The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-10 00:00:00

SEA FISHERIES (IRELAND)•

In reply to Sir E. GROGAN,
Mr. M. GIBSON replied that the Government considered
it very desirable that the recently appointed royal commis-
sion should extend its inquiries to the fisheries on the coast
of Ireland. (Hear, hear.)
THE PURCHASE OF THE INTERNATIONAL

EXHIBITION.
Lord ELMO desired to learn of the Chief Commis-
sioners of Public Works whether a complete survey had
been made by a competent surveyor of the Exhibition ;

and, if so, whether he would lay it on the table of the
house ?

Mr. COWPER replied that it had been carefully and
minutely surveyed by Mr. Hunt, the surveyor t)t the board
of Works. His estimate was moved for last night, and
would be immediately in the hands of hon. members.
Lord ELCHO did not wish to be troub eson e, but he did
not allude to an estimate; had there been any report by a
competent surveyor ?
Mr. COWPER could not say whether there was any
such document in existence. He knew that the surveyor
had forwarded an opinion on the subject, but he could not
say whether it was in writing. He should, however, be
able to answer the question to-morrow.
THE EXTRA MORNING SITTING.
In reply to Colonel FRENCH,

Sir R. PEEL intimated that the Government proposed a
morning sitting on Friday in order to take the Irish
Fisheries Bill.

