The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-19 00:00:00

said that Church-rates were a necessary incident of pro-
perty ;. if. so how came it that parish vestries had the po.wc.r
of deciding whether prope, ty should pay or not ? and if it
was a necessary incident then he must contend the Church
rates must last as long es property lasted,—(Hear, bear)
Th.., feet was that Church-rate' was a ki.nd of contri.
btPi. n in aid of the tithes for the stipp3rt of be
r.. 1), to be paid or withheld as might seam
withheld
to t;,e in6jori:y of the parish ; and if they were
e..-e was no means of enforcing them liy means of the
ford
Statute or Common Law. He regretted the Noble
had not taken that opportunity of throwing some BO)! 013
the views of the Government as to the general quesso?'
Were Church-rates to be allowed to be continued- in tliFn.
present state? \Vaa the law, according to the recomme"
dation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, to be made
mere slrigent ? Tire Hon. and Learned Gentleman
knew that the law, as it stood at present, was a scandal;
and with his legel and ecclesiastical subtlety proposed t?
sunpl,fy the law, to cheapen the process, but to make
best.
mere ringent, and that he thought would pleasC tbe,
Dissenting body. Why that was the rccommenthtion
tie Ecclesiastical Commission, and the reason why it
itselfbac!
not Leon ad. pied,- was that the Government, calling .
Liber,l, dared not to introduce a measure so severe in
fla
operat;on. Did they target that Church-rates were
abolished in Ireland, and did not exist in Scotland?
Was the peaCe of the Church in every parish in the I‘
to bc diAtirbed, and the House coni:antly to receivert.,twn9
complaining of their vexations for the paltry consi
fur
dere-
tion of what might be levied from the pelale fort he
port of the wealthiest Establishment in the world? In L.,r;
cer to Fett:e the goes:Lin of Church rater, iro tb"g,",
that all parties must concede a little to the general read-
of society. lie did not believe that the Diss.enting b°
entertained those hostile feelings to the Church, burre,
that jealousy of the property
actuated by
or the anxiety to possess it tl.ems(lv2s, which urns
times ciibed to them. They knew that the princ:97
by which they were upheld was a strongcr one, end till,
as. the Church adopted the voluntary plilciple, $o walla
bomr
it would become more strong and powerful likewise. e
uf the Ce:
bagged pardon if he had trespa.sed on the House, ilur.
fat strongly on the subject ; and, wit'iout wishirg to roll,
the Church, he could not consent to force the conscia'"
of those who dissentel from it.

D NICHOLL exilained. to
Si' ROBERT PELL iai 1 the question was not :the
any ae:ation of the law as to our jurisdiction 0' ',„ •
churcici
Ecelesiastiea Courts, cr as to any aeration in
rates, but it was whether the House of Commons weu•r,
lend its sanction to the ptinciple th.t there were ce tad!.
exceptions to tl,e duty, addeli every mar) owed, cf °he 10
ence to the law of the land ; and that provided men
could al:ege conscientious scruples, that man sholl".o..
allowed to violate the la w.—( Loud cheer=.) If this rt?
cipte acre once as ented to, where would thy ?
