The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-22 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON THURSDAY E V ENING,

-
church and the due administration of the ceremonies oft rates, while those should escape with impunity whose
religious worship. His chief objection to the bill under j only plea was that they had not paid the tax within al,
diseussiou, then, was that it proposed—without creating ! given time. (Hear.) The proposition is also open, it
any substitute for it whatsoever—to abolish at once a appears to me, to objection in point of practice, inas-
system which secured to 10,000 parishes in England the much as it has sometimes happened that in districts in
continuance of a state of things such as he had described, which church-rates have not been levied for a long period
and which he felt assured every hen. member who had at I the inhabitants at length come forward perhaps under
heart the spiritual welfare of the poor must be anxious i the leadership of a clergyman who is a Dissenter, or a
to uphold. (Hear.) The hon. member for Sandwich had member of the Established Church who has the interests
observed that the Church of England was essentially the of his parishioners at heart ; it is found that the church
Church of the rich man, but from that proposition ho is out of repair ; a rate is consequently proposed,—it
(Lord J. Manners) begged entirely to dissent. Ho be- may be by the Dissenters,—in vestry, and is levied with
lieved it was the Church of the poor man, and it was the gecera! assent of the whole body of the inhabitants.
bee iuse he was of opinion that it had a jut claim to (Hear.) Surely, if you keep up a church-rate at all, you
that character that he stood up in his place in the house ought not to prohibit the occurrence of such a proceed-
of Coemeons to raise his voice in favour of a system ing at that—(hear)—and lam glad therefore to find that
under which the fair obligations of the realised property the right bor. barontt does not propose to adhere to the
of the nation to contribute to the support or the fabric suggestion which he formerly made upon the subject.
of its houses of religious worship wore maintained. The (Hear.) With respect to another proposal of my right
argument drawn from the considerations which he bad hon. friend, which is to the effect that those who might
just urged was one, he might add, which was not appli- be exempted from the payment of church-rates
cable to the case of the poorer classes belonging to the upon the ground that they were not members of the
communion of the Church of England alone, but one Established Church, should be deprived of the right of
which might also be relied upon on the ground that it voting at the election of churchv ardens, I can only say
was a fact perfectly notorious that members of the Die- that I think it also is open to serious objection. I have
seeding body avail d themselves in considerable numbers always felt very strongly that in acting upon such a
of the services performed in places of religions worship principle as that you would be taking a course which
connected with the Church of England, and that they would tend to eeparato altogether from the Church a
would regard it as a great religious grievance if in con- great body of persons, who, although they may not be
sequence of any legislative enactment they should be regular attendants at divine service, yet upon certain
precluded from the enjoyment of that privilege. (Hear.) occasions, such, for instance, as when a marriage takes
There was scarcely a country clergyman of the Este- place in their family, resort to the church. (Hear.)
blished Church who was not practically aware that the Now, that any such result as that should be produced
Dissenters in his parish looked up to him not only for would be in my opinion a great misfortune. (Hear.)
E upp)rt and advice in temporal matters, but also for aid For my own part, I think if yen entail any disqualification
in connection with their spiritual wants. (Hear ) He at all of this description, it ought to be one extending
had had, indeed, a letter from a clergyman residing in not to the right of voting at the election of churchwar-
the country, in which he stated that he had upon various dens, but to the dispo-al of the money which may be
occasions during a period of 21 years officiated at the raised by means of a church-rate. You might yore fairly
burial of members of the Dissenting body in his parish, say to a man, "If you claim your exemption from this
and he (Lord J. Manners) should wish to know how it rate you cannot come into vestry and vote upon pies-
was proposed, if church-rates were abolished, to continue tions relating to the mode in which the money obtained
to Dissenters the enjoyment of those privileges. (Hear.) from it is to be expended." I could, however, consent
The question raised by the bill was whether property to the imposition of no other disqualification than that
should continue to be bound by those obligations with to which I have just adverted. (Hear, hear.) If we can
respect to the support of the fabric of the Church which possibly come to any agreement with respect to the
' had been imposed upon it before the Conquest, or should amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire, that,
be relieved from them by the adoption of a principle I think, would be the wisest course to adopt. lam told
which would not only set free the consciences of Dis• that there has been a large majority of the House of
centers, but eaee the pocket of the landlord. (Hear, Commune in favour of the proposal for the total obeli-
hear.)] He spoke of the landlord because he it was tion of church-rates. Teat is a statement which is un-
whe would undoubtedly receive the benefit of that re- doubtedly true, but at the same time I have heard many
mission which it was the object of the bill to accom- men say, that while they were prepared to vote fort ha-
relish. (Hear, hear.) He bad not come to that con- abolition, rather than maintain the Existing system, yet
elusion without the aid of experience, and in support they were disposed to give a favourable consideration to
of his opinion upon the point he might state any reasonable proposition by which a compromise of
that a member of that house had assured the question could be effected. I therefore cannot quite
him that if a proposition for the total abolition concur with those who think that the majority, in fa-
of church-rates should pass into a law he should feel hirevour of the total abolition of this tax, without any provi-
-
self authorised to make arrangements for a corresponding sou being made to substitute some other means of
increase in the rental paid by the tenants upon his pro- securing the maintenance of the fabric of the church in
perty, and should put the amount than realised in his its place, is quite so concluove as some hon. members
own pocket. (Hear, hear.) The result of such a propose _seem :seem to imagine. (Hear.) Be that as it may, however,
tion, in short, would he, either that the landlord, being I think we shall do well to take into our earnest consi-
a pions and conscientious Churchman, would undertake deration the amendment of the hon. member for Hert-
fordshire. (Hear, hear.)