ENGLISH CHURCH SERVICES (WAL-ES) BILL.
Mr. WALPOLE postponed this bill till Friday week.
UNIFORMITY ACT.
, Mr. BUXTON then rose to move the following resolu-
tion :—" That, in the opinion of this house, the subscrip-
tion required from the clergy to the Thirty-nine Articles
ought to be relaxed." The hon. gentleman trusted that it
would not be thought that he brought forward the motion in
a spirit hostile to the Church of England. The only test to
which he desired it should be put was this—would it injure
the Church of England, or would it benefit the Church ?
If its tendency would be to injure the Church, let the
house reject it by all means ; but if, on the contrary,
it were calculated to benefit it, then he trusted that no
prejudice would stand in the way of the adoption of the
motion. (Hear, hear.) He represented no section or
parity in the Church, and his sole object was to relieve its
clergymen in general from what many of them considered
a grievous burthen, and to open a way for many of its lay-
men who were now excluded from the ministry. (Hear.)
It was not solely a clerical question, it was much more the
question of the laity, and as such he desired chiefly to treat
it. He had nothing to do with the revision of the Liturgy,
or the Articles themselves ; what he aimed at was that the
clergy should be relieved from that portion of the eubscrip •
tions that they were called upon to take which disquieted
many of them. Those lists or subscriptions were extremely
numerous. There were seven oaths upon the subject of
supremacy, six declarations of assent to the Prayer Book,
and nine declarations of assent to the Thirty-nine Articles,
the upshot of all being this : In the first piece the clergy-
man was required to declare that he would conform to the
Liturgy of the Church of Edgland as by law established.
That was a fair and reasonable subscription. In a second
subscription he declared that he willingly and ex animo ac-
knowledged all and every the Thirty-nine Articles to be
agreeable to the Word of God, and gave his unfeigned assent
to the same. And by the third he declared his unfeigned
assent and consent to all and everything contained in the
Prayer Book. There was an essential distinction between
the two latter subscriptions and the first subscription. The
first was a promise of performance; the two others Were de-
clarations of belief, and it was those which he wished to have
done away with. Those subscriptions were required of men
when they were young, and they all knew how apt young
men were to take up all kinds of crude theories, but which
died away under the advancing growth of common sense.
Bit in mature life they called upon these men to make the
subscriptions, and in the most unqualified form. He ad-
mitted the Prayer Book to be the most sublime of human
productions ; but, taken as a whole, there must be many
things contained in it which it was hardly just to call
upon men to declare their entire and unqualified belief
in. With regard to the Thirty-nine Articles, though they
did not present so many technical points of objection as the
Prayer Book, still they had given rise to many great and
fierce controversies. (Hear, hear.) He would put it to those
who here and elsewhere were remarkable for their just and
generous characters, whether it was just to ask young men
to declare their entire belief in everything that the Prayer
Book contained. He denied their right to do it; for it was
trespassing upon the freedom of men in a way that was un-
justifiable. It was only the fundamental doctrines of the
Church of England upon which they should require unifor-
mity of belief. He was aware that it was the opinion of
many eminent men that the best thing to do was to leave
the Church of England as she stood, and not to try to mend
matters wherever they found fault, The hon. member then
reviewed the history of the successive changes in the forms
of subscription at the Hampton Court Conferences in the
reign of James 1., and again under Charles 11., when an•
other turn of the screw took place, and it was laid down
that all the articles were to be taken in their true and literal
sense. The whole object of the High Church party in those
early days was to get rid of the Puritans; and finding the
subscriptions were not stringent enough for the purpose,
they set to work to devise the minute words to which he had
referred, requiring the clergy to give their entire adherence
to everything in the Prayer Book. The Act of Conformity
was another of the many atrocious acts of the time which
had been brought forward for a similar impose. He could
quote several passages from the writings of Dissenters dur-
ing the last few years, to show it was impossible that 20,000
clergymen could give their entire assent to everything in
the Prayer Book, which contained so many different com-
positions. For his own part he thought that young men
should not be called upon and almost forced to act in a way
' contrary to what perfect truthfulness would require of them.
He thought it would be well for the clergy, and well for
the religious and intellectual life of the people of this
country, that the clergy should have scope and latitude to
think out their own thoughts. That liberty was denied
them at present. Men of original mind were apt to have
their thoughts and ideas cramped when they had to steer
within barriers like these subscriptions. And these hin-
drances met them at every step in their career. The curate
wanted to become a rector ; the rector an archdeacon ; the
archdeacons bishop ; and the bishop looked forward to pre-
siding over the see of Canterbury or York ; but those sub-
scriptions were always before them. It could not but be
painful to men accustomed to think for themselves to be re-
quired to repeat like parrots the phrases set down for them.
The result was to make men excessively timid, so that, in-
stead of leading the religious thoughts of the people, they
became afraid of taking a single step. There were a great
many men of original mind in the Church of England, but
their number was becoming less and less every year. At
Oxford the candidates for orders had decreased from 242 to
120, and at Cambridge from 270 to 178. He had with him
a letter which he received from a graduate at Oxford—a
man of ability, who would have been an ornament to the
Church—in which he complained that he had been forced
by those subscriptions to adopt a profession infinitely less
congenial to him than holy orders, He had no doubt that
many hon. members opposite would in the course of the
evening say that this was a stale and shallow cry of the
" Church in danger." He believed the Church of England
was every day becoming more beneficent and more beloved ;
but yet, withal he admitted there might be danger before
her. If she chose not to be a National Church, but a nar-
row and sectarian one ; and if she stubbornly resisted all
reform, and stood in the way of human advancement, human
speculation, and the discoveries of science, not with strong
and gentle reasoning, but with paroxysms of fear and rage
—(hear, hear)—and if she discloses the most pitiful sight of
all—the wish to persecute without the power—then she
might find herself forsaken and spurned by the English
people., But if, on the contrary, men found in the Church
of England a welcome and a home, if she opened wide her
gates and let people enter freely, then they might hope
that their children's children would cling to that Church as
their fathers had done when they sealed their faith in her
with their blood in the great days of old. (Cheers.)
Mr. G. DUFF seconded the motion. They ought to
approach questions of this kind as politicians, for he appre-
hended that religious questions would form their principal
business for some years to came. They were no longer an
assembly of the Church of England, nor of Protestants, nor
even of Christians, save so far as civilisation had infused its
spirit into Jew and Gentile alike. The recent judgment of
Dr. Lushington, although it gave greater latitude within
the Church, still it put a stricter form of interpretation upon
the articles and formularies than before satisfied the con-
science of persons. The result of this was to give rise to
many painful struggles during the last few months. The
proposal of his hon. friend was a very moderate one, and
did not interfere with prosecution. The bishop would have
the power to prosecute the clergyman, and the clergymen
would be able to prosecute each other. But if the resolu-
tion was agreed to, one element of malignity would be taken
away from the clergy, for although one man might call his
neighbour a heretic, he could not call him a " peejm.er.e
(Hear, hear.) The hon. member concluded by alluding to
the want of conciliation on the part of the bishops, and ex-
pressing a hope that a future minister would appoint better
bishops than those of the Tiverton type. (A laugh.)
Mr. M. MILNES rose to move an amendment, the
effect of which was to limit Mr. Buxton's resolution to
the subject of subscription to the Prayer Book. The hon.
member said he entertained so much reverence for the
subject, and admiration for the moderate tone and man-
ner in which his hon. friend's motion had been brought
forward, that he should be sorry to take any course
which looked like opposition to it, unless he felt con-
vinced that the subject was one involving so many great and
important considerations Oak it could not be too closely
discussed. Indeed, he should be unwilling to say but that
given
bagrezle to. The
one day some such motion as that of his hon. friend would
contests
long Thirty-nine
aArticles,gos ttll
theyth o u though
bore havingup oupon
fierce
them the spirit of compromise, and a great desire to include
within their sphere men of many
These Articles wereth
di ffereelnatwosrodfetrsheactihdurreelhi-,
anmidghtht ebeobajdeuactitotefdhitsohaodnin. friend's
these
gems opinions.
motion was that persona
laws'
o
their adherence to
.
and act upon
lon of the resolu-
ethveemrythwiinthgocuotntinined in them. The adg
required to declare
unwritten law
tion in its integrity would be to establisllt;
the on
—the law of public opinion—to the overruling
iet the written
law. He believed that the law of public opni
cn
more intolerant than the law of the Church, Thew„aatictiaree
had been gradually interpreted in a more and more liberal
sense; and the freedom of the Church would not in any
degree be increased by diminishing the authority ee the
articles. It was of enormous importance that the freedom of
thought of the Church of England should not be subjected
to any sacerdotal inquisition; and it was admitted that the
articles were now open to a very liberal interpretation. The
object of his amendment was to confine the action of the
resolution to the Book of Common _Prayer; and in that way

