The Express.
London, England, 1862-05-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

11013131 OF 001111101C8 NN, "lIDIVEt,DAY, MAY 14.
(Clostimied from yesterday's S.rprres.)
CHURCH RATES ABOLITION BILL.
Sir G. C. LEWIS, defending the till, said he thought
that if the present law were abolished there would be
IMO dance of coming to en arrangement which it
seemed to him would be effectual and complete, as far
as regarded the maintenance of the fabrics of the church,
whilst it could give no possible offence, even in imagination,
to those who dissented from the charch of England,
Mr. R. MILLS thought that church rates, which was
BOW the only subject ou which the ecclesiastical courts bad
authority over laymen, ought to be abolished if they could
not have • reasonable compromise. That was the coostitto
time' course, and it would only be doing justice to the
nonconformists and the Roman catholics to relieve them
from this impost.
Major BARTTELOT said that he could not agree in the
emiclueion to which the hon. gentleman who bad just
spoken had come. Since this question had been discussed
is the house be believed the sentiments of the people had
been much altered with respect to this question of church
MAIL The language used by many of the opponents of the
rate tended to mitigate very much the feelings of the
Ration.
'Mr. BRIGHT adverted to the curious circumstance that
church rates had been defended by legal lomisaries from
Ireland ; and pointed out that Mr. If la had admitted
that • measure which some years ago caused • greater
alteration than that now proposed in the church of Ireland
was a Dealing measure. He contended that the supporters
of church rates made them • party rather than • religious
question. Mr. S. Estcourt had repudiated every
measure which bad been attesipkd to settle the
matter, and said that any measure which did not
settle it was worth nothing, and that reasoning
applied to his owa immediate tion. There
wee no dispute about the legal or constitutional
right ; but the rioesition was. whether • state of law and
practice which was established 800 years ago was applicable
to the present time, when all the circumstances of the
country were so different. If by the Toleration Act men
were allowed to worship as they pleased, what was now
liked was • sequence of that act, that Do one should be
called on to contribute to the expenses of • worship in
which their consciences did not permit them to join ; and he
dared any member of the church to say that they were sot
liberal enough to bear the expenses of the conduct of their
own religious services. In fact, the voluntary system now pre-
vailed to • vast extent in the church itself ; and how was
it that that principle could not be trusted in this small
question of church rates! In his opinion the resolution
was one which the house ought not to accept, as it only
suggested a substitute for the present system without pro-
posing • remedy for the existing evil. He had suggested a
plan, and if it could be accepted now, he would ask that
W present bill be withdrawn, namely, that things should
21011i111 as they are, except that the power of enforcing the
payment of churci rates should be taken away ; and then
he was sure that uo difficulty would be found in finding the
means of supporting the fabric of churches. He agreed
that the government ought to take up this question. I
think (said the hoc. member) they ought to take
it up out of respect to that great party by
whose support alone they hold their offices. (Cheers.)
It has been the course for many years put lito take almost
every question, at • certain period of its career, into the
hands of government, because they were more able to effect
the settlement of it than any private member. But that
has not been the case with the particular question now
before the home. We have now • government which seems
more and more inilispeeed to touch such subjects. (Hear,
bear.) Wilms the A ..48480 government was formed, an
hon. gentleman, who was not only a politician but • wit,
said that the government of Lord Aberdeen could go on
wall so long as it kept off polities. (Laughter.) That
seams to me to be rather the oourse of the government of
the noble lord. (Cheers.) There are two reasons why the
government changed its course on this matter. The right
hon. gentleman the member for Bucks made • remarkable
speech—l think in the month of November—it was at all
events in the fog—(laughter)—in which be attempted to
clarify this great question. The right hon. gentleman never
made a more remarkable or ingenious speech, and I would
give • great deal to see the countenance of that bishop who
listened to him on that platform. (Much laughter.) Bat
he did not confine his sympathy tea great church establish-
ment. His commiseration wee also excited an behalf of
members on his aide of the house. The country, he mid,
did sot sufficiently support them in their gigantic and au-
perhumen efforts to raaiatain church rates. The thing was
only done by a strain on the physical energies of those who
repelled the attacks, ou which it was not in human nature
to reckon. unless the country and churchmen came forward
to support them. (Laughter.) My mind turned to the hon.
member for Norfolk, whose physical energies never seem to
fail him in opposing anything. (laughter.) But the right
hoe. gentleman called upon the church and churchmen to
support him and his party in the opposition they made
to shim bill. We believe we have here a substantial ghee-
.ance, and I hope the noble lord will take it in laud.