to provide for the maintenance of the fabric of the church,
reimbursing himself for any outlay which he might snake Mr..NEWDEGA.TE said be should not oppose the
in that respect by the imposition of an addii.ienal burden motion for going into committee upon the bill, but that
upon his tenants, or, being a person who was lax and in assenting to it he mutt not be supposed to waive one
careless in such matters, or a dissenter, would permit iota of the claim which, he contended, every poor man
the necessary expenditure for the support of our places throughout the country possessed to the enjoyment of
of religious worship to be thrown upon somebody else. the advantages of being present at the service of th e
(Hear.) And who, he would ask, was that somebody else Church of England. (Hear, hear.)
likely to be in nine-tenths of the parishes of England ? Mr. PACKE said, after the appeal which had been
Why, in all probability, the very man who would be least made to him by the noble lord the member for the city of
competent to bear the burden which would thue be thrown London, he begged to withdraw his amendment.
neon him—namely, the clergyman of the parish. (Hear.) (Cries of no, no.)
Under those circumstances, while reserving to himself Mr. BRIGHT said he thought those who were in
the right to give an impartial consideration to any propo- favour of the passing of this bill had some ground for
sition which might have the effect of relieving the c n• complaint against the hon. member for South Leicester-
sciences of dissenters from the grievance of which they
shire (Mr. Packs) for the course he had just proposed to
complained, while it made due provision for the main-
tenance of the fabric of the church—he should entreat take. He (gr. Bright) had listened—he would not say
the house not to lend its sanction to a scheme the ope- to exactly the same arguments—but to much the same
ration of which would be to free the property of the speeches from the hon. member's lips year after year
country from obligations to which it had for centuries upon this question of church-rates as the one they had
been liable, and which had been imposed upon it for the hoard that day. The hon. gentleman was not a young
promotion of the spiritual welfare of the poor and the free
and unfettered worship of Almighty God. (Cheers.) member ; he knew when he came down to the house he
Lord H. VANE said he should not trespass upon the was going to object to this bill being proceeded with ;
attention of the house by entering into a discussion of the he bad moved an amendment with that view, which the
various topics upon which the noble lord Lad touched, house had discussed for the last three hours, but all that
but he wished at the same time to state briefly the
time would be wasted if he was now permitted to with-
opinions with respect to the important subject under
conk ideration which he entertained. He was not prepared draw it. The truth was, it was found to be convenient
to deny that the question was beset with difficulties, but to some members not to have their names recorded in a
as the position in which it at present stood was extremely division on this subject—(a laugb)—and therefore it was
unsatisfactory, he trusted the house would concur in that the hon. gentleman sought to avoid going into the
framing a scheme by which it would be placed upon a lobby. But be (Mr. Bright) would advise the supper-
better footing. It was, he believed, a fact that under
tern of the bill to go to a division on this question.
the operation of the existing arrangements church rates,
owing to various causes, were never levied in one-tenth (Cheers.) That, at least, was the course he himself was
of the parishes of England, while in the case of one- prepared to take. With regard to the observations which
seventh of the remaining nine-tenths the property of had fallen from the noble lord immediately below him
Dissenters mainly contributed to the impost. Be that, (Lord J. Russell)—whom he was happy to see sitting
however, as it might, there was no doubt that the Dia- in that very wholesome part of the house—(laughter)—
senting body was taxed to a considerable extent for the he did not think the noble lord could have well consi-
meintenace of the fabric of the church, and he might dered the points which he had placed before the house.
observe that he did not concur with the noble lord who He (Mr. Bright) did not know whether or not the
had just spoken in the opinion that the effect of a change amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire could
in the system under which that result had been brought be brought forward at all, because it proposed to lay a
about would be to throw the burden of the church rate charge on property, which was very like imposing a new
upon men who would be unwilling to provide for the tax, a thing that was more in the province of the
proper support of our places of religions worship. The Chancellor of the Exchequer. ekt all events, if the
(act was, he believed, that the Burns which were now bon• member did move such a resolution, those who
paid by resident and absentee landlords, and other volun- were in favour of the bill would know how to meet
tary contributors, for the repairs of our churches were it. (Cheers.) In fact, the noble lord, who was one
very large, so that the noble lord need be under no ap- of those who were only half-way between the wrong
prehension that the landlords would evade the duty and the right of this question—(a laugh)—seemed to
which attached to them in that respect. He quite agreed forget that those who contended for the abolition of
with those who thought that a certain portion of our churctaratesi understood their own !nee, and that they
churches should always be open free to the poor ; but were likely to understand it a great deal better than the
then he was of opinion that nobody should be allowed noble lord and those who acted with him. He (Mr.
