by .Sir R. peel, b . , (, (Lord ...T. Russell). Any r injurious it would be hard to ColleiliVC. WOu-- to excite the utmost and ill-feeling, dividinii, the parishioners compulsorily into classe s, and com pallinm men to define their opinions, who, perhaps, pre viously hardly kneW that they differed. The principle of the measure was to relieve only dissenters, exacting a declaration, of conscientious objectio n on the .gno round of .-conformity. But how could the sincerity of the de claration be ascertained or tested'? (Hear.) After a man had made it was he to be excluded from the` arish h hi crc om h . ? - Was the beadle to stand at th e doorto preent fr entering—(a Inngh) ; or if he entered was ho to be sub jected to a suit in the, ecclesiastical Courts ? And if he had a family were they to be precluded from entering the ten: c hurch ? Mr. PHILLIMORE.—Nro—(a laugh). Sir W. CL .y.—Then fi man ef wore ingenuity than sincmity might easily let his whole faintly attend church and escape paying for its support ? (Hear, and a laugh.) Would such a course b e satis fac tory to such as wore sin cere on either side. ( Hear, hear.) And why should it be assumed that the members of the Church of England were satisfied with the present state of things or desire church rates t be con s tinueemb,ir of the d? He believed thhat of they Eng wland, ere nothe For himself, a m would abolish- church rates,• in the firm belief by that course the Church would be strengthened and not weak ened. Within the last 20 years more churches had sprung tip than for centuries past, and considering the present posi tion of the Establishment, and the multitude of churches which abounded. he saw no reason toanticipato a falling-off in the exertions ia its behalf. Mr. Edward Baines, on the authority of Dr. Hook, had stated that since church rates were refused in I,2eds the parish church had been rebuilt, at an expense of 30,000 C, and six other churches and thirty-seiQn schools established at a cost of 109,0001. The dissenters, in the meantime, had raised 35,0001. for the same purpose. In the face of such facts could there be any doubt that the zeal of members of the Establish- ment would fail to supply the necessary funds for Church purposes ? As, however, the total abolition of church rates was not deemed an acceptable proposal, he was pre p tred with a sul stitute, which: ho held to be unobjection a.ble in principle and easy of application. Nothing could better attest the imperfection of the present system than the large increase of dissenting places of worship, which exceeded the places of worship belonging to the Establish ment, and were most likely attended by a larger aggregate congregation. Under these circumstances, should they, the members of the Chtireh of England, be se' dead to all feeling of self-respect, and he might' say of common honesty, as to permit the dissenters to contribute to the support of the Church as well as of their own places of worship ? If the reasons for the abolition of church rates wire stronger sinco 1837 (which he contended to be the case', the facilities for carrying it out had also increased. The substitute, then, he proposed, was a system of pew rents, which should be devoted to defraying the charges of the minister and the celebration of Divine worship. The people were already familiarised with this plan, which, in its more extended application, would in no way interfere with the provision of gratuitous seats for the poor. But the source to which he chiefly looked for the necessary funds was that of the surplus revenues of the Church of England. (Hear, hear.) Last year, in an address to the Crown by the prelates, members of the Privy Council, and others, they stated it had been also shown that by a better system of managing Church pro perty not less than half a million a year could be obtained within a few years for the support of additional clergymen in the new churches to which it was proposed to direct the surplus ; and the noble lord the member for the city of London had said on the occasion of the proposal of 1837, that it was quite as necessary to provide for the establish ment of religious peace and harmony in the Church as to provide for the dignity of the Church and hierarchy. He (Sir W. Clay) would not dwell upon the revelations of - the last fear years, although ho might, perhaps, excite a smile were he to refer to the complaints of some of the episcopal beach that their already large incomes were insufficient ; to the sums which had been retained out of the produce Of the episcopal revenues ; to the large sums laid out on epis copal palaces ; and to the items for gamekeepers and watch ers. He might excite a smile, perhaps, by such revelations concerning those meek and lowly descendants of the apostles; but he preferred resting his case on the broad ground of • justice. The surplus of half a million a year was,twofold greater than the sum which Lord Althorp thought it neces sary to charge on the general revenue for the purpose of extinguishing church rates. Even without pew rents the surplus revenues of church property, if that property were properly managed, would provide an ample sub stitute for the present church rates. By maintaining the present system, injustice and a wrong were done to their nonconforming brethren. In fact, it was spolia tion in disguise. He, therefore, placed his resolution in the hands of the house, earnestly entreating it not to reject it. That there was an imperative necessity for legis lation of some kind, was admitted on all hands. Church rates could not long remain upon the statute book. He earnestly implored the Government, and more especially the noble lord the member for the city of London, to un dertake the good work of abolishing this odious and unjust impost. By so doing the Government would earn a fresh title to the gratitude and respect of the great Liberal party, and establish a lasting claim upon the confidence of all those to Whom the principles of religious liberty were dear. (Hear, hear.) Mr. PETO, in seconding the motion, said he thought it a happy omen for the dissenters, that both the reso lution and the amendment had been brought forward by liberal and consistent members of the Establishment. The dissenters paid not only for tho support of their own edifices, but of the churches of the Establishment. (Hear, hear.) If it was necessary to give an example of what had been effected by relying solely on the voluntary principle, he might instance the result of the Rev. Mr. Dale's exertions in London, who, by making an appeal to the good feelings of the inhabitants, had been met with such a hearty response as had enabled him to overcome every difficulty. He might also mention the success attendant upon the Rev. Mr. Bickersteth, of St. Giles's, exertions, who contrived, without in any way interfering with his dissenting brethren, to accomplish the largest re sults. He (Mr. Pete) could not but feel that for the Church's own sake legislation was required on this sub ject. Indeed, if the hon. gentlemen wished to stop what was termed the turbulence of dissent, they could only do so by acting justly toward the Church of England herself. And he must say it was quite as painful to him (Mr. Peto) and his friends as it ever could be to members of the Church of England, to see accusations brought against a prelate in the most influential journal in Europe, which, if they had remained without denial, would have excluded any merchant in London from the Royal Exchange—acchsa tions which cast a foul blot upon our common Christianity. (Hear.) If the noble lord the member for the city of Lon don—the author of the Test and Corporation Act—would immortalise his name, let him place himself at the head of the movement for the reform of the Church. But there was another aspect in which the question was to be viewed. The prelates of the Church of England were members of a Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, Well, they ought to know that in the city of Calcutta alone there were no less than fourteen prints published for the use of the natives alone ; and yet in these very papers all such matters as he had just referred to were carefully held up for the inspection of a •fellow-subjects there... At the present moment there was one person resident in the city of Lucknan who had subscribed 80,0001. for the building of a temple there, and another gentleman in Calcutta had given 150,0001. for a similar purpose. W e ll, was it pos sible, in. the face of such instances of generosity, to witness our own prelates held up to public reprobation without bringing a blush of shame into the face of every Christian —without bringing the principles of religion into disrepute? The dissenters only asked to be left to themselves, and to he relieved from clihrges which pressed alike painfully upon churchmen as upon themselves. (Hear, hear.) Mr. coLLIEr. was exceedingly happy to find that at length the objections to church rates had penetrated even to that venerable and ancient abode, Doctors' Como - ions. itself. On, however, balancing the respective merits of the two propositions before the house he must confess that the proposition of the hon. baronet the member for the Tower Hamlets was far more suited to the exigencies of the case and the wants of the country. Of all the taxes levied off the community, he _believed chinch rates were the most objectionable. They were objectionable because they were levied upon all for the benefit of the few--because they were uncertain as to this property from which they were raised—hecnung they were uncertain as to the purposes to which they could be applied—and, lastly, because they were enforcible only in the ecclesiastical courts of this country—courts whase method was so tedious, expensive, and dilatory, fl 3 to tax to the very utmost the funds of the suitors and: the patience of the public. (Hear, hear.) The lion, and learned member for Tevistock proposed that -rah rates should be leviable as at present, excepting !es to be made in the case of.any person end mid ho was as dissenter. His chief eh - position was that it left all persons leciaeations that they were dissenters h rates, subject to all the doubts and h /ell sureeendesl the -law. He was, then, s avour of the proposal of the hon. baronet the her for the Tower ilamlets, which would throw the hintenance of churches upon the funds which were origi nally devoted to that purpose, and which ought to have continued devoted to that, inasmuch as he believed such an arrangement would conduce to the benefit of the public,. but above all to the interesls of the Church. (Hear, hear.) Mr:E.