The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1860-02-14 00:00:00

WEDS E.SDAY.

After the presentation of • vast number of petitions
upon the subject, one of which, signed by 64 arslidea-
cons against the Bill, was read at length at the table.
Sir J. TiII:LAWNY IDOVvil the second reading of the
Church-rates Abolition Bill. He acknowledged that
the subject was one of great difficulty, and proceeded to
notice sonic of the details which were essential to the
proper consideration of it. He referred to the weight
of authorities in favour of a settlement of the question,
and reviewed the argoinents against the abolition of the
rate founded upon its legal incident., contending that it
was not, as sometimes alleged, a charge upon the land.
and adverting to special reasons why the House ought to
deal with the question at this time. The decision of the
House of Lords in the " Braintree c.se " had mule en
entire alteration in the law of Church-rate, and the
amount of rate now levied had been already reduced to
1.'253,000. and WAS reducil.le still further by the exclusion
of illegal charges, while the exception of Dissenters from
the compulsory pa) went of the rate (which the oppo-
nents of the Bill were prepare,' to concede), and making
no distinction between them and Churchmen, would
have the effect of augmenting the amount of voluntary
contributions towards the repair of churches. Ile
pointed out other resources for the ml Bun of charges.
and asked the advocates of the rate. IS assenting to its
abolition, they, 01501 the whole. gave up much for an
object so desirable As the final adjustment of this vexed
question.
The motion WAS seconded by Sir C. DOUGLAS.
Lord R.BIONTACI: moved, as an amendment, to defer
the permit reading for his thii. After boticing come
of the arguments of Sir. J. Trelawny, lie observed that
lie hail looked at this question in the old point of view,
whereas. since the evideiice adduced before the Lords'
Committee last year, which Sir John seemed not to have
read, the question had entered an entirely new phase,
and assumed • different charactc r. It was kilned), sup-
posed that this was a question uf conscience ; but it now
amerced, from tl.e evidence of Dissenters, that the con-
scientious objection bad nothing to do with the matter ;
that it was ins-rely a political objection or • factious agi-
tation, the ultimate aim of which Was the severance of
the Church end the State. he read portions of the evi-
dence taken by the C 'Bee in supporta his position,
observing that the ulterior object, to which coda victory
over Church-rates would be used as a means, showed
that more would be given up by the surrender of the
rates than Mir J. Trelawny wished the House to suppose.
He insisted that the evidence and the number of peti-
tions proved that the desire for the abolition of Church-
rates was not general, and that a feeling was growing up
in favour of their continuance.
This amendment was seconded by Mr. R. LONG. who
dwelt upon the injustice of sweeping away • fund ap-
propriated by law for the eustenation a churches with.
out equivalent or eompeneation.
Sir G. Lew's, after defending Lord J. Russell (who
was absent) against some strong remarks mon his change
of opinion regarding this question by Mr. Long, observed
that lie was not one of those who took extreme views
mon it, differing on some points from both sides, and he
proceeded to explain the reasons which hail led him re-
luctantly to the conclusion that, in the present state of
the question, the only course for him to take was to vote
in favour of the Bill. He pointed out what he considered
as fallacies on either aide, and, looking at the propose"
to substitute pew-rents for Church-rates, be remarked
that lie could not understand the objection to resorting
to a system of pew•rents, which were Church-rates under
another name, and in which lie was convinced an equi-
valent would lie found.
Mr. H. K. Stan EK, considering the present poeition of
the Church-rate question, thought the House had a
right to complain that a ques of scm much importance
should be left in the hands of • private member, an.l
cited the oi .i .. ion. expressed by members of the present
Government, which lie contrasted with the coarse they
had purseed upon this question. Suggesting practise'
objections to the working of the measure before the
House, lie contended that in rural districts there was no
real opposition to Church-rates, •tel that the oeimiition
of Diesenters, it was now IVoWe.i. WAS not founded upon
a conseientiona objection. With reference to pew-rents.
he believed that uienibers of the Church of England in
rural districts were unit,. rsallv "Nemec' to them.
Mr. Bats-row neid lie thought that, both for the in-
terestsof the Church of England and the peace of the
country. it would be wise and prudent to pass tide Bill
abolishing a compulsory Churelerate, which was an
annually recurring cause of strife and
Mr. DISRAELI WiSIIMI to put before the House a view
of this question which had Hot been at all considered—
namely, the extreuiely centralizing character of the mea-
sure, which called upon • central authority to interfere
with the parochial constitution, at lewd 10 per cent, of
the parishes not wishing to he interfered with. He
looked, he said, with great jealousy upon • central
authority interfering with a constitution that had

existed for centuries, and had been productive of benefi-
cial results. The object was no longer to redress a prac-
tical grievance, but to adopt a speculative theory.
Heretofore legislation upon this question was proposed 1
to be based upon a oonacientious scruple; but that basis
wu now abandoned, and the real question was whether ;
there should be an Established Church. Although this '
, issue was not necessarily put before the House upon
this occasion, they had it in clear evidence that it was
the real name ; and, believing that this measure would
revolutionise the parochial constitution of the country,
he should give it Ids Lelrty opposition.
Lord Extooiv denied that the abolition of Church-
rates would interfere with the connexion of the Church
and State. This measure would only do in England
what had been done in Ireland—it would get rid of con-
tests and hearthurnings, and the Church of England
would lie stronger than before.
Mr. PACKE and Mr. HUBBARD spoke in opposition to
the Bill, and Mr. TMOMPISON in its support.
Sir J. TBELAWNT replied, and, the House having
1 divi led, the amendment was negatived by 263 to 234.
leaving a majority of 29 in favour of the Bill, which WY
read a second time. _

The Public Improvements Bill was read a becond
time.

.....
Mr. JOHN Locus moved the second reading of the
Attorneys and Solicitors' Bills, explaining the clauses.
Mr. Bucti.i. suggested the postponement of the second
reading.
. . . . . . .

-
The debate was ultimately adjourned.
Sir 11. CAncin obtained leave to bring in a hill
(No. 2) to amend the law relating to endowed schools.
The House adjourned at 6 o'clock.