to have a pew without paying for it a certain sum, which Bright) and those who supported the bill before the
might very fairly be applied to the maintenance of the house had studied this question all their lives. They
fabric of the church. lie might add that he saw no had submitted much too long to the impediments which
resson why facilities for creating endowments should had been thrown in the way of its settlement, and had I
not also be afferded. (Hear, hear.) seen themselves constantly treated with injustice and
The CHANCELLOR of !he EXCHEQUER—AI- humiliation, They had not taken up this question for
though I entirely concur in the opinions which have been the purpose of getting up a debate on two or three Wed-
so clearly expressed by my noble friend near me (Lord nesdays in a session. They were determined to get rid
J. Manners), I cannot resist the conviction that this of church rates—(cheers) ;—and if any one thought that
question has now arrived at a stage at which it is desir- b e proposing to make the owners pay towards the repair
able that we should fully discuss any practical measure of churches instead of the occupiers, or by calling on
which may be submitted to us for the soiution of the them to make humiliating declarations of their religious
difficulty which it involves. (Hear.) Having that ob- opinions, he would settle this question, he was very
ject in view, I feel there would be some advantage in much mistaken. Why, some hon. members now ap-
astenting to the motion for going into committee, though P •iched the discussion of this question as they would
I cannot, for my own part, give utterance to any very have done some 30 or 40 years ago. He was amazed at
-anguine hope that the labours of the committee will the extraordinary want of observation shown by hon.
have the effect of materially improving the proposition gentlemen when they fancied that any of those palliatives
embodied in the bill under discussion, or of removing could do anything towards settling this eics:ion. There
those objections which have been urged against it by was only one way of settling it. If those were a ma-
many hon. members upon both sides of the house. By jorhy who did not want to abolish chersh-rate, the ques-
going into committee, indeed, we may have the benefit tion would not be eettled ; but if, on the ether hand,
of being afforded an opportunity of considering those they who supported the abolition were in the majority
suggestions which were made upon a former occasion in an well in that house as throughout the country, of
reference to the subject by the right hon. gentleman the which no man could doubt, let them have the settling of
i member for Morpeth, one of which is especially worthy it. (Cheers.) With regard to what might be done in "an-
of notice—l mean the proposal which he submitted to other place," the noble lord the member for the City cf
our consideration last year to provide for the commute. London well knew that the gentlemen who sat in that
)tion of church-rates by effecting certain alterations in "other place" did not always take as much notice of
the laws of mortneain. (Hear.) There is, however, an the resolutions of the House of Commons as the noble
amendment which stands upon the er i'e the name of lord would wish them to do. (A. laugh.) Those gentle-
the hon. member for Hertfordshire (Mr.' Puller), wh
which men in "another place" hied been the people in the
appears to me to be well entitled to the attention of the drawing-room,hwhile they in the Commons bad been
house, and which cannot, I believe, in ;accordance with the
the forms of the house, be moved in committee. (Hear.) the peoplewaiui
whicht heeleitchen (Laughter.) Thatl Boras
about
Now, with all respect for my hon. friend the member for the treatment the
h(atilr. Br.ighditiush,o,uu
"another er e'teri'''
Leicestershire (Mr. Packs) I cannot help thinking that (Cheers.) He woulyd reminrdectehlevenoble lord the memberpaee
it is of more importance that the house should have an for the City that there were many
tmore
than
eersone zealous
opportunity of discussing the amendment which I have about this question o( f church rates there were
just mentioned than that we should, by putting his about the Oaths Bill— laugh)—and although it might
motion that the house resolve itself into a committee on happen that those in place""aanotr gsi h reject this
this bill this day six months, merely repeat a division bill once, twice, or thrice, it ewe desiriblge ttobear in
which has been taken in a similar form upon previous wind that they would never have an opportunity of re-
occasions. (Hear.) I trust, therefore, that my hon. jectieg it unless it passed the House it f Commons,
friend will withdraw his motion, in order that we may (Hear.) He was therefore anxious that it should pass
be afforded an opportunity of taking into consideration the Commons. The house was not to suppose that it
. the amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire, was Dissenters only who desired to see church-rates
which, I repeat, is well worthy of our notice, and which, abolished. The hon. member for North Warwickshire
I beg the house to observe, cannot be discussed except it talked about the "Dissenting interest." lie (Mr. Bright)
be brought before us at this stage of our proceedings. was not one of the Dissenting interest. (A. laugh.) But
t if be were a Churchman he would use much stronger
lLord J. RUSSELL—I quite agree with the right hon.
anguage on this question than he had ever done. (Hear,
hi
gentleman opposite that it is desirable the hon. member an )lt was in the interest of public honesty, of public
for South Leicestershire should withdraw his motion, morality, of public order, and of religion itself that be
and that we should attempt at last to arrive at come asked the house to abolish this unjust and irritating
settlement of this question. It is, I think, quite obvious system. (Cheers.) If he were a Churchman he should
eir r
congregations,ef
( Che (Cheer,.)