-BALL could not think that the - h e el - there might lbe very strong objections t o church rates, still it could be onsidere.l -- a violation of conscience to pay them, in ace<ir- Elan CO with law, which if it enforced church rates from dis hentera, on the other hand protected them and their pro- Pe sty If, however, there had been any doubt as to the " De e s; ssity of coming to a decision upon this question, what had Wen advanced by the hon. and learned gentleman must pc:l-feet-17 sa tisfy every one that a settlement could no longer be 41elassed. He must say, however, that ho ob jected to the proposition of the hon. and learned member for Tavistocka because he considered it to be a premium upon dissent, rind he seemed to have recourse to such means to propssgate sectarian views. He thought also that it would tend to produce a clashing of various inte reets ; for suppose the case of a Dissenter having a child to' - bury—he came to the clergyman to ask for burial, but the latter turned round and told him he could have no such cl situ,' no he paid no rates. He hoped that upon tha pre sent 'question some understanding would be arrived at which would remove those feelings of discord, and promote a kiodiier spirit amongst all parties than had existed here tofore. (Hear, hear.) Mr, .11UME said, as Parliament had como to the doter- Mination of abolishing church rates in Ireland, ho could not understand why it should not abolish them in Eng land. He had always maintained that the property of the Church sh ou ld maintain the Church. The present law in r a c n s a pe d c i t s.u to ni c o h n u rci h rates had ever been . a source of discord ward a proposition ISt when Lord Althorp brought for -well as in Ireland to abolish church rates in England as lord wanted to throwlie opposed it simply because the noble Fund'. The elio the whole burden upon the Consoli datedd learned gentleman, in intro ducing the eubject tonti3.on.l7l of the present system. In convincing gpeech as to the ©vile had made no doubt a most the first paragraph of his speechev' hon, and learned gen tleman said that the Church should make a sacrifice; but and learned gentle he (Mr. Hume) did not hear thealrinel._ theo Church look to man propose any sacrificemacteial.m,„tu her own resources. The matter into fp) large a money surplus that they had a h iT e mi i! lie hers had Isoped that the Government would take the l) led He srd_ put an cud to it at once.' bo flusir own hands, 1 fh.tt the remedy proposed by the bon e s iaaah he": for Taviatock would but add to the diauuipn such 3110111 , at present existed in respect to this subject. chi. co nclusion that the best and si mplest wa; estion „S , to place the church rate up on to the E s t ablishment. He would ad sir N• Clay) to alter his amendment 403 . 1 1 o n that church rates should cease ei money req Ind for the repairs of that who remission v fons-nra ,pays diffi (pi .4< A s), :-' 4 THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 27, 1853. churches and other objects should be paid from the funds now below , to the Church. He would, however, vote for tip amendment of the hen.. baronet rather than for the proposed bill of the honourable and learned member for Tavistock^: Sir 11. H. INGLI'S said that when a proposition was m ade Ly an hon, and learned member sitting immediately behind the Trea.sury bench, and when an amendment to it was moved by an hon. baronet who stated that ho gave his general support to the Government, he (Sir .R. H. Inglis) thought ho might have been accused of presumption if he hail urged his objections to both propositions before any member of the Government had spoken. Having waited u ntil - that moment, in the expectation of hearing the opinion of the Government upon the question, he thought that he might now fairly claim the attention of the house. Lie would consistently object, as he always had done, to the.proposition before the house: What was the pressure to produce this result? His hon. and learned friend said, if the house wanted repair they ought to repair it in a time of calm, and not wait until a storm should arise. But he (Sir R. H. Inglis) asked, did it want repair, as the hon. and learned member assumed, and made the basis of his argument ? The hon. and learned member for Plymouth stated that the tax was a unique tax which combined every possible evil existing in every other tax. But who felt the evil ? He defied any hon. member who sat on the back benches to produce a single instance of a tax in favour of which so many petitions had been presented. He (Sir It. H. Inglis) felt ho was justified in saying that the hearts of the people were identified with the Church, and would gladly support it voluntarily in the way the law now supported it. For 14 centuries this property had been devo ted to tile maintenance of the Established Church. He trusted that this house would still represent the feeling of the great body of the Church of England by rejecting the pre sent proposition. The proposition of the hon. baronet (Sir W. Clay) sought in a more open and intelligible mode to get rid of the impost. He maintained that from time imme morial this property had ever been looked upon as the ap panage of the Church, which was essential to the existence of the nationality of the Church. This was an impost upon property. It was a mere quibble to say that it was a tax upon individuals. This was a rate imposed upon persons rela tively to the property which they held. If it were other wise, every pauper would be equally taxed. When this subject was first introduced into the House of Commons, Mr. Daniel Whittle Harvey, on the 21st of April, 1834, said :—" The church rate affect property in the same way as any other charge. The other day I was called upon to pay 141. for my house in Great George-street, for the repair and maintenance of a neighbouring church. Now, if I were to sell my house, would not the purchaser in quire after the the church rates as well as the parish rates, the sewers rates, and all other charges affecting property ; and having taken them into consideration, would not the amount of them influence the price ?" ;But surely ' if this be the case, had not this gentleman purchased the property in like manner? (Hear; hear.) Where was the honesty of endeavouring to get rid of this impost for the purpose of putting the amount into the pockets of individuals ? He had the greatest respect for an honest conscientious man ; but ho had none whatever for that conscience which resided in a breeches pocket. (Hear, and laughter.) Let them take care that it was not the bare money question to which they objected. It was not the amount of ship money which John Hampden resisted — Hampden resisted the impost upon principle. The pro position was, as he had already described it, neither more nor less than to render the Church of England one of the Many sects supported by voluntary contributions. It was to denationalise the National Church, for Dissenters had over and over again said within the last twenty years, " Get rid of church rates, and we shall get rid of the Church." (Hear, hear.) Whether they were right or wrong it was not his present purpose to inquire. His purpose was rather to show the animus which prompted them to desire to get rid of church rates, and it was against this animus he wished to contend. He felt that, upon every ground, this house was not called upon to adopt either of the propo sitions before it. It was not called on to adopt the amend ment of the hon. gentleman the member for the Tower Hamlets (Sir W. Clay), because that proposed to destroy the system of church rates without providing any adequate equivalent. Indeed he (Sir R. Inglis) believed there was no equivalent which could be adequate, either in point of amount or of principle. With respect to the reference which had been made to Church property, that had been a perpetual claim made by every ecclesiastical reformer during the last twenty years ; and he believed that it was now thoroughly exhausted. When it was stated that 500,0001. remained in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Corn misioners, he begged to remark that that sum was already pledged to objects which were infinitely more im portant than that of getting rid of church rates. Church rates were applied to build up the external fabric of the Church. But that 500,0001. was applied to the providing spiritual instruction for the people (Hear, hear) — and from that purpose ho for one would never consent to divert it. Then as to the motion of his hon. and learned friend the member for Tavistock (Mr. Phillimore), that, he contended, was still more objectionable than the amend ment, for it went to withdraw national support from the Church altogether. (Hear, hear.) Upon all these grounds, therefore, he should oppose both motion and amendment. Mr. A. PELLATT could assure Mr. Phillimore that if ho supposed his proposition would give satisfaction to the dissenters, he was very much mistaken. So far from that, they felt that this proposal for putting them, as it were, in forma pauperis, and compelling them to go to the churchwarden of the parish in which they resided to make a declaration of their religious creed before they could obtain relief from the tax, was a degradation to which, as conscientious men, they could not submit. (Hear, hear.) The hon. baronet the member for Oxford University (Sir R. Inglis) had alluded to the necessity which existed for maintaining the nationality of the Established Church. He (Mr. Pellatt) would suggest to the hon. baronet amode by which he would do that, and at the same time give sa tisfaction to the dissenters in the matter of church rates. He had been informed upon the best authority that if the present system of leases of ecclesiastical property, which being carried out upon the principle of fines for renewal, prevented the improvement of that property, were altered, and the fines capitalised and reduced to a rent-charge, church rates might be abolished altogether, and 20 per cent. gained on the rental of such property. He (Mr. Pellatt) understood the hon. member for Tavistock (Mr. Phillimore) to propose that the. bodies of dissenters were not to be interred in the burial grounds of the church; and were to be excluded from the rites of the church. Mr. PHILLIMORE made a remark as if in correction of the hon. gentleman, which was not heard in the gallery. Mr. PELLATT—WouId the hon. member introduce a clause into his bill, not only to receive the body of the dissenters, but to allow the friends of the deceased person to employ their own minister to perform those religious duties over the grave which they thought necessary and proper ? As the hon. gentleman was aware, the laws of country were at present adverse to that. (Hear, hear.) Milton wrote that the Church would never cease to per secute until she ceased to be mercenary. (Hear, hear.) There was no doubt of it—no one could deny it. And he agreed with the hon. member for Oxford (Sir R. Inglis), when he said that the whole question—ho (Mr. Pellatt) would add, so far as the Established Church was concerned was one of the breeches pocket. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The hon. member then Iroce3ded to contend that the church-rate system was a net st unjust one ; that it gave rise to feelinge of animosity, and was the cause of much that was unseemingly en 1 unchristian ; and that the voluntary system, where it had been tried in the case of the Church of England itself, had operated most beneficially for that Church. The Church had already an amount of property which, if wisely managed, would enable her easily to dispense with that compulsory rate. Mr. MIALL said, that previously to having come down to the house he had looked at a pamphlet which had been published a few days ago by the noble lord the member for Lynn (Lord Stanley), and he begged to return to the noble lord his sincere thanks for the kindly spirit in which he had, in that pamphlet, endeavoured to deal with the ques tion. (Hear, hear.) If he did not entirely agree with the practical solution of the difficulty which had been suggested by the noble lord, he did not in the slightest degree doubt that he had, in perfect good faith, intended to relieve Dis senters from what ho believed to be an injustice, and, at the same time to free the Church of which he was a mem ber from a reproach which still attached to it. He (Mr. Miall) could sot help thinking that they were then engaged in the consideration of a difficulty which it was very easy to solve. - They were asked bow sacred edifices could be maintained, and how Divine service could be suitably per formed, if that charge were discontinued. But it should be mule labored that the dissenters found no difficulty whatever in providing without church rates for the due administra tion of their religious rites. According to the census of 1851, the dissenters maintained-not less than 17,000 separate buildings for -the performance of Divine service. The Church had, in the earliest and purest ages, been enabled to meet ail her material wants by means of the voluntary contributions of her children. Since that period the system of church rates had gradually been established by a series of priestly encroachments on the right of the laity. But it was alleged that property had been bought subject to that charge, and that there could at present be no valid reason for objecting to its continuance. Now, ho denied the troth of the statement on which that argument was founded. In thousands of cases the property which was assessed -to church rates • had come into existence, within time last few year.i. There was one subject upon which he wished to trouble the house with a few words as regarded the mode of dealing with the question. Here were two modes proposed, one by the hon. baronet the member for Tower Hamlets, and the other by the hon. and learned member for Tavistock. Respecting the proposition of the hon. baronet he should say "aye" to it in case of a division, although he should do so with more satisfaction if he - simply proposed to abolish the impost, leaving tho main - tentmee of the Church to be effected out of such funds as had previously accrued. As to the proposition of the hon. and learned member for Tavistock, he (Mr. Itliall) entertained not the slightest doubt or suspicion of his motives ; but he still believed he was more anxious to benefit the members of his own church than to free the dissenters from the payment of church rates. In a word, the effect of the proposition would be simply to denationalise the Established Church, and convert that which was at present a national institu tion into a religious association invested with public funds. Under these circumstances, and unless he was assured by the promoters of the bill that such was not their intention, and that ecclesiastical affairs would still continue to be re gulated by the legislature, he could not vote for the bill. But with such an assurance he should certainly sustain the measure. Mr. WIGRAM could only see in this measure, as con tained in the amendment of the hon. baronet opposite, the forerunner of another measure to attack the tithe system. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) What was the position of church rates ? The law of the land required that in every parish there should be a church especially accessible to the poor, and for the maintenance of which church time property with which Providence had blessed the wealthy should be made to contribute. (Hear, hear.) The amendment of the hon. baronet was calculated to abrogate that wise provision of maintenance. (Hear, hear, hear.) He contended the charge was upon the land, and not on the the individual. He was of opinion that a measure might be framed which would entirely remedy all the defects that at present ex isted in the law, so far as the levying of church rates was concerned, and which would remove, that uncertainty of which so much had been said in the course of the debate. In conclusion, he would state, that it was his intention to oppose both the amendment and the original motion be fore the house. Sir G. GREY said that he entirely differed from the hon. and learned member for Tavistock -and the hon. member for Oxford University with regard to the import ance of church rates to the established church. (Hear, hear.) He thought they greatly exaggerated the import ance of church rates when they said that they regarded them as almost vital to its existence. (Hear, hoar.) He tulielought u t rch to i i ) m i a n t a u i t its was injudicious many maintenance fiie ndofth u a f t tit hes — (heat)—f or a very p existence with the curch. '.rtes. rates etod i (Hear, hear.) He thought that church as he believed different relation to the church from v 2o : r t: though church rates were abolished to was now, ,tuielaba:ihe,,toetcrlvtethea4tittheevcehruwrcohulwdould remain,rem morrow, the people of thisairnooatsedit, , in the hearts of the great bulk of country, (11o4r, 'tor.) lie thought the objections to the proposition of the hon. and learned member for Tavistock were unanswerable. And it was curious that though they had been debating this question now for six hours, no single member rose to support his proposition. (Hear, hear.) He had read the pamphlet of the noble lord with great interest, but neither the propo sition of the hon. and learned gentleman, nor that con tained in the pamphlet of the noble lord was original, for twelve years fS•2;O the hon. member for Finsbury, and in 1819 Mr. Page Wood, then member for Oxford, brought forward propositions for exempting dissenters from the payment of church rates, and throwing the whole burden on the members of the established church. He opposed the proposition on that occasion on the ground that it drew a line of distinction between the churchman and the dissenter which he considered to be objectionable; and that objec tion was increased now that he heard the details of the plan of the hon. and learned member for Tavistock. He stated then that in the north of England, with which he was more particularly acquainted, the dissenter and the churchman, notwithstanding the difference of the form of their wor ship, lived on terms of good fellowship with each other ; and he was afraid that if a line of distinction was drawn by registering dissenters who claimed to be exempted from the payment of church rates , many persons would claim to be so exempted. And this he firmly believed would tend to the injury of the church itself, and would impair that good feeling and fellowship which prevailed amongst different denominations of Christians, who although they might differ in their formularies, were agreed on the groat leading doctrines of their common Christianity. (Hear, hear.) Ho believed that access to the parish church would become a less desirable object than was now the case—he believed that dissenters would not seek it, as of bis own knowledge he knew they constantly sought it now, and that having once declared themselves dissenters, they would not think it right to intrude themselves amongst the members of the established church. But if this plan wero agreed to, or if the plan of the noble lord were agreed to, dis senters would thereafter be for ever debarred from any of the rights and privileges of the Established Church. (Hear.) He thought that the right to purchase admission to those rights and privileges by the payment of a miserable sum of money—for that was what the proposition amounted to—was a proceeding which the house would not entertain for a moment. (Hear.) It appeared to him that a plan which would debar persons who once declared themselves dissenters from partaking of the communion in the parish church, from having their marriages celebrated in the parish church, and from burial after death in the church yard—though the hon. and learned gentleman declared that he had no serious objection—nor did it much improve the matter that they would be permitted to enjoy their right and privilege, according to the plan of the noble lord, on the payment of additional fees—to be asked, he sup posed, as compensation for the non-payment of the church rates. (Hear, hear.) He could not think with the hon. member for Oxford - University, that this would be a mea sure of occasional conformity, but that it would be a measure to prevent occasional conformity. (Hear, hear.) It proceeded on the assumption that the whole popula tion of the country was to be divided into the members of the established church and all those who dissented from it. He thought that would be a great error. He believed that many dissenters, so far from regarding he established church as an abomination, looked upon it as a church which had been the means of conferring in estimable blessings on the country. He therefore thought that any measure which would divide them by a strongly marked line would be fraught with prejudicial conse quences. (Hear, hear.) He agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman who spoke last, that this measure if carried would not produce peace, quiet, and contentment in many parts of the country, and particularly in those places where disputes and contentions took place on the subject of church rates. This question of church rates had much changed since the last 20 years. The heats and con tentions which then existed to a violent degree had for the most part passed away, owing, he believed, in a great de gree, to the good sense of the members of the established church, who, in their desire to promote peace and unity, did not seek to enforce the church rate ; and the churches were now for the most part repaired by voluntary contri butions. (Cheers.) But if, as the hon. and learned member proposed, more stringent means were to be taken to recover the church rate from the members of the established church in future, he was afraid it would lead to a renewal of those scenes to which he had referred as having happily passed away. The hon. and learned gentleman then proposed to leave the decision of these church rate matters to the ecclesiastical courts. This he considered would be a most unwise proceeding, and would lead us, in the repair of the churches, to a kind of Churchwarden Gothic in the administration of the law. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) With regard, therefore, to the proposition of the hon. and learned member for Tavis tock he should have no hesitation in voting against it. With regard to the other proposition , that of the hon. member for the Tower Hamlets, he admitted the full force of his objection ; and if ho was prepared with a bill on the subject embodying his views, he would vote for it. But if he were asked to vote for a mere abstract resolution he would not vote for a proposition of that kind, which was to lead to no practical consequences. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL—I cannot say that there is any thing very satisfactory in the propositions made to the house, or in the debate, in which they have been discussed. The house must feel that the subject is a most important one, and therefore its decision ought to be deliberately made. I agree with my right hon. friend in the opinion that a church establishment may well exist without church rates, as we see that it does in Ireland. At the same time we, looking at this as a practical question, must consider in the first place that this church rate amounts to a consi derable sum. Those who have put it least, put it down at 300,0001. And in the next place we must bear in mind that this sum of 300,0001. is in many parts of the country raised without any opposition, that in many parishes there is no opposition whatever to the payment of this money, and that the sum so raised is applied to the keeping in re pair and maintaining those ancient edifices which have be longed to the worship of the country from the first intro duction of Christianity. To part with that sum of money, therefore, becomes a serious question. But then, likewise, we ought not to omit from our consideration that though a church establishment may exist and flourish without a church rate, the ground of objection to a church rate is not so much that it is a peculiarly vexatious burden, but that it forms a fund for the repair of churches. The hon. member for Southwark stated before the committee in 1851 that the principle on which Dissenters objected to church rates was an objection to the union of Church and State, so that the objection was one of a civil as well as a eligious character. Now, that is an objection not against this particular rate or tax, but against rate as forming part of the fund with which the church is endowed and established, and which, as being established, is considered to place Dissenters in a position of inferiority. (Hear, hear.) lam not going to argue the question of church establishments and of the voluntary principle. They are very great and important painciples, no doubt ; but at this hour of the night I am not going to debate them now. What I wish the house not to lose sight of is that this is not a separate tax that is considered odious and oppressive, but it is a part of la system which is looked on in that light ; and if you were to remove this objectionable impost you would only open the ground to some fresh attack upon some other part of the church establishment. (Hear, hear,) Well, it may be wise policy or it may not to abandon these church rates ' • but, generally speaking, a general who has to defend afortress does not say, " I will abandon the outworks and then the citadel will be safe." (Hear, hear.) With respect to the propositions which have been laid before the house by the two hon. g entlemen, I must say that I was more struck with which each attacked the proposition of the other than the skill with which he defended his own. (A laugh.) The hon. member for Tavistock said with respect to the proposal of my hon. friend the member for the Tower Hamlets, " I object to pew rents being universally established ; for to make the poor pay for admission into our country churches, or to exclude them from those churches, would be a very great hardship. (Cheers.) It would likewise be inconsistent with the principles, and would prove injurious to the well being of our church. That is one strong objection to the hon. baronet's proposition, and I object to his other pro position because I think there is not much need of addi tional means of religious worship and instruction, and that whatever funds can be raised or added to the value of church property ought to be applied to the relief of that spiritual destitution." Now I think all we have heard very much confirms the objection of the hon. and learned member, and I cannot but feel that it strengthens me very much in my opinion against the proposal of the hon. baronet. But then comes my hon. friend to deal with the proposal of the hon. member for Tavistock. He says that it will be a very great evil to separate the whole commu nity into two bodies of churchmen and dissenters, andsthat a person who is once re ,, istered as a dissenter will probably become more hostile than if you leave him in his present state, in which, although frequenting a dissenting chapel, lie may occasionally attend the services of the church. Well, I think that in that argument the hon. member for the Tower Hamlets had the best of the dispute—(hear, hear)—and that, as ,the hon. member for Tavistock had almost demolished the proposition of the hon. baronet, so the hon. baronet, on his part, had fired his battery with such effect that the wall of his opponent was exceedingly damaged. (Laughter.) The proposition of the hon. and learned member has been considered on several former oc casions. It was objected to in 1849 by my right hon. friend, and by Sir H. Peel, who also pointed out the disadvantage of formally, and by act of Parliament, sepa rating churchmen from dissenters. It was also objected to by myself, who took a very brief part in that debate ; and it seems to me that if carried into effect, it would not only place persons in a state of hostility to the church . which they do not now occupy, but it would also act as a penalty upon churchmen. (Hear, hear.) Be cause, although the noble lord the member for Lynn in his pamphlet says, that - while there may be about 600,000'. a-year collected as church rates, only 60,0001. are paid by dissenters, no one can say what will be the effect if this bill should pass into law. (Hear, hear.) There is many a man who belongs to the church generally whose affection for it is not so great that he would continue to do so if he could procure exemption from church rates by merely ranking himself a; a dissenter. (Hear.) Nor is this all, the man that remains would say—" Last year I paid 21., and this year I am charged 41. ; what is the rea son?" " Oh, sir," the answer would be, " the reason is you remain attached to the church, while two or three of your neighbours have gone over to dissent. They have now nothing to pay, and therefore you must pay twice as much." Surely, then, we should expose the Established Church to scene danger by taking such a step. At the same time, I shall not object to the hon. and learned gentleman laying his bill upon the table. (Hear.) I can conceive its being so altered that it may be safely enter tained by the house ; but unless very much altered I can not consent to its passing into2a law. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, the question is what are we really obliged to do with respect to this question of church rates? For one, I think that the evil, as at present existing, has been very much exaggerated. (Hear, hear.) In 1835, no doubt, wo con tinually heard of battles and contests in parishes and ves tries, and of many very scandalous scenes. Many persons, and no doubt most persons in the House of Commons, thought that a remedy was necessary. Different remedies were proposed, but none were sanctioned by Parliament. Parliament, on the contrary, chose to remain still upon this subject ; and I must say that - from 1840 to 1853 I don't think that many great practical evils have resulted from the present state of the law. (Hear, hoar.) Now, mind, I am not saying that the law might not be improved. It might, for instance, be improved by sweeping away the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts with regard to church rates. (Hear.) With respect to the act of the 10th Geo. IV., I think that instead of taking away the autho rity of the magistrates where the question of the rate's validity is disputed, it might be allowed to extend to those cases, although it might be desirable to have some civil court of appeal which might deal with them without the expense and delay of the present mode of litigation. (Hear, hear.) That I think is desirable, and that, as has been observed by the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Cambridge, might be done without in fringing upon the general state of the law. I do not think, however, that we are in a state for legislation even upon that subject, because I think it is desirable that the long disputed and famous Braintree case should first be decided, and the law laid down by the highest judicial authority in the country. (Hear,. hear.) In almost all the large towns where church rates have been opposed, that opposition has been successful and no church rates aro now obtained. On the other hand, where there is a willingness, as in the rural districts, there they are paid. lam told that the effect of the voluntary principle is likely to bo in such districts what it has been in large towns where church rates have been refused ; and that there is nothing more easy and simple than to part with this 300,0001., or 600,0001.