The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-03-30 00:00:00

all "anxious to leave the sea, if they can find
anything to do on shore." Mr.„Lamport describes
the Arnerican4Ateln as. one that is to give to any
.foreign 7lation what tlira.liatirhi will give to it.
But:.thkefUsal of the`tt.J,:nite States to open
,theii!aiiting trade. to ris;'i at:variance with
that system. Mr' Laniport's,yersidn of it is, that
• whep2:tlie Americans opened-0 whole of their
Irade kr.s. with the exceptiOn of the coasting
trade; pO;sibly.kheir reason for not including the
.dasting'irade •Wirs.that weffid not open ours until
four years afterwards." Yet he is not without
hope, he declares, that the Americans themselves
will by-and-bye insist on the removal of the
restrictions which now exist.
The Zimes„ with, most amusing sophistry,
persists in arguing, that " the French treaty is
not a bargain,"—it only "bears the outward and
visible semblance of a bargain!" But, for the
matter of that, it is only an " outward and vi-
sible semblance" altogether, as yet ; and whether
it will ever become anything more, is somewhat
doubtful just now. The leading; journal,
.how-
- ever, wants it to be made a bargain as
respects. paper. As proposed by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, it is shown, "you
dam up the raw material by an export duty of
50 per cent. ; you let the manufactured article
flow in free." And it is asked, " What must be
the operation of this upon the Englishman who
exists by buying raw material and selling the
manufactured article ?" Why the ruin of his trade,
of course. But what of that ? Paper-making is
not a Manchester manufacture. Still, as in
Printing-house-square, the price of paper is a
consideration, our contemporary of that ilk insists
upon a bargain being made of it. "We have the
largest paper-market in the whole world to offer
to a people who already produce very good paper,
and who have an immense gathering-ground for
rags. Surely we are in a position to ask some-
thing in return for this." No doubt of it what
ever. But then that would not bd free trade,-
it would be reciprocity.

THE Liberals in the House of Commiins'ininSt be
a party very heedless of all fair and honest prin-
-eiple, or they could never, as they reported to
have done, have loudly cheered the Church-rate
Abolition Bill on its passing through committee.

Even were such a, measure deemed, expedient, as
a political concession or compromise,—though we
are far from saying that it really is so—still it

would be most indecorous to greet so iguopinious

• .
an act with applause, implying as it does, that
there are legislators for a Christian nation who,
even on A great Christian question, can glory in
their shame. We regard it as such, not merely
as being a Church subject, but as a matter
of justice and right—of national good faith and

moral obligation. We pray for the High Court
of Parliament, that their consultations may be

directed' and prospered to the good of the Church
which yet they not only do.not scruple to de'SpoiPo
rights of property to which she has even a-higher
claini than, they have to any, of theirs, but sig-
nalise their sacrilegious success with cheers !
How can it ever be expected that " truth and
justice," to say nothing of " religion and piety,'
can be " established among us"—as we further
pray it may, by their endeavours, come to pass—
if so flagrant a course of wrong as this is to be
extolled and exulted in ? We say distinctly and
emphatically of wrong,—for let it not be for-
gotten that the greater part of the property of
this country has been bought and sold with an
understanding that the Church of the pariqf was
tabe kept and repaired by the owners of that
property,—except for which liability, 'a larger
price world have been" paid for 'it'. "For those
therefore," as a writer on the question has well
observed, " who have thus profited by the exist-
ence of a Churchrrate, to refuse that rate, and so
appropriate to themselves what does not belong
to them, is an act not only of profatieness,"%ut of
dishonesty." The amendment which Mr. NEWDE-
GATE proposed would at least have respected that
principle, providing as it did that there be estab-
lished in lieu of Church-rates, thenceforth to be
abolished, a charge on all hereditarnents in respect
of the occupancy of which Church-rates have been
paid within the last seven years, such charge to
be levied with the county-rate at a uniform rate
of poundage, the occupier- being;-in- nll, rages,
entitled to deduct the amount of the charge levied
on his occupation. This, we say, would have
maintained the right of preperty, and secured a
continued provision for the maintenance of the
Church's fabrics,—an object in which every man,
be he Churchman or Dissenter, is more or less
directly interested. "It respected the conscien-
tious scruples of the Dissenters ; it accepted the
decision of the House that Church-rates should
be abolished- as a personal tax ; whilt, on the
other hand, it preserved the property of the
Church, and prevented the landowners rom
pocketing that property to the extent of £300,000
yearly." Surely this were an equitable course
for the Parliament of a great country to pursue
on such a question. But, instead of pursuing it,
or anything like it, the House-of Commons have
.passed a bill of grass spoliation and sacrilege,—
an act of injustice and .injury which Parliament
would never dare to require any lay corporation

to submit to.
Now, a right of this kind possessed by the
Established Church,-,--,a- right at once equitable,
reasonable, and legal,—is not one the enforcement
of which can with any truth be said to infringe
upon a just toleration. The system of the Estab-
lished Church is that of a comprehensive national
religion, guarded by necessary articles of peace
and confOrmity, yet recognising, a complete tole-
ration of all Dissenters from its doctrines, and all
Separatist§ from its pale i and it is one that has
been truly described " as' not only the most just
and • liberal; but the wisest and safest system
which a State can adopt : inasmuch as it unites
the several perfections which a religious consti-
.tution ought to aim at,—liberty of conscience,
with the means of instruction ; the progress of
truth, with the peace of society ; the right of pri-
vate judgment, -with the care of the public
safety." Such a system as this, then, deserves to
be supported; and with,itsrrights of property, espe-
cially—the enforcement of which is so necessary,
so essential to its support—surely there ought on
no account to be any unjust interference ; least of
all any actual destruction of those rights. It-is
all very fine for the Dissenters to Pretend that
they " did not think the abolition of Church-
rates would ipjure the Church, brit, on_ the con-
• trary, they believed that 'Still greater benefits
would be conferred upon the Church by the adop-
tion of the Voluntary principle." Is it, in the
first place, to be- believed; that- the-ppponents of
the Church really and sincerely wish to see " still
greater benefits conferred upon her.? " And, in
the next place, where is there any - ground of
assurance that " the adoption of the Voluntary
principle " would sustain the fabrics of our parish
churches ? Why, in the United States, where
that principle is in full operation, it is just in this
respect that it most signally fails. They do contrive,
upon that principle, to maintain, in one way or
another, the ministers of religion; but for the fabrics
of their places of worship, they cannot succeed at
all. The value of these buildings throughout the,
Union is now estimated, we believe, at not much
short of a hundredmillions of dollars ;- and of this
sum, at least thirty millions of dollars, 9r 'six mil-
lions of pounds sterling is debt—debt which is felt
as the great curse of their ecclesiastical system.
The whole question,- however;; is before the
country ; and a large amount of sound public
opinion will back up the House of Lords, or we
are much mistaken, in their rejection of this
sacrilegious bill of spoliation which the Commons
are about to send up to theM again. The Morn-
ing Herald has well expressed the present state
of the case, when it says There is no further
concealment as to the ultimate intention of those
who take the part of the abolitionists.
argument and suggestion which has been pu
forward against Church-rates is equally available