e nor)
be ashamed of hon. members who opposed this bill.
from a consideration of the prospects which, according
They They
d no f evidentlyith iennr ot
the
fheaeizt heeal
loi no
eloquence
tethnhecei
to the reports I have seen in the public press, her Ma-
je:ty's Pri•ne Minister holds cut to us that this in ie arguments their pastors.
bill will, if it should go up to the House of Lords, be They believed their churches qwould fall into ruin if this
rejected by that assembly. Now, that is a result which hill were to pass. He had never said anything half so
would be extremely unsatisfactory— (hear)—and I should severe of the members of the Established Church as that.
wish, therefere, to see whether some plan or another (Cheers, and a laugh.) They had been brought up to
might not be devised by means of which we would be think that this question was associated with the exis•
enabled to arrive at a settlement of this question, which tence of the Established Church, and, therefore, it had
would prevent the occurrence of the result to which I become a matter of sentiment rather than of argu-
be one Hertfordshirew hi
oh seems have alluded. The amendment of the /lon member for meat with them. He had no doubt if church-rates
te,ewmesliteoumtiteleudntdoerouthrosecircUmstances to were abolished to-morrow, all the parish churches in
would be better to confine
he will, perhaps, permit consideration ; but the country would eventual:y
which
himetheh
the ob
blue! !serfs thti
ooh him that
proposesth a t i t
hear)state ofl
ur etphaei r
interestthan theyofbe in a much better
th we er e
Churche t
ipresent.tself
he (Hear,would
to attain to those for
under the existing system, andt church-rates are levied ask the house to pass this measure. (Cheers.) They who
that he should not en- brought it forward understood their wants, their claims,
dcavour to embrace other and ant'
the scope of his resolution. (Hear.)
new objects within and their rights ; and they knew, from what had taken
merit provides for the repair
of .)So far as the amend- place in that house for years and years, that they would
for the maintenance of churchyards, existingi 19hurches, and get what they wanted. (Cheers.) There was on the Tree-
limits to which I refer ; but when the honies within the sury bench a Secretary of State who had written an ad•
to make " provision for the building of
o.eirtnecmhubrerhseeks minable pamphlet and made several able speeches in fa.
PoPulous places" he travels, in my opinion, beyond tells()abolition of
in
se yourll of the church-rate'. (Hear, hear.)
T osa who supported the existing
system saw eontinual
limits. (Hear.) The building of new churches is carried defections from their side, while those who 'opposed it
out by means of the diocesan fund, and constitutes an had as constantly accession to theirs ; and if there wee
object which, however desirable it may be to make pro- any Bill
, passed to extend parliamentary franchise and
vision for it, is totally separated from that which we to
redistribute the seats, they wh e supported ;church
ought to have now in view, and which might more pro- rates, and who were already' in a minority on the
.goes-
ly -if indeed, it should be necessary to legislate with tion, would per - ,dwindle down to a small fraction. (Hear.)
respect to it at all—be made the subject of a distinct pro- Why should those
who supported church-rates go on
posal. (Hear.) With this exception, I, for one, am cer- using the some arguments year after year in favour of a
tainly disposed to look with considerable favour upon system which thefeeling of the country had al-
the amendment of the hon. member for Hertfordshire. ready condemned generaltb should the hon. member for
(Hear.) But, suppose that amendment should not be Newdegate—(load laughter)—he meant the hon. mem-
accepted by the house, what course do you then pro- her for North Warwickshire (Mr w erte)— whom
pose to take ? The observations which have fallen from he always honored for his sincerity,. be .
my right honourable friend the member for Morpeth in session after session on this subjeCt, whnicah ifnogu speeches(i
o lit -
the course of this discussion tend I must admit, to de tie reepon-e in that henie, and none whatevern ins the
away to a great extent with the objections which I country ? (Cheers.) He was glad the right hon, baronet
entertained to a proposal which he submitted to the the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey) went so far with
house some years ago, and which was to the effect that the supporters of the bill as to desire that it should
we should be prohibited by legal enactment from into committee. He (Mr. Bright) would Fay to him,go
raising- church-rates in those districts in which they and to every member in the least disposed to assist them
"PPcned net to have been levied certain • . " G with us as far as you case ; the further
fora polled. o you go
That, I think, is
a proposition which is open to strong the pleasanter you will find the road ; and let us, with-
objection upon the score of •
• principle. It is hardly fair, out further delay, proceed
at once with this bill, the fate
in my opinion' that certain parishes should be subjected, of which has been irrel.ragably decided." (Loud cheers.)
as it were, to a
, penaltya because their inhabitants bad . Mr. STEUART followed in a brief speech, but such
cemplied with the
1w
by levying the ecesFary church. was the impatience of the house to proceed to a division

that the observations of the hon, member did not reach
the gallery.
