The Express.
London, England, 1847-03-03 00:00:00

WARRINGTON MAGISTRATES.

Mr. T. Dlll46didlE—wishedtoput—;.question to the
right hoe. baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department,
relative to a petition he had presented on a former evening,
complaining of the manner in which certain magistrates of
the county of Lancaster had exercised their summary juris-
diction. Ile understood that the subject had been under
the serious consideration of governmeet, and the object oe
his question was to inquire whether the nsult of that con-
sideration was such u to render it unnecessary that be
should bringthe subject under the consideration of the house.
Sir G. GREY said that the consideration to which the
hon. member bail adverted, had nothing whatever to do
with the merits of the case. A second petition which his
hon. friend had presented. contained an allegation cam
pleining of informality in the mode of trial adopted in the
eases of the four men alluded to in the first petition, who
were charged with absenting themselves from the employ-
ment of Mr. Edlestom of Warrington. The law officers had
pronounced the objection valid, and as tie only remedy
would be a writ of certiorari to the Queen's Bench, he (Sir
G. Grey) had thought the best thing to be done under the
circumstances, wu to recommend a free pardon. He
begged his bon. friend distinctly to understand that the par-
don had been granted without any refsrence to the merits of
the case.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE.—I am perfectly satisfied that
the magistrates acted illegally, and, therefore, I withdraw
my notice. (Laughter.)
NAVY ESTIMATES.

- ---.—.
Lord J. RUSSELL Mated that. it wu his intention to
move the navy estimates after the Ordnance cetimates on
Friday next. The noble lord further stated that he did
not intend to take the Customs' duties on that evening.
FREE CHURCH (SCOTLAND).
Mr. BOUVERIE rose, pursuant to notice, to move for •
select committee to inquire whether and in what part of
Scotland, and under what circumstances, large numbers of
her Majesty's subjects hod been deprived of the means of
religious worship, by the refusal of certain proprietors to
grant them sites for the erection of churches. Tee hon.
meshes having detailed what bad been done in the matter in
• sessions by the late Mr. P. M. Stewart andthe right
hsa amber he NMI, premeds& to say low naiserthy he
felt himself to follow in the footstep of either of those gentle-
men. One advantage, however, he possessed over both,
and that was, that being of a different religious persuess.on
from the persons whose grievances he represented. he could
not be suspected of the slightest partiality. The house was
aware of the circumstances out of which arose the disrup-
tion of the Scottish church in 1843. Since then, the ecteders
had, in four year', collected for ecelesivetical purposes no lees
• sum than L 251,0001. They had built 630 churches, and
were building thirty more. They had established 430
ministers, besides two normal schools—one in Glasgow, and
the other in Edinburgh, at an expert,. of 1,0001. each. To
190 other schools they had contributed 1001. each. He
thought that a body which had given such proof of its ear-
nestness and oineerity, woe entitled to at lean a fife hearing
in that house, more especially at the present time, when
their exertions to arrest the famine raging in Ireland and
part of Scotland wereso distinguished. (Hear, hear.) The free
church community in Scotland was the first body which
took steps to investigate the amount of dietrese, to
ascertain where it was heaviest, and to make efforts
to relieve it in Scotto:4. To prove this, he need only
refer to page 212 of the correspondence, which had been
published, and in which the Lord Advocate, writing to the
Secretary of the Home Department, stated that the free
kirk had raised 8,0001. for the dist...see, and that their sub-
scriptions would amount to 15,0001.—• sum far exceeding
anything that had been before collected for similar purpoece.
All this community asked was toleration, the same as was
extended to every other branch of tie Christian church.
