The Express.
London, England, 1862-06-25 00:00:00

THE • EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 26, 1862.

EXPRNSM OF PRIVATE 8.114 A.,

hem received, namely, from the central district, sad that
that writ had been haled that afterwma.
- -

Mr. HOl)OSON asked the Chairman of the Committee
on Standing Orders whether he intended to move for the
appointment of • committee for the purpose of emertaining
whether any alteration mold be made in the conduct of pri-
vate business, no as to diminish the expense now incurred
by promoters and tsi of private bills.
Colonel W. PATeIEN said it was his intention to move
for a select oommittea to revise the Mending orders of the
house. If that committee was greeted he would move in
the committee certain resolutions which would have for
their object the reduction of the expense of private legis-
lation. There were, however, other expenses to which the
promoters of private bills were subject, over which
standing orders had no control. He was not in a position to
move for an investigation into that part of the subject, in-
asmuch es returns for which he had moved about • month
since had not yet been presented. He would to-morrow
inquire of the right hon. gentleman the President of the
Board of Trade whm those returns would be lead on the
table of the home.
Mr. HADFIELD inquired whether the resolution alluded
to by the hes. and gallant gentleman would include • revi-
sion of all the fees of the house.
Colonel W. PATTEN said some of the fees were depen-
dent upon standing orders, and they would come under the
cognisance of the committee for which he would move •
but there were other fees connected with private bills,
which the committee would not have the power to examine.
It was only before • committee appointed to examine into
the whoki question that such as inquiry could be tame-
cuted.

In reply to Mr. Auaurrus Surra,
Colonel W. PATTEN said it wee hie intention to move
for the appointment of the select committee on Thursday
neat.

CHURCH RATES.