—whichever it may be—a year, for you will find all your wants supplied by churchmen as liberally as is done by dissenters. But I wish the house and the Pro testant dissenters themselves to consider that the case is very different from those which are cited as examples. The dissenters raise for themselves places of worship sufficient to accommodate all those who form the respective congre gations and not difficult. to be kept in repair. But with regard to the churches it must be considered that they wore not originally intended for a small portion of the commu nity, for a single sect, or even for a majority of the com munity. They were places of worship intended for the nation at large, and I do think it would be a hardship as regards churchmen, and a shame and disgrace as regards the country, if a small number of persons were obliged to keep up national edifices which required great sums to be spent upon them for repairs. (Cheers.) You provide against that by the present system, and you have a remedy so long as the law at present stands. (Hear, hear.) Ido re quest the house to beware how they give their authority and sanction to doctrines which, although they may not appear on the face of the proposition itself, would be and will be carried by votes of this house, if you agree to the proposition of the hon. baronet. I have read, certainly with great interest, the pamphlet of the noble opposite ; but the noble lord states principles that would go much further than he would himself be disposed to go. For in stance, he says, "As a matter of justice it is felt to be wrong to call upon men to pay for the propagation of opi nions in which they do not share." (Loud cheers.) No doubt the argument is good when used against a more ri gorous enforcement of . church rates ; but if you carry it out to its full extent it will sap the foundations of the es tablished church. (Cheers.) The subject of establishments is far too wide and important to enter into in the present state of this debate, but let not hon. gentlemen conceal from themselves the importance of the principle laid down by the noble lord, because in it was involved the whole question of the established churches of England and Scot land. Ido trust, therefore, that this house will always be ready to listen to any practical remedy which may be pro posed to lessen the evils attendant upon church rates, that if they - would maintain the principle of an establishment w iv i eno it c . ou ( n e t h e e n e a r n s cs to doctrines which are in consistent Mr.BRIGHT said, the noble lord had told them that the hon. member for Tavistock and the hon. baronet the mem ber for the Tower Hamlets had answered each other's are ments • but the noble lord himself was open to a charge quite equal that. In 1837 the noble lord was a party to a proposition precisely the same with that which had been submitted by the hon. baronet the member for the Tower Hamlets. In 1819, if he recollected rightly, he stoutly opposed a proposition made by Sir W. P. Wood, which adopted the principle involved in the bill of the hon. mem ber for Tavistock, and that night he opposed altogether the proposition of the hon. member for the Tower Hamlets, and was going to admit the introduction of the bill pro posed by the hon. member for Tavistock. (A laugh.) It appeared to him that the noble lord had not made much progress on this question. (Hear, hear.) If the objections he had raised were to be taken as grave, and serious, and insurmountable objections, then they would have to go on for ever with the church rate question unsettled, He thought, however, that the tone of the discussion generally that night showed that the house was coming calmly to a decision upon the subject. (Hear.) All attempts at a settlement had been opposed by the hon. baronet near him (Sir It. Inglis), and no doubt he would continue to do so ; but he might be permitted to say that, if this country had been governed according to the opinions of the universi ties, we should have been Roman Catholic in our religion and Austrian in our politics at this day. (Laughter.) He was willing to admit that there were objections to both plans be fore the house. As to the question of pew-rents, all he would say was, that he did not think Churchmen who went to church from good motives,as he hoped they all did, would abstain from doing so because payments were asked from them for the support of the church, in the same way as was done among the Dissenters. (Hear, hear.) There were very serious objections to the bill of the hon. and learned gentleman the member for Tavistock ; but there was a plan for which they had a precedent, and which the Government would do well to consider. They all recollected church-coss in Ireland and the evils attending it, andhow the the Government found a plan to abolish the church-cess by a better management of church property, and by pla cing the funds in the hands of a commission, to be by them applied to the building and repairs of churches in Ireland, He did not see why such a plan should not be adopted here. (Hear.) The noble lord said the funds of the church were allowed to accumulate for other purposes, and the hon. baronet (Sir R. Inglis) said they were re quired for extending the spiritual instruction of the church; but so long as enormous funds were appropriated to erect ing gorgeous residences for the episcopal bench--(hear)— far more than was required for such purposes, and more than was consistent with the moderation and simplicity which he thought Christianity required to be provided for for its professors—so long as money was thus expended, and so long—as was stated by the noble lord some years ago—as 15,0001. a-year was not considered too much for an archbishop, being three times more than was received by the Prime Minister or a Chief Secretary of State—so long would it be thought possible to save from the revenues of the church sufficient sums to keep in repair the edifices for public worship. (Hear.) These church rates were found to be very unequally distributed over the country. In his parish they had been reduced from 7001. to 1501. a year. Manchester, out of about 50 churches, there was only one that was not supported by the voluntary contri butions of the people. In Scotland the Free Church had, as was stated by a gentleman in Edinburgh some time ago, done more in 6 years for the education and religious teach ing, by the voluntary principle, of the people than tho Establishment principle has done in three centuries. (Hear.) In Ireland they saw that that portion of the population which was the poorest, and had suffered most, had built chapels in the most oat-of-the-way places, where there was a very spare population, so that it had been always a puzzle to him where they had found the funds. In Wales, where eight-tenths of the population were connected with the Dissenting body, there was scarcely a valley or hill-side in which they did not find a chapel of one denomination or another built by the people, and, as an example, he might instance the town of Merthyr, where 20 dissenting chapels were open, supported by voluntary contributions, and only one church in the Establishment. His conclusion from all these facts was, that the question was very sim ple if the house would really grapple with it. The mode of doing so was that which had been proposed by the noble lord a member of the late Government, to provide a fund of 250,0001. by means of improved management of the revenues of the church. If a bill passed the house for the one purpose of abolishing church rates, and without any other provision whatever, he would undertake to say that by the voluntary contri butions of persons attending the churches of England and Wales they would receive as much as would be necessary for the support of the fabric of the church. (Hear.) Tho church was not worth supporting an hour if it had so deadened the zeal and destroyed the vitality of its people that they would not do so. (Hear, hoar.) Let them see what the Dissenting interest had done in Wales, what the Free Church had done in Smith n 1, and what the trampled and insulted Roman Catholics of Ireland had done for their church for centuries past. (Hear.) The funds of the fabric of the church in ',this country must come either from a better administration of church property, or from the voluntary contributions of Churchmen. Did any mem ber in that house believe a vote would ever pass for the support of the fabric of the church, or that any one would ever get up from the Treasury bench to propose it? He thought, then, they must have recourse to the voluntary principle. The noble lord said the question was settled in the large towns, and it was assumed that because those fierce contests which had prevailed were not now going on, the house ought not to decide it. If the question was settled it was settled against the law—(hear, hear)—by the Dis senters uniting with the liberal Churchmen to put an end to the system altogether. But though there were no longeg any contests in the large towns, there were Dissen ters in almost every one of these parishes, and whenever ono of them was forced to contribute the grievance re mained, and was as great as ever. The house was not to think that because the minority was crushed, and because the clergy and churchwardens had their heel on them, the question had not great interest for the people. He was no great favourer of an establishment for religious purposes. He believed the principle to be exceedingly bad both for civil and religious liberty, but he would ask Churchmen, for their own sakes, if they wished the establishment to last, be it long or short, if it would not be better to get rid of the question of church rates at once and for ever. He was satisfied the house was more disposed to settle the question on fair principles now than it had ever been be fore; and he was sure the pleasure they would give by doing so would not be less to Churchmen themselves than to Dissenters. If they went to a division he supposed the hon. baronet would withdraw that portion of his amend ment which related to pew rents, in deference to the wish of the house, but if the bill of the hon. and learned mem ber was introduced, he must say he would like to have some time between that and the second reivling to make up his mind respecting the principle, which might be good, but was attended with difficulties in some points on which he had not yet come to any decisive conclusion. (Hoar.) After a few words from Mr. PHILLIMORE in reply, The house then divided on the question that all the words after the word " that" be omitted, when there ap peered— Ayes lB5 • Noes 207 Mnjority An amendment was then moved by Mr. liumE, but afterwards withdrawn, and the house divided on the main question, as amended by Sir W. Clay, when the numbers wore— he moved this amendment totally independent of anything in the shape of private feeling with regard to any of the names which had been proposed by the hon. member for Bridport, and simply with the view to remove the smallest suspicion of partisanship on the part of the committee from the minds of all the parties who were interested in the ques