he believed it would in no degree derogate from the power
and influence of the Church of England.
Sir G. GREY was anxious to state early that the Go-
vernment considered it inexpedient to adopt either the reso-
lution or the amendment. At the same time, they were un-
willing to meet either by a direct negative, acknowledging
that he found great difficulty in ascertaining what Was the
precise object of the resolution. The Ina. member for
Maidstone said that allsubscriptioUE! and declarations should
be abolished, but the hon. member did not draw sufficient
distinction between subscription to articles and the declara-
tion of conformity now required by law. He believed it
was difficult to state what those subscriptions amounted
to, and he admitted the iaw was in an unsatisfactory
state—for it require subscriptions varying in terms and
character, t'Zia unnecessarily imposing obligations upon
clerTymen. It would be much better if a more simple and
uniform declaration were adopted. (Hear, hear.) He
understood his hon. friend to say that, though he would
abolish subscription, he would still leave the clergy liable to
penalties for teaching doctrines contrary to the Church.
Now, if that were so, he did not see what relief was afforded
to the clergy. With regard to the subscription to the
articles, if the Church was to have a clear standard of doc-
trine it was not unreasonable to require from a person seek-
ing ordination a declaration that he agreed in and should
teach that doctrine. As to the Book of CoMmon Prayer,
the law required a declaration from the clergyman that it
contained nothing contrary to the Word of God, and might
be lawfully used in divine service and the administration of
the sacraments; but then the Act of Elizabeth said nothing
about the Book of Common Prayer, and therein a difference
was established between the Book of Common Prayer and
Articles. He agreed with the hon. member for Pontefract
that the declaration which a clergyman was compelled to
make on presentation to a benefice was an unnecessary
burthen upon the conscience; and that it would be most
desirable if such declaration were confined within the limits
of the 36th Canon. In conclusion, the right hon. gentle-
man stated that the adoption of either the resolution or the
amendment would only lead to uncertainty. Under the
circumstances, he would ask his hon. friend the member for
Pontefract (Mr. M. Milnes) to withdraw his amendment,
and in that case he would move the previous question.
Mr. M. MILNES then announced his willingness to
withdraw the amendment,
Mr. HADFIELD, however, objected, and so the amend-
ment of the hon, member for Pontefract was negatived
without a division.

