The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-14 00:00:00

THE SUN,

several tea-brokers end ascertained that the pt isem r !eel
been colleclete in the same way Inert many (Oat rs. 11 t;
previously Led no reenututtication with the r. I
had never pron3isrd any sub-senttien.
J. Stokeman—l was secretary of the as:orti..tion ler
the subscription to the Wag}torn Ttetitnenial,
assembled at Cewper's- court, o.trnitill. Tice prisoner
was appointed collector on behalf of the Waghorn
Testimonial, aid was paid for his services by a corn
mission of 2 per cent. We have completed the
subscription. The money he received Le Vra3 nod r
directions to take to Messrs. Glyn's beitkieg-houtte.
On the 4th of F, bruary, 1848, I wrote to him to return
his authority to collect. After he wrote the receipt I
produce, dated the 29th rf April, 1848, he had no autho-
rity to rec ive any money fur the committee. I never
heard of the formation of any fresh coretnittGe on behalf
of Mrs. Waghorn and her family, or her children. Thu
prisoner had no authority to receive the 51. ss. from Mr.
Gibbs, and he never accounted to me for it. My name
has been torn from the book.
Mr. J. Saunders, clerk in the London Joint-Stock
Bank, said the cheque produced, to the best of his belief,
was presented by and paid to the prisoner.
Mr. A. R. Cape!, tea broker—On Saturday the pri-
soner called on me, and said he was collecting subscrip-
tions for Mrs. Waghorn, and the committee were desi-
rous to collect 4,0001. for her, as the East India Com-
pany had provided for Mr. Waghorn. lie then opened
the book and showed me Mr. Gibbs's name, which I
knew to be in that gentleman's writing. I also observed
the name of a Mr. Thompson, whom I knew, and I gave
him 21. 2s.

as.
Another similar case having been proved,
Mr. Gibbs informed his Lordship that a crossed cheque
for 21. 2s. in the name of Mr. Ridgway was found upon
the prisoner.
The prisoner said he considered that he was to con•
tinue collecting contributions until all that had been
promised should be received. Several parties had pro-
mised to contribute, and ono establishment alone had
put down the name of the principal for 501. There were
several other sums to be received, and he considered that
in collecting such money he was to be commended in-
stead of prosecuted. Amongst those gentlemen who he
considered had promised was Mr. Gibbs, whom he had
waited upon between two and three years ago.
Mr. Gibbs declared that he had never seen the priso-
ner before he gave the five guineas' contribution, and he
had never made any premise upon the subject.
The Loan MAYOR, upon examining the subscription
list, found that the name of Mr. Gibbs had been tarn out,
and asked the prisoner how he could account. for tha'
fact?—The prisoner did not know how to account for it.
As to the appropriation of any money, it was neeeasary
that he should state that money was due to him for col
lecting at the rate of five per cent. He was well known
in London. Sir George Larpent and other gentlemen
would speak highly of him. He did not for a moment
deny having received the 51. ss. from Mr. Gibbs. Many
persons had paid in money since, upon which he (priso.
ner) was entitled to commission.
The LORD MAYOR refused to accept of bail, and re-
manded the prisoner.
CLERKENWELL.
ROBBERY OF GoLD.—A fashionably-dressed woman,
who refused to give her name, was charged with stealing
a banker's parcel, containing upwards of 3001. in gold
and silver money.
Mr. Bush, the solicitor to the Bankers' Protection So-
ciety, who appeared for the prosecution, said he should
no doubt be able to ascertain her real name before many
days had elapsed, and also show that she was connected
with a well-organized gang of thieves.
A. Brime, porter of the London Joint-stock Banking
Company, of Lombard-street, proved that on Monday
afternoon he received from that bank a brown•papet
parcel to convey to the Cross Keys, in St. John-street,
for delivery to a banker's at Luton, in Bedfordshire, and
on arriving there he handed the same to the coachman
of the vehicle running to that town.
