The Sun.
London, England, 1855-09-05 00:00:00

B CLERGY.

(From the Times.)
The Convocation of the clergy of the province of Can-
terbury stands prorogued to the 24th of October, with-
out having been able to agree to any recommendation
that her Majesty could be advised to saection, or to
come to any other satisfactory result. It appears, how-
ever, that they have cut out some work for themselves
next session, and among other matters a committee has
agreed to a report upon church rates. That committee,
it is to be presumed, possesses the confidence of Convo-
cation, and fairly represents its legal and legislative
perception. It is, then, a matter of interest to inquire
what sort of a proposal it has made, and what sort of
ground it expects that body to take in its dealings with
other councils and communities of the State. Since,
too, church rates are an affair in which many besides
church people are interested, and which, in fact, some
home to everybody, a tangible scheme for dealing with
them will be regarded far and wide as a ready test of
the degree of wisdom which Convocation will bring
to other subjects. Convocation, in fact, like other
bodies, will be known by its fruits, and what fruit
so entirely within the ordinary apprehension as a
plan for settling what is properly, though inadequately,
called " the much-vexed question of church-rates ?" We
therefore look with. anxiety to what the committee has
brought forth, and have at least the satisfaction of in-
informing our readers that the plan is in all respects
simple, intelligible, and practicable. We see precisely
what it means, and know certainly how it will work ; it.
requires no new machinery, and creates no new autho-
rity or process. What is more, we can discussit with
perfect tranquillity, for there are probably not ten mem-
bers of the House of Commons who in their most aban-
doned mood could bring themselves to vote for it.
After modestly limiting the purpose of church-rates to
the maintenance of the fabric and the church-yard in
decent and substantial order and repair, the committee
naively proceeds :—" In order to enforce the payment
of rates so limited, it is expedient to adopt the course
of proceeding recommended in the report of the
Royal Commission appointed in 1830," &c. That
course of proceeding was the closest possible assimila-
tion to the course of proceeding for striking and enforc-
ing the poor-rate. The churchwarden was to make his
estimate, and ask for hie rate ; and, if the vestry re-
fused it, he was to appeal to the Quarter Sessions, who
might make the rate in spite of the vestry. On the other
hand, if the vestry made the rate, any inlividual rate-
payer might appeal against it. But in any case the
Quarter Sessions were to fix and order the rate, and it
was to be collected, on their authority, on the same as-
sessment as the poor-rate, and enforced by the same
means and remedies. These Royal Commissioners, find-
ing the Church-rate disputed at every turn, both in the
vestry and at the ratepayer's door, and observing, on
the contrary, that the poor-rate was struck without dis-
pute, and collected with no difficulty, at least no more
than any other impost, bethought themselves of coupling
the questioned with the unquestioned, the weak with
the strong, the ecclesiastical with the eleemosynary
tax. Such expedients are no novelty, for, in fact, it is just
what is always done, whether in the highest or in the low-
est material, if there is nothing repugnant in the nature
of the thing and no external difficulty. We always
attempt to make the strong carry the weak,—to
wed, as it were, the vine to the elm. Doubtless the
right rev., very rev., and right hon. Commissioners
thought it a singularly ingenious application of an ex-
ceedingly general rule. But, whatever might be said
about the proposal in 1830, just a quarter of a century
ago, there is one fundamental objection to it now, and
which it would have to encounter in lintine. The pro-
posal begin, " That, in order to enforce," &c. In fact,
no matter how, it is a plan for enforcing a Church-rate.
But the present law, as declared by the highest tribunal
of the land, is that a Church-rate cannot be enforced,
unless agreed to by a majority of the vestry. In 183•,
when these Commissioners made their report, a com-
pulsory Church-rate was disliked, resisted, disputed,
and so forth, but all the decisions were in favour of it ;
and there was probably not one of the Commissioners,
or at least scarcely one, out of the whole 16, who ha
any doubt tbat by common law the parishioners were
liable for the repair of the church, and the supply of
things necessary for the maintenance of divine service ;
and that what was common law could be enforced,
and ought to be enforced, in one way or another. But
since 1830 the House of Lords has overthrown this be-
lief, and decided that a church-rate cannot be enforced,
and shall not be enforced, unless the majority of the
vestry have agreed to it. A proposition, therefore,
which might be applicable to the then state, or rather the
then general opinion, of the law is wholly inapplicable to
the law as it now is. It was then a project for carrying
out an existing law—it is now a project for making a
new law. The proposal is not only too late, in a moral
sense ; it is legally antiquated and obsolete. It belongs
to another era. There is not only the weakness of falling
back after a quarter of a century on a rejected offer ;
there is the ignorance of supposing that an offer to carry
out a law is still available when the law is found to be
io law.