.

result had beeU nn altnost total destruction of the confidence
for a time of the young in those whom they ought to be able
to rely upon and follow with confidence on account of their
age, ability, and learning. By the authorised construction
that had been attached to the articles, subscription had be-
tome more stringent ; but if, as Dr. Stanley urged, a more
liberal or enlightened method of interpretation was granted,
such as was in use in the time of Archbishop Howley, the
grievance of subscription would be very light. He thought
the Government had done right in not meeting the question
with a direct negative, and he agreed in feeling that any
measure of the kind ought not to take its origin in Parlia-
ment, but first pass in review elsewhere, not that he doubted
the power of Parliament to deal with it as with every other
subject. _ _ _

Mr. HADFIELD said that the effect of subscriptions had
been to exclude the most pious part of the clergy from the
Church, and it was time all those difficulties and distinc-
tions that were so ruinous to the Church should be swept
away. The Church was not equal to her duties, or in ac-
cordance with the spirit of the age in which they lived; and
she was like the old patriarch, whose hand was against
everybody, and everybody's hand was against him. He
claimed more attention frcm that house for the large mass
of Nonconformists. There was not that intercourse there
should be between the clergy and the people, and he was
convinced that the reforms in the Church should go much
further before religious peace could be established in the
country. _ _

Mr. B. JOHNSTONE pointed out that there wore two
ways in which an institution might be defended—by in-
variable and steadfast resistance to every demand, or
wise and timely concession. The first was the policy of
Rome at the Council of Trent, and the result was the
establishment of Reformed Churches all over Europe.
The lesson should not be overlooked by the Church of
England. (Hear, hear.) There could be no question that
there was a falling off in the number of candidates who now
presented themselves f6r holy orders. In 1841 the number
was 6C6, in 1861 it was only 489, and he could state posi-
tively that he had known many young men at the univer-
sities who had been unwilling to enter into the ministry on
account of the rigidity of the subscriptions which were re-
quired of them. (Hear, hear) In the university sermons,
it was true, it was endeavoured to soften that rigidity, but
young men felt that such a course was paltering with their
conscience, and declined to accept an interpretation contrary
to the language itself. (Hear, hear.) He admitted that a
national establishment should have tests, but they should
be such that grave men might conscientiously take. (Hear,
hear.) Was it difficult or impossible to frame such tests ?
Or was it difficult to have a form of subscription which ac-
tually implied what it was meant to imply by it ? He did
not believe in any such difficulty or impossibility, but he
did believe that, if they maintained the present rigid tests,
they would soon not be able to get any young men at all to
enter the ministry of the Church. (Oh, oh, from the Op-
position, and hear, hear.) The tests had been imposed by
Parliament, and it was proper that the same assembly should
relax them; but if they were to relegate the matter to any
other tribunal, it;would be relegating it to the Greek kalends.
(Cheers.)

Sir G. GREY then moved the previous question as an
amendment on the motion.