They merely sought to carry on their religious worship, but
they were prevented, by being in so many instances refined
eke. for building churches. Ile should mention a few cant,
to show how the members of the free church hail been treated
in this particular. There were on the Doke of 13uocleuch's
property, two villages—Canobie, in Dumfriesshire, and
Wanloek Head, on the borders of Lanarkshire. In the
fleet of these places, the congregation, when the disruption
took place, met of the cross-roads, and subsequently
in a field belonging to hie grace. An interdict, hew.
ever, disturbed them there, but ultimately they obtained
permission to erect a tent in the field, and to carry on their
wordqo, which they did for the space of three years. The
people at Wanlock Heed were lees favoured. It was the
highest inhabited ground in Scotland, en high that oats were
merely grown y green food for rattle. This place contained
a population of 700 people, seven-eighth. of whom adhered
to the free church. The congregation had, in the brat in-
stance, erected a tent, but it was subsequently destroyed by
the weather ; since then they had met in the open air. Thew
clergyman who had left the establishment at the time of the
disruption was still teaching his congregation, while he had
hardly a resting-place for his head. His family resided at a
distance of thirty 12111 CA, while ho himself inhabited a
single room nine feet square. A letter which he
(Mr. Bouverie) had received from an eye witness,
informed him, that on one occasion, when Dr.
Candlish war to preach, the congregation met in
a ravine, a sentry-box bring placed fur the clergyman.
During the service the congregation were drenched with
rain, and uncle-deep in mud. fhe minister told them to
plane some planks, which lay near, under their feet, hut they
refused, alleging that they would not touch the property of
the Duke of Buceleuch. Such was the state of the tenants
upon the estates of the Duke of Buceleuch, and such had
been their condition for the period of four years, si,ce the
rupture with the Establiebed Church. He would contrast
the conduct of the noble duke, a dissenter from the Beta-
blished Church of Scotland, with that of the Earl of Aber-
deen, one of its members. It wax well known that the
latter nobleman used every means in his power, as a member
of the late government, to stay the movement of the free
church party; but so soon as the severance took place, be
was among the gut of the landowners of Scotland to grant
sites for building places of worship to those persons upon
his 'Mates who wished to worship God according to the
forme of the Free Church of Scotland. The Duke of Bum
deuces had erected a magnificent chapel at Dalkeith, where
worship according to the rites of the Episcopal Church wax
celebrated with all the pomp+ of the rubric. yet he refused
to grant to others the right of worship which he claimed
for himself. These two CM" host reference to the Lowlands;
but he now came to the Hig•ilande, in which similar pro-
ceedings had been going forward. in the Wand, of Skye
and Lewis, there was a large property owned by Lord Mac-
donald. On this property there were 4,000 persons be-
longing to the Free Church, yet his lordship had
thought fit to refuse these people any sites for their chapels;
thus practically prohibiting the liberty of public worship.
in the neighbourhood of Arduanourchan, Sir James Riddell
had a property about 40 miles in length by five mile, broad.
It was in the north-west of Argyllshire. There were 1,100
people belonging to the Free Church, and Bir James Rid-
dell was himself • dissenter from the Established Church,
yet he refused extending the right he claimed himself to
others. In Strathspey there was a tract of country 30
miles long and 15 broad, with from 1,000 to 2,000 persons
belonging to the Free Church. The proprietor wan the
Earl of Seafield, and he had oleo refused sites. So that
the people had to worship in the open air. In
another district in the Western Highlands., Harris, 4,000
percent were obliged to worship in the open air. In the island
of Mull they were obliged to celebrate the ordinances of their
common Christianity in a place where cattle were housed.
Now, these were some of the CSSC where this body had a
right to complain of the inconvenience to which they were
subjected, and lie trusted that the recital of them wou,d in-
duce the house to sanction the proposition he made for en in.
quiry into them. What were the consequences of this state
of th[ngs ? There was, (lest of all, the evil to which he had
adverted, namely, that a large body of the people were pro-
hibited from decently worshipping 13od ; end, in addition to
this, which was an evil of no ordinary magnitude, there was
great tion and acerbity towards thou who had occa-
sioned a deprivation. On the other head, he would
?suture to say, that those proprietors, who, like the
Earls of Stair and Aberdeen, had granted sites, would
experience no want of affection and respect. (Hear.)
