The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
CHURCH RATES ABOLITION BILL.
[We continue the discussion upon this bill from the
period at which our report left off in our first edition
yesterday.]
Dr. PHILLIMORE was prepared over and over
again to repeat his vote of last year. He admitted that
Dissenters had an equitable right to be relieved from
church rates, but that was no ground for passing a bill
totally to abolish church rates. There was no reason
whatever why members of the Established Church
should be relieved from the burden, but he did sincerely
hope that Government would shortly be prepared with
a measure to remove this hateful cause of dispute between
Dissenters and Churchmen.
Mr. HORSMAN adopted the tone of the last speaker.
The question, he insisted, was ripe for settlement, but
the Government appeared to be reluctant to move in it.
In justice to the dissenters, however, a bill of relief
should be brought in, which, while it removed this irri-
tating source of dispute between the Church and the
Dissenters should also place the law of Church rates and
obligation to pay them upon a safe and certain footing.
He advocated this course in the interest of the
Established Church itself, and he sincerely hoped
_
it would be adopted. At all events, f this
middle course were not adopted, he should prefer
the total abolition of church rates to the continuance of
the existing system of doubt and uncertainty, giving rise
as it did to so much heartburning and ill-blood
.in the
country. The Church lost more in influence and
cha-
ractern
from these distressing contests
than it gained i n a
church
pecuniary point of view, -from the c
rates ; and, therefore, on the wholelitinuance of
ne could not do bet-
ter, as a member of the Church of England, than advise
the house to pass the second reading of this bill.
Mr. V. SMITH wished this question to be treated
not as a dispute between Dissenters and Churchmen, but
7hat they should ask
as a question of expedien
Vas it expedient to continue
themselves was this, viz.,
a law which allowed continual attacks to be made en
church rates at the expense of considerable acrimony
and ill feeling ? His answer would be in the negative.
This church rate evil was no new grievance ; it was more
than a century old, and yet no remedy had been
proposed for it. In the absence then of any such
legal remedy, and being averse to the continuance of
_ these church rates disputes and religions animosities, he
had no alternative but to-sapport the second reading of
this bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL—But we propose to settle the
question next year.
Me. V. SMITH said that might be the present inten-
tion of the Government, but at present he saw no Go-
vernment measure before him, and therefore he repeated
that as he could see nothing but good to the church from
the abolition of church rates, he felt bound to support
the second reading of this bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
that-it was hopeless to think of passing such a measure
as this during the present session, and he denied that
the right hon. gentleman who had just addressed them
had put the case fairly. He said the question
the house had to decide was this—in the absence
or impossibility of providing any other remedy
for the evil, was it not advisable to abolish
church rates altogether ? Now, he admitted that
considerable wrong was inflicted on the Dissenters under
the existing system ; he admitted also that their case for
relief was irresistible, and the time would shortly come
when Government would be bound to afford them a
measure of relief. The present state of the law
of church rates was highly objectionable, since it
allowed great and successful opposition to be raised to
the tax, while it was productive of great injury
to the Church. It did not follow, however, that the
law of church rates ought to be absolutely abolished.
It worked well and quietly in many parishes—nay, in
the great bulk of the parishes, not the largely-populated
parishes, but the rural parishes throughout the country.
There were something like 11,000 parishes in the
country ; but out of that number there had
only been church-rate contests in 500, and he
insisted that the fact of these contests was not suffi-
cient to justify the total abolition of church rates. No
doubtit was a good reason for passing a bill, which should
in some way relieve the Dissenters from the grievance
which they complained of, and to that extent he was
prepared to go, and no further. Well, then, the abo.
lition of the law being undesirable, while its amendment
had become almost an absolute necessity, was it prudent
to pass this bill in preference to waiting for a Govern-
ment measure which should go the length not only
of relieving Dissenters, but of removing all the
other objections to which the existing system was
liable ? He, for one, certainly thought not, and
though the settlement of the question in this lat-
ter way was surrounded with great difficulty,
he would venture to suggest, for the considera-
tion-of others, that they should in future have in view
a measure which should have the effect of separating
the parishes favourable from the parishes non-favourable
to the law of church-rates, altogether relieving the latter
from the payment of the impost. (" No, no.") Well,
this was only a suggestion, but whether it were adopted or
not, he could not accept this bill, which, while it sought
to establish a system of equality, would, so far as the
members and clergy of the Church were concerned,
create a system of legislative inequality. (Hear.)