T: .e SPEAKER put the question in the usual way,
that the words of the original motion for going at once
into committee—ehich words were proposed to be omit.
ted by the amendment—should stand part of the question.
The " Ayes" made the custemory response ; but either
through in, ttentien or miss pprel ension, the opponents
of the bill expressed no dissent ; the SPEIKER declared
that the "Ayes" had it ; the mace was immediately re-
moved from the table in the ordinary way, and the house,
which was very fall at the moment, went at once into
committee without a division, amid some little laughter.
The result was that Mr. Puller was precluded from mov-
ing the amendment which stood on the paper in his
name on the motion for going into committee.
Sir A. ELTON moved the insertion of words "delay-
ing the comine, into operation of this bill for threeyears."
Sir J. TR OLAWNY said he was desirous of adopt-
ing every feasible suggestion calculated to put an end to
the existing system ; but he thought if the hon. baronet
had read the evidence of Dr. Lushington he would
have thought it necessary to propose this amendment,
for Dr. Lushington bad expressly laid i; down that
churchwardens were bound to go on disposing of any
funds in their hands for the repair of the churches which
had been raised for that purpose. The parochial autho-
rities, in fact, had nothing to do but to use the existing
machinery in their hands to meet the state of things con-
templated by the hon. baronet. Besides, the amendment
was the less called for when hs (Sir J. Trelawny) found
that in places where it had been left to them as voluntary
matter the Dissenters had contributed liberally towards
the repairine the fabrics of the Church of England.
Mr. ROEBUCK wanted to know why the hon. baronet
proposed to post-:one the operation of the bill far 3 years.
This question of the abolition of church-rates was not a
new one. He (Mr. Roebuck) had been in Parliament for a
(Fatter of a century, and it had been familiar to him as a
member of that house for the whole of that period. What
good, he asked, could be derived from keeping open the
sore, and from not at once putting an end to all the irrita-
tion produced by the levying ofchurch-rates? (Hear, bear.)
If the thing was good, why not do it at once ? Whenever
a change in the law was made great advantage resulted
from its coming into immediate operation. The best
thing they could do in this case was to bring the abolition
into operation at the very earliest moment—(near, hear)
—and therefore ho opposed the amendment.
Sir G. GREY thought it would be very inexpedient to
adopt the amendment, fer if the proposed change was to
take place it was very undesirable that it should be poet-
pined for so long a period. (Hear, hear.) The usual
practice was to make a church-rate at Easter and if the bill
passed ieto a law and came into immediate operation it
would be necessary that some provision should be made
to secure the proper application of the rates made at
Easter in the present year.
Mr. WIGRAfeI thought the amendment proposed by
the bon. baronet would be an improvement to the bill.
He was persuaded that the only possible way in which
the churches in the country could be maintained would
be by an unanimous effort on the part of the great body
of churchmen—(hoar, heat)—and time ought to be
allowed for them to make the necessary preparations if
that responsibility was henceforth to be borne by them
alone, and the more so in caoes where the churches had
fallen into considerable dilapidation.
Sir J. TRELAWNY said he could not believe that
the members of the Church of England would not them-
selves readily make efforts to meet all the cases to which
the attention of the Committee had been pointed. [ Che
hon. baronet made some reference to the amendment
before the Committee having been conceived in "the
old Protectionist spirit," but the exact terms in which he
did so did not reach the gallery, and the expression is
only given hers in a general form because the subsequent
speech of Mr. Gladstone to some extent turned upon it ]
Lord LOVAINE said it was pretty clear to him thet
if this measure became law, by the end of three years
afterwards the qu -stion would be one, not sof shurch-
rates, but of tithe,.
Mr. PALK reminded the Committee that if this bill
passed into a law the 350,0001. hitherto raised for the
maintenance of the churches would be lost to the
Established Church. They had no more right to deal
with this
350,000/, provided for the maintenance of the
Church, than they had to deal with the interest on the
national debt, or any other similar charge ; but
they had a right to deal with any law that pressed
injuriously upon the consciences of Dissenters. This
fund was as much the property of the Dissenters as of
the Church, and if it was dealt with in an unjust and
inconsiderate spirit injustice was done both to the Church
and to Dissenters. The Dissenters, he admitted, bad a
perfect right to object to all those embellishments of the
Church that were hurtful to their consciences ; but un-
less they wished to be branded as spoliators of property
which they had no right to touch, they were bound to
fine some substitute for the means now provided for
repairing the edifice of the church. He would, on the
bringing up of the report, propose a proviso, which in
the mean time he would read to the house.