Who would eecide what was a conscientious scrulS.e
lia
The Hon. Mernb,r fur Kilkenny said, if any gram ,
go to prison rather than pay, his scruple was A :'re-
t•ous oae; and another Hoe. Member had stated thavoo
lie ions scruples were conscientious Cites. But support
di-approved of them, aid prefered goirg to prison T°?,
than pry /axe-, how would they act in that OT-eei4
(Cheers.) 'I he Hon Mealier sari that Scotland
no C=hurch-rates. Now he apprehended that if the °IN
Gentleman or any member of the Episcopal ChurLd
purchased or inherited a large estate in Scotland, be e°
of
be celled upon to pay 1-rs quota to the suPert tad
the Ptesbyterian Cetech established, and if he objeetbo
on the ground of his being an Episcopalian, that
would be no cxemptioa from the peyn.ent of Church-t T°'y
or from the consequences of the violation of the law. ed
this resolution were assented to, they might hoe cloo
wealthy Episcopalian in Scotland alleging conscienutd
scruple; as an excuse for the payment of their duet' .had
coming to the House for relief. Suppose Mr. 13ai"e've
objected to pay tithes, would they relieve him there ?r to
Hon. Gentleman had said Church-rateswere ancillaY
tee
tithes, and certainly if he was entitled to relief
rset‘
one case he was in the other. But where would teey"
the limit as to religious scruples ? He found petitionsp,
sented against the New Poor-law on the ground thBteioe'
teeters were deprived of their religious rights initlyoief •
workhouses ; and others stating that the system of and
under the Poor-law was contrary to humanity, justir%
Christianity. Again, in Scotland there were petii°,ople
scribing patronage as a lording of it over God Ps' c.r'
contrary to Scripture, and he rather thought that tat, on
tain persons in Scotland alleged conscientious ecruPoo
that subject, he had heard it acid on the benches opP
tbo
that if the law were wrong it ought to he altered, heultebed
while it existed no one belonging to a Church estso''"f pa '
by the State ought to he permitted to act in violation% te
Supposing that parties in Scotland were ready to goo,•
prison for their disobedience to the law, would the the.
Member for Kilkenny then say, in a resolution of
House of Commons, that they were justified by theiir true
gious scruples? He (Sir R. Peel) thought the on ice is
ptiaciple was, that whilst the law remained in fei it
should be obeyed.—( Hear, hear.) If it was wrong's
be altered. It would be an utter violation of all r3OO.
for the authority of the Legislature if the House atoms
°c
mons, which was only one branch of that Leesmbee
should sanction a violation of laws which the eiaiio
branches in concurrence with itself had enacted• obo
rev pect to the Poor-laws, were there not many niennocel
had conscientious scruples respecting that, and den,A" 000-
it as a violation of the laws of God ? How cot
scion
Gentlemen presume to determine whether their alle4 001'
were true or not ?—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Baines woof-
ask the House to pass such a re-solution as the rfles)",
All he asked for was an alteration of the laW.'tef the`
hear.) He (Sir R. Peel) thought the question " pre..
policy or justice of the law was quite foreign from tbeoder
sent question. He asked the House of Commons toedteols%
that if it took upon itself to determine in what csse,t
shoo d be respected, its own authority would ve,, tbo
demned. The Uourts of Law were bound to eeforr:ool4-
law, and if this resolution were agreed to, the lad•
not be altered, and Mr Baines would not be liberateu 1.,
Mr. ELLIOT said, without giving any oninieefesolv
your of Church-rates, he would not vote for th's," lases'lion, which would go to sanction an opposition totuts core
Mr. EASTHOPE in reply said that Mr. 13'illee,abicb
before the House on the authority of a resolutios to t
tie House had come in a similar case. He had °Dorf
misty or violently resistel the law; but on the be pe"
had patiettly suba itted to its penalties, although its de
tiently, though firmly, declined to comply with auffsr
mends. He was suppotted in Lis determination to Sol
rather than yield to demands which his conscience re/‘
by 30,000 inhalatents of Leicestershire. of Lei
Mr. HALFORD denied that the inhabitants
cist irshire. would countenance a resistance to the I°i I,eil
Mr. EASTHOPE said that 20,000 inhal-ritantecewocii
center had elected Mr. Baines a Member of the %oven
whilst he was in prison—( /leer, bear)-7,o°A° labs)
signed the petition for his liberation—(Hear, anure-scriuti°-
—and 4,000 signed a petition in favour of the '
now before the House.
The House then divided. The numbers were"'
For the resolution
Against it 46
Majority against tie resolution • eery at
The announcement was received airh loud ebe-fore se
On the motion of ntjor CH ETW YND aLreje
ordered in detail of the number of cases which erat'h dal
red, from the sth day of January 1837 to the J`fraolta,,
January 84 1, in each year, of letters franked or. Itirgb,:
addressed to persons in London, Dublin, or Ed° rat P<
which have been applied for, through the Geisnaen.k..ool4?
