The Sun.
London, England, 1860-12-08 00:00:00

Nati'jnal Church. Our parochial system would
1 ranish with it—with the parochial system local
gs Ivernment would perish also,—and on local
gov, Irnment political liberty depends. There-
fore, t political liberties depend on . 'ur
main-
taining Church-rates ! This certainly will
be news to Sir JOHN TRELAWNY and
to all the Ra. dicals in the House who, we believe,
have, to a ma n, voted with him. Lord JOHN
RUSSELL'S Ilppee:l to the Lords and the Crown
touched them but little, but they must reconsider
their position, \when they find, by the undeniable
logic of Mr. Dim,
kELI, that in demanding Church-
rate abolition they
are endangering not the
House of Lords but :,he liberties of the nation.
Nor were the social dangers less, from overthrow-
ing the National Church, (by surrendering Church-
rates)—here is an appalling picture for the
thoughtless supporters of abolition, " M for the
social relations of the Church with the com-
munity, they were so comprehensive and so
complicated, so vast and various, that the
most farseeing could not calculate the conse-
quences of the projected change. It was not
merely the education of the people that was con-
cerned; it was even their physical condition. He
would almost say, that if, by some convulsion of
nature, some important district of the country, one
on which the food and industry of the community
mainly depended, were suddenly swept from our
surface, the change would not be greater than
would arise by the withdrawal of the influence of
the Church from our society. The fact was, the
Church of England was a part of England—a point
of view not sufficiently contemplated by those
who speculated on changes in its character and

position."
Now, with all due respect to Mr. DISRAELI, we
think that he has been like the House of Lords,
according to his account of it, " a little precipitate"
--precipitate in assumptions necessary to his argu-
ment. He first assumes that abolition of Church-
rates would be followed by abolition of the Estab-
lishment. He hardly argues for them at all on
their merits—at most he only asserts that a
Peace Society man may be equally indulged
in refusing to pay war taxes, a landowner in
refusing to pay the public creditor, and the like—
as if Church-rates were as unequivocally as other
taxes for the equal benefit of all. The gist of his
argument is, that if Church-rates go, the National
Church will go too. We beg to inform the hon.
member that we are of the same opinion as the
vast majority of Liberal Churchmen, that to sur-
render this irritating impost would materially
strengthen the National Churoh ; while we
know well that ultra Dissenters rejoice that
the obstinacy of the Church retains for them such
a battle-field; such a convenient platform for
Anti-State Church agitation in every parish in the

kingdom.
Another assumption quietly made by Mr.
DISRAELI, is, that a National Church and an
Establishment are identical. They may be so in
common parlance, but surely not in principle. It
cannot be essential to the Church of the nation that
the physical force of the nation should be its
reliance for support. That it should depend on
taxes levied by law, that is, in the last resort, by
the constable, and even by the soldier. The more
really national it is, the better could it dispense
with such aids and be a voluntary Church.
Mr. DISRAELI must be well aware that the oppo-
nents of the Establishment are, avowedly, we
believe sincerely, not opponents of the Church
which is established. On the other hand he must
remember the eloquent declamation of the Bishop of
OXFOUD, on the independence of the Anglican
Church on such accidents as State favour or
State persecution. Even, therefore, should Church-
rate abolition involve anything further, it could be
but the destruction of the Establishment, not of
that Church which, if it be a true Chruch, cannot,
of course, be "in danger." Nor is this mere
theory. Churches do exist and prosper, not only
in America, which, of course, must not be appealed
to, but in this country. In England, Scotland,
and Ireland, the non-Established Churches have, at
least, quite as much religious influence—the object
for which churches exist—as the Church by law
established.

We strongly suspect that Mr. DISRAELI has
taken up with a wrong cry if he means to try and
rouse the country on Church Rates. The reference
to the petitions of last session is by no means in
his favour. He spoke of 5,000 petitions, and de-
manded 15,000 for next session; but suppose the
result should resemble that of last year, —it
would be that of five to one against him. The
numbers were—

Pennons. Signatures,
Against Church Rate Abolition 5,575 197,687
For Church Rate Abolition 5,538 610,877

The fact is, Mr. DISRAELI himself was obliged to
admit, that the pro-rate petitions were too often
signed by only the clergy and churchwardens. If
Mr. DISRAELI fairly throws down the gauntlet, he
may be sure that all the towns in England and
all the liberalism of the country will be roused to
join in the battle heart and soul. When that is
the case ignorant country parishes will go for
little indeed.

His Highness the Grand Vizier has recently (as
will be seen from the report published in another
column of our journal of this evening), but very
recently addressed a State paper of considerable
importance to his Imperial Majesty the Sultan
Caliph ABDUL MEDJID. It is literally, in point of
fact, a sort of Turkish Blue-book in miniature—a
report of an Imperial Commission. And viewed in
that character, it will certainly be found upon
examination to be extremely edifying.

We all know surely by this time something
about the condition of Turkey—something, just
something, about the state of things in the
Ottoman Empire, whether considered socially,
morally, or politically. The Crimean war
alone could not but open the eyes of
Western Europe to the frightfully degenerated
and demoralised condition of the Mussulman race
and the Mussulman rule—of the Turkish people,
and of the Turkish Government. We know now
perfectly well how grievously diseased is the body,
and (so far as we may be permitted to judge) how
tainted the soul of that Sick Man who has been so
long sick—yea, sick even unto death. The half-
liberalised system of administration carried out
during the reigns of the present SULTAN and of his
MAJESTY'S illustrious father, the system inaugu-
rated, in fact, by that great man the Sultan Caliph
Marimoup, has only—we all feel that, we all know
that for certain—has, after all, only retarded what
is quite inevitable sooner or later—namely, the
" passing away" of the Mussulman power in
Europe, the return of the Turks into Asia, the
recrossing (by that fated race) of the rubicon of
the Bosphorus. Tne rule of the Turk in Europe
has for four hundred years been an anomaly the
has remained, but basely tolerated, by the Euro•
pean Powers because of the jealousies and conten-
tions of those European Powers amongst them
selves. The day will come, must come, when the
signal shall be pronounced for the disappearance of
the Mahometan Government as an European
Power, and the rolling back of that non-civilised
race from the borders of Christendom.

The Grand Vizier's official communication to his