are many arrangements connected with the repair of
churches that are not settled by the rate of a single
year. (Rear, hear.) It appears that the levying of
church.-rates is considerably in arroar of the making of
church-rates ; and an Act of the Legislature declaring
that no church-rate should henceforth be levied or
made would undoubtedly have an effect which the hon.
gentleman does not desire—viz., the effect of breaking up
arrangements partly carried out, but not yet completed—
arrangements on the faith of which schemes have been
sanctioned and liabilities incurred. (Hear.) Then with
regard to the prolongation of the religious war in which
the country is said to be involved, surely a great deal
too much has been made of the horrors of this religious
warfare. (Hear.) I do not thick it is half so aggravattd
as appears to be supposed. (Hear.) In the great propor-
tion of parishes where church-rates are made they are
levied with general satisfaction, or at leant no osten-i-
-ble symptoms of dissension. (Hear.) I think the people
of England, who generally contrive to solve awkward
problems by the exercise of practical good sense rather
than by theory, have attained the desirable object of
solving even the problem of church-rates in such a roan•
ner that, though it does not obviate everything disagree-
' able, yet removes all really unfriendly symptoms ; for I
commonly see that after there has been a motion for a
church-rate, an amendment against it, and a poll, the
meeting generally breaks up in good humour. and with
a vote cf thanks to the chairman. (Hear.) It is all very
well to ta:k in Parliamentary speeches about religious
war being perpetuated in the country, but I must say
that it would weigh upon my conscience if I did not
sanction as far as I can the short continuance of the
preqsnt system proposed in the amendment of my hon.
friend. (Hear.) But, though I think it fair on the whole
to support the amendment of my hon. friend, it is more
a prudential question for the hon. baronet to consider
than for me; because, iif the church rates are abolished,
it should be done in a manner to mitigate as much as
possible the pressure of the charge. If it were not that
I am actuated by these feelings, I should be disposed to
say, leave the bill as it is and let it shift for itself. (Hear.)
After a few words from Sir J. rIIELAWNY in explana-

tion,
Mr. DILL WYN (amid cries of "Divide") said it was
unfair to charge those who were opposed to church-rates
with being unfavourable to the connexion between Church
and State.

Mr. HENLEY said the right hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Oxford University had so completely expressed
his views in what he said regarding church-rates if abol-
ished being a direct present to the landlords that he would
not add a single word upon that subject. With regard
to the payment of church-rates being hurtful to the con-
science, he would mention a case that came under bis
own knowledge. He happened to have the management
of an estate not his own, and it came to his knowledge
that one of the tenants felt the payment of church-rates
to be against his conscience. On hearing this he (Ar.
Herley) directed the agent to ascertain the average
amount of the church-rate for the last seven years, add
it to the rent, and ask the tenant to pay the rent ; but,
from whatever cause, the tenant did not think it right to
accept the offer. (A. laugh.) With regard to the amend-
ment which would suspend the operation of the act for
throe years, he could not give his assent to it, as he saw
no advantage that would be derived from the postpone-
ment, while it would be adirect admission of the principle
of the bill. (Hear.) He was against the change being
made at all, and could no more consent to it three years
hence than now. (Hear, hear.) They had heard a great
deal about the peace and good feeling of the country
being interfered with, but did any one believe that if the
operation of this bill were to be suspended for three years
it would be all peace I (Hear.) During the whole of these
three years they would have parties arrayed against each
other, and perpetual attempts made to upset the act.
(Hoar, hear.) It would be equally ohjectionaWe in its
tants upon the country. It was natural for people to
postpone action upon a thing that was not to occur for a
considerable time, and nothing would be done in the
' country on this matter, because nobody would believe in
its reality. (Hear.) There would be great inconvenience
caused in various ways by the delay, and, as he saw no
advantage that would flow from it, he should be com-
pelled to vote against it.
Sir A. ELTON would not press his amendment, and
i asked leave to withdraw it. _ _

Lord R. CECIL entered his protest against the prin-
ciple which he understood to have been laid down by the
right hon. gentleman the member for Oxfordshire as one
that would be most fatal if acted on by a party defend-
ing conservative institutions. He understood him to
say that when a bill was brought forward which
he did not like he would do nothing to mitigate its pro-
visions. Now, in his opinion there was nothing to pre-
vent him voting for an amendment in a clause and after-
wards voting against the clause on the whole bill.
Mr. HENLEY said the noble lord had misunderstood
him. (Hear, hear.) He gave his reasons for disliking
this particular amendment, but had not said a single
word that could be construed into the meaning now stated
by the noble lord. (Hear.) He would support any
amendment that he thought reasonable in any bill,
Lord R, CECIL did not wish to attribute to hiaright
hon. friend anything that he was not willing to accept,
but he certainly understood him to say that if be did not
like a bill he would not vote for an amendment upon it.
(No, no.)
Mr. SPOONER (amid cries of "Divide") said he
would not consent to do that in three years which he
was not willing to do now. The poor of this country
would be the chief sufferers if church rates were abolished.
Mr. BRIGHT said, if the noble lord intended to com-
pel a division, it was desirable that he should offer souse
explanation as to the reasons for the vote ho should give.