tion. He begged to remark that he was only following the same course as had been followed in the case of the Derby inquiry during the present session , and the S tainford inquiry in 1848 and that he had shaped his motion in accordance with that of Lord J. Russell on the 22d of May, 1/318. Mr. BRIGHT thought that, in a case of this Idnd,where the personal honour of gentlemen who were not in tho house was concerned, it was important that a member who appeared partly in the character of an accuser should not bo appointed upon the committee. He considered, how ever, it was desirable that some gentlemen who had paid attention to the case should be placed upon the committee, and he would suggest that the hon. member for Bridport should be a member of this committee. Sir J. GRAHAM agreed with the hon. member for Man chester, that it wa..3 almost unseemly that a member who had preferred grave accusations against persons who were not present in the house should form one of that tribunal appointed to try the case ; but on the other hand, if justice was to be done, he thought there was very great disadvan tage in establishing a tribunal in which there was no per son cognizant of the facts of the case, who might elicit the truth. Ho remembered that in the case of an inquiry into an Irish election two hon. members, one of whein ;vas a friend of each of the parties particularly concerned, were added to the committee for the purpose of examining wit nesses, but ho did not know whether they voted on the questions raised in committee. lie would suggest that a similar course might be adopted in the presainstance. After a few words from Air. S. WORiLEY, Mr. MITCHELL said, he was quite willing to adopt the suggestion of the right hon. baronet ; and, The motion and amendment having been withdrawn, it was agreed that a select committee, consisting of seven members, should be appointed to inquire into the Berwick upon-Tweed election petition. ROYAL SURREY ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS. Open for the Season. The Zoological Collection contains a variety of interesting speci mens, and the Gardens throughout have been improved and beautified. The Pictorial Representation is an extensive VIEW of the BAY and FORTS of CIIUiAN, painted by Messrs. Denson, and at dusk is represented the attack of the Chinese fire-rafts on the British fleet, explosion-ships, &c.—Grand Vocal and Instrumental Concert. Engagement of the eminent vocalist, Miss Cicely Nott. Conductor, Mr. Godfrey.— An extra Military Baud during the day time ; and at dusk a grand display of Fireworks, combined with the Feast of Lanterns and other displays.—Doors open from 9 in the morning. Admission, Is. For the motion Against it ... 172 220 Majority The original motion and the amendment were therefore lost. CATHEDRAL APPOINTMENTS BILL. The Lords' amendments to this bill were agreed to. ENTAILS (SCOTLAND) BILL. On the motion of the LORD-ADVOCATE, this bill was read a third time. BANKRUPTCY (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill was read a second time. NEW WRIT FOR PLYMOUTH. Sir J. Y. BULLER moved that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant to the clesk of the Crown, to make out a new writ for the electing of a burgess to serve in this present Parlia ment for the borough of Plymouth, in the room of Charles John Mare, Esq., whose election has been determined to be void. Lord J. RUSSELL said the motion seemed rather pre mature when a committee was sitting under the act of Parliament to inquire into the bribery and corruption alleged to have taken place within the borough. Sir F. THESIGER believed the act provided that the committee were not to interfere with the issue of the writ. Mr. AGLIONBY said the committee did not recom mend that the writ should issue. They left the decision with the house. The feeling of the committee was, how ever, that the writ ought to issue, and ho should vote for the motion of the hon. baronet. The motion was then agreed to. BERWICK-UPON-TWEED ELECTION PETITION. Mr. T. MITCHELL moved that the following members be appointed a select committee on the Berwick-upon- Tweed election petition :—Mr. Thomas Mitchell, Mr. Edmund Denison, Mr. Bankes, Mr. Mullings, and Mr. Collier. Sir W. JOLLIFFE moved as an amendment, "That it be an instruetion to the general committee of elections to se lect a chairman and four other members to be the select committee ; and that the members so selected do constitute the said committee, and that they have power to send for persons, papers, and records." Ho assured the house that MANNING THE NAVY. Admiral WALCOTT moved an address to the Crown for copies of the scheme of Lieutenant Brown, R.N. (referred to in page 7), also of the scheme of Rear-Admiral Sir Charles Napier, K.C.B. R.N. (referred to in page 29), and of Mr. C. H. Pennell (referred to in page 30), all alluded to in the report on the subject of the manning of the Royal navy recently laid on the table of this house by her Ma jesty's command. The gallant officer observed, that this subject was regarded with great interest both by the naval profession and the country generally, owing to the growing repugnance which was felt to the system of impressment. The schemes to which the motion referred had all been con sidered peculiarly worthy of attention, and as it was most important that effectual provision should be made for man ning the navy, and for its maintenance in a state of effici ency, he was desirous that the house should have the fullest possible means of forming a sound judgment on the subject. It appeared that the actual number of men employed in British registered ships was in 1851, 175,000, including 53,600 protected from impressment. About 80,000 men were left available for service, and of this number it was estimated that not more than 21,000 would be found in the United Kingdom at any one time. He hoped there would be no objection to the production of the documents for which he moved. Sir J. GRAHAM could assure the gallant Admiral that ample opportunity would be afforded for the discussion of this very important question. It would be his (Sir J. Graham's) duty, in a very short time, in consequence of the report to which the motion of the hon. and gal lant officer referred, to move for leave to introduce two bills founded upon that report, and an opportunity would then be given for the most full discussion. Two of the documents referred to in the motion were already in the possession of the house. The report of Lieutenant Brown was contained in paper No. 84, presented February 18, 1852, which contained a great deal of information on the subject. Another document to which the gallant officer referred was a paper founded upon the opinion of Sir C. Napier, to which reference was also made in that report. The document in question was a bill introduced by Sir C. Napier in 1848, when ho was a member of that house. That bill did not, he believed, go beyond a second reading. It was, however, upon the records of the house, among the bills which had been introduced, and it would be found in the library of the house. There remained, therefore, only the third document, which was a confi dential report, prepared by a clerk in the Admiralty, who had officiated as secretary to the commission. He was a very able gentleman, certainly, but he was not a pro fessional gentleman ; and he was sure the gallant officer would see that it was hardly consistent to move for the production of a confidential report which had been drawn up by a clerk in the Admiralty. The motion was withdrawn accordingly, and the house adjourned at a few minutes before 2 o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MAT 26. ( From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) CHURCH RATES. Question proposed—" That the words, ' this house do resolve itself into a committee to consider whether Church Rates should not be abolished, and provision made for the charges to which such rates are at present applicable—from pew rents, and from the increased value which inquiries instituted by authority of the Crown have shown may be derived, - limier better management, from Church lands and property,' bo added to the word That' in the original question." Amendment proposed to the said proposed amendment, to leave out from the word " house" to the end of the said proposed amendment, in order to add the words, "is of opinion that the present mode of levying Church Rates for the repair of the edifices, and for the service of the Church of England, shall henceforth cease, as by law has been already accomplished in Ireland ; and that the amount required for the service of the Church should in future be supplied from the funds belonging to the Church of Eng land, and at the disposal of the Ecclesiastical Commis sioners," instead thereof :—Question proposed, " That the words proposed to be left stand part of the said proposed amendment :"—Amendment, by leave, 'withdrawn : Words added :—Main question, as amended, put, " That this house do resolve itself into a committee, to consider whether Church Rates should not be abolished, and pro vision made for the charges to which such rates are at present applicable—from pew rents, and from the in creased value which inquiries instituted by authority of the Crown have shown may bo derived, under better management, from Church lands and property :—Ayes, 172 ; Noes, 220. MINORITY-AYES, 172. Adair, H. Fitzroy, Henry Mullings J. Randolph Aglionby, 11. A. Foley, J. 11. Muntz, G. F. Alcock, Thomas Forster, Charles Murphy, F. S. Anderson, Sir James Forster, J. Murrough, J. P. Bailey, C. Fortescue, C. Norreys, Lord Baines, M T. Fox. W. J. Oliveira, B. Ball,•Edwatd Gat dner, It. Osborne, Ralph Barnes, T. Geach, Charles Paget. Lord George Bass, M. T. Gibson, Thomas M. Pechell, Sir G. Beaumont, W. B. Glyn, George Carr Pellatt, A. Bell, James Goderlch, Viscount Phillimore, J. Berkeley, H.' Goodman, Sir George Phinn, T. Berkeley, Craven F. Gower, F. L. Pigott, F. Bethell, Richard Greene, J. Pilkington, J. Biddulph, It. M. Crowson. Samuel Potter, It. Biggs. William Grenfell, C. Price, W. P. Blackett, J. F. B. Grey, Sir 0. Ramsdell, Sir J. Bland, L. Grosvenor, Lord R. Ricardo, 0. Bonham-Carter, JoLn Hadfield, George Robartes, T. J. A. Bouverie, E. Hall, Sir. Benjamin Russell, F. C. Bower, G. Hamner, Sir J. Sadleir, J. Boyle, Colonel nestle, Alexander Scholeneld, W. Brady, John llastie, Archibald Scobell, Captain Brand, H. Ileadiam, T. E. Scully, F. Bright, John Heywood, James Seymour, 11. D. Brocklehurst, John Heys orth. L. Seymour, W. D. lit otherton, Joseph Hiudley, Charles Shelley, Sir J. V. Brown, William Howard, W. G. . Sheridan, lt. B. Bulkeley, Sir R. B. Hume, Joseph Smith, J. Butler, Charles