In those districts of the Western Highlands where the distress
was the deepest and where the fiercest destitution existed,
the people were in consequence of the refusal of the pro-
prietors to grant Otos in effect prohibited from meeting
together to pray God to mitigate their sufferings. What he
asked for was a committee before which he might sub-
stantiate the statements he had made. It was not for him
now to enlarge upon the remedies he would propose, but
upon that point he might observe that he went the full
length of the bill proposed lot year by his right bon. friend
(Mr. Fox Maule) foe giving powers to a judicial authority
to compel the prrantiug of sites for the erection of churches in
connexion with theirs, church when such interference might
be rendered necessary by the refusal of the proprietors.
The legislature had already sanctioned the principle of inter-
ference with the right of property in cases where the
public health was concerned, as in the Metropolitan Buildings
Act and the Commons Enclosure Act, and also where the
public convenience wee served, u in railway sets--how
much more should they do so when the object was the re-
ligious instruction of a large portion of their fellow subjects ?
Then was a precedent still more directly in point in the
power given to the court of session, in dindingiparishes and
establishing user parochial divisions, to take compulsion
the land of the heritors to the extent o four acres
for the porpoise of erecting places of worship. This power
being thus admitted with respect to the established church
of Scotland, he did not see why some such facilities should
not be extended to the free church. He would not further
enter into the question of remedy—he had stated the
grievances of which he complained—he hoped without
giving offence to any one—( hear, hear)—and having, as he
thought, made out a case for inquiry, he would leave the
matter in the hands of the house.

Mr. BWART seconded the motion, for which he con-
tended that the feet of a grievance being shown to exist with
which parliament wu competent to deal wu a sufficient
ground.
The question having been put,
Sir G. GREY observed that the question to which his
hen. friend had called their attention had been on two for-
mer occasions brought under the consideration of parliament,
and he hadhoped that the discunions which then took place,
and the opinions then declared, would have rendered anv
further appeal to the house unneeeesary. (Hear.) He had
hoped that those proprietors (comparatively few in number)
who had up to that time refused to grant sites, would have
acted upon the advice tendered to them, and been influenced
by the opinions then expressed by those in authority ; and
he alluded especially to the opinions of the right hon. but.
who at the time was Secretary for the Home Department
(Sir J. Graham), and who, on the first occasion when
the question wu brought forward by his lamented
friend, Mr. P. M. Stewart, expressed his hope that
if the statements then made were true, a speedy
remedy would be applied without the interference of parlia-

meat ; and on the second, when • bill was brought in by his
right boo. friend (Mr. F. Haute), while objecting to the
legislative remedy so proposed—and be (Sir G. Grey) did
cot mesa to soy the ohjictions then urged wens insufficient
—the right h in. baronet added, that whatever might have
been the case in the early dap of the secession, now, when
all hope of reunion between the Free Church and the
Established Church had passed away the continued refusal
of the proprietors to grant sites was deeply to be lamented,
sad directly oppose-A to the true principles of Christian
toleration. (" Hear, and cheers ) He believed that time
and the influence of public opinion had produced their effect
in in my inst,nors, and that the number of refusa!s was very
few at the present moment; he wished he could add that
they had altogether ceased in cases where the allegation of
gees aneea was well founded; but from the statements which
64 been made in print, and repeated by his hon. friend that
evening, and which hitherto remained uncoatradicted, he
feared there were still cases in which members of the Free
Church (though all hope of reunion must long since have
been abandoned, and hundreds and thousands were now ir-
revo übly attached to that church), were, owing to the will of
indi.idual proprietors, debarred from a place in which to wor-
ship Clod. Under these circumstances, his hon. friend hadcome
forward with a proposition, not with a direct logislativercmedy,
but for • committee of inquiry to ascertain if the allegation.