Mr. NEWDEGATE expressed his regret that the Go-
vernment had not taken a more decided :course. If the
proposal of the hon. member for Maidstone were adopted
the result must be that the members of the Church of Eng-
land would be subjected to the utmost latitude of teaching
at the hands of their clergy. Let the house take warning
from the condition of religion in the United States of Ame-
rica, and see that vagueness of opinion conduced in the end
to religious violence and intolerance.
Mr. WALPOLE considered the house was placed in a
position of some embarrassment by the course taken by the
Government. He should have preferred to see the resolu-
tion negatived. He agreed that the question concerned the
laity more than the clergy. Was the house or the country
prepared to go in that direction ? He thought not. Then
they heard of another book called " Essays and Reviews."
What were the alterations proposed by some of the writers
of that book ? They contended that all tests were obsolete,
and should be repealed, awl that Scripture should be the
sole basis of the religion of the Established Church. Those
were propositions which could not be countenanced for a
moment by sincere supporters of the Church. The laity
must have some guarantee that, first, they should have no
doctrines taught but those of the Church to which they be-
' longed ; secondly, that there should be some regard to cle-
rical order and efficiency in the appointment of ministers of
the Church; and thirdly, that the clergy who had to offi-
ciate in the Church should preserve its doctrine pure and
free from corruption. There had been another book recently
published which advocated the abolition of all subscription,
but leaving the Articles and Liturgy the same. What
would be the consequence of that ? Were clergymen to
hold one set of opinions and preach another ? Were they to
continue receiving their incomes from a Church whose
principles they did not sincerely believe ? With regard to
the subscription, he did not believe that was the cause of
the decrease of candidates for the Church. The truth
was, the emolument was so small that men of energy and
intellect went in search of other pursuits of a more pro-
fitable character. With regard to the Comprehension Bill
of the time of William 111., he was surprised to hear it
spoken of in the way it had been, when all the best histo-
rians, including Lord Macaulay, agreed that the rejection
of that bill had been the means of securing the civil and re-
ligious liberties of the kingdom. The Act of Uniformity,
at the time it was passed, had proved a great boon to the
community, for from the time of Henry le 111.2-through the
reigns of Elizabeth and Edward VI. to James 1., the whole
country had been in such a state of confusion upon the sub-
ject of forms of public worship, that as one writer observed,
" they knew not what they had to worship or to depend
upon." He was not, however, going to defend all that was
done, nor the penalties that were imposed upon Noncon-
formists. What he did defend was a system which pre-
vented dissension and confusion, and gave to the people a
religion as pure, tolerant, and comprehensive as eternal
truth itself. (Hear.) He thought the Government should
state whether they proposed to make any alterations, and
what they were to be ; otherwise he should feel bound to re-
sist the motion. The hon. gentleman, speaking of the
Church, said, " Truth and peace her courts attend." If
truth and peace did attend the courts of the Church of Eng-
land, his advice was—Do not imperil the one nor disturb
the other. (Hear.) In the soundness of her doctrines and
in the purity of her worship she was of all Churches the
most tolerant in her principles, the most charitable in her
construction, and the most comprehensive in her philan-
throphy. (Hear.)
Mr. MORRISON hoped the object of the hon. member
for Maidstone (Mr. Buxton) would be attained, so that the
differences now prevailing might be put an end to.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE thought an unfortunate amount of
haze had been thrown over the question, arising chiefly
from the difficulty of knowing what was to be the pelicp of
the Government. He hoped the motion would be negatived
without a division.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
notwithstanding the remark of the hon. gentleman who
spoke last, the course adopted by the Government had met
with very general approval, and he did not mean to say that
the Prayer-book and the Articles were perfect, but their
contradictions were to be taken in the same spirit as the dif-
ferences in Holy Writ, and he was inclined to believe that
the task of revision was likely to be taken with the slightest
advantage, or chance of success. The people ought to know
what the teachings of their pastors were to be, and if it ever
came to the point that we were to discuss whether the minds
of individual clergymen should be set free from all letters
and restraints, and be the free arbitrator of what he should
teach the people, it would be far better, before entering on
the subject, that we should break down the venerable fabric
of the Church altogether. The principle of subscriptions had
grown up from time to time from the bona fide mcessities
of the Church since the Reformation, and their existence
without change for 200 years was a proof of the extreme
gravity of the question, and if they were to be dealt with it
should be in such a definite form that any one could under.
stand them. The effect of the amendment was, he thought,
to draw an invidious distinction between the Prayer-book
and the Articles. They were told subscription had failed to
attain its end—that of unity of feeling ; but that was to be
said in some sense of all human laws. But the question was,
had the system worked well for its purpose, and given that
degree of unity of action which qualified the Church for its
work ; and he was not prepared to say there was any rea-
son why we should declare this the sore spot in her history.
By this system, the Church was generally loved by the
country, and she had passed successfully through great
vicissitudes that had strained and tried the efficiency of
other human laws , but that was no reason why the system
should not be amended, though it might be that they were
slow to vote its condemnation, on the ground that it had
failed to accomplish its aim. He demurred io the proposi-
tion that it was better to substitute a judicial penal
system for the present subscriptions, as not likely to
maintain in any adequate manner that unity of belief,
however liberal, within the Church which it was desirable
to attain. That principle was in existence before the Act
of Uniformity, and before they returned to that system they
must look to the powers by which it was maintained, and
ask themselves whether they were prepared to see them
revived. And though the faggot was not the fashion in
those days, certain sharp instruments were which were ap-
plicable to certain parts of the body, and they could not
bring those periods in support of the judicial system, unless
they considered how far they would assimilate those means
of prevention to the purposes of the present day. Nothing,
he thought, would more tend to narrow the Church than
the frequent provoking of courts of justice to lay down in-
terpretations of faith; and his opinion was, that such a
course, if adopted, would materially weaken and injure the
Church. The Prayer Boek and Articles, taken together
and fairly interpreted, formed one harmonious and consis-
tent whole. He could not disguise the fact that young men
of ability did not now come forward and join the Church,
and it was the more striking, because about the period when
he was an under. graduate of Oxford, or shortly after, an
opposite state of things prevailed in so marked a degree that
it might alone have been said at that time that the flower of
the youth of England were rushing forward and offering
themselves for the Church. A serious change, however,
had taken place in that respect, and it had been attributed
to the attractions of the civil service over the poor remune-
ration given by the Church. He thought, however, the
reason lay deeper, and they must look to the zeligious and
moral causes, and not to the system of subscriptions, or it
would have been felt in other periods, especially forty,
thirty, or twenty years ago, when the Church passed
through convulsions so sharp and searching that they might
almost be described 4n the language of Scripture, "which
divides one from another, soul and spirit." The Church
—and especially the University' of Oxford—was in the agony
of religions controversy. They saw the rise of eminent
men, who, after reaching mature life, almost suddenly
announcedwas ect*ntheeirsstaorly forlowe their
that they had found they had
acted wrong in adhering to the Church of England, and
tait
antagonistici church. And the
r
wn salvation that they
should become members of an

