The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-04 00:00:00

wise, to a leasehold estate under the Church, is absurd enough to ima_
gine that he is to have his property enfranchised, without paying an
adequate consideration ; for my own part, as a leaseholder, and I may
venture to say that in this respect I speak the sentiments of many
others, it is only desired to have a fair and equitable consideration
of our position, and that we are ready to meet the matter in a
rea,onable manner, and would be glad to come into such terms for re-
demption as Parliament may deem alike advantageous to the Church
and the lessees; for I have no hesitation in stating that it will be more
acceptable to the public that the scale of adjustment should be fixed by
Parliament, than under the schemes of any set of Cemsznissionses,”
Reference had been made to the subject ef.
u'oralant leases, and on this
he would read an extract fee—
" Can it then be doubte' _... the same letter. Mr. Gregson said,
the lessees,
that it is most desirable for the (22.....7Cit, for
and
should tie' stove all, for the country, that this dormant capital
'
- wrought into play ? We hear and read enough of the ad-
''':-..cages of emigration to Van Diemen's Land, to the Swan River,
&c., where it is stated that the surplus capital of England may be so
beneficially employed; and are we not constantly taunted with our
delays in rendering justice to the unfortunate sister kingdom, where
English capital would instantly find its way, if the finest country
in the world was tranquillised. Now, I would ask you, Sir, whe-
ther it is not quite as reasonable t‘i expect that this English
capital should be brought into action in our own country ? What
great improvements and advantages would not instantly accrue to
England by the enfranchisement of the leaseholds ! Every one would
have an inducement to adopt a more advantageous system of cultiva-
tion, to drain, plant, build, and effect permanent improvements, which
have never been applied to the leasehold properties in England, except
to a trifling extent, where the property happens to be situated in some
thriving commercial district." Most of the church property in the
, county of Durham was situated in the very best part of the county ;
but it was by no means the most improved property. That, however, in
the neighbourhood of South Shields was an exception to this; but on
this point he would a further extract from the letter of Mr. Greg.
son :—" I hare been induced particularly Io refer to this part of the
sult.int from the circumstance that, during one of the discussions in the
1a1..e Parliament, the improved state of the property of the Dean and
Chapter of Durham at and near . South Shields was instanced
as a proof of the statement to which I have just alluded ;
and this fact was particularly referred to, and relied upon,
by a Gentleman in Parliament, for whom I have the greatest
respect; but every one at all acquainted with the locality of South
Shields knows very well that it falls exactly within the exception I have
referred to. South Shields ss near the mouth of the Tyne, one of the
finest rivers in England, and where the coal trade, mannfactories, and
almost every branch of commerce, are carried on to an amazing extent;
the whole of the property for a considerable distance to the south and
west of that town, except that which has been enfranchised of late years,
is leasehold under the church ; and therefore any man desirous of con-
necting himself with trade there has no other choice than the buying or
leasing dean and chapter property; thus its present state of value and
cultivation is accounted for.' He did not mean to say that the church
was a bad landlord ; but he denied the assertion that had been made on
the opposite side, that leasehold property held under the church, and re-
newable every seven years on a fine was equivalent to freehold. He
seas convinced, at any rate, that the people of Durham could not be
convinced of this.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The fact, however, was,
that the nature and amount of the fine levied varied very
much, and in many instances within his own knowledge had greatly
increased within the last few years. It was contrary to corn.
mon sense to suppose that men would lay out their money on improving
land when they had not a permanent, or, at least, a long interest in it.
With reference to this subject he would read a further extract from the
letter he had just quoted :—" But let any one go through the country
generally, and he will soon find the leasehold lands are very far short of
those in fee-simple in respect to every improvement, and it must inevit-
ably be so. Are men likely to employ their money in improvements
whilst their interests are liable to be so affected by increasing fines for
renewals? I have no doubt, however, that persons interested in the
present system will be found to come forward and state it to be their be.
lief that the Church property is as beneficially employed as it could be
under any change of management; nor is it to be wondered at that such
persons should take this narrow view of the question." He trusted
that the House would give him credit for not wishing to bring forward
the statement which he had felt it his duty to make on this sub-
ject from anything like sectarian views.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
With regard to the Establishment, he dissented from it on eonscien.
tious grounds, but he had never there or elsewhere said anything with
respect to it which he had not felt it to be his duty to his constituents to
state.—(Hear, hear.) On every ground, both of security to the Esta.
blishment itself, as well as of justice to the Dissenters, he thought it
essential that the present system of levying Church-rates should be got
rid of. The hardships experienced under the present system were most
oppressive to many who conscientiously dissented from the Establish-
ment. An instance of this had recently come under his own knowledge.
Ile held in his hand an account of the expences attending a levy that
was made on the property of a Member of the Society of Friends at
Gateshead, for the sum of 12s. 6d. due for Church-rates, for which a
cart was seized of the value of 101. He would read the details as they
were specified in the bill of costs :