Mr. PACKE contended that the Church was sup-
ported by the State, not for the benefit of the' Church-
men alone, but for the benefit collectively of the
entire community, more particularly the poor, and
under these circumstances it would be unjust to abolish
church rates altogether. Seeing, then, that Government
had already promised to bring in a measure to remove
the evils and inequalities of the existing system, he
hoped the present bill would be withdrawn. (Hear,
hear.)

Mr. BASS took a very simple view of this question.
He thought the continuance of Church rates was alike
unjust to the Dissenters and the Church. Being of that
opinion he should perhaps have contented himself with
giving a silent vote. Had he not been requested by some
of his constituents to present a petition in favour of this
bill to speak in its favour, and afterwards to vote for the
bill. He had complied with two of these requests, and
when the proper time arrived he should be prepared to
comply with the third. (Cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT believed the Cabinet were as much
divided on this question as every other which had
come before them this session, and therefore he would
rather take the opinions of the noble lord, the Pre-
sident of the Council, upon it, than that of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, as conveying the feelings
of Ministers. Well, then, the noble lord, on the intro-
duction of this bill, confessed himself opposed to the
equitable settlement, and that being see_ he re-
commended the honourable baronet the member for
the Tower Hamlets to go to a division on the second
reading of this bill, rather than withdraw it in favour of
the measure promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Church rates might have been just and proper 300 years
ago when the majority of the people belonged to the
Established Church, but since their establishment a large
sad influential body of Dissenters had sprung up, and
as a matter of justice both to them and the Church it
was only right that church rates should be re-adjusted
or wholly abolished. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL.—The speech which the honour.
able gentleman the member for Manchester has just
made, and the expressions which he has attributed to
me, compel me to take part in this debate. The hon.
gentleman said that he takes exceptions to two argu-
ments which he states that I used on a former occasion.
One was that au unqualified and unconditional conces-
sion on the subject of church rates would lead to other
demands. Well, all that I can say upon the subject is,
that we have heard to-day, as we have upon former oc-
casions, that this is a question of principle, that it is a
question between the establishment and the voluntary
principle, and that this is only one part of the proposal
of those who wish us to exchange an establishment for
the voluntary principle. It is not my fault, therefore,
if following the honourable member for Southwark (Mr.
Pellatt), and following the honourable member him-
self, I say that this unqualified and unconditional
repeal of the present law is a proposal intended
to forward the schemes of those who are the enemies
of an establishment, and are in favour of the volun-
tary principle. Now, be it observed, Ido not make it a
charge against them that such are their opinions. I
only say that, not holding those views —not partaking
the opinion that the destruction of the Church Estab-
rnent, and the admission of all sects to an equality in
respect of the voluntary collection of funds, would be
advantageous—they cannot expect me to consider it as
af2y inducement-to vote for this bill, that it will lead me
rAP by step to that total destruction of the Church which
saB°Tne degree. "
leeate• But then the hon. member for Manchester
PI "At I employed another argument, namely, that
compen ti e
were taken awasa on should be given if church rates
used that word!. I Now,
I do not believe that I ever
that occaaion, spoke, certainly, unexpectedly on
for I
tb.ought the debate would have gone
on much longer than
wor t did
and I may have used the
with d unadvisedly, Luit l,
, antrum:A charge my memory
having_ done so it was certainly not within
the scope of my argument to
"compensa-
tion." What I maintainedthenusylvelr
shwoht
the word t
I maintain now
that in abolishing church rates
F d make some pro-
vision for the maintenance of the fabric: of the church.