Mr. LEFROY said, as he was the only representative of
the Irish Church present, he could not give a silent vote on
this question. He had heard with pleasure the speeches of
the Secretary for the Home Department and the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, both of whom enforced in strong language
the necessity of maintaining the bulwarks of the Church,
and on that ground he gave his hearty support to the pre-
vious question.
Mr. HENLEY said that two extraordinary statements
had been made by the hon. member for Plymouth and the
hon. member for Canterbury. One of those gentlemen
took upon himself to say that he believed the parties who
subscribed these tests did so with mental reservation. He
did not know how any hon. member could take upon himself
to say that of others. (Hear, hear.) The hon, member for
Canterbury made a similar statement of young men in the
universities, and said it was preached to them that they were
not to take these tests in the plain sense of the words. He
happened to live near the university, although unfortunately
he was not a young man, and he thought if such things
had teen done they would have come to his knowledge. A
great deal had been said of fewer young men taking holy
orders, but one important element in the discussion of the
point had been left out of consideration. Ten years ago the
House of Commons stripped the Church of its great nurs-
ing mother, the fellowships of the Universities, They were
very good fellowships, and that might be a good reason why
so many young men did not present themselves for orders
now as before the provision which bad been left by pious
men of former ages had been taken away by the impiety of
Parliament. (Hear, and laughter.) The hon. member for
Canterbury said that they only asked for very little, but no
one in the course of the debate put his finger upon any
point in the Formularies and Articles and said, " That is
what we don't want to subscribe to." What was it they
wanted ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the latter
part of his speech referred to some nice point about a man
conforming to a thing and not believing it. (A. laugh.)
If a man conformed to the use of a thing and did not believe
it what sort of morality was that ? They should remember
that they had an Established Church, and that it enjoyed
large revenues; but if there were larger revenues probably
there would be more persons offering themselves for ordina-
tion. He could have wished the Government bad met the
resolution with a distinct negative, for he feared that, after
th speech of the Home Secretary, the public would say there
should be some alteration. All he would say was, whatever
might be the intellect of candidates for orders, if they had no
honesty he would rather they had remained away. Better
to have honest people, although they might not have an
abundance of intellect. (Cheers.)
Mr, H. SEYMOUR supported the resolution, and
pointed to the Episcopal Church in the United States as a
proof of what might be done by a general form of agree-
ment in the doctrines and liturgy in keeping a church to-
gether without tests.

