The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-30 00:00:00

BIRMINGHAM.

IMPORTANT VESTRY MEETING.—ST.
PETER'S CHURCH.
(Abridged from the Birmingham Journal.)
On Wednesday last a vestry meeting was held in the parish
church of St. Martin's, for the purpose of " taking into consi_
deration what steps should be adopted to repair and restore St.
Peter's church, which was destroyed by fire on the '24th of Ja-
nuary last year ; to make and grant a rate for that purpose ;
and also to consider whether application should be made to the
Commissioners, under the Act of sth George IV., chap. 36, for
a loan for such sum of money, in Exchequer Bills, for the pur-
pose of repairing and restoring the said church." The Rev.
Thomas Moseley, the rector, according to custom, took the chair.
The CHA IRMA N, after reading the advertisement by which
the parishioners were called together, said he hoped those gen.
tlemen who addressed the meeting would strictly confine them.
selves to the specific object for which they were assembled. If
this recommendation were not attended to, he feared that they
might diverge into angry discussions, profitable to no one, and
unpleasant to all.—(Hear, hear.) They were met, not to dis.
cuss whether the laws of the country were equitable and just,
but how they could best conform with their requirements.—
;Laughter, accompanied with disapprobation.) He had to re-
quest that the proceedings might be conducted with order and
decorum—a request which he had invariably preferred on former
occasions, but which had, he was sorry to say, been as inva-
riably disregarded. The Rev. Gentleman concluded by calling
upon the vestry.clerk to read the report of the churchwardens
anti audit committee.
Mr. ARNOLD proceeded to read a report of the senior.
churchwarden, recommending that "a rate of Is. 3d. in the
pound be made by the churchwardens, to be applied by them in
repairing and restoring the church, according to the drawings
and specifications by which it was built, and that they be fur-
ther empowered, if possible, to obtain the proposed loan of
3,500/. from the Board for lending Exchequer Bills, upon the
terms mentioned by their secretary ; and, if obtained, that the
churchwardens and overseers be authorized to give the securi-
ties required."
Mr. NEWTON (churchwarden of St. Philip's) moved the
report now read be received, and a rate of Is. 3d. granted
by the parishioners.
Mr. BENSON 'churchwarden of St. Peter's) seconded the
motion.—(Great clamour.)
W. WILLS, Esq., Low Bailiff, suggested to the Chairman,
that the motion was irregular in point of form, and ought to be
divided into two resolutions. The first being, that the meeting
do receive the report, and the second, relative to the granting
of tile rate.
Mr. EDMONDS observed, that in the report itself there was
a passage, which, if received by the meeting, would completely
acknowledge the principle which he was prepared to dispute,
and upon which he founded his objection to the rate.—(Hear.)
The CHAIRMAN said there was no objection to the reso-
lution proposed being divided into two distinct propositions.
Some observations were then made about the production of

papers.
Mr. EDMONDS considered that the papers produced, and
with which the parishioners were unacquainted, were so volumi-
nous, the law of the churchwardens as stated in the report so
questionable, and if good, the expediency of acting upon it so
doubtful, that he thought the rate-payers ought to appoint a
committee of their own, by whom the case ought to be rigidly
examined before they consented to the recommendation con-
tained in the report just read.—(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. E.
could not but regret that the Rev. Gentleman in the chair
should have excited a disrespectful laugh from his auditors, not
consistent with the character of the gentleman against whom it
was directed, and which ought of itself to have protected the
Rev. Chairman from such an indignity. The only excuse he
could make for those by whom the insult was committed, was
the outrageous doctrine propounded by the Bay. Gentleman--
that the people of England had nothing to do with the laws but
to obey them.
The CHAIRMAN—I never said anything of the kind. I
only stated that we were not assembled to discuss the equity
or justice of the laws. I never said anything about obeying or
disobeying them.
Mr. EDMONDS—WeII, that is the same in substance, but
with a different fiourish._(Laughter.) It was alleged that
6,0001. were required for the repairs of St. Peter's Church ; but
inasmuch as any equitable principle upon which this claim could
be substantiated was not shown, he was sure the rate-payers
would not be reconciled to the imposition by the ingenious
mode of raising the money suggested by Mr. Eyre Lee. That
gentleman proposed to borrow the 6,0001. in Exchequer Bills,
under the sth George IV., to be repaid with interest, by the
parish, at the rate of 10 per cent. Now, in his (Mr. E.'s) opinion,
go far from the amount being a mere trifle, because discharged
by such trifling instalments—so far from the loan lessening, it
materially augmented the evil—(Cheers.) He could not help
remarking that as yet they had no legal proof that the church
was in the possession of the parish. Who purchased the land ?
The Parliamentary Commissioners. Who erected the church ?
The Commissioners. By whom were the architects and con.
tractors engaged ? The Commissioners. The churchwardens
were therefore bound to show that the church had been re-
leased from the management and controul of the Commissioners,
and was now in the legal possession of the parish. Sir James
Scarlett told them, that if the building was totally destroyed,
the parish was not liable to the expences of its re-erection. In
his (Mr. Edmonds's) opinion, the injury done amounted to a
total destruction, and it could never be said that the work re-
quired for its re-erection was merely what was understood in
law as mere repairs of the edifice. Was it not an abominable
principle which sanctioned the taking money from the pocket of
one man to pay for the benefits—whether temporal or spiritual
—of another ?—Would the church of England sanction a prin-
ciple involving so gross a violation of morality ?—(Cheers.)
He would ask another question. What would the answer and
conduct of a churchman be, if, under similar circumstances, a
Dissenter was to say to him, pray will you have the goodness to
pay for the re-erection of our meeting-house ?
The Rev. S. F. MORGAN—We would pay for it, were it
established.—(Laughter, intermingled with cries of " Oh, oh :")
Mr. EDISIONDS--Aye, if " established."—(Cheers.) But
he would take the gentleman's expressions as meant, viz., if the
law of the country required him to pay. But because it was
law, was it necessarily moral, equitable, or just ? It was law
once to burn the martyr ; it was law now to take money from a
man's pocket, and apply it for the benefit of others. Both were
wrong--the only difference being in degree. A still stronger
reason for inducing him (Mr. E.) to take the course he was now
advocating, was the thorough conviction that the efficient pro-
mulgation of religion was retarded by the compulsory exaction
of money for the support of church establishments. The most
loggerheaded farmer that ever went to church could never enter
its portals without having his mind distracted with the iniquitous
tithe system by which the establishment was supported, and he
plundered.—(Cheers.) It was the base connection of the Church
of England with politics, and its still baser connection with
pecuniary interests, which injured the efficiency of its ministry.
The prophecy of a Reverend and clear relative of the Rev.
Gentleman, by whom he had been recently interrupted, was
already accomplished. • When speaking upon this subject some
years ago, the Rev. Gentleman said, " We shall shortly have an
Episcopal establishment and a dissenting population." He (Mr.
E.) was an admirer of the doctrines of the Established Church,
and it was for this reason that he wished to see it freed from
those impurities now its most prominent characteristics. If the
proposed rate were put in force, he (Mr. E.) would turn Quaker.
—(Loud cheers.) He would not indeed put on the broad brim,
nor the bacon coat ; he would stiffer himself to be plundered—
not be a party to the robbery.—(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. E.)
was not opposed to the repair of the church, but on the other
hand, should be happy to see it restored to its perfect state ' •
but he would never sanction the principle that one body of
Christians was legally bound to support the establishment of
another. Mr. Edmonds concluded, amidst loud cheers, by pro-
posing the following amendment
That it is highly unjust that persons who are not Members