Hutchins, E. Smith, M. Tucker Byng, G. 11. Charles Butt, William Smith, Rt. lin. It. Cavendish, C. C. Keating, H. S. Strickland, Sir G. Chambers, Montagu Kennedy, T. Strutt, E. Chambers, Thomas Keogh, William Stuart, Lord D. Chaplin, W. J. Kershaw, James Sullivan, M. Cheetham, John King, P. J. Swift, It Clifford, li. Kinnaird, A. F. Talbot, C. R. M. Cobbett, J. Morgan Langston, J. 11. Tanered, Henry Wm. Cobden, Richare Langton, 11. G. Thicknesse, It. A. Coffin, W. Laslett, W. Thompson, George Collier, Robert P. Layard, A. H. Thornely, T. Craufard, E. li. J. Lee, W. Towueley, C. Crossley, P. Lowe, R. Vivian, J. 11. Currie, Itaikes Lucas, F. Vivian, Henry H. Dashwood, Sir G. H. Me2ann, James Wall, Charles Baring Dl vett, Edward Macgregor, John Wahnsley, sir J. Duffy, C. (1. Maguire, J. F. • Warner, Edward Duke, Sir J. ' Martin, John Whalley, G. Duncen, G. Massey, W. N. Wilkinson, W. A. Daucombo, T. Meagher, Th 0114113 Wilcox, LI. Dunlop, A. Mien, Edward Whittington, Sir T. E Ellice, Rt. lion. E. Milligan, Robert Wise, A. Ellice. E. Mills, T. Wyvill, M. Esmond°, J. 111 i tier, W. M. E. E wart, William Mitchell, T. A. Fergus, John Molatt, 0. Ferguson, Joseph Moleswortle Sir W. Fitzgerald, J. 1). Morris, 1). Fitzgerald, Sir J. Idoatyle B. M. MAJORITY—NOES, 220. Arland, Sir T. Goitele - Sir*E. Noel, lion. G. A'Cottrt, O. Granath, Sir James North, Colonel Adslerley, C. Graham, Lord M. W. Oakes, .1. H. P. A rehdall, Captain Granay, Marquis Ossolston, I ord Arkwright, G. Creaves, Ed A ard Pa, et, Lord Alfred Atherton, Wm. Greene% Gilbert Pakington, Sir John Bagge, W. Greene, T. Painter, It. Benito, G. Grogan, E. Palmerston, Visconti Baring, Sir F. Grosvenor, Earl Parker, It. T. Baring, T Guernsey, Lord Peel, Sir It. Barrington, Viscount Gwyn, Howel Peel Frederick narrow, Win. H: Hare, Robert B. Peel, Colonel Bennet, Philip Halsey, T. Pennant, Col. Bentinck, Geo. P. Hamilton, (leo. A. Percy, J. William Blair, Colonel Ilan bury, lion. C. Phalipps, J. 11. Bolder°, Colonel Ha court, 0. 0. 1 hillintore, It. Booker, Thos. 'Wm. Harcourt, (201. Portal, ?Melville Booth, Sir It. Hardinge, Charles S. Portman, 1111. W. Branaston, 'V: W. Ilayes, Sir E. Pritchard, J. itrockinati, E. D. Ileathcoate, Sir 0. Itepton, G. Brooke, Sir A. lieathcote, Gilbert H. Robertson, P. F. Brace, Lord E. Heneage, G. 11. W. Bolt, P. Bruce, H. A. Heiteage, 0. F. Rumbold, C. E. Buck, Lewis W. Herbert, Sidney Russell, Lord J. Buller, Sir J. Y. Hervey. Lord Alfred Russell, F. W. Burgit.ey, Lord Ilildyard, Robert C. Sanders, (1- . Burroughes, Hem y N Hottiain, Lord Sawle, C. B. G. Butt, I. Hughes, W. B. Seahain, Lord. Cairns, H. 111‘Calmont Milne. W. F. Seymer, H. K. Campbell, Sir Arch. Ingham, Robert Seymour, Lord. Cardwell, llon. E. Inglis, Sir R. It. Stain, Sir W. Cavendish, George Jertnyn, Earl Smollett, A. Cayley, E. S. Johnstone, Sir J. Sonterset,Captaln Cearterls, F. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. H. Sotheron, T. H. Chelsea, Viscount Jones, Captain Spooner, Richard Chohnoudeley, Ld. 11. Jones, D. Stafford, A. Christopher, It. Adam 'Kelly, Sir F. Staftbrd, Marquis Clive, R. H. Kendall, N. Stanhope, J. ii., Clive, It. Kitiescote, R. N. F. Stanley, Lord Cobbold, J. Chevalier Kirk, William Stephenson, Robert' Cocks, Thomas S. Knatchbull, Wm. F. Stirling, W. Coles, 11. Beaumont Kntghtley, Rainald Stuart 11. Colville, O. It. Lacon, Sir E. Taylor, Colonel Coote, Sir C. II Leiran, It. DI. Thes.ger, Sir If. Corry, Henry Lowry Langton, W. G. Tollemache, John Cowper, W. Lawley, F. C. Trollope, Sir J. Davies, D. A. S. Lennox, Lord 11. G. Turner, C. Denison, E. Lewisham, Ld Tyler, Sir G. Dent, J. Liddell, 11. G. Vance, J. Derine, Sir E. Lindsay, Colonel Vane, Lorl A. Disraeli, B. Lockhart, W. Vansittart, G. IT. Duckworth, Sir J. Long, W. Vivian, J. Ennis East, Sir J. Lovaine, Lord Vyvyan, Sir It. Egerton, Sir Philip Lowther, Colonel Waddington, H. Egerton, W. Lytton, Sir E. G. Walcot, Adni. Egerton. E. Macarteney, G. Walpole, S. H. Elliot, J. E. Mackie, J. Walter, John Euston, Earl Macgregor, James West, Frederick B. Farnham, E. Basil Maddock, Sir H. Whatinan, J. Ferrer, James Manners, Lord G. Whitbread, Samuel Fellowes, Edward Manners, Lord J. Whitmore, 11. Ferguson, Sir Robert Masternian, John Wickham, 11. W. Fitzgerald, W. R. S. Maxwell, Hon. J. P. Wigram. L. T. Floyer, John Men '' , S i r Henry Wood, Sir C. Fol ett, B. Spencer 3llles, W. Woods!, B. Forester, Col. 1111chell, W. Wortley, Jas. Stuart Forster, Sir G. Moncreiff, James Wrightson, Sir Wm. Frewen, C. H. Montgomery, Sir G. Wyndham, General Gallwey, Sir W. P. Moody, C. A. Wynne, %V. Galway, Viscount Morgan, C. It. Verse, Eliot T. George, John Mundy William Young, Sir T. Gladstone, William N efts, Lord TELf.ERP. Gladstone, Captain Newark, Viscount Hayter, Hon. W. Goddard, Ambrose L. Newdegate, C. Berkeley, Grenville TELLERS. Clay. Sir William Peto, S. LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 27, 1853. Information received up to the 19th instant, pronounces one or two recent rumours to have been rather premature in reference to the situation of affairs in Constantinople. Instead of hastily quitting that capital on his return to St. Peters burgh, it appears that Prince MENSCHIKOFF had endeavoured to temporise still further with the DIVAN, seeing that, immediately on the rejection of his ultimatum, he had employed every device to open new negotiations. How far this last desperate effort to retrieve the position of his Im perial Master, the Russian AUTOCRAT, is likely to prove successful, may be readily conjectured, we conceive, under existing circumstances. Conces sions are not exceedingly probable on the part of the Sublime Porte, now that REDSCHID PACHA has been once more installed at the head of the Fo reign Department of the Turkish Administration. It is tolerably well known that that eminent statesman, the most gifted and energetic of all the political advisers of the SULTAN, was some time back thrust from power by the intrigues of the Em peror NIMIOLAS through his Ambassador at the Court of ABD-UL-MEDJID. And although we believe that REDSCHID PACHA is altogether too noble and mag nanimous in his temperament to avail him self of an opportunity of indulging in a petty, because personal, act of retaliation, we cannot at the same time remain blind to the undoubted pro bability that his sentiments towards the policy of the CZAR are anything but the complacent senti ments dictated by the feelings of friendship. We do not say that he owes a grudge to the Cabinet of St. Petersburgh. We say more—that he is bound by the force of his patriotism, by the wis dom of his experience, and by the promptings of his conscientious convictions, to withstand by every means in his power the sinister advances made by the Russian EMPEROR upon the Euro pean dominions of ABD-UL-MEDJID. So long as REDSCHID PACHA continues in office at Constanti nople, so long may the SULTAN rest assured that the CZAR will find himself opposed at every turn by all the energies of the Turkish Govern ment. Happily the councils of the Divan in this respect are supported, not merely virtually, but openly and practically, by the representatives of the majority of the crowned heads of Christen dom. Foremost, indeed, among these, of course, are the British and French Ambassadors. It is not any longer that the question at issue is one which the Court of St. James's regards with simple indifference. The difficult and entangled negotiations carried on for a long while in refer ence to the Holy Places have for a considerable time past been definitively settled to general satisfaction. The memorable firmans granted by the SULTAN during the course of last April set that matter at rest by a series of amicable and conciliatory arrangements. What is being battled for now at Constantinople is not the question as to who shall be the custodian of the keys or cupolas of Jerusalem. It is not as to who shall take precedence in conserving the shrine of the Blessed VIRGIN. It is not as to which order of Priesthood should be allowed to have prior claims to the guardianship of the Holy Sepulchre. It is simply the question as to who shall be Sovereign of the European do minions of Turkey—the SULTAN or the AUTO CRAT ? It is the question as to which of these two Potentates shall henceforth be regarded as the Master of Constantinople. MENSCHIKOFF is striving to gain an advantage for the Emperor NICHOLAS, in violation of the rights of nations, in defiance of the force of treaties, with a flagrant disregard of the common est principles of right or wrong : but in this en deavour he finds himself suddenly opposed by the genius and the patriotism of REDSCHID PACHA, resolved at all hazards to maintain the integrity of the Empire of ABD-UL-MEDJID. It so happens that at this identical crisis the imperial councils of France and England are presided over by Sovereigns not less reso lute in the preservation of what is called the Balance of Power in a state of equilibrium than ambitious of preserving with a strong arm the blessings of a prolonged and honourable tran quillity. The development of a lawless and in satiable ambition on the part of the AUTOCRAT will never be tolerated either by VICTORIA or NAPOLEON. Of this, during a long time, the SULTAN has evi dently felt himself satisfactorily assured. His principal support, in case of any instant emergency, would indubitably be in the British and the French Plenipotentiaries. However threatened the Sublime Porte may have been by the audao of the Court of St. Petersbnrg h, it has all alei r '; placed an implicit reliance in the j ustice, and ill tl' honour, and in the resolution of th e allied Cour; of St. James's and the Tuileries. Notwithstandil/' nus ' the military forces collected tog ether en the ari sian frontiers —notwithstanding, in fact, the of lie time -armament assembled on th e waters 1 t of Black Sea—the Divan has ever felt confident securing effectual assistance in the hour of dang e eli through the simultaneous appearance of the F r . e L, and English Fleets at the m outh of the da,nelles. That confidence, we rest assured, never, on the arrival of a lamentable crisis, eQ to have been in any manner misplaced. Irur.