The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-04 00:00:00

CHURCH-RATES.

Upon the Order of the Day being moved, that the House
resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House upon the
Connell-rates ;Abolition Bill, and Mr. Speaker leaving the
Chair,
Th 2 CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and
.aid—Sir, I shall not occupy sour time, and the time of the
House, for any length of time, by apologizing for the grene
clai n of indulL;ence I am about to make upon the Houk.
I stall simply say, that under no circumstances have I
„ever t isen to address the House with a deeper sense
o f th•• responsibility that attaches to me, whether as a Mem-
be.r of Pa_liament or as a NlemLer of the Government, in re-
f,:re,,ice to the important question which I am now about t..
. .

propose ao the house. Sir, it is a question of that character
which absorbs cli ordinary considerations. It is a ques-
tio, . ,n which one not only forgets one's self, hut almost
oat ss own recollection—one forgets alt considerations whet-
s a Jeer, except the great and the mighty interests that art
i;.•ro!ved, not only in the discussion but in the solution of this
bject. It is a question of giving religious peace to the land
—l;;)car)—it is a question of extending farther the great priu-
-4 les upon which this House has heretofore acted,
at d. it is a question which I think in its dis-
ctesaioti—in its discussion undoubtedly I feel it does—but in
its consequences, it is a measure which is still more impor-
t int, ieesmuch as it involves considerations and interests of
'she very greatest possible importance. Sir, the difficulties of
discussing this question are greatly increased by the cir,
eentistances of the times in which we live.—( Hear, hear. )
if I could have hoped that we could have approached the
silscuseion of this question without passion, without prejudice,
without party excitement, then, indeed, I should not have
hesitated in anticipating a favourable reply ; but when one
sees the character of the times in which we live, when one
sees the dispositioa upon all occasions to excite a bias and a
cry that the Church is in danger—( Hear, hear)—l feel that
the difficulties which, under ordinary circumstances, would
connect itself with the discussion of this question becomes
great indeed. Sir, I wish to state. hi reference to the spirit
in which this question is proposed to Parliament. that the
Government in so proposing it, proposes it in no spirit of hus-
tility to the Established Church ; on the contrary, they are•
persuaded that the settlement of this question is that
measure, above all ethers, which at the present moment
will give peace and security to the best interests of man-
kind.—( Loud cheers.) Sir, lot not Honourable Gentlemen
think, that in this anticipation cf difficulty I am drawing
purely on the imagieation—it is no such thing. Within a
very sport pericd of time, during which the intentions of hi,
"Majesty's Goveriiment have been brought to this subject, I
have seen it proclaimed, and that on the authority of an indi-
vidual whom I value—whom I respect and whom I love—thst
the public at large ought to anticipate a measure, which is to
rob God of his glory and the poor of their rights. That iv the an-
ticipation with which this measure is met. Sir. I allude to that
for the purpose of saying, that the intentions of those who have
framed this measure—the intentions of one who humbly pro-
poses are intentions to advance the cause of religion—( Hear.
hear)—to give peace—to give stability to the Church—and so
far from robbing the poor of their rights, to establish the
rights of the poor—( Great cheering)—and to establish those
rights snore particularly in reference to the question of reli-
gious instructiem—( Hear, hear) Sir, it was but a short time
since, that in a discussion upon another question a reference
was made by a Noble Friend of mine to the absence of
petitions on the subject.—(Hear, hear.) No individual
would be inclined to say that the subject of Church-rates
is not a subject which has excited througout the land the
deepest possible attention. No person will say who has a large
class of constituents—and we owe it to the Reform Bill at
least that all amongst us now have a large class of constituents
—I am sure there is no Hon. Gentleman on the other side of
the House that can be prepared to say, this is not a subject
which comes recommended to the House without having ex-
cited the deepest interest throughout the land. Nay, I may
almost put it, that this is a subject which we must approach
within the wails of Parliament under the impression that an
evil exists, and that that evil calls for an immediate and for
an effective remedy. I hope I may assume within the walls
of Parliament—though I know a contrary opinion has been
entertained without these walls that some remedy is called for
hope I may assume that within these walls an evil exists,
and that the question at issue between the two sides of the
House is not—are we to remain as we are, but what the re-
medy is that behoves us to adopt ?—(Hear, hear.) Sir, I
should wish, in the first instance, to refer upon this
subject, because the House will feel it is my duty to strengthen
myself in all respects, to authorities ; and above all, when
I pet authorities that are authorities which have weight with
the Hon. Gentlemen that are opposed to me, that I should
bring forward these authorities ; that I should not argue for
gentlemen who are disposed to support me, but against those
gentlemen who are prepared to oppose me ; and teat I should
assume that gentlemen who have already presented petitions in
favour of the measure from this side of the House are those
who are prepared to support me, but I wish to make converts.
What I propose to do, is to call the attention of Hon. Members
opposite to the consequences attending the leaving of this
question unsettled ; and therefore it is with reference to their
opinions that I think myself called upon to argue the
question. The first authority I shall allude to is the au-
thority of a Commission proceeding from the Crown, which
was issued during the Government of the Duke of Wellington,
and I do not allude to it for the purpose of supporting my
remedy, but of establishing the preliminary fact that the pre-
sent state of things is one in which we cannot allow the
country to continue—that a remedy is called for, and that that
remedy it is the duty of the House to propose. The Commie-
sioners in their report state that the whole subject of Church-
fates demanded immediate attention; for the mischiefs resulting
from the present state of the law were numerous and compli.
cated. Sir, I believe it is perfectly clear and undisputed
in practice, and I believe that it is also so in point of
law, that, if a rate is submitted to a vestry, and if a
vestry is assembled to consider that rate, they have the entire
and complete power of refusing their assent. I don't antici-
pate that there are any gentlemen in this House that will
defend the present state of the law ; but if there are let them
not defend it upon the ground of there being any permanent
or satisfactory income produced for the repair and mainte
nance of the established Church. That cannot be fixed, per-
manent, and established to which the majority of any Town
Vestry can refuse its assent. You may defend the present
state of things on any ground you please ; but defending it on
the ground of its forming a permanent stable support for the
fabric of the Church is a complete misapprehension of
all the facts of the csse, a.nd which is controverted