Cart sold for
Church.rate, 1834-5 l2s. 6d.
Costs of summons, order, and warrant of
distress, and service of summons and order 8 6
Church-rate, 1135-6 ... ll 5}
Costs of summons, order, and warrant of

distress, and service of summons and order. 8 6
Levying distress, in both cases, anal pos-

session 8
Appraisement
~ 2 3
Stamp for ditto
Auctioneer's expenses, advertisements, &c.,

. _
and expences of sale

£3 8 tii

Balance to return to Mr. Oliver
The continuance of such a state of things must necessarily lead to a
state of considerable excitement, and produce a degree of animosity
and ill.will which every sincere Christian must sincerely deplore. He
trusted that the House would have regard to the peace of the country,
and would consent to the inquiry which was proposed by the Noble
Lord, with a view to the regulation of the interest of both the lessors
and the lessees of this property, and that the result would be the getting
rid of the evils which were now experienced.
Sir R. PEEL--The questions before the House, I take it, are these—
first, whether a Select Committee shall be nominated to inquire into the
possibility of creating an improvement in the value of Church property,
by a different mode of leasing it out; and next, whether it would be
desirable to attach, as a condition, in case that an improved value should
take place, that the produce of such improved value should be applied
solely and strictly to spiritual purposes, or an increase of the
means of attendance on Divine Worship.— (Cries of " Hear, hear,
hear.") I shall resist this pretended inquiry, which it is proposed
should devolve upon a Select Committee; but if the Howie shall con.
sent to the appointment of such a Committee, I trust that it will be
influenced by authority and argument, and if it be shown that the
people of England are ardently attached to the Established Church of
the country, that any increased revenue, if such there should be, aris.
ing out of an improved system of leasing church lands, will be appro-
priated to the religious instruction of the people, and to no other object
whatsoever. I confidently trust that this House will never esnsent to
relieve the landed proprietary from the burthen of the support of the
fabric of the Church to which it has always been liable.—(Cheers.)
That :is the real view of the question.—(Hear, hear.) That is one of
the obligations under which all hereditary estates have been inherited.
It is also a condition under which all acquired property has been pur-
chased. Thus all property, whether acquired or inherited, was at the
time of such acquisition or inheritance, liable by both common and
statute law to the expense of supportiug the fabric of the Church. Ido
not wish to oppose myself to the conscientious scruples of the Dissen.
ters, who, however, are but a small minority of those to be benefitted by
throwing the onus of supporting the fabric of the Church upon Church
property." It is not the Dissenters who would be beneflited by such a
measure so much as the great body of the landed proprietary, who are
for the most part members of the Established Church, and upon whose
property the obligation of supporting the fabric of that Church at pre-
sent rests.—(Hear, hear.) The real merits of the question now before
the House are net to be determined by the mere formal words of the
motion under which the proposal is couched.—(Hear, hear.) We must
not look fur these merits in the terms of the proposition referring the
subject to a Select Committee. We must look for them in the history
of the whole proceedings of Government with respect to this question.
—(Loud cheers.) We must look to the animus, to the tone, and tern_
per, and feeling in which the proposition is made. This is not the first
time that the proposition has come. In 1824 his Majesty's then Govern.
ment, at the head of which was Lord Grey, but connected with it were
most of the Members of the present Administration, a proposition was
made on the subject of Church rates. It was said then that it would be
most expedient to get rid of the existing system of Church rates,
and substitute some other in lieu thereof. The substitute then offered,
whether the most appropriate or not, was at least fair in principle. It
was not proposed to transfer the burthcn to ecclesiastical property, but
to render the State liable to the maintenance of the fabric. The
proposed object was to relieve the conscientious scruples of the Dis-
senters by exempting them from the individual burthen; to aster.
to in the precise amount of property which was liable; and in lieu