He was free to confess that, if there were any disposition
oe the part of hon. members opposite to accept the solu-
tion of the question proposed by this bill, he should not
raise any difficulty upon the point whether it should
come into operation in 12 months or three years hence,
(Hear.) He did not believe the difficulties into which
the Church of England would be plunged by the abolition
of church rates would prove to be so extensive as some
hon. members appeared to imagine ; but in the settlement
of a long disputed question, it there were any concession
which would facilitate that end without interfering with
the efect of the settlement, it would be advisable to
make it. The tone in which the amendment had been
spoken of on the other side, however, did not lead him
to believe that the adoption of this amendment would be
at all an approach to a settlement of the question. The
right hon. member for Oxford University had gone
round and about the subject, but he bad not come at it
—(a laugh)—and h e had eat down without eiving the
house to understand that he was more favourable to the
principle of this bill than he had been to preceding bills
having the same end in view. The right hon. gentleman
did not say that at the end of three years he would sup-
port the bill, nor did the noble lord (Lord R. Cecil) hold
out any hope that at the expiration of that period he
would be less opposed to the bill than he was at the pre-
sent time. Indeed he (Mr. Bright) did not see how it
could be otherwise, for all the arguments of the sup-
porters of church-rates were based upon principles which
were not affected by time. (Hear.) He did not perceive
how any one who favoured church-rates could bo per•
suaded by the amendment to change his views. If be
believed the adoption of the amendment would at all
tend to a solution of the question he would advise his
hon. friend to accept the amendment, but as he did not
entertain that belief he thought it better the clause
should be passed in its original shape. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Sir TI, WILLLOUGHBY
and Mr. WIGRAM, which were almost inaudible amid
loud calls for a division.
The amendment was put and negatived without a
di vision.
Lord R. CECIL moved as amendment in chute 1,
before the words England and Wales, to insert " in any
city, Parliamentary or municipal borough in."
Sir J. TRELAWNY said, he could not consent to
the proposed amendment.
Sir G. LEWlfii.—l hope the co mmittee will deal with
this question with a determination, if possible, to get
rid of the grievances which the present system of church-
rates give rise to. It is difficult to find out is what
those grievances consist. (Hear, hear.) All the infor-
mation I have leads me to think that the essential
grievance of the present system is not that there is a
compulsory tax levied for the support of the fabrics of
the established church, but because it is levied upon
property a hich involves in its operation persons who
differ from the tenets of that church. It is not a statu-
tory rate - it is a common-law rate, dating from a period
anti o .dent to the Reformation, where there was no dif-
ference of opinion upon religious matters. Since that
evert differences of religious opinion have sprung up, and
discards have arisen from the imposition of church-rates.
The rate is a voluntary rate. It is competent fo: the
majority of a- vestry to refuse it, and that power has
been exercised in a large number of parishes, amounting,
I believe, to about 10 per cent. of the whole number of
parishes, but comprising about one-half of the whole
population of the kingdom. It is in large towns where
the greatest discords have prevailed, and the result has
been that under the operation of the present system
church-rates in those towns have practically been abet-
lished. It is also in large towns that there is the greatest
accumruulation of property, and where are to be found
the greatest facilities fcr raising subscriptions in order to
maintain the fabrics of the church. At present it may
be said that there are two distinct systems in operation
under the existing law. In large towns the parishes
have f n: the most part practically abolished church-rates
and subsii uted voluntary arrangements, which have bean
found to answer well. But that state of things only ap-
plies to towns. In rural parishes for the most part
church-rates are made without opposition—(bear, hear)
—and even where there have been objections raised they
have been overruled by the majority of ratepayers. In
90 per cent. •f the parishes of England and Wales the
churches are supported by church-rates. That is the
way in which the present system works, and it appears
to me it would be not a compromise, but a reason-
able and practical solution of the question, if the house
would adopt the plan that was proposed by my right
hon. friend the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey)—viz.,
to ab dish church-rates in those towns or parishes where
practically they had ceased for a series of years, say
four or five years, and in those towns where church-
rates continued to be levied to allow those who differed
from the established church, upon a mere declaration or
statement of that fact, to be exempted from liability on
account of them. By that means church-rates would
only be compulsory upon members of the established
church. (Hear, hear.) It would satisfy a real want
and would overcome a real difficulty, for in rural
parishes no obj' °Lion is now made, and the facilitiesrds
which the aggregation of wealth in large towns affords
for raising voluntary subscriptions in large towns do
not exist small rural parishes. I am not prepared to
share the fears of those who think that if church rates
are abolished our churches will be permitted to fall to
the ground. (Rear.) I believe that funds would be
raised by collection, eubscriptlene, and other modes
which in large parishes would meet the wants of the
church, hut in poor, small, and remote/parishes, if you
do not allow the ratepayers to tax themselves, you will
introduce a system far less fair and equal than the pre.

Mr. AYRTON spoke to order. The hon. gentleman
was not in form in introducing another amendment in
addition to the one before the Committee.
Mr. PALK did not intend to move another amend-
ment He only meant to read a proviso which he gave
notice be would move on the bringing up of the report.
Sir. G. GREY was not prepared to say the bon.
gentleman was out of order, but it would be very incon-
venient to bring before the Committee at present any
proviso while there was an amendment undisposed of.
