The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-09 00:00:00

PAPER DUTY.

General THOMPSON presented four petitions from
printers in the metropolis praying for the repeal of the
paper duty.
CHURCH-RATES ABOLITION BILL.

The adjourned debate on the third reading of this
bill was resumed.
Sir J. TR EL A WNEY a-dced the house to read this

bill a third time. He insisted that if the Church had any
rights in the matter that ought to be reserved by the bill,
it should be left to the judicial mind of the House of
Lords to determine in what manner it shod i be made.
He therefore declined to accept any proposal for a com-
promise and should press the third reaoing.
Sir BROOK BRIDGES said he believed everything
had been said that could be said on this questi,,n.
(Hear, hear.) Be contended the origin of church-rates
was neither unreasonable or unjust, and he opposed
the landed properly of the country being increased in
value at the expense of the Church. It the rich man
was not bound to support the Church by a church-rate,
the poor wan would be deprived of the benefits of
church accommodation. The only charges which
should be defrayed by Church-rates were those which
the honour and glory of God regardee—viz,, the susten-
tation of the fabric of the Church, and for providing
the decent requisites for the worship of God, He was
anxious every abuse diould be rectified. He moved the
third reading of the hill this day six months.
Mr. PACKE expressed his regret that the reason-
able compromises offered by the opponents of the
bill had not been accepted. it appeared the pro-
moters of the bill would have nothing but the bill, and
it was the duty of the opponents of the bill to take care
that a substitute should be provided. There could be
no doubt there were many instances where the rate had
been improperly applied, but that was no argument fur
the entire eb•,lition of the rate.

Mr. ACKROVD was opposed to the abolition of
Church rates, and he should vote against the third read-
ing of the measure. He thought Dissenters should be
exempted from the payment of the rates :led
be believed they could be relieved from pay.
ing them without any offensive distinction.
Whilst he wished to do justice to Dissenters, he could
nut do it by perpetrating an injustice on the Church,
which this bill would inflict. He objected to the bill on
hat ground, and also oe the ground that Dissenters, by the
abolition of the ;nil would still retain the right to inter-
fere in the election of churchwardens. Where there
was a majority in favour of a church-rate, they ought
to have the power of taxing themselves, omitting dissen-
ters. Pew rents he thought objectionable, and also
voluntary contributions for raising a fund for the
sustenance of the fabric of the Church. No compro-
mise had as yet been provided which was calculated to
settle this question in a spirit of justice to all parties.
The compromise he should be prepared to agree to was,
this—first, that all Dissenters should be exempt from the
payment of church rates; secondly, that Churchmen
should be left to determine by a majority of their own
body whether a church rate should be lev ed either
voluntarily, compulsory, or not at all.
Sir J. GRAHAM, as an attached friend of the Church,
would have been glad to have seen a compromise of thin
matter, though compromises rarely effected their of ject.
The practical working of the present law he thought un•
objectionable, because in populous and large districts
church-rates had fallen into disuse, but it was in rural
parishes the rate was most needed. He obj-?eted to
pew-rates, as it would give the poor a disinclination to
attend the church. He had the gravest objection to
branding Dissenters as such, to exempt them from the
rate, because it would perpetuate those feelings it was
so desirable to get rid of as speedily as possible.
He was, as he had said, deiroas of a reason-
able compromise, but he regretted to say he saw no
chance of their arriving at a satisfactory compromise on
the question. There were charges on the rate that were
disgusting to Churchmen, and ought not to be con-
tinued. The dignitaries of the Church had certain eili•
cers paid out of church-rates which they ought to pay
themselves out cf their ample funds ; and he thought
the luxuries of worship, such as singers, organist, &c.,
ought not to be paid out of church-rates. All that was
required was the maintenance of the fabric, and the
remedy he proposed was to relax the statute of mart-
main to a limited extent, and enable landowners,
whether holding in fee or tenants for life, with
proper precautions to charge their estates a ithin the
maintenance of the parish church within certain limits
and safeguards. The luxuries of religion should be die-
charged through the voluntary contributions of the mem-
bers of the Church. If the Church of &Tilted was to
become a missionary church, and descend into he arena
of contentie et with Dissenters, the latter ought not to be
taxed for the support of the fabric of the Church. The
right hon. hart. referred to the course now pursued by
the dignitaries of the Church in preaching in uneoue-
crated places, to the Spurgeonite meetings at Exeter-
hall, and an evangelical alliance heir g held at Lam-
beth-palace, and said it was not for Line to say
the course pursued by them was a wrong one, but he
looked upon it as a departure from the strict principle of
an Established Church—(hear, hear)—and was at vari-
ance with all the doctrines that had hitherto been con
sidered and recognised as belonging to an Established
Church. He was against their carrying on longer a war
to the knife with Dissenters. Toe time bad arrived
when it was not politic for the Church of En laud to
fight this desperate battle to the last extremity,g but to
make timely concession in the hope of obtaining 'mace.
(Llear, hear.) He could not sanction the contirmarice
of the contest longer, and he should give his vote in
favour of the third reading of the bill.
Mr. E. BALL snpported the bill.
Mr. WALPOLE considered there was an inconsist-
ency in the arguments of the right hon. baronet (Sir J.
Graham) that ought to have led him to a different con-
clusion on this subject. The righ hon. gentleman then
referred to the proposition made by Lord Althorp to
pay for the sustaining of the fabric out of the land tax—
to that of Lord Monteagle, for its payment out of the
surplus funds in the hands of the ecclesiastical commis •
sinners, and lastly, to the late Sir Robert Peel's propo-
sition for its payment out of the consolidatedofund.
all Theof
next proposition was to exempt dissenters, b
them there were grave objections—more to the three
first than to the last, which would have been just to the
dissenters—it was an equitable arrangement and freely
offered by the Church. There was, then, no remedy
li
but to abolish the tax altogether, and relieve
eve property to
the extent of 300,0001. alear,withou
dissenters ine
thanany w
bya h
y tbee-
lieving the consciences of
proposition to exempt the dissenters from the tax. He
found, however, that the dissenters did not simply seek
relief of conscience, but an ulterior object—that of lead-
ing, step by step, to the parochial system and the break-
ing up of the connection between the State and Church,
and the adoption of the voluntary system throughout
the country. In saying that, he wished it to be under-
stood that he was desirous of settling the question
by a relief from church-rates. The voluntary system
was an admirable ally to the Establishment, but
it never could be made an adequate substitute for it. Re
was for maintaining the Establishment and encouraging
the voluntary principle by which they would be able to
supply the necessary requisites for the celebration of re-
ligion in which their poorer brethren could take part.
He considered the present bill would not effect the set-
tlement desired.

Mr, AYRTON said there wus to be no compromise,