„4 o has a guarantee of this at once in the honur'oo, in the interest of the French and English vernments. • with Th t e h ll e o i u n s t e er o e f sti C n o g m a m n o d ns i zs )or Church Rates last night that no time re to dispose of the Income Tax Bill. That s o bJe s ; therefore, remains for this evening, when w ., no t, There 1 ' f• pose it will finally be disposed of. bees sil l t g a o n f t tli g lY• ue °3 ol ; ll : l oe ii cif however, much hope for those who hav e _ O3 O fering under the iniquitous system that 0 .0 for eleven years. Not a single person 113 : 00 t given notice of bringing forward an an . ! bie 5 11 J for the purpose of obtaining a more e q ua l test impartial assessment, or even the slig n of avi proximation to justice by the recognitieura, distinction, however trifling, betwe en Pe Gen tle and precarious income. One Honourable coo ti man, the representative of an Irish 30 0 tuency, while evincing a creditable tire on to improve the details of the inessoi;jo points exclusively relating to the sister 00;tiO has given notice of motion, that " the O w to persons whose respective incomes are ' t dal)! 1501. a year, shall be continued in r es Pe e% duties chargeable under schedules P an d b i e aO, also "in respect of any duties charge r ' •01 any income, stipend, or emolument, re cel of Oaf Clergyman, Minister, or Religious Teaeh er ,ai ti. denomination, from or in right of anY cal benefice, preferment, or in respect 01 ; aj o i er. pation as such Minister or Relig,ions We thank Mr. BUTT for this excellent Pr_ ini gt7 al J`' It is true that it affords but an infinjY y r gr ee gree of relief ; that it does not in all ' Le o nefit the numerous sufferers with ine elli- bot ing from 1501. to 3001. per annum' fir ; would keep the collector from the L i ,* t 1 those whose positions are, of all e', - n ott most difficult to maintain ; it would Pr e ; impost from touching on the domains e ;10 10 from including in its operation men tho ol e t r varying from 21. to 31. per week, or, — Gosr . , toiled and under-paid ministers of w a e s „,_Aelfr iit whose scanty remuneration is totally A to maintain the position which an educa te- f men should assume, or to the eXCreieii°o Christian charities befitting his sacred e';l l '`, which the sick and the destitute are as e rej) s J to consider almost as a right ; for it i s D' o per, able fact, that it is not to the rich and 1 / 411 ,t pluralist the wealthy incumbent - ', , 5 0 0 afflicted turn with almost a certainty of but to those who must curtail their 0 7 4 ,0' forts—we had almost said necessa rl i e ;a; who must purchase by their own privily expensive luxury of doing good. 33 , 1 %tier„ especially do we thank the Honourable for the universality of his proposition. sc cor i ; no exclusive privilege intended ; n e ~,r 7 1 favour to one at the expense of his brotll2'te'o:ll Burr's amendment comprehends the Minis Religious Teachers of every denominationv the Roman Catholic as the Protestant, senter as the State Churchman. Th is ill oi should be ; and most sincerely do we 11°1):If , will insure the success of the amendinee'',oe, could anticipate any degree of independea; part of those who at one time refuse d tr i themselves to the chariot wheels, or o f '` their own convictions at the behest, Minister, we should have no don') t yid the result. As it is, we await se patiently. If it should be in off; with justice and expediency, we ella i : d dy r for the sake of those who have esr a d, J r , undue responsibility. If, on the other w; Chancellor of the Exchequer shoal" triumph—if "might should once inor e ,ll) 4 Y over right "—we shall comfort ourselve s ,:ed consideration, that the more atrocious tl'", ;r 11 : ‘ , the sooner we may anticipate its overthr°' de° 4 when the " iniquity" is thoroughly tn i h oo` and the full extent of the burden h I, o s i dured, the pressure from without wil' io d irresistible, and the law must be re lhn materially improved, even long beforea, years' lease, to which the obedient Deg ot lef,,i' about to affix its seal, shall have expired . re s 9 circumstances, and whatever may be tl ie ) i f . the proceedings, we willingly render te e dli the approbation to which he has en a bler titled himself for his judicious and 0 111 s position. its 1° 1'11;5? Mr. BLACKETT , too, merits thank D o if positions, by which due allowances ar e i f i ptel' me for the bad debts, and losses by bank'itioo;n! solvency, or the acceptance of con i P es pro, which every trader is liable, and ill s° o f P l oi derate allowance for the wear and t ea lye nery employed in any manufacture. to e t re' gladly have seen the allowance exten ue re kind of trade or professional expend itu- it ' l 4 ' it viously recognised ; but, even as i t 15 ! o as r if sanctioned, remove some very s eri , n ie o P antes, and materially improve the s ' r p e I V 4 would, however, be letting in "the s v OO,l io the wedge," and would lead to an err° .Dit' e5 l " 6 0 4 that any regard to justice would b e *fr. lir I P ' . the assessment—a precedent w-h e o' l ' STONE will unquestionably resist wile/11010i powers. Well, NOUS verrons, time wil l ine od fo' manufacturers of the West Riding, the , 0 , chester, will think of no allowance be l' ano tiN 0 1 0' 1 111 bad debts or depreciated machinery'. a 13 perhaps arrive when Messrs. Conni — for nie); t o", will rejoin the ranks of the Fiscal Re and, which they have so recently seced e- ', i vati o veteran JOSEPII HUME, head th e c : o st industrious classes against the t i o f 4 ,OiP and iniquitoUs instance on rec ur tha t legislation." At present, all r for the friends of the people, fe recognise the justice of the Pr e t t e aP to o 0 1 every new law should tend to orootloo4, of " the many," that " the greate s ' tha t sj greatest number is a sacred prit i L ci e ll a l° i s lat° l :efr 4 : i e j l' ; never be lost sight of by our : o h 0 4 0. 4 enter their earnest protest agains t '„i r eacly based on injustice, and (as we have i ; d ort exhibiting in all its parts a flag nibs/ lei the commonest principles of „ t i e as j almost as demoralising and inlP° l / I ‘ , ste r tO r just and inexpedient," and alike the agitation which its oyere, certain speedily to excite. r l ittle p '0 , 4 1 but A ir A sent Parliament we have b ide pf ov ile y tation of relief. But We c the 0 ,1) It 0 .1 Whatever may be the resu disso in Reform Bill, there must be '/P s 4o have to render a strict accoun an ,en year. Every Honourable Ge t n o ta f e h r l s 11; c it r o oifnstehekeinlgncaomreenTeawxalwoifil cnoontfibdeenfoereg7 o t , te arri a ( 1 ( A 11 „ e r n rc heq- di , V day of reckoning shall at length 11___3 " weathered the east winds of 3 13 3'7 / o a t v o /MO iP When a Chancellore pd ver" ifieoeuldparyetyaksuinrge t o e f m l p iis s ell ` the sweets of Whitsuntide an tale the ` l4- re lv # o3 oa e.i. of a ro/ what with the near appr 40 0 Members get afraid of being au' itc h er no one likes, by delayin,, &in ' lO ,Ol spirit of obstructiveness begin s _ oun tecl K a n, i r delay of Cabinet measures, to s i g ns e' ` lo g Already Mr. DISRAELI gi Ve . s e i to g'll4 o t, ijV of thea d her:n and we fear that we are destroile 13acioaeji bitter as well as the sw eet at .nro pon Mr. GLADSTONE'S schemes been r the refitl, rO clf - Mr. DISRAELI'S befOTO Clirist ' l o s r would surely have left whey© t P 164 logic has left him in argument b w ho 01 .133 i ive ° ing to the old proverb, Inn s ,. to In j A x onal' , as r 2 ' between two stools. a lready from rateable property THEATRE ROYAL. H &YMARKET, 'Under the management of Mr. Bnekstone. TIIIS EVENING, MAY 27, Will be performed (12th time) THE MOUSETRAP. Characters by Messrs. 'filbury, Chippendale, Rogers, Bnekstone, W. Farren, and Edwards ; Mrs. Poynter, Misses A. Woulds, Louisa Howard Mrs. Fitzwilliam, and Mrs. Stanley. After which, MR. BUCKSTONE'S ASCENT OF MOUNT PAR NASsUs. To be followed by TUE BO 4RDING SCHOOL BALL. To conclude with BOX AND COX. ROYAL PRINCESS'S THEATRE, OXFORD-STREET. Under the Management of Mr. Charles Kean. THIS EVENING, MAY 27, Will be performed the Tragedy of MACBETH. Principal cha racters by Mr. and Mrs. C. Kean. To conclude with BLACK-EYED SUSAN. Characters by Messrs. T. P. Coooke, Wright, Meadows, Manvers, Graham, Eve rett, F. Cooke, and Saker ; Mrs. W. Lacy and miss Murray. ROYAL LYCEUM THEATRE. Under the Management of Madame v(ntria. THIS EVENING, MAY 27, WIII be performed A.S.S. Characters by Messrs. F. Mathews, Suter, ant Rosiere ; Mrs. Macnamara and Miss Wyndham. Alter which, A F.tsT TRAIN-111(;H PRESSURE EXPRESS. t haracters by Messrs. C. Mathews. Baker, and Suter. To be followed by THE LAWYEIN. Charac ers by Messrs. C. Mathews, F. NI aLthews, and Roxby ; M. F. Matthews, and Misses Robert, , oo and Ellis. Afton which, A DIVERTISSEMENT. To conclude with TRYING IT ON. Principal character by Mr. C. Mathews. THEATRE ROYAL ADELPHI. Pro?rietor, Mr. B. Webster. —Directress, Madame Celeste. THIS EVENING, 31A1 27, Will he performed JACK SHEPPARD. Supported by Messrs. Paul Bedford, A. Wigan, Parselle, and C. J. Smith ; Mrs. Keeley, Misses F. Maskell and Mary Keeley. To be followed by TO PARENTS AND GUARDIANS. Cha racters by Messrs. Keeley, Cullenford, and Alfred Wigan Mrs. Keeley, Mrs. Wigan, and Miss Mary Keeley. After which, GOING TO THE DERBY. To conclude with THE DANCING SCOTCHSIAIT. ROYAL OLYMFIC THEATRE. Lessee and Manager Mr. Farren. THIS EVENING, AWE 27, Will be performed THE MILLER OF DEB WENT WATER. Characters by Messrs. H. Farren, Shalders, G. Cooke, Clifton, and F. Charles ; Mesdames E. Turner and Anderton. To be followed by TILE IVANDERING MINSTREL. Jem Bags, Mr. F. Robson. To conclude with MACBETH. Supported by Mr. Samuel Mac beth, Mr. F. Robson, Mrs. Sarah Macbeth, and Mrs. A. Phillips. ASTLEY'S ROYAL AMPHITHEATRE. Sole Lessee and Manager, Mr. W. Cooke. Immense success of the Holiday Novelties. Second Week of the EQUESTRIAN GALA. THIS EVENING, MAY 27, And during the week, the Entertainments will commence with the highly successful Hippo Daama, with new scenery, costumes, and appointments, entitled THE CHASE, er LIFE ON THE TURF — in which will be represented a FOX CHASE, with REAL FOX and HOUNDS, illustrative of the daring and celebrated Aylesbury Leap of the Horse over a Dining Table—the Race—Steeplechase, &c., &c. To b 3 followed by an unprecedented cilsplay of Equestrian and Gymmastic Achievements in the ARENA, introducing Mr. Cooke's highly-trained Horses and Ponies—supported by the eminent Artistes of the Establishment ; and the Premier Hotseman, Mr. Alfred Cooke, and his talented Family in the new classical and beautiful Act entitled THE KING OF THE AIR, or SHINING HERALD OF AUItORA, which has been nightly received with perfect enthusiasm. Box-otuee open daily from Eleven to Four. Stage Manager, Mr, W. West. HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE. Tars DAT —Morning 51 min. after 4 i Evening 18 min.aft. 5 To-Wm:Row—Morning 43 min. after 5 I Evening 10 min.aft. 6 THE WEATHER.—Sus OFFICE, MAY 27. THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE. 73—highest since noon yesterday. 59—lowest this morning and during the night. 73 this day at noon. BAROMETER, 2975. WIND, N.N.W. --Light, pleasant breeze, and fine, clear weather. ~~j~, Q ~ nn,