which WI been made in that house and elsewhere were
true, and to overlain the extent of the grievance. It had
been stated that there were, in many instances, strong rea-
sons to justify the refusal of sites. Tha: was a que.tion,
too, which the committee might fairly inquire into, and the
result, he belived, would be to show that, in the great ma-
jority of Ms" as in that of Lord Aberdeen and others,
proprietor,' examples of toleration had been shown which
could not be too highly commended—/ hear, hear), and who,
seeitg that permanent secession was inevitable, granted •
reedy compliance to the applications for sites. This he
believed would be one beneficial result of the proposed in-
quiry, while some of those who now laboured under the im.
putation of having intolerantly refused, might be able to
show that the charge was not justifiable. Ile, therefore, for
one, was perfectly prepared to accede to the motion. (Hear,
hear.) lie • o old txpres. no opinion as to the ulterior legisla-
tion suggested. He would not consider the question of
principle upon which the free church had separated from
the establishment, nor whether the points of difference were
audicient tar Judie the step they tsok. The secession was a
most remarkable event, and one that must enlist our sym-
pathiee, if it failed to obtain our admission of its necessity.
What bad been their conduct since the accession ? (Rear.)
It had recently pleased G scl to of the western districts of
Scotland with severe destitution and want, and as soon es
the extent of that evil was ascertained, the free church
pare were the most forward in proffering their assistance;
and at the meeting at Edinburgh the members of that church
placed the money they had collected amongst their own
body into the common relief fend, and they had at this mo-
ment, in Scotland, two religious bodies who, though they
differed bitterly on other matters, acted together in har-
mony and unison in feeding the hungry, clothing the naked,
ant arresting the preemie of famine and disease. (Hear,
hear.) Surely, then, this was not • body to which the
house would refuse to lend its assistance in removing, what
he hoped was, the last cause of bitternews and animosity be-
tween the two c-mmunious of the Church of Scotland.
(Hear, hoar.) He hoped the year would not pass away with-
out the right Mend of fallow.hip being stretched out from
each to the other, and that for the future, while differing on
dectrinal pointa, they would be united in the practice of good
will and charity towards each other, as well as to their fel.
to w-eountrymeugenerally. (Hear, hear.)
Sir It. INGLIS thought that some regard should be paid
to the feelings of those who did not think it consistent with
their duty as members of the established church to promote
the worship of the fres church. He had not the honour of
being sufficiently acquainted with the Duke of Buceleuch
and the other noble persons whose name* had been dragged
before the public in connexion with the subject, to spesk of
their acts, though he was quite sure they had not been influ-
enced by other than conscientious motives, but as to Sir J.
Riddell, he was convinced that he had at all times evinced
the utewst readiness to extend every indulgence to his
tenantry consistent with what ho considered to be his
duty as • Christian. The few landowners who still
refused to grant site., were not much encouraged to change
their determination by the conduct of the Free Church
party, who, in several cases in which these applications had
been succeisful, had built their place of worship directly op-
posite to, or in such juxta position with the churches of the
establishment, as almost to make the mime bells and the
demo clock answer for both. (" No.") He had been in-
formed that this had been done at Cramond, Broughton,
Kinross, Libberton, Kirkliston, and Costorphine. Though
the proposition was less objectionable than that brought for-
ward lost year by his right hon. friend (Mr. F. Mauls),
still, as he had suffieiltit experience to know that a com-
mittee was never moved without a foregone conclusion that
legislative interference was necessary, he should oppose the
motion. _

Sir J. GRAHAM commence' by stating that it had been
his painful duty to address the house more than once on
this subject, and that he had now but little to add to, and
nothing to retract from what be had before stated in refer-
ence to it. (Hear.) Ile deg ply regritted that the refusal
of the applications for sites should have been continued in
the few instances alluded to. But this, after all, was as the
boa. mernher for Oxford had said, very much a question of
oonecienee on the part of the proprietors. Ile differed, how-
ever, from that hon. baronet in preferring the present motion
to that of last year. If say interference was necessary this
was not a case requiring previous investigation by a com-
mittee, but one which should be met by direct legislation.