The coachman having given evidsnaa of its receipt and
the deposit of it by him in the bar 01 the Cross Keys, the
landlady,
-Mrs. Mary Ann Griffin said, that on Monday after-
noon she first saw the prisoner, who applied to he ac-
commodated with a seat until the departure of the Luton
coach. She invited her to take a seat in the coffee-room,
to which she objected, on the ground of gentlemen being
there, and on being offered a private sitting-room up
stairs, she urged that it would be too lonely, and went
away. In about five minutes afterwards she again pre-
sented herself at the bar, when she was asked to take
a seat in the bar parlour, an offer which she readily ac-
cepted, and in a very short time the last witness
left the banker's parcel in the same apart►nent on
a desk two yards from the spot where the prisoner
was sitting, Not long after this a " gentleman,"
who had for several weeks past been in the habit
of visiting the establishment, and leaving in her
care his great coat, presented himself in a hurried
manner, and, after saying, " Oh, you have a lady
here waiting for me," pushed rudely by her, notwith-
standing she objected, and entered the bar-parlour to
the prisoner, who recognised him, and said something
about his wib; at the same time the man called out for
a glass of sherry. She went to serve him, when see-
ing, from the reflection on the glass doorway, the pri-
soner receive from her friend a paper parcel (produced)
with red seals, and exchange it with that of the bankers,
she ran up to the desk where the first one was placed,
and at once perceiving that the changes had been
effected, she challenged them with so doing, whereupon
the " gentleman " seized her by the arms, endeavoured
to throw her, and to take the packet that had been sub-
stituted for the banker's from her, but failing to do so,
he escaped from the house. The prisoner was detained,
and was observed to drop the banker's parcel. Tho
parcel substituted for it contained sand.
The prisoner was remanded.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 13.
ABOLITION OF CHURCH-RATES._

--- -
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition frem the Pro-
testant Dissenters, praying to be relieved from church-
rates.
Mr. BRIGHT presented similar petitions from Ilitain
and Derbyshire.
Mr. OSBORNE presented a petition from Denbigh to
the same effect.
Mr. LOCKE presented a similar petition to the same
effect; as also did Mr. G. THOMPSON.
Mr. TRELAWNY then rose to move " that it is the
opinion of this House that effectual measures should be
immediately taken for the abolition of church-rates."
He said he should first take a review of what had been
done with respect to this important subject. In 1834
a measure was introduced for the abolition of
church rates, and the substitution in lieu thereof of
a land rate ; but it was opposed by the Dis-
senters, who considered that the proposition
rather favoured the Church than the Dissenters, and,
besides, the property of the Dissenter would have
become liable for the payment of the rates,
end after it had passed he would have had no opportu-
nity of escaping from it. In 1837 Mr. Spring Rice
brought in a Bill on the subject, but it was open to the
objections he had named. The rate was to have heel;
paid upon that improved management of Church lands.
—(Hear, hear.) Subsequent legislation had taken
price, but, nevertheless, the question had
been left in its present unsatisfactory state.
It appeared to him that that state of things was very
touch calculated to injure dissent. lie siscerely
hoped he might induce Right Honourable Mem-
bers to agree with him, that something ought to be
done. Lord Altherp, on one occasion said that church.
rates were a tax luid on upon one class at the discretion of
others, and the Dissenters n pre compelled to pay towards
a system of worship of which they did not approve. That
he (Mr. Tx ewlawny) thought was a strong expres-
sion of opinion from a Nobie Lord so moderate in his
opinions, and so warmly attached to the Church of
England.—(Bear, hear.) Lord Stanley had also
said, when speaking on this subject, that " ho was ready
to acknowledge that church-rates formed a serious
and substantial inconvenience to Dissenters."
Was it not lamentable after that, that years
after years had passed away without any set-
tlement of this question? In July, 1839,
when John Thorogood, a Protestant Dissenter, was
committed to prison for the non-payment of church-
rates, the House of Commons came to a reso-
lution that it was highly expedient to make
such an alteration in the existing law of
church- rates, in the ensuing session of
Parliament, as should prevent a recurrence of
similar violence towards any of her Alajesty's sub
jeets who conscientiously dissented from the Church.
