The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-13 00:00:00

THE STEWARDS' CHALLENGE CUP.

Cambridge—Third Trinity Boat Club
London Rowing Club
The Cambridge Crew.
• - -- •

St. lb.

St. lb.

1. R. Beaumont .... 9 3 13. J. P. Ingram .... 10 12
2. H. H. Collings.... 10 12 14. W. Holland, stroke 10 1
T. K. Gaskell, coxswain, 6st 131 b.
The London Crew.
St. lb.

St. lb.

1. Casamajor lO 9 I 3. J. Paine... l2 10
2. W. Farrar l2 4I 4. Playford, stroke.. 10 3

W. Weston, coxswain, -Est 41b.

This was another great race. The Londoners had
the Berks side, and took the lead, but ere they had
proceeded far the Cambridge came up, and a most
extraordinary race occurred, the boats making
alternate shoots yard after yard. Cambridge was
outside, and, having at length nearly got a lead,
began to close for the corner, and their oars over-
lapped for sometime, till Trinity put on a beautiful
spirt and went ahead. The London men went so
desperately to work that they reduced their oppo-
nents' lead at last to three feet, there only being
that difference between the heads of the boats at
the finish. After the race an appeal was made to
the umpire by the London Rowing Club, who
alleged that in the overlapping above mentioned
the oars had come in contact ; but the umpire de-
cided there was no foundation for such an assertion.

'IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(THIS DAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.

NEW MEMBERS.

Mr. LASLETT took the oaths and his seat for Worcester-
shire, and Colonel Steward for Cardiff.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were-considered and ordered to be
read h third time :—Birmingham, Erdington, and Sutton
Coldfield Railway (Western Line) ; Isle of Wight Railway
(Eastqrn Section) ; Llanrwst and Abergele Roads ; Nor-
wich and Spalding. Railway ; Oxford, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton Railway; SouthlYalliam and Lancashire
Union Railway ; and Waveney Valley Railway.
PETITIVS.
Several petitions were presented*frainst the continuance
of church rates, against the Endowed Schools' Bill, and in
favour of the abolition of the duty on paper, &c.

CHURCH RATES ABOLITION BILL.
Mr. DILLWYN moved the second reading of thisbill, and
said that the subject was so well understood in the house
and throughout the country that it would be unnecessary
to make any lengthened observations, and he would confine
himself merely to his motion.
Mr DU CANE moved as an amendment that the bill
be read a second time this day six months. Considering
that the present Parliament was a new one, he thought he
was justified in stating his arguments against the mea-
sure now before the house. He considered that the bill
was one of spoliation, and a direct attempt to destroy the
State establishment of this country. It had been said that
they might allow the bill to go into committee, and then
graft on it such modifications as the majority of the house
might approve. He objected to that course, because he was
opposed to the principle of the bill, and he was aware that
any alteration affecting the vital principle would be fatal to
the bill, and therefore would not receive the support of
those hon. members who were in favour of the bill.
(Hear, hear.) He contended that if the bill were
to be passed into law, a state of things would ultimately
arise in which the maintenance of the fabric of the Church
would be left dependent on the slender support of voluntary
contributions. With regard to one of the arguments in
favour of the bill, namely, that it was opposed to conscien-
tious feeling, the fact was that a very simple mode existed
in the different parishes throughout the country for obtain-
ing exemption from the payment of this rate; and in many
cases, without this church-rate, the fabric of the Church
must necessarily fall to decay. The hon. member for
Birmingham (Mr. Bright), in one of those statements
with which he had been in the habit of entertaining his
constituents during the last few months, said that
only one-third of the country was in connection with
the Church of England. It appeared, however, by
the census: of 1851, that more than one-half the church
accommodation for those who attended places of worship
was supplied by the Church of England. It appeared fur-
ther that 84 per cent, of the educational establishments of
this country were in connection with the Church of Eng-
land, 74 per cent. of the children attending these public
schools belonged to that Church, and that 84 per cent, of
the marriages within a given period were celebrated in the
churches of the State Establishment. Having cited a me-
morial from the clergy of Birmingham, to show that the
voluntary principle was inoperative to maintain the fabric
of the Church, he concluded by an earnest appeal tothe house
to negative the further progress of this measure, or to so
modify its provisions as to divest it of its dangerous and
destructive Irovisions._