The facts wero not disputed. It was admitted that the pro-
prietors had in some parts of Scotland from a conscientious
sense of duty refused to grant sites for the free church.
The boa. mover had certainly treated the subject with gr. at
calmness and perspicuity, but he had not brought under
their notice any new facts. Reliance was placed upon four
cases, those of the Duke of Buccleuch, Sir J. Riddell, Lord
Macdonald, and Lord Seafleld, the two latter being the only
additional cases cited. On the other hood, the Secretary of
State for the Home Department announced, that by the
lapse of time, and the influence of public opinion, the refu-
sals to grant sites had diminished in numbers, and were
likely still farther to diminish from the came causes. It
was not annouaced by the bon. mover, but had been frankly
avowed by the hon. seconder of the motion, that exposure
was his object. In the sentiments so eloquently expressed
by the Secretary of State for the Rome Department at the
close of hie speech, he (Sir J. Graham) fully concurred. He
felt that the present was not a fitting occasion for the discus
tion of the subject, when they were in the midst of a great
national calamity, and when so severe a dispensation of
Providence ought to humble the pride of man. He
also coacarral in the eloquent language which
he had that morning read as having been ad-
dressed by Mr. Jones Lloyd to the community of
this country, who said that this was an occasion upon which
all the angry melons of party ought to be silenced, and
when all the bitterness of religious animosity ought to be
assuaged. (Hear, hear.) Such being the sentiments of the
British public, and he hoped of that house, surely it was
net a legitimate object to hold out, the obtaining of facts
not being the thing desired, that the exposure of certain in-
dividuals in the exercise of their conscientious scruples,
should sway the decision of the house towards instituting a
committee, which so far from having the effect of allaying
animosity, would tend in the strongest manner to excite and
exasperate it. (Hear, hear.) Upon that ground, if upon
no other, be was prepared to resist the motion. The Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department had told them that
the frequency of refusals had diminished. He (Sir J. Gra-
ham) wished that the exceptions did not exist; but he
maintained that that formed no fide ground for an inquiry.
The strong objection be expressed to the bill of the hon.
member for Perth lost year he still entertained, conceiving
it to be a dangerous course of legislation. Indeed he
considered that refusals to grant sites for places of
worship did not require such legislative interference. lie
did not deny that it was competent for the legislature to in-
terfere if a necessity for doing so existed, but he denied the
existence of the necessity. Besides, if they did interfere they
must do so upon the principle of general toleration. Their
legislation could not be confined to Scotland, or to the free
church, it must be extended to religions of every description.
(Hear, hear.) Let them, if necessary, bring in a bill with
any modification of rules they might think lit, to compel
proprietors throughout the United Kingdom to grant sites
for the building of places of religious worship, not for the
benefit of particular sects but the community at large.
(Hear, hear.)
Lord G. BENTINCK entirely concurred in every word
that had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, but could not
help observing that the principle adopted by the hon. mo-
ver was to make the voluntary principle compulsory, for he
called upon them to give to the free church of Scotland a
power to take by forms the land of those who differed from
that church. This was a dangerous principle, and one
which the house ought not to sanction, even by the prelimi-
nary step of an inquiry. Every hon. gentleman who spoke
bad borne his testimony to the moderation with which the
hon. mover had introduced the question ; but although ha
had shown much svaviter in mode, he (Lord G. Bernina)
thought he had evinced also somewhat of the fortiter
in re Giving credit to the Duke of Buocleuch for
his high and distinguished virtuel,both domestic and public,
he nevertheless observed that that noble duke was not tua.
willing to indulge in a little persecution of his own. Now,
every one who !mew the Duke of Buocleuch, knew that •
more generous man did not exist, and that persecution was
a feeling altogether remote from his nature. (Hear, hear.)