After the decision of the House of Lords the ma-
jority of any vestry has a right not to agree to a church-
rate, and so prevent a church-rate from being levied at
all in that parish. On the refusal of that majority
every ratepayer bas a right to refuse paying the
rate, which thus becomes a mere voluntary subscrip-
tion. Even where the ♦estry is otherwiSe unanimously
for the rate, any one dissentient ratepayer can now ho-
nestly, and without the imputation of agitating against
a law, contest the rate at every stage, compel exact
forms of striking, assessing, and collecting, use all his
influence against the rate, and entertain the hope of one
day carrying a majority with him. Such is the existing
right of the majority and of the individual. The com-
mittee of Convocation propose, in the most off-hand way
possible, to takeaway this right, to make the majority
powerless against the churchwarden, backed by the Quar-
ter Sessions, to render the individual parishioner liable
to pay a rate he now need not pay, and perhaps never
has paid, and to convert what is now a legal and ho-
nourable resistance to a rate into a factious conspiracy
against the law of the land. This is what the commit-
tee of Convocation proposes, as if it were just proposing
nothing at all. Could we suppose the scheme sanctioned
by the Legislature, all the ratepayers of Manchester, of
St. Pancras, and many other places where Church-rates
either never were levied, or are now out of date, would
be liable to pay them at the order of the Quarter
Sessions. We will not speculate on the inevitable results
of such a change, but we will venture to say that there
never was imagined so offectual a scheme for extinguish-
ing church-rates altogether, and a good deal besiies.
We do not happen to know, and do not wish to know,
who were the members of the committee which signalised
itself by this notable project. We will, however, sug-
gest to Convocation to try some new hands the next time
they select an important committee, unless they would
lose not only the shadow of deliberative, or rather sug-
gestive, power they now enjoy, but even the fond inte-
rest with which a section of the churoh still cherishes
their fitful and ineffective existence.

( From the Morning Pool, )
Our readers are doubtless aware that a petition has
been presented to the Queen from both houses of the
Convocation of the province of Canterbury, setting
forth the desirability of amending the representation of
the clergy in the lower house, and requesting, according
to the proper constitutional formula, her Majesty's
license to deliberate upon a canon for that purpose. The
prayer of this petition has not been granted.
The correspondence upon the subject between the
Archbishop of Canterbury and the Home Secretary is
now before us, and exhibits clearly what it was that
Convocation requested, though it furnishes no clue to
the reasons for the refusal. The petition states that
certain subjects deeply concern the spiritual welfare of
this realm. Of these, it enumerates four, namely,
" the measures needful for enforcing discipline amongst
the clergy : the extension of the Church : the modifica-
tion of her services : and the reform of the representation
of the clergy." But, in the consideration of these, it is
of the utmost importance that the mind of the clergy at
large should be fairly expressed. This fair expression
cannot be obtained till some modifications are made In
the representative system which supplies the Lower
House with members. Learned and excellent as the clergy
of that house may be, there are faults in the relation be-
tween themand their constituenta which demand remedy,
I and which, until they are remedied, must greatly detract
from the confidence of the clergy in the proceedings of
that portion of the Convocation.
The first step, then, is the amendment of this represen-
tation. Till that is done, all effective deliberation must
remain in abeyance. The Houses may discuss ques-
.tions, and communicate one with the other, and so pre-
pare the public mind for synodical proceedings at some
future period, and may train a number of clergymen to
the duties of synodal debate ; but this is all that can be
done, nothing which they may recommend will have
authority, or carry consequences, unless the structure
of the Lower House be first completed. This recon-
struction cannot be achieved without a canon, a canon
cannot be concocted without a royal license, and a royal
license cannot be had without the advice and consent of
Sir George Grey. This Sir George Grey will not give,
and so the Church is left to stand still and wait for bet-
ter times, and
while
hd
e moreto c
no no
tsii
edeertahtee Hp
oosmi t
ieo Sn etcarke teanr y .
