The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 5 minutes after 12 o'clock
THIRD READING.
The following bill was read a third time—Caledonian
Railway (Granton Branches).
The following bills were considered and ordered to be
read a third time :—A.bergavenny Roads, Cleave and Eve-
sham Road, Hamilton Water, Llanelly Railway and Dock,
London and South Western Railway, and Penzance and
Saint Just Roads.

SECOND READING.
The Surrey Gas Bill was read a second time,
PETITIONS.
A large number of petitions were presented against the
he Burials Bill.

DISTRESS IN THE COTTON DISTRICTS.
In reply to Mr. FERRAND,
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.
Mr. 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 questicei
Sir G. GREY replied that ho did not intend to bring on
the second reading of this bill to-day. He proposed defer-
ring the second reading until to-morrow week. A full
opportunity would be given of 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 Church, 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 and 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 graveyat ds, and the result would be that an unseemly
fracas would take place over every Dissenter's body carried
into the churchyards for sepulture.
Lord HENLEY 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 possession 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 this direction he had sought to relieve
Dissenters from the payment of church rates. He ob •
jected 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 rime'. 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 be saw no reason why the house shoult,
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-
la, ion 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 Chu, ch. This he considered a grievance which the
Dissenters were quite justified in seeking to be relieved
from. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARDY 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 01
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 att«nded 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 vromoted by the Liberation Society, and
Lead 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. TRELA.WNY 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 against giving
his assent to the second clause. He objected to the option
of permitting Dissenting funeral services being vested in
the hands of the clergy. No sufficient gi ievance had been
shown to justify the bill; and besides, in all large towns
there were cemeteries, where Dissenters could perform their
sepulture' rights. (Hear, hear.) He should support the
second reading on the grounds adduced by his right
hon. friend the Chancellor of tho Exchequer, having, like
him, an intention to oppose the second clause when the
bill was in committee of the whole house, unless materially
modified. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI replied to the arguments of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. The right hon. gentleman ap-
peared to approve the first 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
applied no principles to the Dissenter dead which he did
not experience living, but if his friends brought his bod) into
the churchyard this act implied that they desired him
buried in accordance with the rites of the Church of
f
England. It was not true to say that the principles 00
civil and religious liberty were violeed in this matter, 0
far as the Dissenters were concerned. They
freely hey had their
licensed meeting houses, and could w,orsehuipbi
ects. The
openly in common with all her 310:101esfeYs.
(Cheers.) He
church did not invade their satereedbipl,
though r.
regretted the support given to
vations, by the Chancellor ofthe Excheq g
urthaend Hto withhmeerreis eDh
De-
vations,
hon. gentleman the Secretary of
State
partment, and their conduct was
truly fo
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 on that Pharos 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 at
once reject the bill.
The house then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading
Against it

_
M ijority, .. -125
The bill was consequently lost, The announcement of

the numbers was received with loud cheers by the Opposi-
-1 ion.

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 agreed 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 control of the
Commissioners of Woods and Forests from the operation
of the bill.
The house resumed.
OATHS RELIEF IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
(SCO ['LAND) BILL.
This bill passed through committee.

SUPPLY.
The report of the committee of the 25th March was re-
ceived. When under consideration on the day named the
house was counted out. The report was now agreed to.
The report of supply agreed is on Monday night was
also agreed to.
BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION (IRE-

LAND) BILL.

The Lords' amendments were considered and agreed to.

STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES.

Mr. H. B. SHERIDAN moved for leave to introduce a
bill to facilitate the appointment of stipendiary magistrates
in cities, towns, and boroughs of 20,000 inhabitants and
upwards.
The bill was read a first time,
EDUCATION.

On the motion of Sir S. NORTHCOTE, an address for
a copy of the minutes of the Committee of the Privy Coun-
cil on Education, dated respectively the 24th day of Fe-
bruary, 1863, the 3d day of March, 1863, and the 17th day
of March, 1863, prescribing new arrangements for the
remuneration •of the masters of schools of arts, and for
the granting of aid to such schools, was agreed to.
NEW WRIT—THETFORD.
On the motion of Mr. BRAND the Clerk of the Crown
was ordered to file a new writ to elect a member for this
borough, in the room of the Earl of Easton, called to the
House of Peers.