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

CHURCH RATES.
Sia W. CL AY then rose to move for leave to in Aroduce
a bill for the entire abolition of church rates. 11 e said it
was admitted on all sides that the question could: not re-
main in its present state. The interests of religion, of
justice, and of sound policy alike require that it should be
finally settled. Almost every party and section in that
house had brought forward and ennorted 'measures for the
abolition of church rates. The Qovernment of Earl Grey,
in 1833, and the Government a? Lord Melbourne, in 1837,
both endeavoured to effect a final settlement of the ques-
tion; and, more recently, ;Alla were introduced for the
same object
by Sir J. East:nope, by Mr. Trelawny, by the
hon. member for Finslo:ny, and by the hon. and learned
member for Vavistock. And the house had now before it
measure propoeed, by the hon. member for Leicester-
shire. None of these measures had obtained the assent of
Parliament, with many of them he disagreedconsiderably,
but., 'at all. events, they proved that a strong sense prevailed
bo'ata within and without the walla of that house, of the ne-
Frassity of some alteration in the law. (Hear, hear.) Since
no last had the honour of bringing this question before the
house, two circumstances had occurred of no mean impor-
tance, and having no light bearing either upon the main
question itself, or upon the mode in which it should be
dealt with. Re alluded to the decision of the House of
Lords in the Braintree case, and the publication of the
census report upon religions worship. (Hear, hear.) The
substantial essence and effect of the decision in the Brain-
tree case was this—the House of Lords, having had the
advice of the judges, pronounced by the month of Lord
Chief Justice Truro, gave judgment that the church rate
-under contest was invalid, inasmuch as it had not had the
assent of the majority of the vestry. Lord Truro took oc-
casion to state that the judges were unanimous in the
()Pinion that a church rate, to be valid, must have the
assent of a majority of the vestry. Some difference
of opinion had previously existed among. the
..1110.ges who were consulted, one or two thinking that
a majority of the vestry, by refusing a rate, would oust
fnemselves from their jurisdiction, and that in such a
case their would be a constructive majority in favour of the
1-ate. Lord Chief Justice Truro, in a judgment charac-
terised by that luminous phraseology and that power of
analysis for which the noble and learned lord was cele-
brated, completely overturned that view of the question,
and it was finally decided unanimously that to make a rate
valid it must be assented to by a majority of the vestry.
He entreated the house toconsider the full importance and
significance of that decision. It not only set at rest the
much disputed point of whether the churchwardens of
their own authority, or supported by a minority of the
vestry, could make a rate valid, but it incidentally settled
for all practical purposes two other questions which had
been much debated, namely whether church rates were to
be considered a perpetual obligation on property, or only
an obligation on property in virtue of the person, and
whether there was an obligation at common law to main-
tain the fabric of the parish church. With respect to the
first of these questions, he understood that the best autho-
rities were in favour of the rate being considered a per-
sonal tax ; while with regard to the second, the balance of
authority was supposed to favour the view that there was
no obligation -at common law to maintain the fabric of the
parish church. Hitherto there had been some doubts about
the law, but now it was perfectly clear, and the conse-
quence would be that in all cases where a majority of the
vestry had the chance, they would refuse to impose a
church rate. Already that power had been exercised in a
large number of places. After all, upon whom were they
imposing these dues ? Was it on a small portion of the
people ? Was it on a fragment of the population of Eng-
land, that made it unnecessaryand unbecoming the dignity
of the house to listen to their complaint ? Upon tbathead
they had the most extraordinary disclosures, upon the
most complete authority—the census report on religious
worship. • Tho population of England and Wales was, in
round numbers, 18 millions. The proportion for which,
by an elaborate process of reasoning, that report showed
they ought to provide church accommodation was 58
per cent., or above ten millions. The Established Church
had provided 14,713 churches, and accommodation for
5,317,915 persons. The nonconformist body had provided
20,390 places of worship, and accommodation for 4,891,604
persons. Therefore, of the religious portion of the people
—those who really availed themselves of places of worship
—nearly one half did not belong to the Established Church.
On the census Sunday, the attendance of all denomina-
tions at religious worship was 10,896,000, of which 5,604,000
attended places of worship belonging to the Established
Church, and 5,292,000 places of worship belonging to the
Nonconformist body. That close conformity between the
number of persons attending and the accommodation pro-
vided, west far, in his opinion, to establish the accuracy
of both calculations. Those figures proved to his mind
that the present state of the law could not be allowed to
continue. The question remained, in what mode should
the alteration be effected ? The suggestions were mani-
fold. The first was to take the law as it now stood—to
recognise the permanent and nniveral obligation to pay
church rates, and to devise some summary and efficient
process for enforcing the law. He supposed that scarcely
any one would be found to advocate that mode of dealing
with the question, though a petition to that effect had
been presented by the hon. baronet the member for the
University of Oxford (Sir W. Heathcote) from certain of
the clergy in the diocese of Exeter. The second was the
mode proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr.
