The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-14 00:00:00

tained extreme views on this measure. His experience in
church-rate cases led him to believe it was impossible to
settle this question properly without an abolition of
church-rates, and he was ready to give the Church assist-
ance in the collecting pew rents, &c., for providing for the
fabric of the church. He wished to see the tax collector
secured from the Church, and the " ticketing" of Dissen-
ters, as it had been termed, men who had only differed from
the Church in its observances. He had no wish to interfere
with the parochial system, and as Dissenters were not called
upon to pay towards the ministration of the Church, they
ought not to be called upon to support its fabric. It
showed a want of faith in their religion on the part of
Churchmen to wish the perpetuation of the rate. All our
churches were built by voluntary contributions, and he for
one felt satisfied that if church-rates were abolished the
fabrics would be supported as well as they now were.
Fe was surprised to hear the opposers of the bill aasert
that chinela-rates rested on the same basis as liroperty and
poor-rates, because the former Tested entirely on the will
of the parishiznep. He urged the house to legislate on
this measure in a liberal spirit, and put an end to the ill-
feeling and Ptrife which existed in the parishes of England.
mr. J. ii. ROPE addressed the house amidst cries of
"divide." He felt the necessity of a chailge o,s much as
any ens, but he differed from the means that had bm
suggested for making it. Whether the Church of England
was the church of the majority or the minority, it mattered
not in this matter ; but' whether before an ancient pro-
vigion was swept away another should not be provided in
its place. He, however, objected to its coming from an
illegitimate or undesirable source. He objected to the
adoption of pew rents, because it would have the effect of
driving the poor from the parish church. He quite agreed
that if it was unfair to exact church-rates from th dia.
center for the ministrations of the plquoh it was equally
so to exact them from hjm for the support of the fabric.
When church-rates were first imposed there was but one

Church, and he thought 'only the members of the
Church should be now called upon to support the fabric
Sys well as to provide the neces aries for its ministrations,
but instead of depending on valtuatary tioniributions it
should be by a rate levied on churchmen, but in which
dissenters should take no nartt
Mr. GILPIN said disienters did not admit this was a
question of Compromise, but a question of conscience. It
was stated hi a former debate that a member of the Society
of Friends in Bristol cheerfully contributed towards church
rates in that city, but it was not so in London, for every
year there were taken from the Friends' Meeting-house, in
Houndsditch, twenty-six chairs and one table, for the
liberty they enjoyed of worshipping God according to
their own consonance. The honourable gentleman denied
that the agitation of the question had 'sled out. With
regard to the" ticketing" dissenters, as it had been stated,
he paid no attention to it. He had ticketed him-
self; and as soon as a man was ashamed of his profession,
the ei3ner he lefid t the better. He contended that it was
as unjust to compel an unwilling churchman to pay church
rates, as it was a dissenter. He found the recorded
opinions of many of the members of the present Govern-
ment in favour of the abolition of the rate which he
adopted as his own. He called upon the house to settle
this question, and the only effectual way of doing so was
by their abolition. He denied that there was a movement
against the Church of England, but it was a movement
against church-rates and a compulsory system of relision,
whatever Church adopted it. He was convinced that so
far from the abolition of church-rates being detrimental
to the Church of England, it would prove the contrary by
drawing out the zeal and affection of its members for the
faith which they professed.
Mr. BRUCE, as a Presbyterian, supported the conti-
nuance of church-rates, from a conviction that it was a
charge on the land which all wore bound to pay.
Mr. GARNETT said it had become established in the
country that church-rates were doomed, and he believe
that their loss would not affect the Church of England.
He would propose that a clause should be added to the bill
enabling churchwardens to name a certain amount of vo-
luntary payments, to be called church offerings. The
names of the parishioners should be entered in a book, and
the churchwardens should carry round the book, and the
amount should be entered that each parishioner chose to
pay, and any dissenter objecting to pay should not have a
voice in the vestry upon any question upon church pur-
poses. All the supporters of the Church in this matter
required was a little more faith, a little more hope, and a
little more charity, and they would to sure to surmount
what appeared to be the difficulties which surrounded the
question.
Mr. FOX said the object of the bill was to abolish the

compulsory rate ; but the supporters of the bill did not
desire to abolish church rates if the supporters of the
Church desired to pay them. Let those who worshipped
in the Church be taxed for the support of that Church.
Lord R. CECIL said by this bill, if passed in its present
form, the Church wou d bo prevented from raising a rate
for itself. The Church was prevented raising rates, snd
yet he was told to pay the church-rates among her own
people. He thought the majority in favour of this bill
was intoxicated by success, and therefore would listen to
no compromise.
Sir A. ELTON suggested that they should decide at
onee on the clause and consider- the amendments, which
were on the paper.
Mr. COLLINS considered this was a better bill than
any which bad proceeded from a kindred source.
Mr. ALCOCK said the country bad demanded a settle-
ment of this question, and it must now be settled finally.
Mr. BIGGS said that it would be impossible for the civil

magistrates to exercise their functiocis if this law were
continued. In his town the battle of church-rates had been
effectually fought. In 1841 there wore thousands of people
assembled to resist seizures for church-rates, and such was
the state of things that in that year, when he was chief