It is worth by
Sir
George Grey in this ma tter. Divestedionnio!and
all ctirhceuttnelrao:
cutton about expediency, popular op
is
presentpractically b
eallowed
the
h teh e
exercise Church
of
fe rEonfgnd Parliament,
mueti t
not
at
of her rightful
hertful desire to improve,
andpowers,
three greatore
eff
poilettes.
which it
the extension n the Church,
andtive
the
modificationof the clergy,
fe rtghe
services, shall be
atonyre quo. George
.eeHe rge
sGimreyplydoesasyneottghiavet
advised to grant the prayer of
rele4aisnoninfostrattuhigs
" her Majesty has not been advt.
refuse it, but only
the petition," by which we supposehas
p tbaotsitthiveeplyuoblnicpoissetdo
understand, not that Sir G. Grey
the prayer, and advised her Majesty
the matter. Without decided advice, of con
be
that he has abstained from offering dteecidedraedtvhiceeQunpeoenn
that Secre-
rendered the more easy by the remembra
will notact. There is nothing for it thenneeut patience,
taries of State undergo removal mutation, while the
Church goes on in the same old track, century after cen-
tury, till her work is done. in some brighter day, when
a gentleman of a more practical turn of mind, and more
liberal views of ecclesiastical polity than the present
Secretary, shall succeed to the Home Seals, we may
hope to see a truer estimate of the Church's need and
duty publicly avouched. •
Nobody ever suspected Sir George Grey of wish-
ing to promote the efficiency of the Church, and nobody
' therefore is disappointed at his opposition to the
'only Way in which the Church, as a Church, can meet
its own difficulties, and take counsel for its own neces•
sities. But it is only a question of time. The Church
cannot stand still. She is carried forward by the active
spirit of the age, and must work or cease to hold her
own. She cannot work in any efficient way with her
hands tied. Statesmen, therefore, who wish to see her

(From the Dispatch.)
It is said of Lord Stanley that, in saeaking of the
Earl of Derby, he is wont to observe, Wor an orator
and a genius of varied powers, my father is the most
ignorant man I ever knew." The son seems to have
taken warning by the father's defects. He seizes upon
hard facts—he analyses details—he patiently inquires his
way through realities. He does nothing loosely. He
is guilty of no easy assumptions or lazy admissions. He
is really master of every subject of which he presumes to
treat. We regard him as now a hope of his country.
We think we see a Premier in him, schooling his pre-
judices in the academy of progress and reform, foresee.
ing that when his age has arrived at its point of leader-
capacity, the world will have shot far beyond the aver-
age of the thinking of the " ignorant present time." No-
thing can be clearer or better reasoned than his views on
Church-rates. (We wish his votes on the whole Church
question were more in unison with his professed principles.)
Nothing could be abler in its way than his brochure
advocating the wrong side of the question of the taxes
on knowledge. His speech of last week is a model of its
kind, and now we have to thank him for his letter on the
subject of the sessions of Parliament. We wish, however,
he bad gone deeper into the range of thought which the
topic suggests. It approaches the threshold of Adminis-
trative Reform. Why not take the leap and cross the
border ? The society, called into being by Vas, loud man-
date of public opinion to occupy that ground, if not pos-
sessed of quackery enough to advertise itself constantly
to the public by what may he called a perpetual bustle of
paragraphs znd reports, has evidently made itself to be
felt and heard. In every department of the Government
may be seen a practical recognition of its principles, and
substantial homage to its power and activity ; and here-
in we recognise the elastic and mercurial vigour of Lord
Palmerston, who, at an age when men are slow to move
and cantankerous with stupid prejudices, calling ehange
peril and improvement empiricism, has yet a youthful
sensitiveness to the signs of the times, and a delicacy of
touch alive to the movement of public opinion and
willing to obey it. There is, perhaps, however, some
foundation for the criticism made on the operations of
the Administrative Reform Association, that they have
begun at the wrong end of their subject, and have
sought to improve the departmental details of Govern-
ment before addressing themselves to the reconstruction
of the centre power from which all authority and rule
must emanate. When one listens to the speeches or
reads the printed exponents of the views of the associa-
tion, the thought involuntarily rises to that surface of
the mind which may be termed the silent utterance of
ideas. " Weil, but this is the proper business of the
House of Commons—that institution alone is fitted by
its functions and its means to command official infor-
mation and enforce the necessary changes. Why is
there an association, but that the House of Commons
does not duly execute its office If it do not, why not
begin the work of reform there !" We do not here
mean organic change— electoral reconstruction—an
alteration in the elements of the composition of Par-
liament. That is a large separate question on which
we have expressed strong opinions. But we are now
concerned in the consideration solely of the functional
machinery of State-craft—of the working of the instru-
ment, accepting it as it comes from the hands of the arti-
ficer. Toe House of Commons professes itself to be the
public office or counting-house at which the business of
the State is conducted. In spite of the early closing
movement, it begins its work when other people have
closed their shops and some sober and health-loving citi-
zens are thinking of going to bed. The sun rises and
sets, the winter and summer come and go, at the same
time now that they did in the reign of Elizabeth, when
the Queen breakfasted at 6 o'clock in the morning, and
was rarely out of bed after 9 p.m. In the morning the
faculties are clearer, the passions colder, the pulse,
less disturbed by meats and drinks, the physical sys-
tem more newly refreshed than at any other period
of the day. You then get the best state of the
human functions. Why not sit for three hours before
breakfast ? We will engage that three times as much
real work will be accomplished between 6 and 9 a.m.