thereof to render the Consolidated Fund liable for a similar amount.
Lord Althorp at that time laid down the doctrine that it was a funda-
mental principle of the Establishment that the community of the State
should be liable for the maintenance of the fabric. Thus, though the re-
lief was to be afforded to the Dissenters in so far as removing the onus of
individual contribution, still it was insisted upon, as a necessary principle
of the Establishment, that, if not the community, the State, at least, was
bound to provide for the maintenance of the fabric.—(Hear, hear.)
This was carried by the large majority, of I believe 116. Whylwas the
principle thus affirmed by such a majority abandoned without any
notification ? The sum proposed to be paid out of the Consolidated
Fund by Lord Althorp, as a substitute for the rate to maintain the fa-
bric of the Church, was 250,000/. This proposition so made and so
abandoned, had a natural and necessary tendency to raise the agitation
(the description of which has always been exaggerated) on the question
of church rates. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer
came forward last year with another proposition. He made a calcula.
tion as to the increased value which Church property was susceptible
of by a new arrangement. He looked for no Committee, he sought
no inquiry, but brought forward his proposition on the responsibility of
the executive Government. The Right Hon. Gentleman under a shal-
low pretence that the difference between him and me was but one of
degree—that is between twenty-five and thirty years' purchase—that
it was a question for an accountant and not for a Committee of the
House of Commons—the Right Hon. Gentleman, in bringing forward
his proposition, was exceedingly happy in the result of his calculations.
—(Hear, hear.) He had the good fortune to find that the increased
value to arise from an improved mode of leasing Church land would
be just 255,0001.—(Cheers and laughter.) That is, in other
words, just the amount of Lord Althorp's proposition, with 50001. to
spare. Such was the fortunate—l might almost say the supernatural—
result of the Right Hon.,Gentleman's calculation. Well, upon the
strength of this calculation leave was asked to bring in a Bill, and on a
division it was granted by a majority of 25. On the proposition for a
second reading that majority fell to five. The measure was then aban-
doned, but now, for the first time, the House heard a proposal made
for a Committee to inquire into that which the Right lion. Gentleman
had previously and peremptorily settled by means of his calculation.
With this statement before the House I ask whether any one will
believe that the main object of the present motion is not to procure a
substitute for Church-rates out of the property of the Church ? The
Noble Lord opposite says that the qustion is of such importance as to
render it impossible to leave it unadjusted longer than the next ses.
sion. Let me ask him, if the case be of so urgent a nature, how
does it come to pass that so much of the session has been allowed to
elapse, and that it is not until the 3d of May he comes forward to ask
for a Committee ?—(Hear.) If the necessity was so pressing as that
this question must be adjusted in the next session, why was not this
proposition made within one week after the meeting of Parliament ?-
- (Renewed cheers.) A Committee was moved for last year, in June
or July, yet nothing arose out of it. The House n:et again in Novem.
ber, and still the subject remained where it was.—(Hear.) 'Why was
the long interval between May and November suffered to elapse, and yet
nothing done to forward a question, the decision of which was now in-
sisted upon as of so much importance. Why were not Ministers pre-
pared with some measure which could be laid before the House in all
its details, and not come now at so advanced a period of the session to
ask for a Committee upon a question, the prompt decision of which is
so strongly insisted upon ?—(Hear.) I will not charge anything
against the Noble Lord. I dare say his motives are most pure and
honest; but if ever there was a proposition which had the appearance of
being intended to gull both parties—to palter in a double sense both with
the Dissenter and the Churchman—it is this.—(Loud cheers.) The
Coronation is to come on the 28th of June, and yet a measure upon
which so much is said to depend is not brought before the House until
the 3d of May.—(Hear, hear.) It is utterly impouible, even if a Corn.
mittee be granted, that such,Committee could report in a way which
would satisfy the Country upon the nature of a property tottered