The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-15 00:00:00

DISTRESS IN 1 HE COTTON DISTRICTS.

In reply to Mr. FERRA.ND,
Sir G. GREY stated that the Government proposed to
allot Monday, the 27th, to the hon. member, in order to
enable him to bring on his motion on this subject, provided
that day would suit the convenience of the hon. member.

Xtr. FERRAND assented.
BARRISTERS' (IRELAND) BILL.
On the order for the second reading,
Mr. MAGUIRE said his hon. friend the member for
King's County had requested him to postpone the second

reading until Tuesday next.
SALE OF GAS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
In reply to a question,
Sir G. GREY replied that he did not intend to bring on
the second reacting of this bill to-day. He proposed defer-
ring the second reading until to-morrow week. A full
opportunity would be given cf discussing the measure.

BURIALS BILL.
Sir S. M. PETO said, in moving the second reading of
this bill, that the passing of such an enactment would be
simply an act of justice to those who conscientiously dif-
fered from the Church of England. He denied that the
chief object of this bill was first of all to get possession of
the churchyards ; and, secondly, of the churches them-

selves. The bill would simply permit Dissenting ministers
to perform service in the churchyards in cases where the
officiating clergyman objected to do so from conscientious
motives. The bill had emanated from the committee of
the house composed of members in whom that house had
reposed confidence, and he trusted, in justice to a large
class of conscientious and loyal citizens, quite as reputable
as members of the t.thurch, the bill would be read a second
time.
Lord R. CECIL rose to move that the bill be read a
second time this day six months. The bill in its present
form was only assented to in the committee upstairs by a
majority of one. There were 400 cemeteries, all in the neigh-
bourhood of populous towns, which had unconsecrated
portions where Dissenters buried their dead, and where
Every facility was afforded to the ministers of the dissenting
bodies to read whatever service they liked over their dead.
(Hear, hear.) It was only in rural districts where the bill
would become operative. The grievance was quite micros-
copic compared with the evils which the bill would work, for
its passing would cause an amount of antagonism an& ill-
feeling which it were better to avoid. During the last 30
years great additions had been made to the churchyards by
private benefactors, and this bill would have the effect of
actually spoliating Church property for the benefit of an
antagonistic sect ; as much, in fact, as if the ground were
given up for a music or dancing room. He opposed the
bill because it would never work well; it would be most
destructive to the peace and harmony of parishes.
There was a prevalent disposition to promote good
feeling and amity between different sects, and
this bill would disturb so good a design. In 9 cases
out of 10 clergymen would refuse to admit Dissenters to
their graveyards, and the result would be that an unseemly
fracas would take place over every Dissenter's body carried
into the churchyards for sepulture.

Lord HANLEY supported the bill on this ground,

that Dissenters were called upon to pay church
rates, and, therefore, were entitled to have
the burial ceremony over their bodies performed by
their pastors. This was all the Dissenters sought by this
bill. The bill would permit all reasonable objections on the
part of the clergy, such as a Roman Catholic procession to
the churchyard, but in all other respects no fair objection
could be set up for the small boon sought by this bill—