In the first case a rate was made, which the pa-
rishioners refused, and the rate was nevertheless
levied. In the next case, the rate was carried
with an amendment, that the money should
be applied to other than church purposes.
Eventually the cgs° came to!be argued before the Courts,
and it was decided that the amendments were bad, but
that the rate was good, for the vestry was held
solely for the purpose of making a church-rate.—
(Hear, hear.) He would then state some of the
cases in detail: the first was that of a man of the name
of Riddle, in Cambridgeshire, whose goods were dis
trained, and who was himself subjected to an imprison-
ment for three months for the non-payment of the rate.
The next sufferer was subjected to an imprisonment
for six months. The Hon. Gentleman then went into a
detail of a variety of cases in which the imposition of a
church-rate had been oppressive to several members of
the Society of Friends and other individuals. In thfiyesr
1837 there were petitions signed by no less than 674,715
persons, against the system of church-rates, preee nted to
that House. The principle on which he took his stand
was that a tax which created more private pain than
public good should be abolished, and that akw hich
was impracticable ought to be repealed. Tire remedy he
would leave in the hands of other Members to determine
after his resolution had been adopted. It would be com-
petent for gentlemen on the opposite side of the House
to add anything they pleased to his motion. The social
evils of the system were of such a nature that they de-
manded redress, for nothing could be more unwise in a
social point of view. The tribunals, too, before which
prosecutions for the recovery of church-rates were de-
termined weee of an objectionable nature. Some time
ago the Noble Lord at the head of the Government
stated his willingness to introduce a measure different
from that now in existence, but had not done so.
He (Mr. Trelawny) had thrown the subject before the
House, in the hope that it would be taken up, and he
trusted that Hon. Members would come forward, and by
the support they lent, put an end to the grievous litiga-
tion in connexion with the recovery of church-rates
which existed throughout the country. The Hon. Gen-
tleman concluded by submitting his motion.
Mr. P. WOOD had heard but very imperfectly Ides
had fallen from the Hon. Member, but from what he
could gather from the Hon. Member's speech, he was by
no means sure that he could concur in his views. With
every respect for the conscientious scruphs entertained
by Dissenters, he must say that he himself should not

LONDON,

feel the slightest scruple of conscieme in contributin,
t:.v ards the maintcounce rf n Wesiel an, e r
Roman „lace of religious worship. if he ILL:i r-,-
ceived property subject to such a charge. Unforuriotel)
there were but too many ways of avoichitg a rate. It way
necessary that parties should 'wet to for the pur-
pose of assessing the amount of it, and a feeling was na
turally generated in minds unaccustomed to view such
[flattens with legal precision that the making of a rat--
was somehow a voluntary act; and this uomatis'actor)
result often happened—that if the majority voted for no
rate at all, then, having failed to do that for which they
were met, they were held to have thrown away their
votes, and the minority prevailed. But when marshalled
with more tact and tiexterity. inst. ad of maltii,g
no rate, they made a very small, and all but
an evasive, rate; and the consequence was the
the fabric of the church, unlesi saved by the production
of more conclusive evidence on the part of surveyors,
was allowed to fall into a disgraceful state—(Hear, hear)
—a state in which they would never for a moment suffer
their own private dwellings to remain. At the same
time, no very great anxiety on this head could be ex-
pected to exist when a large preponderance of Dissenters
was found, and he had long thought it absolutely neces-
sary, therefore, that steps should be taken to put the
matter on a more satisfactory footing. Although he
could not agree in the motion to abolish all church-rates,
he saw no reason why the ancient mode of providing
for the repair of the parish church should not be conti-
nued, in deference to all who partook of its advantages.—
(Hear, hear.) There was a difference, however, in the
case of the Dissenter. Although he could not go the
full length of concurring in their scruples, still he thought
it impossible, looking at the altered state of
the country, to continue any longer the pre-
sent system.—(Hear, hear) The system of church-
rates was one of great antiquity, and founded entirely
on the common law, and was established when the whole