Lard R. MONTAGUE seconded the amendment, as he
believed the real object of the supporters of this bill was to
sever the Church from the State. They openly professed
that their ultimate object was to reduce the Church to the
position of an ordinary sect. They maintained that the
State had nothing to do with religion, and he warned this
house that it must be prepared to concede a much larger
question if they agreed to pass this measure.
Mr. E. BAINES, as a Dissenter, disclaimed any hosti-
lity to the Church of England ministers, but he con-
tended
that it was unjust and indecent to compel
the Dissenters to pay an impost to which they conscien-
tiously objected. He argued also that the continuance of
this impost was injurious to the best interests of the State
Church. He referred to the West Riding of Yorkshire in
illustration of his position, for in that extensive district,
where church-rates were abolished, he had not heard of a
single instance in which the fabric of a church was per-
mitted to fall into decay. He had heard statements from
many clergymen of the Church of England that their posi-
tion was improved since the church-rates were done away
with in their respective parishes. He called on the Church
of England not to attempt to perpetuate an injustice, but to
place self reliance on its own means and energies, and then
it would flourish in proportion to the amount of the spiritual
merit it possessed. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ADDERLEY opposed the bill, which he con-
sidered a most violent method of dealing with property.
He denied that there was any necessity for such a bill,
because as the law stood a church-rate could be levied only
by a majority of parishioners, so that its imposition could
not be regarded as an injustice, being the act of the ma-
jority. He thought it would be more unjust to allow the
fabric of churches to be dependent on voluntary contribu-
tions in those parishes where a church-rate was voluntarily
conceded. In some cases a church-rate was opposed be-
cause the clergyman of the parish was unpopular, while in
the same places that rate was freely granted when a
minister was appointed who succeeded in rendering his
teaching attractive. He alluded to the case of Coventry, in
which a church-rate was cordially voted, and wouldit not,
he asked, be a great'injustice under the circumstances to do
away with a church-rate there ?
Mr. MILLER denied the accuracy of the statement of
the last speaker, to the effect that this rate was so popular
in Coventry. He adverted to the situation of the churches
in Nottingham, which he represented, and in Leicester,
which were never in better order than at present, notwith-
standing that they were supported by voluntary contribu-
tions. The same was the case with regard to Liverpool
and other large towns throughout the country. He called
on those who had any apprehension as to the maintenance
of the fabric of the Church to refer to the histcry of reli-
gion in England to show what the voluntary principle had
effected, and to place more reliance on the feeling of the
landed and propertied classes in this country, who
would not suffer the churches to become dilapidated.
Looking to the origin of this impost, it appeared that it
was levied on the parishioners for keeping in repair those
churches which they frequented. That was at a period of
intolerance, but when different sects were established, was
it not most unjust to call on those who derived no benefit
from the State Church to repair and decorate fabrics which
they never used, while at the same time they were obliged
to build as well as maintain their own religious edifices ?
He denied that there was any analogy between this rate
and tithes, which were placed on a totally different basis.
He concluded by supporting the second reading of tle bill.
Mr. PACKE said that as there was a committee sitting
in the other house on this subject he thought there was an
efficient reason for not proceeding further with the present
bill. There was no security for maintaining the fabric of
the church if this rate were abolished; and he alluded to a
speech delivered by Lord John Russell in 1856
deprecating the passing of a measure like the
present. He could not understand what spell there was
which had induced the noble lord to alter his opinion, for
there was no reason assigned for such an alteration.
Mr. STANIL IND said that recently he had an oppor-
tunity of ascertaining the opinion of the clergy of Lincoln,
which he believed coincided with that of the majority of
the clergy, who would not be satisfied with any substitute
for a church rate. There was one-third of the community
at least who dissented from the Church, and therefore he
denied that the State establishment could be considered as
a national church. In Boston, which he represented, the
fabrics of the church were efficiently supported by volun-
tary contributions, and he believed there was ljtae '..round
for supposing that in large towns the result would be dif-
ferent; and it should Irf borne in mind that in rural dis-
tricts five-sevenths of the property belonged to members of
the Church of England.
Mr. J. P. HENNESEY, as a 'Roman Catholic, opposed
the bill, which he denounced as a direct attack by the dis-
senters on the Church of England. He thought that
Roman Catholics could not consistently support this bill,
and those who voted for the Maynooth grant werebound to
maintain church-rates, for though the details of the two
were different, the principle involved was the same.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that no doubt in a great number
of the town parishes church-rates were not Collected, but
the case was different in rural parishes, and in any atte-ept
to arrange the question relative to the rate, that difference
should be considered. As the law at present stood there
was no obligation on a vestry to levy this rate, and as the
law was in an anomalous state, various attempts had been
made to remedy the existing defect. The right hon. gentle-
man having adverted to the different bills introduced on this
subject, and some of the roust prominent objections to nny
alteration in the present system, contended that, if the
£263,000 a-year, compulsory rate levied on the population
of England and Wales, were abolished, it would have little
effect either on the maintenance or the continuation of the
fabric of the Church iu this country. lie based his opi-