restablished
have nen e that it is
that inconsistent with the notion of an „, Is
Church ? On the contrary, it appears to
suggests, totally
essential. The State may choose to- o establish-
ment. It may, as the hon. member
abolish such an establishment if it exists ; hut if
they
State chooses to have an establishment, there should be
in connection with it persons with a sufficient income
for'their maintenance, and with sufficient learning and
qualifications to give religious instruction,. and likewise
tzleetlausa
there should be a fabric maintained in which divine sr.
Ilze--ofTangIrTTRE BLACK SEA. FLEET.—Frequent at-
vice maybe performed, and in which the instructions
aleadare very common in her Majesty's ship
and ministrations of these persons may.y with have a
sufficienttheir due ,
effect. It appears to me that a clergy
fabricin I
and a , severely fro, . Vengeance, both which ships suffered
maintenance, and sufficiently qualified,
re essential 1 has been -nee intermittent fevers at Besika Bay. It
which their ministrations are to take place, are
esearY to
ropose , quinine au use very large quantities
to a Church Establishmen t. Then I say that if you p , . . • e want of medicalof
brie of the is quite lamentabl officers in the squadron
entirely to abolish the provision by which the fa
to 1 FREE TRADE e.—Medical Times and Gazette.
Church is now supported, it becomes you, if you mean.
fourth LA"
SOCIETY.—Last evening. the
support an establishment, to make some other provision
_t.quarterlyJames
meeting, of this society was held at the
less objectionable and less productive of evil and of heart- i offices, S -street—Lieut.-Colon 1 Dickson .
e in
burning, but at all events to make some provision for the , the chair. From the report read by the secretary,. that the Anerle
maintenance of the church. The bon. member (Mr. ; appeared y estate had beenit
Bright) talks of ~ washing of surplices,"and "sweeping ' allotted during the past quarter, and the . wholly
roads and sur-
of floors," but that does not seem to me to comprehend face drains nearly completed. The
Camberwell estate
the whole of what is intended • d for b'would soon be in the hands of the society, a •
to be provide
church of portion of which would be prepared for immediate 11
rates. What, sir, was the original state
things I Our Catholic ancestors raised heaven-directed ; ment. Negotiations were nearly completed for the pur-
spires and venerable towers, not simply that the build- I chase of another attractive estate, conveniently situated
ings to which they belonged' might receive the uungre• I in a highly picturesque neighbourhood, a short distance
gations resorting to them • they thought it belonged to from London. The report concluded by stating that
piety that they should make for the whole People an the society was in the most prosperous condition. Mr.
edifice for them te worship in, and worthy of the religious , Canny having moved, and Mr. Unwin soconded, a vote
purpose to which it was devoted. This is therefore not 'of thanks to the chairman for his untiring exertions on
a question of " washing surplices" and of ~ sweeping ' behalf of the society, Col. Dickson appropriately acknow-
floors," but of maintaining those fabrics. As time went led d the compliment,
ge and the proceedings terminated.

to question and the first to respect. But in this country
we have other institutions. We have a national church

—we have an hereditary aristocracy—we have an he-
reditary monarchy—and all these things stand together.
(Hear, hear) My opinion is, too, that they would de-
cay and fall together. (Hear, hear.) I see no reason
why we should prefer to these institutions those of the
United States of America ; and I must, therefore, op-
pose this bill, as, in my opinion, tending to subvert one
of the great institutions of the State. (Cheers.)
Sir W. CLAY having briefly replied,
The house divided, when there were—
For the second reading lB2
Against
The bill was therefore lost.
The Literary and Scientific Institutions Bill was read
a second time.
The Bankruptcy (Ireland) Bill was read a second time.
The house then adjourned shortly before six o'clock.