Therefore did he think they might assume that his refusal
to grant sites had arisen out of great provocation. Indeed,
he (Lord 0. Bentinek) bad been given to understand that
nothing could be more violent than the denunciations which
had been made against his public conduct and private cha-
racter by the preachers to whom such refusal had
been made. Lord Macdonald had also been men-
tioned, and yet he had forestalled his entire income,
in order to meet the existing calamity, and thereb;
attracted the admiration of that house. LOoking• indeed,
to the general character of the four gentlemen late whose
conduct it was proposed to inquire, he thought it might be
taken for granted that their refusal of sites arose out of cir-
cumstances of provocation. He would therefore oppose this
motion. If they were to compel landlords to grant sites to
the Free Church of Scotland, upon what ground could they
refuse the Roman Catholics of Ireland and of this country a
similar right of building their churches wherever they might
think fit to erect them ? (Hear, hear.) He had bem in-
formed, too, that in Scotland a desire had been evinced, on
the part of the Free Church, to build their places of worship
where they were mart likely to be offensive to the members
(gibe Established Church. He held property in Scotland,
and, as ter es he was individually concerned, he felt moat
desirous of mosornoodating both churches with sites ; but the
ionostien beim them wog ens to which he moat give a
rk lamas thought he could establish upon the
quashin albs noble lord and the right hon. gentleman who
boa asidossesd the bows, their claim to inquiry. The right
boo. geneses mid they had adduced no new feels, while
the noble lord made assertion alter assertion, believing them

to be true, but every one of which he (Mr. F. Maul.), had
undertaken to show, before a committee of that house, were
Capable of easy contradictioo. They did not ask for an in-
quiry into the acts and motives of individuals, but into an
Kong grievance affecting nearly one half of the whole corn-
runnity of an integral portion of the nation. It was al
grievance which had been already on three several occasions
laid before the house. On each of those occasions the state-
meats with which it had been introduced were doubted, and
he conceived that the time was now come when the hone°
was bound to take official cognisance of the facts, which
were to be arrived at only by a committee of Military. If the
accusations which were mule against ministers by the Free
Church be true, let them be proved before that com-
mittee, as well as the cases of refusals of which
they complained. He asked for no exposure in the
sense in which the right hon. gentleman the member
for Dorsetabire had made use of the term, but for investiga-
Goes The four eases cited had been brought forward, not
with reference to the individuals hut to the large districts of
which they were the sole proprietors, end in which there was
therefore no opportunity of getting sites without applying to
them. How stood the case with regard to the Isle of Skye ?
The famine had been so severe as to drive many to the verge
of desperation, and threats were at one time held out that
they would use for their suefenanee the sheep oa the moun-
tainside. The doctrine of obedience to the law was preached,
and snecerefully, to 4,000 men, who bad no place of worship
but under the canopy of heaven, and who, owing to the infi
ence of their clergy, hal abstained under such circumstances
from committing one single act of aggression. Were such men
to be denied the privilege of an humble place of worship?
If the house so decided, it would drive them to despair, nod
I possibly to the alternative of not attending peaic worship at
all. It was in vain to say that the parish churches have ac-
commodation for them, since they conscientiously differed.
(Nos, no.) He said it advisedly, since they conscientiously
differed from the doctrines that were taught in those
churches. With regard to the Oleg( d denunciations against
the Duke of Buceleuch, he could at once destroy the noble
lord's argument oa that head, by stating that the Duke of
Bucclench had himself admitted that the information on
which he had made that complaint had not been well
founded. The right hon. gentleman the member for Dor-
chester would remedy the grievance by the weight of public
opinion and not by "exposure." But how was public
opinion to be guided but by a knowledge of facts, and what
was a knowledge of facts bee exposure ? No great political
change bad ever taken place that was not preceded by
inquiry, so as to bring public opinion to bear on it. The
right hon. gentleman said that the refusals were rapidlT
decreasing. True, they had decreased since he (Mr. F.
Maude) had brought the question forward—(hear, hear)—
but there still remained thirty cases of refusal, which fully
justified a demand for inquiry. He had heard no Scotch-
man argue against the motion, and he sincerely hoped he
should not. .

