The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-27 00:00:00

CHURCH RATES.

Earl DE GREY and RIPON presented a petition from
a place in Yorkshire in favour of the volition of church
rates.

The Earl of DERBY presented petitions from places in
Lancashire against the abolition of church rates.

MARRIAGE LAW.
The Bishop of CHICHESTER presented a petition
against any alteration in the law of marriage.

UNION OF BENEFICES BILL.

The Bishop of LONDON moved the second reading of
this bill. Its object was to remedy one of the principal
evils pointed cut by a committee which considered the sub-
ject. There were a large number of parishes which had
once been very populous, but had ceased to be so, though
they still possessed very large endowments, the object for
which they had been made having ceased to exist. The bill
proposed that these funds might be made available for the
spiritual improvement of the poor of an adjoining or poorer
parish. In the City of London there were many such pa-
rishes, with populations varying from between 800
or 900 persons, and it would be a source of
benefit if these large and wealthy parishes were made to
contribute for the spiritual relief of the larger but slen-
derly-endowed districts. Another of the benefits
the bill would bring about was an amalgama-
tion of various parishes, and ensure the existence
of a parsonage house, and the residence in it of a clergy-
man, whereas under the existing system the clergy-
man was compelled to reside at a distance of some
miles from his parish, and in many cases the poverty of
the district was so great that it was impossible for the
bishop to insist upon the erection of a parsonage house.
There were at present acts of Parliament in existence by
which it was possible to tax a rich parish for
the benefit of a poorer one when the patronage of both
was vested in the same hands, but the state of things
in the City of London was so complicated that the appli-
cation of those acts was rendered impossible. It was not
generally known that in the City, in spaces no larger
than Grosvenor-square, there was, in ono instance, four,
and in another five churches. By one of the provisions
of the bill it enabled the taking down certain churches. He
was aware that in this he was trenching on dangerous
ground, especially as there were such strenuous exertions
being made to erect them. He was also aware of the out-
cry that would be made by persons who would look upon
the bill as one to destroy the splendid specimens of the
genius of Wren and other great and eminent nten, but such
would not be the case, for all those churches which had
any historical interest would still remain intact ; and
in any case where one church was taken down he had
no doubt another would be erected in a More populous
parish. Another objection to the bill might be the removal
of the remains of the dead, which would produce infection,
as it was calculated that at least 48,000 tons of human re-
mains were under the city churches. He assured their lord-
ships the bill provided for the removal of the dead in a proper
and reverential manner after an order in council had been
issued ; and as to the fear of infection, he thought the fears
on that head were somewhat exaggerated. It had been sup-
posed that the City benefices were of a very wealthy nature ;
some, no doubt, were, but the majority of them were, on
the contrary, very small. What he should like to see was
that in the city of London they should have small model
parishes, the duties of which would leave them leisure to
pursue theological learning. Looking at all the circum-
stances, he hoped their lordships would consent to the
second reading of the bill.
The Earl of CARNARVON analysed several clauses of
the bill, which he considered most objectionable, and said he
trusted their lordships would not give their consent to those
clauses.

The Bishop of OXFORD regarded many of the clauses
of the bill objectionable, and in particular that clause which
proposed to give a power to the commissioners to disturb
the remains of the dead, and to devote the consecrated
grounds in which they were laid to other purposes. Ho con-
sidered such an appropriation of those sacred spots as a vio-
lation of the contract entered into between the Church and
those who laid the remains of their departed friends in those
grounds, and he should therefore oppose such a provision
in the bill.
Lord REDESDALE, the Bishop of EXETER, and the Earl
of DERBY made objections to some details of the bill, and
suggested that Its operation should be confined, in the first
instance, to the city of London, in order to test the prin-
ciple. '
Earl GREY thought the interests of the Church should
not be lost sight of in the provisions of the bill, any more
than the interests of other parties concerned.
The Bishop of ,LONDON having replied, the bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
DIVORCE COURT BILL.

On tho motion that the house resolve itself into com-
mittee on this bill,
Lord ST. LEONARDS objected to that clause of the
bill which proposed 'that the dissolution of marriage should
be confined to the decision of one judge, and proposed that
in so seriously important a matter there should be added
another judge, to assist the Judge-Ordinary, and that their
concurrent decision should be necessary to give validity to
the dissolution and nullity of marriage.
The LQRI) CRANCALLOR read a letter from Lord

INCLOSURE BILL.
`This bill; on the motion of Earl DE GREY, passed through
committee.

The house resumed.
DIVORCE (IRELAND) BILL.

• I
Lord CHELMSFORD brought in a bill for extendino
the provision of tho Divorce (England) Bill to Ireland.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he should support
such 4 bill, which, in his opinion, would confer much ben '
fit on a large section of the population in that country ; b t
it was it measure which the great body of the people the
did not want and would not have.

The bill was then read &first time, and their lordships
adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
NEW MEMBER.

Colonel ROWLEY took the oaths and his seat for Har-
wich, and was received with loud cheers from the Conser-
vative benches:

' ~PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The London and South-Western Railway (New Line to
Bristol and Exeter Railway at Exeter, &c.) Bill was read a
third time and passed.