The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1867-03-26 00:00:00

CHURCH RATICS.

I The majority of seventy-six in the House of
Commons, which serried the mond reading of the
Church Rates Abolition Bill, nails the attention
of the country 0009 more to that difficult subject
—not that,, attach moth Importance to that
division I Ohurth ratio have survived, and
will survive, many such votes, for this
simple reason, that the divisions do not
really represent the feelings of the people at
large. It is well known that many members
vote for the abolition of Church rate., only
because they know that the Hones of Lords will
not pass the 02•1111199 : thus they satisfy the
demands of the more unreasonable of their
constituents, without any great risk to
Use Church's Interests It Is this knowledge
that enables the Upper House so quietly to
dispose of this measure from time to time.
But this state of things ought not to last; the
Upper House ought not to do the work which
members of the other house are afraid to do,
and the question would soon be settled if the
opponents of them Wee dentin:Awl only what
Is fair. The usoonditional Abolition of Church
Rates without any compensation is neither just,
nor, as we think, expedient—it is not just to
take the case of a Noooonformist, for it is
not the man that is rated, but the property
which he has either bought or rented
subject to this rate, and for which he has
a proportionably smaller sum. If therefore
• afterwards refuses to pay that rate, what oan
he do with the money 1 It is not his own. HO
never paid for it, nor was it given him. To apply
it therefore to any other object than that for
which he undertook to par It when he made his
purchase, is 'Web, not an act of high moral
principle, but just the 000tru7. And after this
impost has existed for a thousand years, and
churches have been built on the faith of its
existence, no justice can call for It. abolition.
Nor Is it expedient either for the Church or the
State that time Church rates shintld be abolished.
It is quite true that the March dose not depend
for its existence npoli such a paltry sum, but
those rates gine the State the right of interferon*,
In Church matters, which at the present time is
most beneficial. Turned adrift from the State,
the Church would soon become the peg of fierce
factions, who only Willi their hands loose to
begin the fray ; antt hence it is that some of the
most turbulent of churchmen are willing to per-
chers the liberty of the Church at the price of
the Church rates. Nor is it expedient for the
State to give up its hold upon to poirliful an
organization as the Church. In its present
position it la, Comparatively speaking, power-
less as a political body, there is such
perfect freedom of opinion on all subjects
among its members; but, take away Church
, rates, and you oonvert it into a sect, bound
together by sectarian interests and feelings, and
I by sectarian hostility against all that are opposed
to it. And we cannot but feel that some of our
Nonooinformist friends will find, if they guessed
lin abolishing Church rates, that they have
purchased very dearly an imaginary advantage,
whilst they will have arrayed against themselves
I compact and powerful body of Episcopalians
no longer pensive, liberal, and generoue towards
those whodiffer from them, from albelingoitheir
own security of position, but watchful, zealous,
and aggresive. From this we hops to be saved by
a fair and holiest settlement of the question and
If this division in Parliament haelisne such a
settlement, we shall look upon it as an important
step in the right direction.