Mr J. WORTLEY opposed the motion. Ho thought it
ill-timed and unfortunate—(bear, hear)—and conceived
moreover that the government were already in possession of
all the information which a committee could develope and
were bound to bring forward a legislative measure if they
considered the case to require it. He regretted that they
should give their consent to the motion, net that he dissented
from the principle of toleration, but because he believed time
the appeintment of a committee would only create great
irritation on a question which was in course of set-
tlement. and have the effect of delaying instead at
facilitating the object they all had in view. (Hear, hear.)
The right hon. gent. the Secretary at War spoke of one half
of the people of Scotland having to complain of this religious
grievance. Now the petition of the Genet al Assembly stated
that only one-third of the population were affected by it ;
that there were 1,100 parishes in the country, 831 congrega-
tions exercising all the rights of freedom and religious woe-
ship, 610 churches actually built, and 27 in progress of
building. Now according to the right hon. gentleman him-
self, there were hut 30 cases in which there was any reason
for complaint--(bear, hear)--end that wee a diminished
number contrasted with last year. Why ? Not because of
legislative interference. ; but 'because they had allowed the
expression of the public feeling in that house to have had its
influence upon the proprietors In Scotland ; and unless they
now interfered, he ventured to predict,—indeed, he foresaw
—that in the 30 excepted cases sites would eventually be
granted.
Lord J. RUSSELL.—If I was anxious to address the
house before my right hon. friend the member for Perth,
and if I take a part favourable to this motion, it is from no
partiality for those in whose behalf the motion is made. I
am one of those who strongly resisted their dtims to be heard
before this house, and was opposed to any legislative decision
in their favour before the unfortunate secession which took
plane In the Snatch church. I was one of those who could
are nothing which should have induced a large body of
ministers and of the people to secede from the church.
But that secession having taken place, and • large nuns-
bee of the Teeple hoeing followed their minister,, who
abandoned their homes and their means of liveli-
hood, in order to pursue the dictates of their con-
ecience, fans no less persuaded that everything should be
done by this house to enable them to preach the doctrines
which they believe, and to listen to which they are followed
by crowds. The right hon. gentleman the member for
orchester put the came in so smooth and round a manner,
that if nothing had followed In the debate it would almost
have concluded the argument. He said that the facts were
ascertained ; that there wag nothing about which to inquire ;
either we should legislate at once, or abstain altogether, but
that no inquiry was necessary. The right hon. gentleman
however, had no sooner concluded, than up rose my noble
friend the member fer Lynn, and said, with regard to the
facts, that he took ter granted this, he assumed that,
and he presumed the other, all of which were
contradicted by my right hon. friend the member for Perth.
My noble friend summed that the ministers were wrong ; he
took for granted that they had been violent in their attacks
on those who had refused sites, and he presumed that 'they
bad so acted as to make it impossible for the proprietors to
de otherwise than refuse. All three facts are assumed ; and,
in order to know what they really are, it will be but fair
that there should be a committee, and to see if the pretences
which are put forward for refusal of rites are to be justified.