.
nions on the fe.eliufr of the country geuerally, and the revived
ate fut. promoting church architecture which oxisteti.
He certainly saw some objections to the voluntary prin-
ciple ; but, on the whole, as he considered that in endea-
vouring to friaintain this rate they were only continuing a
fruitless struggle, ho would vote for the second reading of
this bill. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. MANNERS said that the bill introduced by the
late Secretary for the Home Department (Mr. Walpole)
would have effected everything that was necessary to
satisfy the conscientious scruples of Dissenters, but
it was rejected by the Dissenters of that house, and
by some of those hon. members who were members of the
present Ministry, . He thought the present bill was not a
bill to meet the case of tender consciences, but to subvert
one of the fundamental principles of the existing constitu-
tion of the country. He maintained that it was most illo-
gical to argue that by changing the present system, and
abolishing the impost of £630,000 for the maintenance of the
fabric and the services of the Church, that the same result
would follow.
away with in that
scooundeetpryl:
Lord FERMOY said that in doing away with this im-
post they would strengthen and not weaken the Church.
(Hear, hear.) What was the case in Ireland ? No less
than ten bishoprics were
rgehgutoirm7sa.B
as well as church-rates, and there was a considerable re
done
nilugn the origin duction in the revenues of the clergy. The result was that
instead of its efficiency beingto impoaired, there never was a
very troublesome
For that conscience he confessed he had
i priev:eintrted. drwiiihne;tithtehualfa:feirhtoinosrneshDofesathidoecitrhcsaot
ocitenthceewoaosostmendoe toofbe. of Chris-
tianityp 0e possession;
o convenient.oc o. n
hs
an attack,
Dissenters was very
no respect or deferenc.e. The Dissenters had been candid,
Dissenters
on the supporters of that
a l' outrance, on
tahnedstto!tdetchhemuttehha,tenthidshboilloawll
said that ho would vote for the
second churchL orir toepaAdr
ieLns
migs t
oftheE itths
iaTst toab
will
kl l ~
though he had not hitherto
voted for a bill of that description. (Laughter, and cries
theo in
of
it
" Otehrestsoha honour outrhooufght
this itoo was essential to
maintenance of religion that the churchunftarhyr
i,
casnd should
the
sustained, and if it had been possible to continue the
present system he would have been prepared to
adopt that course. (Hear, hear.) But when that
system was repudiated not only by public opinion outside,
but in Parliament, he did not think that he should set
himself up in
opposition to that opinion. He was
bound, therefore, to see how the object of main-
taining the fabric of the church in repair could
be accomplished by -moans the least objectionable.
Looking at the state of district churches in this country—
which' d
were capable of containing very large numbers, an
suited to all the purposes of such edifices, were erected, it

