The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-22 00:00:00

blishment in providing for religion and religiousordinances
My hon. friend, the member for Maidstone, said the other
day that England can now reach all the greatness and all
the power and prosperity, materially speaking, of the Roman
Empire, and he added a caution lest when you get to this
culminating point you fall into the corruption and laxity
of principle which led to that empire falling. My hon.
friend has classical skill, and no doubt will recollect that
even a heathen poet reminded his fellow • citizens that
unless they took care of their temples and kept them in
a proper condition :their prosterity would have cause for
regret. Even a heathen poet could say that the greatness
of Rome was owing to the constant acknowledgment, with
all humility, of a higher Power, and that the neglect of
this duty had been followed by calamity :-
6, Delicta majorum immeritus lues,
Romane, donee templa refeceris,
2Edesque labentes Deorum, et
Freda nigro simulacra fumo.
Diis to minorem (pod geris, imperas.
Hine omne pincipium, hue refer exitum.
Dii multa neglecti dederunt
Hesperite mala luctuosa3."
(Hear.) Sir, I trust that no Christian poet will ever say
of this country what the heathen poet wrote of his. (Hear,
hear.) I trust that Parliament may avert such a calamity,
that the fabrics of our churches may not be allowed to fall
into decay ; that the ordinances of religion may be secured
for the benefit of all ; that this may be accomplished by
voluntary means and by voluntary efforts; that you may
thus respect the rights of conscience while you uphold the
rights of property ; amid that you may effect all this by
allaying agitation, by recognising duties, by satisfying
scruples, by reconciling differences. (Cheers.) These are
the objects, the only objects, which her Majesty's Govern-
ment have in view in making this proposition. It is a pro-
position which, from my soul, I believe to be a just, a fair,
a reasonable settlement of this complicated question ; and,
having submitted it, we must leave to you the pleasure of
adopting, or the responsibility of rejecting it. The right
hon. gentleman concluded, amid loud cheers, by moving
for leave to bring in the bill.

Sir J. TRELAWNEY said that, after the able, courteous,
and conciliatory speech of the right hon. gentleman, he
would state the course which he proposed to take with re-
ference to the somewhat complicated plan just submitted.
He felt the great importance of settling this question, and
had never thrown cold water on any plan, by whomsoever
proposed, which had that end in view. He felt, too, that if
another year were lost they, as administrative reformers,
would be the laughing-stock of the country. Under these
circumstances, he asked the right hon. gentleman to allow
him to read his (Sir J. Trelawner s) bill on this subject a
second time pro forma on Wednesday next, and in the mean-
time they would have an opportunity to consider the details
or fhA arwprement measly, and to judge of their practica-
bility. He was disposed, possible to meet the right hon.
gentleman half-way, and hoped, therefore, that his propo-
sition would be acceded to. There were one or two obser-
vations in the speech just addressed to the house which he
felt bound now to answer. In the first place, those who
thought with him believed that the Church of England was
disposed to make such sacrifices as were necessary for the
support of the fabrics throughout the country, and certainly
the right hon. gentleman when he cited the numerous in-
stances of the liberality of Churchmen seemed to be of the
same impression. It was said that to abolish church-rates
would (ally be to transfer so much money into the pockets
of the landlords, which would be quite preposterous ; but
the right hon. gentleman seemed to forget that in the case
of the sister country Lord Derby proposed and succeeded in
carrying a measure which confiscated one-fourth of the
Church revenue, and transferred it to the Irish landlords
who showed themselves perfectly free from prejudice on this
point, and accepted the gift. (Hear, hear.) He would
suggest whether the proper mode of keeping up the church
fabrics would not be by selling the Crown livings and by
i
applying the proceeds n this way. Now, with respect to
the plan which has been submitted to the house by the
right hon. gentleman who had just spoken, he wished to
observe that it contained one proposition—that of consti-
tuting the churchwardens and incumbent a corporation for
certain purposes—which, in his opinion, were open to
serious objection. He took that view, because he thought
if carried into effect, that part of the right hon. gentleman's
scheme would be extremely likely to bring clergymen into
a constant state of hot water with their flocks, and because
he could perceive no advantage likely to result from the
proposed corporation which could not be secured by adher-
ing as far as possible to the ancient machinery and institu-
tions of the country. (Hear, hear.) So also with regard
to the system of ticketing Dissenters, to which the right hon.
gentleman adverted, he (Sir J. Trelawney) was afraid that
in practice it would be found to be prejudicial to the interests
of the Church. For his own part, he could not help think-
ing that thebest way of dealing with those who objected
to the payment of church-rates on conscientious grounds
was to act towards them in a kindly and liberal spirit,
and in support of the soundness of that view he might
state that in the borough which he had the honour to
represent, where church-rates had been abolished 12 years
ago under the pressure of the agitation against them, no less
than £1,500 had since been raised by voluntary subscrip-
tions for the repair of the church, one Dissenter—who
under a system of compulsion would rather suffer himself to
be cut to pieces than pay the church-rate—having contri-
buted no less a sum than £25. (Hear, hear.) He should
not upon that occasion enter further into the merits of the
propositions which the right hon. gentleman had laid before
the house, but should conclude by expressing a hope that
due time might be afforded for their consideration. (Hear,
hear.)