Here is what must be confessed to be a considerable griev-
ance. (Hear, hear.) We have congregations meeting on
the moors and on the mote, exposed to the winds, drenched
by the rain, listening to divine worship, without any sheher,
reminding us of the times of the Covenantees, when religion was
persecuted by law. In other pintoes the people have to leave the
mainland, and go in boats to tho ministers who alone can
give them religious and spiritual doctrine, and whom alone
they can fellow; and these things are justified on the ground
of the rights of property. (Hear, hear.) With regard to a
legislative remedy, while on the one hand I am unwilling to
legislate on a subject so difficult, and one which touches the
couecientious opinions of a particular class of men, on the
other, if it is proved by facts, and on inquiry, that grievances
are suffered,—that it is not in special or peculiar cases in
which the charastere of proprietors are attacked, or in which
they could not grant sites without creating divisions among
their tenantry, that sites are refused,—but that the refusals
are mode on religious grounds against a sect of which they
disapprove, and that in thirty cases the congregations gill
listen to divine service without theater, or under the
cover of a roof, I moat say that if, after patient inquiry
these facts are established I shall not be indisposed to agree
to s legislative remedy. (Hear, hear.) Although we ought
not, except in extreme eases, to.agree to a legislative remedy
on such questions, yet as there is nothing more sacred than
that every one should be allowed to worship God according
to the dictates of his conscience, in cases where any obstacle
is opposed to it, we should not permit it to remain. I will
not touch upon the character of individuals who have been
alluded to as having refused to grant sites, with many of
whom I am acquainted, and who are possessed of the kindest
dispositions and the highest character. But in cases of this
kind we well know how far very kind and benevolent per-
sons will go. Even to-night my hon. frieud the member for
the University of Oxford, than whom there can be no
kinder or more benevolent man--(hear, hear, hear)—has
shown, on the subject of religious liberty, that he does
not experience any very strong feeling for others, or appre-
ciate their sufferings. He very calmly says, in speaking of
one of these parishes, that there was the church of the esta-
blishment for the people to go to. Ile thinks it enough that
a church was open, and he does not consider what may be
the doctrines and opinions of the men whom he desires to go
there. What would he think if, in a &until Catholic town,
he asked for a Protestant place of worship, he was told there
was a place for him in the Roman Catholic church ? (" Hear,
hear," and laughter.) And it was said to him " Don't ask
for a place of worship of your own when you and 160 others
can go to • Ronan Catholic church, and you will always be
well received ? (" Hear, hoar," and laughter.) So little
then does the kindest and most benevolent person enter into
the feelings of others in religious disputes. Though it may
be a dangerous principle for the legislature to appropriate
sites for places of religious worship, yet considering that by
acts of the legislature we violate the rights of property,
when it is a question of health ; or in the case of a railway,
or where the beauty of • square or a street is concerned, and
when to ornament a town we do not hesitate to say to pro-
prietors your house must come down, we will give you only
the full value of the site, I think this might be a ease for the
interference of the legislature. I am glad to find that in
this discussion all who have spoken lamented the refusal to
grant these sites. The hon. gentleman who has just sat
down, says that in voting against the inquiry he believes he
is acting in furtherance of that object. lam glad to see that
opinion is general, and I hope that whatever may be our de-
cision, those who, from a conviction they are right, have
hitherto refused these sites, seeing that the general feeling is
in favour of those who they must be convinced, also think
they are right, will change their opinions; and I hope the
members of the free church of Scotland may be allowed to
worship God according to their consciences. (Cheers.)
Mr. F. SCOTT thought that if he wished to consult the
feelings of those proprietors who had refused sites, he should
vote for this inquiry. The Duke of Buoclauch and Lord
Macdonald would be glad to have an opportunity of stating
the reasons for which they refused to ggrraannt the land for the
sites, and would be able to show atrflldent cause for with.
holding them.
Celenel KURE said that although he did not concur in
the hopes whisk had been expressed that the result of this
begralry would be to produce • practicable result, still as
be thought that • can of grievance, owing to the obstruction
et** hie church by the refusal of sites had been made out,
it ems fit that the house should deal with it, and therefore he
sbeeld vote for the motion.
The house then divided—For the motion , 89
Against it
LAW OF SETTLEMENT.
Xt. BANZIB then "3,6 to bring forward the motions of
whisk be had glees neeiso—wis. to call the attention of the
Maim le the need et the Select Committee on Settlement
and Peer Illemovel, and for a copy of the case submitted by
the eaminimioners to the law officers of the crown
for =weeds' with reference to the construction of a clause
in the peer Itesseval Aet. He thought it best to bring on the
twesendems tessissr. With regard to the report of the cemmit-
ese as the Pear Reseeral, its substance was contained in one
ernteuro—" that it appeared to the committee that the pm-