The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1861-06-25 00:00:00

if ntp a ial Varlinment.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRMAY.

Lonl Ellenboroogh !irked the Duke of Somerset what
arrangements had been made for placing a sufficient
force of Her Majosty's ships at the disposal of the
Indian Governw.ciit to supply the place of the Indian
navy *Mee its reduction by Mr. Laing, and whether
the expense would fall upon the Indian or English
Trensury.
The Duke of Somerset believed that the Government
liiul trken sufficient funds for thii)car to provide such
a naval service as it required. The whole matter, how.
ever, was still under the consideration of Ilcr Majesty's
Government.

Lord lie (trey and filpon, in moving the second read-
ing of the East Indian Loan Bill, explained that the
necessity for the loan slid not arise from any dcficienc)
of Mcome in India, but from the state of the cub
balances in the Home Treasuiy.
The Bill was rend a second time.

Lord Monteagle presented a petition from certain
firitieh subjects, natives of India, complaining of their
exclusion from the competitive examinations for
appointments to °files, called the attention of the
House to various Acts of Parliament and to the Royal
proclamation to the natives of India, admitting the
eligibility of the natives to hold offices the duties of
which they were qualified to perform.
Lord Herbert epplaincd that the words of the Royal
proristor.tion guaranteed appoiutinents to nativai in
India only, but not in the wmeral service of the Crown.
Lord Ellenborough born the highest testimony to the
qualificatiors of the utilise doctors, preferring them, if
in India, to those of Europeans.
Lord Clanricanlo and Lord de Grey and Ripon having
said a few words., the petition was ordered to lie on the
table.

Their Lordships adjourned at 20 minutes past 9
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMSIONS.-WEDNESDAY.

WINDOW CLEANING DILL.
Sir C. Burrell moved the second reeding of the
Window Cleaning, to., Bill, stating the reasons,
founded on humanity, which had induced him to
reintroduce this measure, though it had failed last
Session.
Sir F. Goldsmid, giving credit to the venerable
member for benevolent intentions, pointed out the in-
conveniences and vexations which this minute legisla-
tion would occasion, and moved to defer the second
reading for three months.
After a short discussion, the amendment was carried
by 97 to ;so the Bill is boat.

CHURCH-KATO ABOLITION BILL—DZIZAT OT TUB
111EiNURE.
Sir J. Trelawny, in moving that the Chnnth-rates
Abolition Bill be read a third time noticed certain
pointe with the view of obviating objections, remarking
that, as all now teemed to ho of opinion that relief
should be given to Dissenters in this matter, lie had
practically no opponent as regarded the principle of
the measure. He urged the evils resulting from the
existing law, and warned those who opposed the Bill of
the heavy responsibility they incurred in rejecting the
present opportunity of settling this question.
Mr. Collier reviewed the proposed Bill of Mr. S.
Estcourt, and stated his objections to what be termed
his scheme for stereotyping Ch urch-rates, which dimmed
the incidence of the ter, making it not • personal
charge, but a charge upon the laud ; and, so far from
being • measure of relief from Church-rates, it would
render them permanent. There was, in his opinion,
only one way of dealing with this tax—its abolition.
Mr. ti. Esteourt, after replying to the objections
offered by Mr. Collier to his proposed scheme, said he
objected to Sir J. Trelawny's Bill on two main grounds.
In the first place, it prohibited parishioners from
exercising a mode of local self-government coeval with
the earliest period of our legislation, putting an end to
an old common law right. This was an inherent vice
of the Bill. Then, in the next place, the Bill, in its
present stage, stood in the way of • practical solution
of the question, precluding every atteuipt at eoin-
promise, and shutting the door against an amicable
arrangement, which it was desirable to keep open to the
last. Without discussing the scheme he had offered
ineffectually aa • compromise, he adverted to what he
considered to be the principal upon which an arrange-
ment should be based. The only safe course was to
depart as little as powdble from the old principle of
Church-rate. Allow every man to exempt himself
personally from an obligation to support a Church of
which he was not • member, and adopt this principle
in the form least offensive. The Bill now before the
House prevented any such arrangement Allti all mutual
concessions ; it was, therefore, better that it should be
stopped, and lie moved to defer the third reading for
three mouths.

