The Press.
London, England, 1856-03-08 00:00:00

CHURCH RATE ABOLITION BILL.

Sir W. CLAY, on Wednesday, in moving the second
reading of this bill, entered into an explanatory
statement of the principles of the bill, and cited
various statistical returns to show that the Church
rate was either not sanctioned or left unlevied in a
large number of parishes. In conclusion, the hon.
baronet proceeded to argue that on the question of
pr'nciple the Church of England had no right to
impose a compulsory tax on the community; and, as
a matter of fact, declared that there was no call for
this impost to maintain in efficient repair the edifices
belonging to the e•tablishment.
Lord JOHN MANNERS maintained that provision for
the repair of churches was by this bill left entirely
to voluntary contribution. The bill was objection
able in many respects, and be moved, as an amend-
ment, that it be read a second time that day six
months.
Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE seconded the amend-
ment. Dissenters and Churchmen had grievances to
complain of, but he did not think that the proposed
measure provided a sufficient remedy. Ile disliked
the appeal to voluntary contribution. Special and
local evils would result from this measure.

Sir GEORGE GREY explained the views and inten-
tions of the Government. The recent decision of the
House of Lords in the Braintree case had virtually
abolished Church rates, and the state of the law was
unsatisfactory. The Government were not inclined,
however, to consent to the immediate and total aboli-
tion of Church rates throughout the kingdom.
Abolition would be sanctioned in all those places
where the rate had been discontinued fora sufficient
time to mark the determination of the parishioners
no longer to levy it. In those places where the rates
continued be saw no objection to allowing a ratepayer
to claim exemption on a declaration that he was a
Dissenter. But admitting the principle of imme-
diate abolition where the rates had practically
ceased, and of prospective abolition where the ex-
pressed wish of the majority of a parish was opposed
to them, the Government were prepared to affirm
this principle by voting for the second reading of this
bill, and they would propose amendments, the nature
of which he had indicated, in committee.

Lord Jourt RUSSELL was of opinion that the course
pursued by the Government would neither satisfy
the rights of the Church, appease the consciences of
Dissenters, nor secure peace.

Lord PALhiERSTON stated that the determination
come to by the Government was the result of mature
consideration. The proposal merely went to acknow-
ledge existing facts. In parishes where the rate had
not been levied for a certain time there should be
exemption ; and further, that means should be taken
to insure the proper application of the proceeds of
the rate where it existed.

Ultimately, the bill was read a second time by 221
to 178.

Sir GEORGE GREY stated, in reply to Mr. Walpole,
that the amendments proposed to be inserted in com-
mittee would be laid on the table before Easter.

SIR DE LACY EVANS'S EXPLANATIONS.

On Monday, on the motion fur going into Com-
mittee of Supply,
Sir DE LACY EVANS explained, and in some mea-
sure apologised, for certain statements he had made
during Friday week's debate respecting the conduct
of Colonel Gordon, the Duke of Cambridge, General
Simpson, and other officers. Letters, it appeared,
had passed between himself and the representatives
of the officers in question, which bad resulted in
correcting various misapprehensions in the opinions
previously entertained by the gallant member, and
under this new view of the circumstances he com-
plied with a sense of duty in setting before the house
the extent and causes of this modification in his
former convictions. Referring to a statement made
by Lord Claud Hamilton, that he (Sir De Lacy
Evans) had after the battle of Inkermann advised
Lord Raglan to abandon the Crimea, Sir De Lacy
declared himself ready to give full explanations on
the subject at a fitting opportunity.
Lord C. HAMILTON entered upon a similar expla-
nation of passages in his speech upon the same occa-
sion ; but

The SPEAKER interposed, intimating that it was
contrary to the general rule to revive a past debate.

SATURDAY,

lIN

---
Mr. GORDON, after expressing his satisfaction at
the explanation made by Sir De Lacy Evans, was
deviating into a violation of the rule adverted to by
the Chair, when

Lord i)ALMERSTON said he thought the house
would agree that the explanation of Sir De Lacy
Evans ought to be so satisfactory to the feelings of
all who considered themselves affected by remarks
made in the eagerness of debate that the matter,
alter that handsome explanation, should be allowed
to drop. _

Mr: DISRA.EII concurred in this suggestion, ob-
serving that the speech of Sir De Lacy Evans had
very much removed the painful impression he had
made on Friday. With reference to the charge of
Lord Claud Hamilton, that Sir De Lacy Evans, on
the night after the battle of Inkermann, had urged
the immediate embarkation of the British army,
leaving our guns and our allies behind, Mr. Disraeli
thought that the opinion of an experienced and
veteran officer must have been looked to with interest
on a question of such importance:—

But the precise value of his opinion, in this particular
instance, must depend on the manner in which it was ex•
pressed, the circumstances under which it was offered, and
a thousand matters of detail of which it is nut possible
that we should have a competent knowledge. ( Cheers.)
There is a general sentiment of satisfaction that the hon.
and gallant member should have come down to the house
to remove, by a frank and manly explanation, the painful
impressions produced by his remarks on Friday evening ;
and I am sure there is also a general concurrence of
opinion on both sides of the house that my noble friend
the member for Tyrone lies under no imputation of having
made a rash statement, or one which he did not believe
himself capable of justifying. This being the state of the
case, and it being obvious that no satisfactory result can
follow from the prolongation of this discussion, I trust
that it will proceed no further. The hon. and gallant
officer has made his explanation, and it is, I think, the
universal feeling of the house that the matter was revived
only to be terminated fur ever in a manner agreeable to sU
parties. (Loud cheers.)

THE FALL OF EARS.

Lord FALMERSTON, on Tuesday, in reply to Mr.
Whiteside's question for the papers relating to the fall
of Kars, walked to the bar and announced the papers
referred to. (They were brought up and ordered to
be laid on the table amid considerable cheering.)

THE ITALIAN LEGION.

Lord PALMERSTON, on Tuesday, in reply to Mr.
Bowyer, said it was quite true that a disturbance
had lately taken place in the Italian Legion at
Novara. Their conduct hitherto had been unexcep-
tionable, but the Government had thought it as well
to send the whole force, 3,000 men, at once to Malta,
as originally intended. The regiments were already
en route.