Mr. PALK would not now bring the proviso before
the committee if it was not the general wish. With re-
gard to the amendment, which would suspend the opera-
tion of the bill for three years, be thought the delay
might give time fur the preparation of some plan for
maintaining the fabric of the church. There were large
funds in the possession of the Church, and it was pos-
sible tlat luring the delay these might in some way be
made available, or voluntary meats might be provided
for maintaining fabrics which, apart from religion alto-
gether, were on architectural and scientific grounds
worthy the support of the country. (Hear.)
Mr. GLADSTONE—I cannot help observing that
whatever may be the merits or demerits of the amend-
ment proposed by the hon. member for Batb, it has
received no answer from the hon. baronet (Sir J. Tre-

lawny) of any weight or value. The hon. baronet accused
my hon. frier d of acting on the principle of the effete and
extinct system of protection. I must say I ca❑ see no

ground or colour for such a charge ; I see a great deal
o what used to be considered one of the cardinal articles
of protection in the bill of the hon. baronet himself, for
a very prominent doctrine of those most versed in the

articles of protection was, that a great part of the claim
for protection rose out of the burdens on land, and that
some at least of the local rates ought to be remitted and
a present of them made to the landlords. (Hear, hear.)
And undoubtedly this bill, if it passed, will offer the first
instalment of that relief from the burdens on land.
(Cheers and laughter.) The bill, indeed, presents a very
remarkable instance in which the principle of protection
that has been long dead has undergone a galvanic revi-
val at the hands of a gentleman from whom it could
have been least expected, in that with respect to the
whole of the rural parishes of thecountry he has proposed
to make over to the landlords a large and distinct pre-
sent of several hundreds of thousands a year. (Rear,
and laughter.) I wilt illustrate what he has now eaid
by a case in point. A gentleman--a friend of mine,
whose name, if I were to mention it, would elicit from
every one an expression of respect and approbation--
applied to his tenants—not in a tone of dictation, of
which he is incapable, but as between friend and friend
—and expressed his wish that they should support the
granting of a church-rate in the parish ; on which one of
the tenants said "It is surly impossible you can wish
us to support a church-rate, for if the rate is refused it
will be 171. a-year in your pocket in this township
alone." (Hear, hear.) Meat is true in this particular
case is equal y true in other cases. The church-rates,
it abolished, will go into the pockets of the landlords.
I hope, therefore, we shall not again hear it said that
the principle of protection is involved in the opposition
to this measure. (Hear, hoar.) The hon. baronet pro-
needed to say that, however magnificent the churches
might be in the rural parishes, it would be unfair to the
Dissenters to continue, even for a period of three years,
to tax them for the maintenance of those fabrics. There
is a fallacy in that part of the reply of the hon. baronet,
because in so far as regards many of the opponents of
this bill, they have not the slightest desire that any Dis-
senter should be taxed against his will for the main-
tenance of the fabric of the church, (Hear, hear.) Ido
not ask whether a case can or cannot be made out to
' show that the Dissenters might justly be expected to pay.
I say, as a matter of equity, of prudence, and considera-
tion, that I believe it to be for the interests of the
Church and the country that Dissenters should not be
called upon to pay church-rates ; and, believing that to
b) the sentiment of an immense majority of the house, I
protest against the assumption involved in the speech of
Vie right hon. baronet, that whoever supporta an amend-
ment like that before the house does so because he thinks
it is right that for three years more Dissenters ought to
be taxed for the support of the fabric of the church.
(Hear, hear.) My belief—and it is founded on expe-
rience—is that there are large numbers of Dissenters in
this country whose position in regard to the Church is
an anoma!ous one, because it is neither complete rela
Wang union nor complete religious separation, and
i that
I there are many of these Dissenters who do not n the
smallest degree object to the payment of church-rates.
(Hear, !rear.) So far as my local knowledge goes
of that portion of the country which of all
others is perhaps the least inclined to the payment of
chuich•rates—l mean the principality of Wales, I may
say that there are Dissenters there who would be per-
fectly satisfied pith an exemption in their favour from
c impulsory payment. (Hear, ilea %) However, that is
not the question nog before Ps. I only wanted to point
out that the hon. baronet has, unintentionally I am sure
misrepresented the views of those who support the
amendment now before the House. The real question
as regards the amendment appears to me to be something
different from that which the hon. baronet has appre-
hended it to be. I cannot say I think that even with
this amendment the bill would be one which it would be
wise or just for the Legislature to adopt. At the same
time I frankly own that the amendment of my hon.
friend is not only proposed in a spirit of good faith—be•
cause no man would for a moment impute to him the
possibility of taking any other than a straightforward
course—but that it is a proposition which it is more for
the interest of the friends of the Bill than for its op-
ponents to accept. I cannot doubt that this amendment
will improve the prospects of the Bill, for I cannot but
be of opinion, already expressed by an hon. friend, that
it would bo a considerale!e mitigation of the change. On
1 the whole it appears to me to be an amendment couched
1 in a spirit of equity and fairness—not intended to defeat
the Bill, but a tiuly straightforward, candid proposition.
Though it is true you make your arrangements for
church-rates from year to year, it is also true that there