The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-26 00:00:00

down as a rule that the security of the Church was to be
guarded only by preventing any man being annoint-1 •
did not subscribe to the Th;-. ' yr HU
not incl.-- Articles •a'nd who was
u.v the Dioce§an, There was slipped into this
ciati..e viheipit, preglifttit Spe'ciips 4f !nioleizaitee
and ht! hey. -relate sanction a
• i•
elaus'e.V..hichs, if a6reW le, would justify an inquisition into
the rtegious creed of every man in the country.—( Hear.)
Last night he heard, and certainly with astonishment, that.
when the members of the Established creed were few, a pixtti
and expensive Church Ftiblislunput 141. hp. '1 0.
night be,.vo.ek.', it tkii4 11h c that when the number of Dissenters
\vat atremely small—when they were hi CuF prOportiO4
to ni;:e as compared with the mernb‘?: 'ef fat ~'stablished
Church, that was annoektA 'its; a strong ground of exclusion
against the Dliknters, so that all was fish that came to the net
4 the Noble Lord opposite.—(Laughter.) fie would no
longer detain their Lordships ; but he meld ef..r, ait riewti
,ut expressing it as his opinien that Uk greatest disgrace to
and stain en (tie hi43tety 6r this country were that it kept up laws
of exclunien too long, and he felt it to be the prendeSt
lection of his life that he had done seme t6l'els the abo-
lition of laws, which (like the -,•l;ricipie on which the present
clause was founded) Were the sources whence flowed the bitter
waters of exclusion and persecution.—( Cheers. )
Lord I'LUNKETT said that the erpee tie ells teA on the
tendency of this clause, the melt justified he felt in applying
to the argurecetn rr the light Rev. Prelate the observations
which he had done. It was an imputation the most flagrant
and a flagitious perversion of truth to assert that the Dl!!senters
would exercise the trust reposed in the body to which they
might belong, for the benefit of' the Established Church, in
such a way as would overthrew the Church.—( Hear. )
The Bishop of LONDON said that when ho alluded to
the Dissenters, not as a religious sect but as a political body,
he apprehended that it was not unlikely in certain eases, where
more than two candidates appeared for a living, that the
political body acting upon principle, would choose the least
efficient. The Noble and Learned Lord must be aware that
there were in that body persons who could hardly be classed
under the denomination of religious and pious Dissenters.
He \vas the last man to say anything against the Dissenters
as a religious body, but when it was proposed to vest them
with new powers affecting the Church, he felt not only
that he was right, but that he was in duty bound to take the
course which had given rise to the Noble and Learned Lord's
remarks.

Lord BROUGHAM said that the argument used by the
Right Reverend Prelate was calculated to make the Dissen-
ters appear odious in the eyes of the members of the Esta-
blishment. The Right Rev. Prelate took it for granted
that there was among the Dissenters a large body who, if
this power was given, or rather he would say continued—for it
existed already—would exercise in it a base and flagitious
manner. " Many of them," said the Right Reverend Prelate
" are not conscientious and pious Dissenters, but poli-
tical Dissenters. These are the men I dread." Might not
the same assertions apply to the members of the Established
Church? Were there no impious and unconscientious Church
of England men ; and had the Right Rev. Prelate no dread
of them ? " Those political Dissenters," said the Right Rev.
Prelate, " under the denomination of Presbyterians or Bap-
tists, or any other name they may choose to assume, may,
in fact, be nothingarians, or anvthingarians—let us
have none of them." Was the same objection wholly inap-
plicable to the members of the Establishment? Were there
not numberless churchmen, who nominally conforming to the
Established religion, in fact were nothingarians or anythinga-
rians—quite as impious as any of the political Dissenters of
whom the Right Rev. Prelate stood in snch religious horror ?
—( Hear, hear.) For his part he (Lord Brougham) was fully
persuaded that those who were most anxious for the downfall
of the Established Church were not the Dissenters, but the
nominal Churchmen. His Noble and Learned Friend (Lord
Lyndhurst) had moved a clause to which the substance of the
Right Reverend Prelate's argument might be applied as a
preamble. " Whereas, by the Bill now under the considera-
tion of this House, Dissenters are to be admitted as Members
of bodies corporate, and thereby will obtain a voice in the
distribution of Church patronage ; and whereas there is reason
to believe that the said Dissenters will enter into a plot to ap-
point insufficient and unworthy clergymen to the livings within
their gift, for the purpose of lowering the character of the
Church, and of bringing it into contempt • for remedy
whereof be it enacted—;" and then would follow the clause
of the Noble and Learned Lord. Such, in fact, was the
whole sum and substance of the Right Rev. Prelate's argu-
ment.—( Hear.)
Lord WHARNCLIFFE thought it was the duty of the
House to take care that the livings in the gift of Corporations
should not hereafter be placed in the hands of a class of per-
sons different from that which the original donors intended.
Lord LYNDHURST really did not understand the insi-
nuations thrown out in the speech of the Noble Baron. He
had distinctly stated the object of the clause ; and it was in-
tended to effect no other object than that which he had stated.
These advowsons belonged to the existing Corporations by
right and law. It was proposed to transfer them to a newly
constituted body; surely, then, he was at liberty to propose
that of that newly constituted body none but members of the
Established Church should vote in the distribution of Church
patronage. If a Jew, or any other person not being a member
of the Church, possessed an advowson which by law he might
have a right to hold, of course he would be at liberty to ap-
point; but instances of that kind had nothing whatever to do
with the present case.
Lord PLUNKETT begged to ask whether Dissenters were
excluded from the corporate bodies who exercised this patron-
age under the existing law.
After a few words from Lord Ashburton, the Marquis of
Clanricarde, the Marquis of Northampton, and the Duke of
Richmond, the,question was put and the clause inserted.
Several amendments of a mere verbal nature having been
agreed to, the House resumed.
Lord MELBOURNE moved that the Report should be
received on Thursday.
Lord BROUGHAM suggested that it should be received
to-morrow, and that they should take the third reading on
Thursday.
Lord LYNDHURST thought that Thursday would be the
better day for the Report. It was necessary that the Bill as
amended should be printed.
Lord BROUG EIAM said, perhaps there would be no ob-
jection to the Report being received without discussion on
Thursday, the understanding being that the debate should be
taken on third reading on Friday.
This arrangement was agreed to, and the Report was or-
dered to be received on Thursday next.—Adjourned.