body of the community were of one faith. It was im-
possible to deny that at present there existed large num-
bers who would not avail themselves of the ministrations
of the Church; and, on the other hand, they saw large
numbers of the Dissenting community contributing on an
extensive scale towards the erection of other buildings
for public worship, which, at all events, showed no re-
luctance to contribute towards what they thought. deco-
rous and right towards the worship of the Su-
preme Being. From what source, then, were the funds
to be provided? Some pointed to other church funds,
but the result of debates which had taken place in
that House bad shown that there were al-
ready abundant objects for those funds in sup •
plying the wants of spiritual instruction and minis-
tration, and he should therefore be very averse from
diverting any part of those funds towards maintaining
the fabric of the church. There were, no doubt, large
sums raised by voluntary contributions, and many
churches had been built by such means. But there were
some who had such imperfect notions of duty, that,
although desirous of attending worship in the church,
they were most unwilling to contribute a fair proportion
towards maintaining the fabric, and he saw no reason
why these should not be compelled to pay their just quota
towards that object. Without going into a long
discussion, he should satisfy his own feelings by putting
his views in the shape of an amendment to the motion of
the Hon. Member. He would therefore propose to sub-
stitute for the words which came after " that it is the
opinion of this House that effectual measures should be
immediately taken for," the following words:—"dis-
charging persons dissenting from the Church, as by law
established, from contributing to church-rates, and from
taking any part in levying, assessing, or administering the
same. What he meant was, that parties might have an
opportunity of registering themselves as wishing to claim
the exemption, but that when so registered they should
be incompetent to vote for any church-rate, or any sub-
ject connected with it.—(Hear, hear.) If this view were
carried out at any future time in the shape of a Bill,
there might be a provision prohibiting such persons from
occupying pews in church. The difficulty which arose
was this: is alight be said that a premium was held out
to persons to declare themselves Dissenters. That, how-
ever, he held to be an exaggerated apprehension. lie
hod often known those who had refused to pay a rate
imposed by the vestry afterwards come forward volun-
tarily to contribute, and amongst these were found a
number of Dissenters.—(Hear, hear.) Of course they
would take care that there should be no more ex
tempore Dissenters for the purpose of avoiding a
rate ; and the disadvantages, after all, of losiug these
lukewarm Churchmen, who, for the sake of 15s. or
20s. would register themselves as Dissenters, he, as
a tiler-ober of the church, did not think of very great im-
portance. On the other hand, what would be the ad-
vantages of the system which he had recommended? lie
thought they would be very great, for by adopting it
they would at once get rid of all the beart-burnings, dis-
putes, and discussions which took place at the assess-
ment of church rates.—(Cheers.)

Mr. HEADLAM seconded the amendment, regarding
it as a satisfactory settlement of a complicated question.
There wt re large numbers of persons who entertained
conscientious objections to contribute towards the main-
tenance of the fabric of the parish church, and it would
be no longer possible to maintain that system. In the
town which he had the honour to represent many Dis-
senters had contributed in a voluntary form that which
they had refused under a compulsory system. He saw
no reason, however, why those belonging to the Esta-
blishment should not be compelled to contribute, and he
thought the Church of England had a sufficiently strong
hold on the community not to be prejudicially affected
by limiting the contributions levied for the purpose of
maintaining the fabric of the Church to those who did
not choose to avow themselves Dissenters.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. RICE had listened to the speech of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Oxford with great satisfaction, for
it had relieved him from a very great difficulty under
which he had always laboured in reference to this sub-
ject. He hoped the Hon. and Leartted Member would
follow up his amendment by a Bill. lie would venture
to throw out, merely as a suggestion, that a general rate
might be made throughout the country for the mainte
nance of religious edifices, the contribution to be applied
to the church of the contributor.