magistrate of Leicester, in order to avert the danger which
threatened the town, he signed a blank cheque to pay the
disputed rates. That was a state of things inconsistent
with good government. Tho churchwardens in his town
became ashamed of issuing warrants for church-rates.
They announced that a voluntary rate would be made, and
then those who had violently opposed the compulsory rate
came with liberal contributions to support the fabric of the
Church to which they were all attached, but which they
would not allow to be made an instrument of extortion.
The committee then divided—
For the clause
Against it 153
Majority in favour cf the clause -74
The clause was then agreed to, as was also clause 2.
On clause 3, which limits the operation of the bill to
England,
Lord R. CECIL moved the insertion of certain words
which would extend the bill to Scotland.
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE opposed the motion.
Mr. BLACK strongly supported the motion.
Sir JOHN TRELAWNY said the case of Scotland was
different to that of England, and it would be better to
bring in a separate bill.
Mr. BOUVERIE said the clause was useless, as the
preamble of the bill said the bill was to apply to England
and Wales.
Mr. BRIGHT thought the clause useless.
Lord IL CECIL withdrew his amendment.
Mr. PALK hoped the bill would be rejected in another
place.
The clause was negatived.
Sir ARTHUR ELTON moved the following clause :
That any church-rate made before the passing of this act,
and since the Ist day of January, 1853, may be collected
and recovered in the same way as if this act had not been
passed. The churchwardens of every parish in England
and Wales shall, some day in the month of in
each year, give au account to the parishioners at a vestry
meeting of all money they have received, and also of &I
they have expended in repairs and otherwise, for the use
of the church during the past year ' • and, the said account
having been allowed by the parishioners, the churchwar-
dens shall lay before them an estimate of the cost of re-
pairing the church and churchyard and conducting public
worship for the ensuing year; and it shall be lawful for
the said churchwardens and parishioners to make a volun-
tary rate upon the occupiers of all property now liable to
church-rates in such parish, for the purpose of defraying the
amount of the said estimate. Provided always, that no
occupier of such property who shall have refused or neg-
lected the said voluntary rate, after the same has been duly
demanded of him, shall be entitled to vote at any vestry
summoned for the transaction of church business for the
space of 18 months.
Sir JOHN TrIELAWNY said he would accept the first
part of the clause.
Mr. GLADSTONE proposed to omit the words, " and
since the Ist of July, 1858."
This was agreed to.
Sir J. TRELAWNY objected to the second part of the
clause, as tending to brine the law into confusion.
Sir W. HEA.THCOTOthought it would be better to
bring up these clauses in the report, when power might
be taken for the Church to levy a rate which should be
compulsory on churchmen only.
Sir A. ELTON said that Sir W. Clay, in his bill in 1854,
did not think it was complete without a clause similar to
the one now proposed. The bill as it stood would take
the power from the churchwardens of maintaining the
fabric of the church. What he proposed was, that they
should have the power of making voluntary rates. No
one need pay these rates who objected to them. Ho
would exclude dissenters from vestries called for Church
purposes, but if any dissenter desired to take part in the
vestries he might do so by paying the rates.
Mr. LABOUCCIERE thought it would be better to
postpone the clause to the report. He believed that the
fabric of the church would be more readily supported with-
out any compulsory rats whatever.
Mr. HENLEY said the clause as drawn would make
confusion worse confounded.
Mr. CROSSLEY said it was perfectly useless to go to
that house for powers to be a volunteer act. He strongly
recommended that the clause should be withdrawn.
Mr. MELLOR said this clause cnly gave the church-
wardens the power to do what they could do by law now.
Mr. COLLINS did not believe there was the difficulty
of working the clause which had been supposed.
Mr. CROSSE supported the clause.
The clause was negatived without a division.
The house then resumed.
POOR-LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill was reported.
NON-PAROCHIAL REGISTER BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
PROPERTY QUALIFICATION BILL.
Mr. L. KING moved that the house do go into commit-
tee on the bill.
Mr. BENTINCK thought that the late hour (past 12)
ought to be a reason why it should be further postponed.
He 'Loved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. KNIGHTLEY and other gentlemen urged adjourn-
ment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that the late hour at which the bill was read a second time
on a previous evening was a reason why further time
should be given for the discussion of the measure.
The house divided on the motion for adjournment of the
debate when the numbers were -
For the motion a.—
Against ie.
Majority
The motion was lost.
Mr. F. HUME moved the adjournment of the house.
(Cheers, awl cries of " Oli, oh.").
Sir IL WI LLOUGHBY, believing that discussion was
muss .ry, advised the withdrawal of the motion.
Mr. MALINS agreed with this view.
After some remarks from Mr. BOUVERIE,
The debete was edjourned till Tuesday.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (11,000,00 J.) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
STAMP DUTY ON PASSPORTS BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
COMMON-LAW PROCEDURE ACT.
Mr. ATHERTON moved for leave to bring in a bill to
amend the Common-law Procedure Act of 1,54, with re-
ference to the exercise of equitable jurisdiction.
Mr. COLLIER seconded the motion.
Sir F. KELLY said it was not his intention to offer op.
position to the introduction of the bill, which he thought
would be prods ctive of
LIMERICK. REPRESENTATION OF
groat advantage.
On the motion of Mr. BLAND, a new writ was ordered
for Limerick, in the room of Major Gavin.
The house adjourned at 211 minutes to one,

156
-75