as in a week's floundering through the present hours of
Parliament. Conceive the state of a senator, after an
exciting debate and a factious division, crawling to his
town lodgings at 3 or 4 o'clock on a winter's morning,
with heated head and icy feet, attempting to win sleep
to his pillow, to gain rest and refreshment for the renewed
agitation of the adjourned discussion of the coming night.
Can we wonder that the work, operating an entire change
of domestic habits upon all, makes serious, although,
perhaps, unperceived, inroads on the constitution of the
young, and absolutely kills off the aged in serious pro.
portionate numbers ! Buller stated too truly that the
success of the opposition sometimes depended upon their
having a balance of influenza in their favour. Under
the existing dispensation, the fate of legislation is really
too often a question of physical endurance—the toughest
statesman becomes the most successful—while Pitt
and Fox, at a comparatively early age, fell victims
to the joint influence of unseasonable hours and
unnecessary work. It is a fact in regard to which
we have very authentic information, that it
has been already intimated to Government by a
very large number of the House of Commons that it is
their firm resolution to retire from Parliament on ac-
crunt of the oppression of its duties and the utter unsea-
sonableness of its seasons. It is very justly observed by
Lord Stanley, moreover, that the times of the year at
which Parliament site are just those which are best
adapted to country life, and that it is really preposterous
that the chief men in their vari -us districts should pass
the spring and summer in "populous city pent," while
they are only enabled to escape to the country during
winter—the proper season for a town life. So much
for a Parliamentary season, the apologies for which we
shall examine on a future occasion. At present we pro-
ceed to ask wherefore is it that the great inquest of the
nation continues its sederunt through seven long
months of very long days and nights ! It is seldom
that above one or two measures of any real importance
are matured and made law in a whole season, by the 658
units of the " collective wisdom." The "Murder of the
(Cabinet) Innocents " duly takes place—three-fourths,
five-sixths, of the whole business of the session is
rejection, suppression and utterly abortive activity.
Why not purge the minutes of all this trash—define the
real business of the session at its commencement—address
attention exclusively to that, and reduce the " much
ado about nothing" to a reasonable compass of two or
three months at most ! Parliament mistakes its func-
tions when it undertakes to govern as well as to delibe-
rate—to administer and execute as well as to direct and
to decide. Formerly it simply rejected or adopted the
measures which always originated with the Crown. If it
can govern better than Ministers we are ready to swallow
the formula that stands in the way of that exercise of its
functions ; but it appears daily to be becoming a greater
nuisance, a less useful instrument of good government.
How can it be otherwise! Do the directors in:the Bank-
parlour, or at the India-house, do their work daily by
making long speeches ? Could a large bankrupt estate
ever be wound up by the creditors and assignees striving
who could be the most eloquent, sarcastic, or witty ? Is
it men of real busicess who rule the House of Commons
Notoriously the mere talkers manage to spout to them-
selves the whole powers of office, and to convert the
constitution into a logomachy, or the monarchy into a
logo-archy. Might not the business be done in one
chamber, and the fine speeches delivered in another to
all who chose to be inflicted with the flowers of Peace
Society oratory, or the scintillations of Disraelitish wit,
sufficient
operationquantity ? How can h
of bad portte
taofteernatbhleeythhaevme
to
omsbuibsed athe sustain
business of the State be satisfactorily conducted in Par-

liawent when that of every private individual is in a great
measure drawn to the same office ? 'Water, lighting,