Mr. AGLIONBY could not say that the Hon. and
Learned Member for Oxford had relieved him from any
difficulty; on the contrary, he had placed him in a still
greater one than before. The great objection to the re-
solution of the Hon. Member for Tavistock was that it
was too vague, and many were disposed to say that it
should have been followed up by some definite or spe-
cific proposal, by which means would be pointed out of
supplying the defect that would be thereby occasioned in
the funds for the maintenance and repair of the edifice
of the church. His (Mr. Aglionby's) desire was, that
such rates should no longer exist; but he certainly
contemplated the substitution of some other mode of
maintaining the edifice and performing the services of
the Church. The Hon. Member for Oxford had, how-
ever, taken tho House by surprise, as he had proposed
an amendment of the greatest importance, without
having given the slightest previous intimation of his in-
tention. He found there was something wrong at the
bottom of his amendment, and that it would not give
satisfaction generally. He certainly was not prepared
to vote for it, and was rather disposed to support the
original resolution, ant have that followed up by some
substitution. One objection to the Hon. Member for
Oxford's amendment was, that it would be a premium
upon dissent; but it had been urged by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman that such an allegation would be a
reproach to dissent; and he had followed it up by say-
ing that the Dissenters as a body were too honourable
to take advantage of such a plea to escape the payment.
He added, that tie had known instances of Dissenters
having refuted to vote for a church. rate, and after-
wards having made a voluntary rate among themselves for
that purpose. He feared, however, that the proposition
might operate in this way, that, many persons not being
Dissenters, but members of the Church of England and
landowners, might pretend to be Dissenters, in order to
get their land freed from this payment. It was urged as
an objection that the parties had purchased their land at
a lower rate as being subject to that tax, but the objec-
tion would be still stronger if the Dissenter was allowed
to go free and the Churchman still obliged to pay. For
his part, he thought there might be an amendment upon
that of the Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford—
(hear and laughter)—and he hoped the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman would exercise some judgment and discretion
upon it, now that he was in a position to turn those sug-
gestions to account, as a member of the Committee ap-
pointed to inquire into Church property. He reminded the
House when some years ago a Noble Lord (Monteagle),
then Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed to the House
a substitute for church-rates, by which they would relieve
not the Dissenters alone, but the Churchmen also. He
proposed that the Church property itself sbould pay the
rates—(Hear, hear)—and that the Church should ob-
tain the additional revenues for that purpose by the en-
franchisement of all leasehold ecclesiastical property.
The proposition went off, not because the principle was
ma a good one, but because the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer chose to take down his books, and get his actu-
aries to make calculations by which the leaseholders
would be charged 50 per cent. more than they were en-
titled to pay.—(Hear, hear.) If that proposition were
put before the House in a just and satisfactory way, he
thought those parties would be willing to accept it, and
that it would meet the difficulty of the present question.
If that were done by establishing an equitable valuation
of th s property, the effect would be to set at rest the
present disputed question, which had raised between
Churchmen and Dissenters the most bitter controver-
sies, while it would give a largely increased revenue
to the Church.—(Hear, hear.) He thought he had in
that suggestion given the Hon. and Learned Member for
Oxford a much better plan than his own, which would
relieve all parties, and enable the Church to repair and
keep in order its own fabric. He shoUld be prepared at
all times to give his best attention to any plan which
would continue the maintenance of the edifice of the
Chusch, and at the same time relieve every man who
had a cutiscientious objection to the payment of these
rates.
Sir G. GREY hoped the House would not be led into
the discussion of a very intricate question on the present
occasion. The management of Church property was not
the question then before them. That had been referred
to the consideration of a Committee. He thought it
would be time enough to discuss that question when they
had before them the report of that Committee.—(Hear.)
He would confine himself to the tsvo propositions then
before them. With regard to the first he was not pre.
pared to give his assent to it. The Hon. Gentleman
proposed at once the abolition of church-rates, but had
not indicated any substitute, and he had gone so far as
to say that no plan had yet been proposed that would
be satisfactory to those who had conscientious objec-
tions or scruples to the payment of', these rates. With
regard to the amendment of the Hon. and Learned
member for Oxford, he certainly felt prepared to admit
with him that it was most desirable to put a stop to the
sessaelal and the scenes that had taken place in populous
pa hes owing to the contests between Churchmen and
Dissenters.—(hear, hear.) At the same time there were
oa eat difficulties connected with it. Looking at the fai-
lure of every attempt that had been made to arrange the
question satitLctorily in that way, be could not help re-