Mr. 8. ESFOOURTehn rose to move that the law re-
lating to church rates might be beneficially settled by com-
bining in one measure previa:es for each of the following
objects :—First, to enable vestries specially summoned, in
which urines should have a vote by proxy, to transfer from
occupiers to owners so much of their liability as regarded
the repair of the parish church and churchyard, and to
make such spec al rats, if voted by a majority, recoverable by
the same process as • rate for the repair of the highways.
Secondly, to repeal the existing legal process for enforcing
• compulsory church rate ; and, thirdly, to give facilities for
c • voluntary rate. The compulsory process,
which htinfle proposed should be confined to the owners
of property, would, wherever it was so applied, be
collectable by the proles akar, which at present it was not,
and they would likewise pin this, that the great body of
the occupiers or the country would be taampted from all
penal consequences whether they paid church rates or not.
Sir 8. NORTHOOTE seconded the motion.
Mr. HODGEINSON brought forward an amendment, to
leave out all the resolution after the fiat paragraph, and
to insert these words i—" To authorise the levy Of • rate or
rent in respect of the appropriated portion of seats
churches, but so that no appropriation of seats in any
church shall be made to • pester extent than now actually
exists ;" but uaderstanding that Mr. Sotheron-Estoourt did
not intend to Joke • division on his resolution, he would
abstain from formally moving it.
Mr. BUXTON was of opinion that Mr. Eetcourt should
have confined his motion to the two lart paragraphs of his
resolution. He advocated some system of pow rates for
the purpose to which church-rates are now applied.
Mr. HEYGATE moved an amendment, that, in order to
effect a setidastary settlement of the law relating to church
Mee, it is expedient in the first place to transfer their direct
charge, with all powers of imposing the same, from the
occupiers to the owners of property.
Sir G. GREY said that there was no practical question
before the hones, the object of the original motion being to
elicit individual opinions on • propelsl which was intended
to go to the settlement of the matter. Having examined
the different views at • settlement of the question which
prevailed, he said that if the molars had been confined to
its last two sections, it would hare gone nearer to • est-
Suomi than anythrag mom= the tend abolition of church
rates ; but as it eiseL it warm* calculated to add another
instance to the dttgeollies which surrounded the question. I
Mr. DISRAELI mid--I shall refrain on the present'
ocomdon from eateriag on Amy disunion of the principle
of church ran= but I think it due to my right
boo/arable friend (Kr. Sotheron /Moon*, however I
may differ treat him as to the principle on which be
would endeavour to arrive at • ' settlement," uit is
called, of Ibis long-ciontroverted question —to beer my testi-
mooy to the honourable feeling that has infineneed his
tooth= throughout this 'astronomy. (Hear, bear.) I
think, also, it is highly advantageous that gentlemen of his
intelligence and of his position in the house should take
these opportunities of bringing forward questious which
have long been the subject of public discussion, and thus
enable the house to form an opinion as to the ultimate
means by which some solution of the difficulty may be
arrived at. The conclusion I have come to, after all the
various attempts that have been made to settle the =at=
of church rates, is • conviction that when the subject was
first brought forward, now twelve years ago, and mods •
public question, • very narrow and much too limited view
was When by parliament of the character of the question.
The truth is, we hove discovered during the last quarter of
• century that discordant intonate and great principles are
involved in this question. The principle of • nations'
church, the principle of local government, the privileges of
the great body of the population, and, above all, the pro
dominance of the majority, on which the whole of our social
system depends, ware really involved in what wee brought
forward as merely • sectarian grievance and a parish
quarrel. It is the sacredness of these principles, the import-
IMO of these intercede developed it parliamentary disunion.,
that really have produced the difficulty, and prevented may
settlement of the limited question that at first wee erouglit
under our notice. And when I remember this I feel that it
is not possible in a rapid and easy manner to arrive at any
cooclusion upon
.• question which involves considerations
of such immense importance. lam satisfied, though I will
not follow the example of my hon. friend to-night in saying
that it is • question on which the existing government
of this country should form their opinion. and
stake their existence in use their solution is not
'dotted. Still I would say that there is no ques-
tion men worthy of the oonsideratiou of government.
or that von requires the authority and responsibility of
government for its solution, and except by • government I
am convinced that no solution of this great question can
ever be arrived at. I do not despair myself that the time will
arrive when, with a due regard to All the great principles
favolved in it, some solution satisfactory to the country
may be arrived at, but I sat satisfied that nothing can be
accomplished except with a due regard to the ancient anti-
tutioos of this country, and to the habits, the castor= and
the privileges of the people of England.
Mr. NE VirDEGATE said the hon. member for Leicester
seemed to think that he (Mr. Newdegate) would interfere
with the rights of the parishiooers in regard to the mainte-
nance of the church in their own parish. But boa members
who considered his bill would see that he preserved the
rights of the parishioners. There was the authority of the
oominissioaers of 1843, the late Sir Robert Peel and Sir
James Graham, in favour of transferring the charge to the
owners al Lad. . . .

Lord R. CECIL said it seemed to him that her
Majesty's government were positively enamoured of
their inaction on this question. He considered that his
right hon. friend had offered this evening that which was
really a compromise ; sod he should think that if the dis-
senters refused it they would show that they did not desire
so much the settlement of this question as the attainment
of some ulterior object.
Lord HENLEY said be thought they were under groat
obligation to the right hon. gentleman (Mr. S. Estcourt)
for bringing forward his resolution., but he did not think
there was the least chance of their coming to • settlement
on the basis of those resolutions, because, as it seemed to
him, the right hon.gentleman proposed to take everything
for his own party and to give nothing at all to those who
were on the opposite side of the question.
Mr. HEYGATE said it was not his intention to divide
the home upon his amendment, and therefore he begged to
withdraw it.
Mr. DILLWYN said, when the noble lord the member
for Stamford taunted the ministerial side of the house with
not being able to settle the question of church rates, he
should have remembered that his own side of the house was
not in a more happy position, for during that evening the
house bad had placed before them two or three amendments,
all emanating from members sitting on the opposition
beaches. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. ESTCOURT, in reply, said he was gratified at the
mum which the dismission had taken. He felt that no
settlement of this quietism could be arrived at, except by
diseasson in the country, and by a compromise generally.
He would, Is ormelusioa, beg to withdraw his resolution.
After a few words from Mr. ILILDFULD, the resolution
was withdrawn.