This amendment was seconded by Lord It. Cecil, who
congratulated Sir J. TreLawny upon his having dis-
connected himself from the Liberation fisiciety, the
object of which was the destruction of the Church of
England. He denied that this Bill was one of Shelly
or of enfranchisement ; it was, he said, a Bill of dis-
franchisement and of pains and penalties.
Mr. If Lewis, in a first speech, supported the Bill.
He believed, he said, that • c.mscientious principle
was involved in this question ; but, in voting for the
Bill, ha Waal convinced that it would confer a greet
boon upon the Church of England, which ought to live
in the heart and affections of the peed., and never
could, an long as they were vend by the miserable
bickerings caused by the Church-rates.
Mr. Cross said be should assume that a great majority
of the House and the country desited • settlement of
this question. As to the kind of settlement, opinions
differed. Some were furs total abolition of Church-
rates ; others would have no surrender. He concurred
with Mr. Eetcourt that the only practical way of
settling the question was by ceramist exemption ; and
Ise proposed that MI persona who object:el to pay
Church-rates should have an opporsanity of saying so,
aid be exempt without declaring themselves to be
Dissenters. The Bill stood in the way of a measure to
carry out this settlement, and ha should support the
amendment.
Sir G. Lewis observed that the objection to Cluirch-
rates was a eoustientions objection, which he believed
to be sincere, and it was impossible to offer a valid
argument against • conscientious objection. On the
other hand, it was urged that by the abolition of
Church-rates the essence of an Established Church
would be annihilated. This objection, he thought, -
after what had been done in Ireland, bad not sufficient
weight. Ho was prepared to vote for the third reading
of the bill. Al the same time, he was quite ready to
enter into a dimussion of other proposals. His
objection to the proposed of Mr. Cross was that it
would reduce a Church-rate to • voluntary contribution,
depriving it of the character of • rate, the principel
of which was, that it should be general and coin.
milsory, while it would concede the whole doctrine
upon which the Bill was founded. He (Sir George)
would propose a plan which would begin by laying the
eharge upon them who were members of the church,
and who testified the same by attending the Church.
Some objection might be made to the term of"pew.
rents," but it seemed to him than a rate might be in
iuiposed, that it should be compulsory, and that it would
provide a sufficient fund for maintaining the fabric of
Use Church.
Mr. Newdegate vindicated a proposition he had
f_onn=i made for a substitute for Church-rates, and
the third reading of the Bill.
opposed the
approved the proposal of Mr Cross.
Mr. Bright said all the plans which had been proposed
did not hit the grievance. The object was to get rid
of every shred of what the Dissenters regarded as the
supremacy of the Chureh of England in relation to this
particular question; to place the Church and ether
sects in that respect upon an eqnality. The resistance
to Chuch-rates was not grounded upon the amount •
theme must be something deeper in the matter that's
money. He was going, be said, to vote for the third
reeding of the Bill; but he wu ready to salient to a
compromise by which the compulsory power of levying
the rate should be withdrawn and the term of total
abolition delayed.
Mr Hubbard addressed the House for • short time
amidst ieterruptions.
Kr. Stansfeld observed that this question WAS one
of policy rather than of principle. It was totally
distinct from that of • sepexation of the Church from
the State. No scheme of compromise hail been, or
could be, proposed that would not be objectionable
and degrading to Dissenters; and he believed that
all attempts would be vain, mischievous, and
dangerour.
, Mr. Whiteside accused Sir G. Lewis of inconsistency,
, professing himself utterly unable to reconcile his
logic with his vote. He dented that this was a
question of policy merely ; it was • question of
principle. An sressive movement was made against
the Established hnrch, and the opposition proceeded
from a desire to maintain the old j.rinciples of the
Constitution.
Upon • division, the numbers proved to be equal
ThAyes
e announcement or the numbers was received with
loud cheering by the Opposition, and a great deal of
anxiety was manifested as to what the casting vote of
the Speaker would be, and when
The Speaker, in giving the casting vote, explained
in a few sentences the reasons why he thought, in
this stage of the Bill, lie should best discharge Ins duty
by giving his voice with the " Noes"—that is against
the Sill being "now" read • third time, the is,
on the part of the Opposition. wait deafening.
The Bill is, consequently, lest.
The House went into Committee nivel the County
Voters (Scotland) Bill, but got through only a portion
of its clauses.
The remaining eiders having been disposed of, the
House adjourned at five mioutes to 6 o'clock.