Phillimore), in conformity with a proposition of the same
kind by Sir Page Wood, and also in conformity with the
very able pamphlet of the noble lord the member for King's
Lynn (Lord Stanley). That proposal was to enable Dis-
senters, on complying with certain formalities, to relieve
themselves from the liability to pay church rates. It
had an aspect of fairness about it, but it was a very
offensive thing to insist on the declaration of any
man's religious belief, and by forcing men to define their
creed they would sharpen those differences of opinion of i
which they were scarcely conscious. There were a great 1
many persons who went to church in the morning, and
in the evening to some nonconformist chapel. He could
not believe this mode was likely to receive the sup-
port of the house. (Hear, hear.),_ Then came the pro-
posal of the hon. member for Leicestershire (Mr. Packe),
which most whimsically combined all the objections to the
other modes suggested. The hon. member for whom he
had a great respect, proposed to retain a large portion of
the church rate, and enforce it by summary process, whilst
he also proposed to relieve nonconformists upon declaration
of religions belief being made before two magistrates. He
came to the last mode, and that was abolition. That was
the mode which, either by i`aelf or accompanied by some
substitution of other sources for the maintenance of church
fabrics, would be found to be the only mode of dealing
with the question. (Hear, hear.) Whether the abolition
should be accompanied by some substitution of other funds
to provide for those precise objects to which church rates
were applied, was a question upon which arguments of
considerable weight might be used on either side, and upon
which a difference of opinion might very fairly exist. It
was a question more for churchmen than nonconformists.
The essential point for the latter was abolition. To that
they were entitled. (Hear, hear.) It was for the mem-
bers of the Church to consider whether by law they would
provide a substitute. In bringing forward the subject last
year, he suggested that some provision for those objects
might be found in the surplus funds of the Church, not
because he believed them necessary, but because there was
a difference of opinion, and some thought that, the Church
being a national establishment, some provision should be
made by law for the maintenance of established places of
worship. He cononrred in the opinion expressed by the
noble lord and the hon. member, that the superfluous
wealth of the Church should be devoted to keeping up the
fabrics of the Church. No one doubted that the surplus
teveaues of the Church would be ample for the purpose ;
for in 1833 Lord Althorp stated the amount applied to
1), lag up the fabrics was about 250,0001., and a report of
* ultor date, in 1840 he believed, estimate it at about the
ofAa to the expenses attending the ministration
cif divbis
had been worship, pew rents would be sufficient. They
the , for the purpose in a great many churches,
end„ was ,
, - familiarised with their appli-
ption us be. d •••*b Way and no more just principle
should Pay for than
.that persons using the church
the rati ' that worship which
they aPproved. (Heruil,t 111
ment epted, hilli.,,aear.) If, therefore, the Govern-
dace t maid either? was about to propose to intro-
or make' the law of ti:aaft, upon it those propositions,
an additional bill for that d, as proposed, and bring in
glare, on the moat mature Pnenretir- He was bound to de-
ful analysis of all the facts tbeter°u, and a most care-
ledge, that church rates might boado, come to his know-
smallestToinistraoteie,
nlished without the
chance either of the
of service or of
the maintenance of the fabrics being ira
were certainly very startling, Dunn,. the The facts
first half of the
Nresent century, more churches had been built than during
oo
or 300 years before. From 1801 to 1851, 2,520
churches were erected, at an expense of 9.087,000,.
The
contributions towards those nine millions from the public
funds amounted to 1,663,429 ; while from private bone.
