The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-24 00:00:00

CEIURCII RATES.

A division took place in the House of Commons last
night which we can only regard as preliminary to a final
settlement of the question of church rates. When leave
to bring in a bill for the entire abolition of that impost
is carried by a majority of more than two to one, it is
evidently in vain to persist in the defence of what was
never very easy to be defended. Already the payment
of rates is a voluntary act wherever the parish is wealthy
and populOus enough to.rosist the demand. There are
large cities tliat pay no rates, and Liverpool has just
successfully resisted an attempt to extract a farthing in
the pound from half a million of people. In this metro-
polis the parish of St. Pancras, with a population of
160,000, has never paid a church rate, except a special
rate by act of Parliament for the building of the parish
church. Any parish that can find the money may earn
immortal distinction or notoriety by refusing church
rates ; and, as the House of Lords has interpreted the
law, they cannot be levied except by the vote of a de-
cided majority of the parishioners in vestry. Is it•worth
anybody's while to go on contesting a point which all
the powers that be have agreed to surrender ? There
are not a few great questions before us ; the position of
the Church, the cause of religion, the advancement of
morality, the spread of education, claim our enthusiasm
in turn ; but it is clearly impossible to enlist the sympa-
thies of mankind very generallyin favour of a tax which is
only a perpetual watchword of war; and, so far from con-
tributing to the dignity, the peace, and the security of the
Church, puts it in the ridiculous position of extorting
from the weak what it does not even venture to ask from
the strong. These considerations have very great weight
when the only appeal on the other side is to old common
law, and to the eternal scruple against giving up the
smallest temporality once possessed by the Church. We
have said that, after all, church rates are voluntary.
Even with all the appliances of wealth and the law,
they may be successfully refused by the majority of the
parish. But law itself never gave the Church more
than was necessary for the maintenance of the fabric
and the bare performance of divine service. If the pa-
rishioners choose further to decorate their church, to
have an organ, a warming apparatus, lights, or any
other luxury to the sense or to the taste, they must be
ready to pay for these accessories, if need be, out of
their private pockets, for no law can enforce them.
The immense sums now spent in the building and deco-
ration of churches leave no doubt that churches will be
kept up from some source or other without the painful
resource of taxing those who have no wish to pay, or
who have a positive scruple against paying. If it is
Christianity that all Christians should pay in proportion
to their worship of the Almighty, it cannot be Christi-
taonitthyethooant
fiteheeaytiwoohoofarteheniortgoCohdrei,sttioanhns
psrhisoouhldmbenetl,iaabhlde
excommunication, if they refuse to give. We may re-
gret that all are not Christians, that all do nob press
to pay, and that there is not a godly rivalry for the
honour of undertaking the maintenance of the Church
and the peformance of divine service. But our re-
grets are vain. The fact is lamentably otherwise, and
,ve have only to adjust the law to the fact. Less than
:300 years ago a man was liable to be fined and im-
prisoned if he absented himself from his parish church ;
still more, if he attended any other form of worship.
Church-rates harmonised admirably with that state of
things ; but, as that is past, so also is past the season
for a compulsory Church tax. As Lord Stanley ob-
serves, the chief burden and nuisance of Church-rates
tall on those zealous Churchmen who are prepared to
spend half their incomes, if need be, on the Church ;
mt who feel it a duty to struggle for the miserable
etice, which they imagine the law gives the Church,
Ind which they feel it wrong to give up. There cannot
be a worse hardship than that a man of great generosity
tnd kindness should feel himself put, as it were, on his
honour and upon his mettle to do that which is wholly
alien to his nature, and which degrades him even while
he feels that he is doing a duty. That is the case with
these Church-rate rows, in which the amount of rate is
the last thing cared for, even if it be known • and the
only question is, whether Dissenters and malcontents
shall be made to pay or not.
There are various minor diffieulties which, as they have
not prevented the effective refusal of Church rates in
many populous cities and parishes, will not stand in the
way of a general measure. The churches must be kept
up in this metropolis without the aid of Church rates.
There are also certain antiquated payments for " preen-
rations," " synodals," and we know not what besides,
that figure in churchwardens' accounts, and amount to
several pounds annually in each parish. But, as they
have been dispensed with to a very great extent, and
visitations and the other church forms go on with un-
abated frequency and effect, it is clear that the payment
is not necessary. The only result will be that some offi-
cial will receive still less than he does now for doing next
to nothing. There is talk of compensation or substitu-
tion; and, if any can be found, well and good ; but it is
idle to wait for a substitute that will work per-
fectly well, when the real foundation of the evil
is, that the Church is no longer the communion
of the whole nation, or even of a decided majority.

t is, indeed, a matter of common policy not to remove

one prop till another is supplied, but nobody can look
around at the magnificent fabrics rising in all direction§,
each more costly and even extravagant than the last,
and seeking, as it were, every excuse for expense, with-
out feelin!-, quite easy as to the eventual ruaintenance of
all our churches, as soon as the proper organisation can
be found. As to the other questions, that have often
been asked, and to which Lord John Russell by the zeal
of his churchmanship gives some currency, time will
soon answer them. It is asked where dissenters will
stop ? How long will the Church be united to the
State? How will the Church stand to the State when
even its fabrics are not secured by the law ? These are
questions of theory. We have to do with the fact --to
retain that fact or to reject it, as the public weal may
require. We are ready, therefore, to give up this un-
popular impost, and then leave ecclesiastical philosophers
to define the relations of the Church and State in this
country as they can, It was never a very easy question,
and we do not think it will be rendered more difficult by
the change now in contemplation.--Times.