offices of those cities, containing money, bills, -01016
or other property, which have been secreted or Parooee
by any person in the employ of the Post-office dePao Ode;
or been demanded therefron by private partiee'eaeh leas;
livered, with the amount thereof in each case, iti"f all P_.,"3
respectively; also, of the natre3 and situations ° nortaur
sons dismissed or removed from the Post-office urerd o r
as above, under the allegation of having PuTl°jl3,oocer°4,
creted letters franked or urfranked, or be other Pd'io
therein, containing money, bills, bank-notes, et stoon6:4o
perty belonging to private parties, with the
rsone
each instance; also, a Return as above of all P-iit of the
have actually d&auded the revenue departrne:atioge,
Post-office, and been dismissed therefrom; 6'oo/P jo
either case, if the first offence was visited with reebeieglai
dismissal, or if repeated previous thereto kaoth v!",
continuation of Return No. 265, ordered mso pI
of March and 6th day of April 1838). officeiarito
return of the names of the colonels and other the '3-130
the different regiments of militia in Seotland;Aose Iteit
of their several commissions; distinguisbieg lord
'save served in the household brigade, the lines,o sup
navy, together with the rank obtained by then: 'this
the above services, and whether on half-pay 3.000 t ; looel
or holding commissions in any yeomanry OW be a of
the date of such commission. These returns t? cocotte
by the Colonel or fief'-officer, or other sent of each
the different regiments, and by the Adjutant
setterbe
giment. _erree
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that to.tMote
would move that the House resolve itself into tdu
.0
on the subject of the South Australian Lean'
Mr. H. DRUMMOND obtained leave se. seoti°
Bill to a tothe close time in salmon fishing le
11
from the 15th to the Ist of September. to
The House then Adjourned at a Quart°.
o'Clock.

----------_ 36ss
40,,
PA RLIAMENTAR Y .13 US°
1. Preston and Report'Lon;isdogNeEßsnarw,ayM,lnctsl
ivarc•„.. 1149.00 42,.!..p.
NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE
2. Preston and Lormidge Railway; Third Reading:c 0 air'
3. Eccicshill Inclosure,—Committee on Bill, March -'''
ter before afCh 19.
4. Manchester andthree. Salford Waterworks,—ReP°—rt' M '
5. Winwick Rectory,— Report, March 19.
Derby. It % inie;
_____'''!",--''.-..-- . c
A CANINE POST-BEARER' -..-.t> •erirroati t;
morning at ten by a dog from an extensive
resting scene may be witnessed auy day on •6
: et ever.ig
waiting-. appears that the Derby mail i 5 aks ~7,
lf, howev,.,r iron.
5_ pr v.
Worksop, waiting to be the bearer of the letter
guardbgoitholo
master, which is regularly dropped by the not sotae;
where about at the hour of ten,
_, the oe.. ine Messenger 1! 'soead;
and the dog is immediately observed ir, the ,b, tas_.l
the her is distaeci
meet • v
coming along the road with all speed to
the
eae,, ,
.at the lane end ; but this is very seldom tu d•eiio.l'
walls a i ail.
the dog usually scat; itself upon the ~ the to. ii,
the Works, listening for the approach or
re, cot
When the bag is thrown down, the ta;thful creeintue thronta
out delay, invariably takes the nearest way. borne
day, t_.,„
the heige, and over the fields. Laier on In
.' t the Poirot
empty bog is brought b, ck by the dog, to o'h'ee guard deb
mail to Derby ; but, in comequence of t „coon f_i,
getting off his seat, it is necessary to send. ~;_it is gePaer
the hog, who can throw it upon the mail wi'i,i_uecieeep „
The dog, feeling his inability to supply this With thiscesc,
notes his anxiety by balking and howling.
_, a psi b•
cei.tion, the animal performs all the duties,°'dispeteb•
rier for his master " with punctuality an u rid
Manchester Guardian. frerwr,
• U
Her Majesty the
fonn a ,z light coil aoJ In enns,Lie:';;c,, sur''''' .iai,r Pi` ,‘;
Nobility madw cans at Nl4rlborougla liot.:6' •
_a,
.icefpg
ii.as in hash had. a dia:ler pariy cn oincsa4
Marlborough House, which was pustp_oncd.
Queen Dowager
citis,, lc;
ja,,,,,,i