namely, the admission of dissenting clergymen to church
yards to perform the funeral service over their dead.
Mr. NEW DEGATE was most anxious to do everything
to promote a Catholic union between all Protestant Dissen-
ters. As a step in thts direction he had sought to relieve
Dissenters from the payment of church rates. He ob.•
jetted to the bill, because it would permit the use of
churchyards to other than church purposes, and
make them common graveyards. The Church took
its stand upon its ritual. He objected to the power sought
to be vested in the rectors of parishes, because he would not
give any unsound clergyman an opportunity of playing any
tricks he might feel inclined ; it was never well to place in
private but responsible hands despotic powers. The bill
would make the clergy sole arbitrators of whatever service
should be allowed in the churchyards—a power with
which he objected to endow them, for he feared that
many of them would act unwisely and improperly.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was a member of the select committee of last year, and
recapitulated the course of proceedings adopted both in the
house and in that committee. The bill was open to several
objections ; but he saw no reason why the house should
not assent to the second reading. For himself, he should
most probably, at a future stage, raise some objections to the
2d clause. It was inconsistent, and opposed to the practice
of civil and religious liberty, which had guided their Legis-
lature for many a year, to permit the Church to lay its
hand upon the body of a Dissenter and to refuse him se-
pulture, probably with the bones of his ancestors, unless
the service of that Church was read over his remains ;
compelling him, in fact, when no more, to enter the pale
of that Church. This he considered a grievance which the
Dissenters were quite justified in seeking to be relieved
from. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARDING held that the graveyards were as much
the property of the Church as the Baptist or other Dissent-
ing chapels of their particular sects. (Hear, hear.) If a
clergyman admitted one extraneous service, those of every
denomination could not be refused—not simply those of
Baptists and other dissenters, but sects whose tenets were
disproved by professing Christians, and whose mode of
worship was positively ridiculous. (Hear, hear.) It was
not the laity who desired this bill, but dissenting minis-
ters, who desired to perpetuate, even at the grave, that dis-
sent which they advocated. (Hear, hear:) Vast numbers
of the laity, though they attended dissenting chapels
came to the Church to be married, to have their children
baptised, and to bury their dead, according to the ritual of
the Church.
Sir C. DOUGLAS said there evidently was little hope,
from the crowded state of the benches opposite, that this
bill would be read a second time. He hoped, however,
that the right hon. baronet would introduce an amended bill
next year more acceptable to the house. He denied that the
bill had been promoted by the Liberation Society, and
read letters from the society to the ,right hon. baronet
objecting to several of its features ; so that the bill was en-
tirely the emanation of the right hon. baronet, and intro-
duced in pursuance with the report of the committee up
stairs.
Sir J. TRELAWNY opposed the bill, because if Dissen-
ters were permitted to make use of the churchyards in the
way proposed they would be clearly amenable to the pay-
ment of church rates to which they now objected.
Mr. HUNT opposed the bill. He entered upon a cri-
tical examination of the various clauses, and held that an
imperative in the place of an optioral measure, so far as
the clergy were concerned, would be preferable. The bill
would create a grievance, one he believed as large as that
sought to be remedied, and which besides caused great
confusion. (Divide.)
Sir G. GREY wished to guard himself ag
the option
giving
his assent to the second clause. He objected to tvee stedin
of permitting Dissenting funeral services.ebveatge
had been
the hands of the clergy. No sufficient g.ri
All large towns
shown to justify the bill; and besifdeert: :_nuid perform their
there were cemeteries, where Dissen
u should support the
sepultural rights. (Bear, hoettare adduced by his right
second reading on
the second clause when the
him, an intention t°
07P,h; whole house, unless •
lied to the arguments of the Chan-
cellor materially
hon. friend the Chanclehlelorogio.ef the Exchequer, having, like
bill was
modified. (Ilea'', ").
Mr. D.LO
Exchequer. The right hon,
of the i..icnoAmEnaLititereerp
gentleman ap_
peered to approve thefirst clause, but objected to the se*
cond, because it would lead to a breach of the public
peace. This was a singular argument. The Church
aDissenter applied no principles to the • dead which he did
not experience living, but if his friends brought his body into
the churchyard this act implied
buried in that they desired him
accordance with the rites of the Church of
England. It was not true to say that the principles of
civil and religious liberty were violated in this matter, so
far as the Dissenters were concerned. They had their
lieensed meeting houses, and could worship freely and
openly in common wit • h all her Majesty's subjects. The
church did not invade their sacred places. (Cheers.) He
regretted the support given to the bill, though with reser-
vations, by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the right
hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, and their conduct was truly extraordinary. If
they did not fully approve of the bill, why did they not
bring in a measure to define exactly what they meant?
(Hear.) He deprecated these campaigns against the
church session after session; but it would not be well for
the church or its friends to disregard these assaults because
they were used to them, but rather to take care that the
light of the Palace was not deteriorated or extinguished ; a
light whose radiance was grateful and cheerful to the people

of these realms. (Cheers.) He trusted the house would
once reject the bill.
The house then divided, when there appeared
For the second reading
Against it
jerity -125

The bill was consequently lost. The announcement of
the numbers was received with loud cheers by the Opposi-
tion.

RAILWAY BILLS BILL.

Mr. WHALLEY postponed the second reading for a
fortnight until the report of the select committee was before
the house. He hoped the house would be enabled to legis-
late conclusively on the subject this session.
GARDENS IN TOWNS PROTECTION BILL.

The house went into committee, and a clause inserted
by the house of Lords, ,and several verbal amendments
were agleed to. A clause was added, on the motion of the
ATTORNEY-GENERAL, omitting the property of the
Crown in the Duchy of Lancaster and parks under the con-
trol of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests from the
operation of the bill.

The house resumed.
OATHS RELIEF IN
rLANDCRIAIINAL
BILL, PROCEEDINGS
(SCO )
This bill passed through committee.