(Hear, hear.) I believe Do question can be brought
before the house, not even the question of want of confi-
dence in the government, that will unite a larger number
,of votes on this side of the house than this question that is
to be eulimitted to it. (Hear, bear.) If that be so, if it
affect millions of the people—if •14 et least all seasonable,
men in the house wish it to be settled, I think that we have
a special right to call upon the government to take up this
matter ; to submit it to the house upon some basis that
will be acceptable to the great body of their supporters in
the house and the country, and to stake their existence as a
government on carrying their measure. (Loud cheers.) If
they abjure this question altogether ; if this question is to
be merely used io small boroughs against conservative can-
didates--(bee, hear)—if government care nothing for its
carried,being then they abdicate their character as states-
men, and they take their places on that bench as—
what shall I call them superior clerks. (Great
cheering.) I am only anxious for the settlement of
this question on some principle so simple and just
as will recommend itself to the great body of the people,
and no longer leave it • matter of contention in this house.
.If you drop your feelings of hostility against those who are
the supporters of this measure, whom you consider as
attacking the supremacy of your church—if you will look
only to the harmony which all religious sects ought to enter-
tain and cultivate—if you will look to those great principles
that are as much inculcated in your church as in ours, you
will come to the conclusion that there is nothing in this
question that can tasks it worth while for the country or
parliament longer to debate about it. (Cheers.) Twenty-
eight years have not driven away the attacks which have
been muds upon this odious and unjust impost—(hear)--
sad if the agitation is to continue for 28 years more, it will
be our imperishable and unchangeable duty to assail
it. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) Let us in a session
in which nothing bee been done hitherto but the spending
of money hardly gathered from the people, make it famous
for one thing which will have the effect of allaying a
warm of constant irritation throughout the country, and
embody in English law one of the noblest precepts of the
Gospel and of morals, that we do to all our neighbours as
we should wish them to do to us. (Loud cheers.)
Sir P. BURRELL supported tho amendment. Ile re-
pudiated mixing up this question with mere political con-
siderations, and complained that matters had been im-
ported into the discussion which had nothing whatever to
do with it.
Sir 1. PAKINGTON said that everyone who had
liseened to the speech of the boo. member for Birming-
ham must admit that he (the right boo. gentleman) was
justified in making two remarks upon it—first, that ell the
arguments of the hon. member WWI applied as much to the
paying of tithes as to the paying of church rates ; and
secondly, that the hoe. gentlemau forgot that the church
of England was essentially the poor man's church. (Hear,
bear.) There was no church of England throughout the
teed which the poor man was not free at all times and on
all OCCISiODS to enter without paying coy tithes what-
ever. He took exception to the answer made by
the ben. member for Birmingham to what hail
fallen from another hon. gentleman with regard
to the former views of Lord John Russell ,on this question.
The Lou. member said that Lord J. Russell bad as good a
right to an opinion on this matter in 1862 as he bad in 1854.
nu complaint of the conduct of the noble lord was, that the
answer of the hon. member for Birmingham did not apply
so it. The noble lord had never told them he bad changed
his opinion. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord bad changed
his vote—(elseers)—:and his conduct—(hem, bear)—but he
(Sir J. Pakiegton) believed he had never changed his
opinion. (Oh, oh.) Of this he was sure, that the noble
lord had never professed in that house that his general
mitten on this gnostical had been at all changed. (Hear,
hear.) He bad heard with regret the speech of the right
boo. gentleman the Secretary of State (Sir G. C. Lewis),
because he thought this was a questiou which ought not to
be left in the hands of an independent member, but should
be taken up by the government. (Hear, beer.) He
thought that when the government refused to adopt
that plan they laid themselves open to the severe
charge brought against them by the hon. member for Bir-
mingham. The reason why this question had not been
settled was the violence shown by a portion of the dis-
senters and the tergiversation of certain politicians in that
house. He would admit, however, tbat there were a great
number of dissenters who did not take part in this agit•-
don, but who were willing to contribute to the support of
that church which they knew to be essential to religion.
Ile was • party to the bill brought in by Loot Derby's go-
vernment in 1858, and he must say they did that which
the present government had not even attempted to do, for
they grappled with the subject and endeavoured to effect •
compromise, although some hoo, gentlemen trout religious,
and others from party motives, would not accept that con-
cession. (Hear, bear.) He believed the real motive of the
dissenters in the course they had taken was not to get rid
of a grievance but to destroy • church to which
they were opposed and which they detested. As a
churchman, and as one who had always upheld the church
rata, he did not regret this violent, course, because he
thought the house had already elm the result in its divi-
sines, and in opening the eyes of liberal members. (Hear,
hear.) He believed it had dose far more for the cause
of the church than liana te it. (Hem)
Mr. DILLWYN said ors mmerally admitted that
some settlement of the irruption bat lea= seemery,
but ought Dot to etnemste fleet se neseaber.
lawbee.
MO COBBI cot, however, think tie goverentee rest
encouragement to come forward it tie alit wise mi.
gentlemen opposite could not agreeasoog timaissins.
Mr. DISRAELI said be would detain them wilya few
manatee, but if be were to allow some of the remado mode