Lord R. CECIL said he had listened attentively to the
debate, and he could hardly make out the reason why young
men in the universities did not go into the Church in such
large numbers as formerly. Probably the best reason was
the taking away tae fellowships. He understood that no
change in the formularies was asked for by these young
men. He did not believe that the hon. member for Canter-
bury (Mr. B. Johnstone) had rightly described the state of
mind of the young men of Oxford. He had no doubt that
a great intellectual movement was going en, and that there
was great unwillingness to enter into the Church, but the
cause of that lay much deeper than a mere unwillingness to
subscribe to the Articles of the Church. The truth was, it
was not mere subscription that was objected to, but it was
the Articles themselves, (Hear, hear.) There was no
doubt, owing to the subsidence of those great controversies
which had occupied the world during the last 30 years,
much more of unbelief in these days than at any period
during the memory of the oldest member of that house ; and
it was not an unbelief as to small points, but an unbelief
which went to the very foundation of religion, and with
which no compromise could be held. (Hear, hear.) But
at the same time he did not believe that under the present
system the clergy were compelled to tamper with their
consciences. For 200 years, and during six generations
those tests had been cheerfully subscribed to by the clergy ;
and they might depend upon it that the experience of 200
years was of more value than the experience of the hon.
member for Canterbury. (Laughter, and cries of " Hear,
hear.")
Mr. DISRAELI said that he could not at all agree
that moving "the previous question" was the proper mode
of meeting the motion of the hen. member for Maidstone.
The hon. member counselled the adoption of the motion in
deference to the power of public opinion, while the hon.
member for Pomfret (Mr. M. Milnes) argued from a totally
opposite point of view, that public opinion was not to be
trusted as a guide in the matter. The House, however,
after hearing the statement of the Minister, agreed neither
to support the motion nor the amendment ; it consented to
a course which, without explanation, would give an implied
assent both to the motion and to the amendment. Sub-
scriptions to the Articles and the Prayer Book were ob-
jected to, because it was opposed to that comprehensive
character which the Church should assume and maintain.
No one was more in favour than himself of the comprehen-
sive character of the Church of England, but he would
add the condition that the comprehensiveness of the
Church of England should be based upon Church prin-
ciples. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Maidstone
and others had referred to the Act of Charles 11. as inju-
riously affecting the comprehensive character of the Church,
and ancient legislation was denounced as the cause of their
present situation. Well, he doubted very much the justice
of that criticism. He doubted whether it was possible, in
this, or perhaps in any other country, to prevent what is
dissent. He looked upon dissent as a weakness incident to
humanity. (Laughter, and hear, hear.) Even in the case
of Roman Catholicism, he might show, if necessary, as
much dissent, as much heresy, as much schism as in the
Church of England, although in the Church of Rome
dissent had been occasionally more forcibly suppressed.
(Hear, hear.) What, then, were they to expect in a coun-
try the infallibility of whose religion was founded upon free
inquiry, and where, although religion was supported by the
civil power, it was by a civil power founded upon the prin-
ciples of civil liberty ? (Hear.) No modern English states-
man had contemplated that though the Church of England
should bo founded upon a Catholic creed it should, at the
same time, comprehend a Catholic union. A standard of
religious truth should be established in the country that
should influence the conduct of men by the highest con-
ceivable sanction, and that had been accomplished by the
Church of England during the last two couturier. But if
tke experiment of a comprehensive Church had not been
very successful on the Continent, what was their chance of
success in England ? Nobody could doubt that the attempt
to enforce such a system of comprehensiveness would be
most disastrous. In fact, the religion of the National
Church might become so comprehensive, that at last nobody
would be able to comprehend it. (A laugh.) With respect to
the Act of Uniformity, that had been so much maligned, it
was futile to consider it in the abstract. It must be looked
at in connection with the history of the period, and then
some just ideas might be formed of its usefulness. The
truth was that there was no one of the important mea-
sures introduced by their great ancestors that might not
be impugned or perhaps improved He had no doubt that
if he were to give notice that on Friday next he would bring
forward the case of lee Bill of Rights, with a view to its
amendment, lie would make out a strong case against it,