to 7,423,5711. The pronorti
factions they amounted
public funds was 17 percent. to 83 per cent. private- °ll f:3e-
Asetions. (Cheers') But if they divided the half century
into two periods of thirty and twenty years, the result was
still more surpres' ing. From 1800 to 1830, five hundred
churches were built,
at an expensedfrom public funds, of three millions,
whereof there was contribute
1,152,0001., and from private fund. s 1,848,0001. being 3
per cent. public, and 65 per cent private contributions,
Prom 1830 to 1850, there were 2,029 churchesebeunitlrit,bauttaedn
expense of 6,011,000/. whereof there w
from public funds 511,0001., and from priv_as tm, funds
5,500,0001. or 8 1-3 per cent. from public f un and 91
2-3 per cent. from private funds. (Cheers.) It d
appeared
that the exertions of the Church proceeded in an inverse
ratio to the help received from the State. There were two
grants by the State in 1817, and in 1821 or 1825, and in
the first thirty years the proportion of private and public
contributions was 35 per cent, and 65 per cent. In
the last twenty years, when no grants were made by
the State the. proportion was 8 1-3 against 91 2-3 per
cent. If, again, they added to the whole sum contri-
buted in the half century to the building of churches by
private benefactions, namely seven millions, the expense
defrayed by nonconformists in the erection of 10,000
chapels at an average cost of 1,5001. each, or 15 millions, it
'would giie alotal-of 22-millions devoted to the erection of
.see.s of worship by private benefactors, as against
1,600,000/. contributed from the public funds, or 921 per
Bent. against 7i per cent. (Cheers,) Such a statement as
that almost precluded argument. (Hear, hear.) It
showed beyond all doubt that the members of the Church ,

Mr. PETO, in seconding the motion, expressed his gra-
tification that it should have been introduced by a mem-
ber of the Church of England. (Hear.) It had been looked
upon too much as a dissenting question. It was really as
much a question for the members of the Established Church
as for members of the nonconformist body. They had
heard to what a great extent churches had been built and
public worship carried on within them by voluntary con-
tributions, and in many of the contests the refusal of the
rate had been decided by church votes. For these reasons
it was eminently worthy the consideration of the Church
off England, whether they would allow this root of bitter.
ness to remain promoting discontent and division among
themselves. (Hear.) With regard to noncomformists they
had strong and conscientious objections, arising from be-
lief in Cie voluntary nature of every religious exercise, and
in the impropriety of forcing parties to support a religious
service which they disapproved. " He believed it could be
shown that the assessment was not necessary for the sup-
port of the edifices used in religious worship, and it was
itself impracticable. They need only look to the census
returns to satisfy themselves that with a body which had
shown such a determination as to contribute a sum not
exceeding seven millions of money for the erection of
churches within the last half century, it was not at all
likely they would allow those churches to fall into decay.
The Dissenters had 20,390 places of worship entirely sup-
ported by voluntary contributions, and in those centres of
activity and intelligence, Lancashire and Yorkshire, great
results were accomplished entirely by voluntary efforts.
(Hear, hear.) He might refer also to what Scotland had
done. The Free Charch of that country, when thrown
upon her own resources, had provided an amount for the
erection and support of places of worship which had excited
the astonishment of the nation and the age. It had been
often said that it was only in the towns and in the manu-
facturing districts that any question with respect to
church rates arose—that the majority of the rural dis-
tries were practically Church of England, and that
therefore, with respect to them, no hardship existed.
The statistics of the Independents, of the Baptists,
and of the Wesleyans—showing the relative numbers
of sittings in connection with each denomination in
the towns and in the rural districts—contradicted this as-
sumption; and the fact that some of the severest contests
which had taken place with respect to church rates had
arisen in rural districts, was a proof that the feeling there
was as strong as in the towns. He must say, with respect
to the bill introduced by the hon. member for Leicester-
shire (Mr. Packe), that he believed they were only prolong-
ing feelings of bitterness, and preventing the fair and final
settlement of the question by the introduction of these half
measures. (Hear, hear.) He believed that justice required
that church rates should be totally abolished, and that the
Church of England could do nothing more effectually to
promote peace than by meeting this question in a fair and
liberal spirit, and by showing a proper reliance on her own
principles. (Hear' hear.) He knew that Dissenters were
sometimes charged with entertaining feelings of bitterness
towards the Church. He disclaimed on his part, as a
Nonconformist, all such feelings. (Hear, hear.) Although
he was himself a Dissenter, no member of that house would
rejoice more than himself to see the Church of England
prosper—to see her reformed within herself—to see the
immense revenues in her possession brought to bear for the
benefit of the country, and to see her relieved of the scan-
dal which was at this moment caused by the incomes en-
joyed by her bishops and by the higher orders of her
clergy, and by the lax state of morality which prevailed in
our cathedral towns. (Hear, hear.) He believed that if
half the money which was expended on our cathedral esta-
blishments were devoted to City missions, to the augmen-
tation of the incomes of the poorer clergy, and to the
placing of clergymen where none at present existed, the
Church of England would have a much stronger hold on
the feelings and affections of the people of England; and
the Dissenters, so far from regretting, would most heartily
rejoice to see it, because by such means the cause of true
religion would be advanced, and no interest whatever,
with respect to the Church, would be sacrificed.
(Hear, hear.) He knew it was sometimes said of them
that they wished to sacrifice the prizes of the Church.
(Hear, hear.) But what should be the prizes of the Church ?