Sir G. GREY—I think the general wish of the house
must be that the right hon. gentleman should be allowed to
lay his bill upon the table this evening, so that it may as
soon as possible be placed in the hands of hon. members in
a printed form. It would not be desirable, it seems to me,
until we have thus been afforded an opportunity of con-
sidering it, to discuss its several provisions in detail, or to
express any opinion upon the general scheme which the
right hon. gentleman has submitted to our notice. For my
own part, however, I must say that I entirely concur with
my hon. friend who has just sat down in the testimony
which he bore to the conciliatory tone and spirit by which
the speech of the right hon. gentleman was pervaded—
(hear, hear)—and which I must also say marks the propo-
sitions which he has laid before us, so far as I can form a
judgment upon their general purport and tendency. (Hear,
hear.) lam extremely happy to find that the right hon.
gentleman has not taken counsel of those who are desirous
of re-imposing a church-rate in any form, however modi-
fied, in those parishes, comprising as they do a large
population, in which it has been practically abolished.
I have always felt in dealing with this question the neces-
sity of recognising the fact of such abolition in a great por-
tion of the large towns and parishes throughout the coun-
try; while, upon the other hand, it appears to me that to
interpose in the case of those parishes in which a church-
rate is levied by the inhabitants for the necessary repair of
the fabric of the church, and to say that they should not
at their own option have recourse to the machinery of a
church-rate in order to raise the required sum, would be
a very arbitrary step for Parliament to take. Now, with
respect to the first class of parishes to which I have
referred, the right hon. gentleman has stated that he
objects to all legal abolition of church-rates, even in those
cases in which they have already been practically done away.
with, contending that the inhabitants of those parishes are
under a common law obligation to maintain the fabric of
the church. Now, I fully admit that it has been held by
one of our highest tribunals that such an obligation upon
the owners of property does exist; but it has at the same
time been decided that the obligation is an imperfect one,
and that in the case in which a vestry refuse to enforce a
rate upon the parishioners of a particular locality there is
no means of compelling them to do so. Now the right hon.
gentleman, if I have not misunderstood him, proposes to
leave the law in thatrespect unaltered, while in those cases
where a rate is at present imposed by the vestry he would
give to landowners the power of making it a voluntary
charge upon their property. I shall not say one word
which should induce the right hon. gentleman to imagine
that I do not concur with him in the hope that his scheme
may prove acceptable to Churchmen upon the one hand,
and to Dissenters upon the other. On the contrary, I shall
give to it a fair and candid consideration, in the earnest
desire that the right hon. gentleman will be found to have
framed a measure by which this long-agitated question may
at length be satisfactorily settled. (gear, hear.) I may,
perhaps, before I sit down, be permitted to call the attention
of hon. niembers to the returns upon that question which,
by command of her Majesty, have been laid upon the table
of the house. In the discussions which have taken place
out of doors as well as in this house as to the amount of
church-rates there has been exhibited upon the part of
those by whom the tax was supported, as well as by the
advocates of its abolition, a tendency to magnify upon the
one hand or to diminish upon the other that amount. Now,
I hold in my hand -a return which shows that the total
amount of the church- rate received in 1854 was £314,000.
The return quoted by the right hon. gentleman strikes an
average of the last seven years, including the year 1854, and
how do the figures come out ? The receipts from church
rates, instead of being £314,000, were, according to the blue-
book, £248,838 ; but, according to the statement of my right
hon. friend, including the 500 parishes omitted from the
other return, the amount is £262,000. Here, then, we have
evidence that the annual amount raised by church-rates is
continually and rapidly decreasing, and I have no doubt, if
we could have a return for the last year, 1858, we should be
still more conscious of that fact. So rapidly is the annual
amount raised by church-rates diminishing that I have little
doubt, if Parliament were to abstain from doing anything,
church-rates would soon become practicallylextinct. The
right hon. gentleman has alluded to the possible effects
upen our future history if we abandon our duty of main-
taining the churches of the land, but what are the facts as
we find them here ? The total expenditure in 1854 for the
maintenance of the fabric and providing for the service of
the church was £464,550, while the average expenditure of
the last seven years for the same purposes has been no less
than £594,000. Thus, while we have the income from
church -rates continually decreasing, the general expendi-
ture, derived chiefly from voluntary contributions, had
largely increased—(hear)—showing that the attachment of
the people of this country to the Church of England had
not diminished, and that they were willing to contribute
for the maintenance of the fabrics, and for the performance
of Divine worship. Therefore, looking at the elasticity of
the voluntary principle, I cannot share the apprehensions
of those who think that if church-rates were abolished the
churches would be ruined. I believe they would be main-
tained—(hear)—but still I think it would be a harsh and
arbitrary act to prevent those numerous parishes which are
willing to tax themselves from doing so. (Hear.) The right
hon. gentleman last year gave, as the result of the returns
moved for by Sir W. Clay, that the parishes where church-
rates had been refused were about 5 per cent, of the whole
number ; but those returns were exceedingly defective, and
I ventured to assume, from other data, that it must be
more like 10 per cent. But what do the returns produced
by the right honourable gentleman himself show ? In one
of the summaries he has appended a note, that 8,115 out
of 10,206 parishes the rates were sanctioned) which shows
that in 20 per cent. of the whole number of parishes
the church is supported by other means than church-rates.
In another column of these returns, which states the condi-
tion of the churches in each parish, you will find, I think,
as often as not, that where the church is out of repair, it
is in a parish where the church-rate has been levied, and
which has, perhaps, stood in the way of voluntary efforts,
but which has not been sufficient for the repair of the
fabric. (Hear, hear.) If we refer to Bradford,
where not a shilling is . raised by church ,rates, we
find that the state of the churches is " good," and " excel-
gboySoodchinru;th4hier-drajeanteseryis oofniMyanach2,eoostoer,,anwhderthe
ethveolaunmotunaryt
raised
contributions are £120,000 0r£130,000. There the
are in
Newcastle, trusta,4tdheurefollrie4, tthheatP4:4lBrtalin escapeeci slid
e
consequences which the right hon. gentleman seems to ex -
pect will flow from the neglect to maintain the fabric of the
church. These returns are very instructive, and will repay