appeared to him thata _pzoNision rnijAhe made for the
maintenance of parish churches in the same way. (Hear,
hear, and " No, no.) With regard to the Motives imputed
to those who promoted this movement, he was sure, in many
eases, Dissenters would contribute to the maintenance of
the State Churches voluntarily when they would not do so
on compulsion. He trusted that in committee some pro-
vision would be made to meet the case that had arisen. He.
believed the Church was too deeply rivetted in the attachment
of the people to suffer from the:-abolition of this rate, and
that she could suffer only from' some demerits on the part
of her ministers. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he agreed
with those who thought the abolition of what was consi-
dered an injustice, even by some members of the Church
itself, would be the means of strengthening that Church.
(Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI, having, commented on the alteration
that had taken place in the opinions of the noble lord
(Lord Palmerston), contended that before any change was
made in the present system the Government should be pre-
pared with a substitute for the impost which they proposed.
to abolish.

- Lord J. RUSSELL said he would vote for the second
reading of the bill, and stated that any change inlis pre-
sent views to those he had formerly expressed on dila sub-
ject was the result of reflection, and the alteration that "had
taken place in his opinions with reference to the question.
He considered that they were much more likely to main-
tain the Church in- its efficiency—(hear, hear)—and in
the affections of the people by abolishing than retaining a
compulsory impost for its support. (Hear.)
The house then divided, and the numbers were—
For the second reading. . 263 .- :r
Against it
Majority ...... . ... —7O
The bill was accordingly read a second time.
Mr. NEWDEGATE gave notice that on going into
committee he would move an amendment, the exact nature
of which was not clearly understood.

CHURCH RATES ABOLITION' BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
___

SALMON FISHERY BILL.
This bill was read a second time.

Tii.CiVAYS (IRELAND) BILL.

This bill was read a second time.,
The other orders of the day wereelhen disposed of.
The house adjourned at half-past five o'clock.

LIVERPOOL RACES-(THIS DAY.)

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
NURSERY PLATE.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY).
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
et 6 o'clock.

IT ALIANAFFAIRS.

Lord BROUGHAM asked the noble eatl. (Granville) if
the blessed boon (laughter)—he hoped he might call it—
was likely to be obtained. He heard that the pre-
liminaries ?
had been arranged.
Earl GRANVILLE thought it would be better to wait
till the house was fuller.

TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN FRANCE AND

AUSTRIA.

Lord WODEROUSE said he would now communi-
cate the important intelligence that had been received by
her Majesty's Government this afternoon. It was, that
peace had been signed by the Emperor of Austria and the
Zmperor of the French. The following was the telegram

VALEGGIO, JI:ILT 11.

" THE EMPEROR TO THE EMPRESS.
" Peace is signed between the Emperor of Austria and

s The bases of the peace are—
" Italian confederation under the honorary presidency o
the Pope.

" The Emperor of Austria cedes the kingdom of Lom-
bardy to the Emperor of France, who transfers it to the
Xing of Sardinia.

" The Emperor of Austria preserves Venice, but she
remains an integral part of the Italian Confederation."

Lord LYNDH URST—Did I hear the word correctly.
Is the word honorary used ?
Lord WODEHOUSE—Yes ; honorary presidency.
Lord NORMANBY said, when his noble friend the Earl
of Malmesbury moved on Thursday next for the produc-
tion of Count Cavour's despatches, he should move for an-
other paper, viz., the despatch of Lord John Russell to Sir
James Hudson in reference to the claims of the Sardinian
Government to the appropriation of the duchies of Parma
and Modena.