If he knew anything whatever of the obligations of a Chris-
tian man, he should rank first among those obligations the
duty of living, as far as he possibly could, according to the
revealed will of God ; and if he were told that it was a
" prize" for a clergyman to obtain an income of some
15,000 c. or 20,0001. a-year, when 5,0001. would be sufficient
to maintain him in any position of life which it was neces-
sary for him to fill, he must reply that he believed those
incomes were a source of great discomfort in the Church
itself, and were perfectly unnecessary. In conclusion, the
hon. member repeated his conviction that such reforms as
he had indicated, and the dealing with this question of
church rates in the only way in which it could be dealt
with satisfactorily, would tend to strengthen the Church
and to extend her influence, as well as to promote peace
and harmony and goodwill throughout the entire com
munity.

Mr. WIGRAM agreed with the hon. members who had
made and seconded this motion, that the time had come
when it was a matter of the utmost importance, and indeed
of absolute necessity, that some measures should be passed
upon the subject of church rates. (Hear, hear.) He said
so because it must be admitted that in some districts of
the country—although he hoped that those Districts were
neither many nor extensive—but certainly in some dis-
tricts church rates had been the cause of much bitterness,
and of much unkindly feeling. (Hear, hear.) He was
persuaded, however, that this had had its origin, not in
the subject of church rates generally, so much as in the
uncertainty of the law. (Hear, hear.) It was because for
a long series of years theobligation to paychurch rates had
been a matter of uncertainty thatattempts had been made
to elude them. (Hear, hear, and oh, oh.) He was per-
suaded that if the law upon the subject of the obligation
to pay had been as clear as in the case of tithes, they
would have had no more contests with respect to the pay-
ment of church rates than they had had with respect to
tithes. (Oh, oh.) This was his most sincere belief;
nor could he see upon what ground a valid objection
to pay church rates could possibly be made. He hoped the
house would not consent to the introduction of this bill,
which was a bill not for the substitution of any other
mode for that which had so long been recognised, but for
the simple and entire abolition of the provision which had
so long existed in this country for the maintenance of our
parish churches. (Hear, hear.) He doubted whether the
expectation which the hon. member had held out, that, in
the event of church rates being abolished, other means
would be voluntarily provided out of which the churches
might be maintained, would be realised in the result. Re-
ference had been made to what the Church of England had
done in the erection of churches, and in providing clergy-
men in those parts of the country in which they were most
urgently required. (Hear.) Those only who had engaged
in such undertakings could appreciate the difficulties which
were experienced, and the efforts which were necessary to
surmount them. To what extent, then, would those diffi-
culties be increased if they called upon the friends of the
Church to supply the means for the accomplishment of
those objects which were now provided for by church
rates ? (Hear.) There could be no doubt that in that
case the energies of the Church of England would be ham-
pered, and her expansion impeded to a very considerable
extent. The right hon. baronet had very truly said that
the law on the subject of church rates had been very fully
and carefully considered in the Braintree case, which was
decided in the last session of Parliament ; but if they would
refer to that case they would find that the judges who had
hoobenahruzdtarytiitotw:earrteepcaolalmleeningaoreed in the opinion that the obligation
oen the owners and occupiers of lands and houses in this
tiou? It was". wolhdiethhewapsa
justrish acshubricuhdiwngasanadn
undlauwp,h
this country aolltao:ause of God,
counts clearly recognised as the obligation to repair
y bridges' (Hear, hear.) What was that obligo.-
sent to the maintain and uphold in every parish in
had been made abrogation
open to the poor as well as
to the rich.
this country, without°ll:l
r, hear, hear.) Would the house em-
otion of such a provision, which
ground vision for it?
assignedwita?s f(
}le r
said,e thearantiquity by the common law of
indeed,
eiddeeoa:crsubstitution
oftion
such
o af
caonuyr s othere. pro-
(Hear,
ar, or
that contributions for the
He had heard no valid
were called for from all,
mheaairn.t)enance of our churches
their advantages ; but
whereas all could not participate
hear.) They were
the fact was that they were not esnialsed for the benefit
and were open
of any particular sect. (Hear, hear,
established for the benefit of the country,
to all those who could and would use theym,.
Parliament, representing the the whole peopelaer'olflear.)
country, Dissenters as well as Churchmen, exercised over
them a real and effective control ; and laws were continuer-
ally introduced into that house with respect to them.
(Hear, hear.) It was not the fact that the whole people
could not use them ; for the doctrines of the Church of
and
England were such that the great mass and body of tho
people could with the utmost propriety
dif-
ferences upon particular religious doctrines, a portion of
conscientious-
ness, and they only did not do so because, from slight
them preferred to provide other places of worship for