Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-09-23 00:00:00

parishioner is entitled to a

free sitting in the church of his parish.

is only hypothetically

shows us, is

That it

so, as our experience

a gross abuse, which lye

must seek to remedy. 'Church-rates are
intended to support those material fabrics of
the Church, which the piety and. munificence of
our forefathers have built and endowed ; so that

the poor may have preserved to them such con-
secrated edifices, and the same may be kept in
repair by their wealthier brethren. JOHN
BRIGHT, and those other hostile dissenters who
so persistently advocate the total abolition of

Church-rates, would really take away this great
privilege from the poor man, in order to fill their
own pockets with the money of the Church that
provides it. One good result, however, of this
onslaught by dissenters is, that attention has been
more universally directed to the adoption of open
pews and free sittings ; whereas, until now,

such a return to a right principle has been
too apt to be regarded as the symbolism of

a mere party in the Church. •By Lord BLAND-
FORD'S Act, every churcli must put aside half the
seats as free. Yet why, we ask, should any be
closed to the worshippers who congregate there ?
And again—wllieh half is it that is too gener-
ally appropriated to 'the poor ? Is it not the
worst situated, and -the most incommodious,
whether for the purposes of public worship, or
the hearing of the preacher ? We advocate, there-
fore, the open-pew system in its integrity, and
its entirety, in all our churches, throughout the
length and breadth of the land. We maintain
that " first come first served" should be the
rule in every church, and that no line of

demarcation should ever be drawn that would be
offensive to the feelings of a poor man, by forcing
him into a position which publicly proclaims, if
not his relative, or his absolute pauperism, yet

his worldly inferiority, not to say his social de-
gradation,—and this in the house of Him who is

no respecter of persons, and before Whom rich
and poor meet together on terms of perfect equali-
ty in such respects. This point was very happily
and forcibly dilated upon by the Rev. Mr. TAY-
LOR, of St. John's, at the meeting we refer to.
The Dissenters,—at least, such as are most pro-
minently hostile to the Established Church,—
profess to have a conscientious objection to the
payment of Church-rates--that it is supporting a

religious system, of which they do not approve,
and of which they wish to get rid. And, more-
over, the sum, they pretend, that they want the
Church to give up is so trifling—only some £300,000
per annum. But the sum is really not so unimpor-
tant as they would represent it, since at the
ordinary rate of legal interest, it would repre-
sent a capital of £3,000,000 ; an amount which,

if ChUreh-rnteS are to be abol-Aed, we should be
glad to see voted as a compensation for them, and
which in all justice and equity ought to be done :
it would relieve the Dissenter of all recurrent
violence done to his conscience annually, would
allay all the heartburnings upon this vexatisslina
qutestio, and afford an opportunity of abetter adjust-
ment of the amount set apart for the maintenance
by the State of the fabrics of the National Church.
We should. prefer some such modification as this
to the irritation which the discussion, upon this
topic ever and anon provokes in the House of Com-
mons and in the country to say nothing of such
an unbecoming and lamentable spectacle as that
which the dispute has lately exhibited, of two
venerable and experienced statesmen so disgrace.
fully, for the paltry and petty triumph of party,
and the transient possession of power, repudia-
ting their long-cherished and often-expressed
convictions, and voting for the abolition of what
they always professed to consider the just and
legal rights of that Church in whose arms they
were born, and in whose bosom, as Christians,
they must hope and desire to die.

There are many queStions which Conservatives
and Liberals will be at issue upon, in the coming
session of Parliament. One of these, of course,
will be, as hitherto, the subject of Church-rates.
To quote the words of the Morning Herald :

" It must never be forgotten, that this attack

" upon Church-rates is, in point of fact, the first

" step towards a vigorous attempt to separate
" Church and State, and to apply to secular uses
" all national property now held in trust by the
" United Church of England and Ireland.'

thing short of this will satisfy the opponents of
the Church, whether sectarian or infidel. With a
Barabbas-like acquisitiveness they seek to mis-

appropriate property which the late Sir ROBERT
PEEL emphatically declared >belonged solely and
exclusively to the. Church,—an authority; certainly,

of no mean or trifling character—the opinion of
one of the most distinguished practical statesmen

of our country.

Much more might be said upon the Church-
ind most forcibly said-

rate question,—

—if a

contrast were drawn between the parochial and
voluntary principles of the Church and dissent.

We reserve its further discussion to another

occasion