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1861

and get some supporters in and out of the House. (A laugh.)
But of course no sane man would think of doing any such
thing. With respect to the decrease of candidates for the
Church, he could not believe it was owing to the sordid
motives by which it had been attempted to be explained.
He had been young himself once and had committed many
follies—(a laugh)—but he could assure the house that the
question of the more or fewer " nuggets" he might make
was not then the influential motive in his career. The
House of Commons, however, was not an ecclesiastical
synod, and he did not wish to see the time of the Long Par-
liament come back, when hon. members brought their
Bibles in their waistcoat-pockets, and enforced their parti-
cular dogmas with a quotation. At the same time, due
homage must be paid to the memory of the great statesmen
and churchmen of the age of the Stuarts, whose energy and
perseverance had procured the passing of measures which
had produced to the country two centuries of tranquillity.
(Hear.) Upon the question of subscription, he was gene-
rally opposed to the arguments of the hon. member for
Maidstone. How could they have a Church without a
creed ? How could there be a known and acknowledged
creed without some symbols of communion ? (Hear.) In
fact there must be subscription, or there was an end of the
Church. The revision should not originate in either House
of Parliament, but with the Queen as the head of the
Church, who should initiate a Royal commission, and then
first submit its report to Convocation, whose basis should
be extended by the introduction of the Irish Church and
lay members, if necessary. Convocation, in its present
form, had, since its revival, done many things deserving
of commendation, and had acted, contrary to predic-
tion, in an eminently practical manner. He coLdemned
the course the Government had taken in meeting
the motion with the previous question. It was the boast of
this country that she had reconciled order with liberty, but
in her religious affairs she had the greater boast that she
had combined orthodoxy with toleration. But what security
had they for retaining it if they adopted the course that
had been so invidiously recommended by so many means,
and by so many channels ? He preferred to stand on an-
cient ground—on that Church which lives in the historic
conscience of the country, and which had come down to us
with her title deeds which all could understand, because
our ancestors bad contributed to their creation. He had
heard no satisfactory cause given for the proposed change.
Mr. BUXTON having replied, said he should not divide
the house on his motion.

Sir G. 130 WYER had never in that house taken part in
a discussion on the discipline and doctrine of the Church of
England, and, while defending his own Church, he had
never said a word offensive to any other person's church or
religious belief. On the present occasion he merely in.
tended to refer to some observations of the right hon. gentle-
man the member for Buckinghamshire. That right hon.
gentleman had said that a church must have a creed and
must have formularies, and from that he deduced that a
church must have an act of uniformity. But he must say
that if he were now in the Anglican Church, as he once had
been, he would not attach any value to the Act of Unifor-
mity. His Church had not an act of uniformity, and he
hoped it never would have one. What did our Lord intend the
Church to teach, when He told His apostles to go and teach
all nations, and that he would be with them to the and of the
world ? Did He intend it to teach an act of uniformity ?
Did He intend it to teach the Thirty-nine Artic'es, which
were not a dogma ? Did He tell it to teach for political
purposes or to teach as many errors as possible? No, with
diversity there must be error. The duty of the Church
was to teach the truth. What did the Catholic Church
do ? She proclaimed a certain doctrine, and she said to
her followers, "If you do not believe this—you are
wrong." 'He knew why hon. gentlemen laughed; but he
was stating a fact. The debate had afforded him considera-
ble amusement. He had heard a great deal about the com-
prehensive character of the Established Church, and about
what was politically wise; but he had not heard one word
about truth. The right hon. baronet the member for
Buckinghamshire had said that there were differences and
schisms in the Roman Catholic Church. He told the right
hon. gentleman that there were neither in that Church.
There were differences of opinion in the Roman Catholic
Church with regard to discipline and politics, but not with
regard to doctrine. There were differences among Catholics
as to the temporal power of the Pope, the celibacy of the
clergy, and other questions, but they did not differ upon
any question of dogma. As to the monastic orders, there
were differences between the Dominicans and Franciscans
on certain scholastic points of theology and science, but
they were perfectly agreed on all questions appertaining to
the Roman Catholic religion. That religion had always
been one and undivided, and those who differed from it had
always been ejected from it immediately. This was the
only honest course—to say, "I preach the truth," and
eject those who did not believe with you. But if men put
on a false appearance of unity which did not exist, shelter-
ing themselves under ambiguous words and uncertain for-
mularies, that was not honest. (Hear, hear.)
The "previous question"—in other words, that it was
inexpedient to consider at that particular time the motion
of the hon. member (Mr. Buxton)—was then put and
agreed to without a division.