of the Church of England, and who are Dissenters from it,
should be compelled to contribute towards the support of the
Churches and institutions belonging to that Establishment. That
a Committee be appointed to investigate the circumstances under
which Saint Peter's Church was built--to inquire into the legal
liability of the architects and builderu—to ascertain the liabi-
lity of the inhabitants to repair and restore the said Church ;
and that such Committee do report to a Special Vestry to be
called and advertised for that purpose."—(Cheers.)
Mr. WILLS seconded the amendment.

The Rev. S. F. MORGAN presented himself to the meeting,
but was received with considerable disapprobation. His rea-
son for supporting the exaction of rates was, because it was
done under the authority of a positive law. He knew it would
be immediately asked, upon what grounds was such an unjust
law enacted ? This was, doubtless, a very plausible inquiry,
for on the first blush of the question, it appeared unreasonable
that one body of Christians should be supported by the peen-
niary means of another.. In answer, he begged to reply, that
if he could find a more efficient mode of communicating ge-
neral religious instruction to the whole population of the
country, he would abandon his advocacy of an establishment,
and adopt such a plan. His belief, however, was, that if the
establishment was abandoned, a very large portion of the in-
habitants of the kingdom would be entirely without religious
instruction.---(Hisses, and cries of " No, on.")
Mr. JOSEPH PARKES came forward and was loudly
cheered. The Rev. Gentleman, Mr. Morgan, required no re-
ply, for his speech was altogether one of the blessings of a
Hierarchy, with which the present meeting had no concern.
The Rev. Gentleman assumed the fallacy, that whatever was
established by law was good and holy, and ought to be obeyed.
This egregious position would make the Rev. Gentleman's re-
ligion depend on the accident of his country. In Druidical
times, Mr. Morgan would have been a Druid; in Turkey, he
would be a Mussulman ; in Hindostan, a fire-worshipper ; in
Otaheite, a wooden god-idolator.—(Laughter.) In the days of
the English martyrs, he would have justified the burnings in
Smithfield.—(No, no, from Mr. Morgan and some of the
Churchwardens.) Yes, yes, Mr. Parkes repeated, he hoped lie
should not be considered to impute those principles to the Rev.
Gentleman, but the Rev. Gentleman, by his fallacies, imputed
them unjustly against himself. The Rev. Gentleman, in his
speech, professed great respect for their liberty of conscience;
he wished the Rev. Gentleman would exhibit the same degree
of respect for the pockets as for the consciences of the rate-
payers.—(Loud cheers.) On the question before them, the facts
were, that ecclesiastical law, the ancient Statute law, and
common law, did not impose these church-building bur_
thens on the people ; but certain late Acts of Parliament,
called the " Church Commission Acts," appropriated a mil-
lion sterling of the national money to the erection of new
churches. One of that late batch of statutes burthened parishes
with the cost of keeping such new churches in repair. St.
Peter's Church, built by the London Board of Commissioners,
was destroyed by fire. No public inquiry had been instituted—
no liability of architects or contractors had been yet ascertained--
, no investigation of the necessity or cost of re.erection had been
made by the rate-payers at large. Was it decent to commit the
parish to a rate under such circumstances ?—(Loud cries of
" No.") Was it just, was it creditable, was it politic to force
those not belonging to the Establishment to contribute to the
cost and maintenance of a Church from which, on principle,
and under laws of liberty of conscience, they dissented ? He
called upon Mr. Moseley, the Rector, to declare whether the
harsh enforcement of such a supposed law would ultimately
advance the interest of the Church of England ?—(Cheers.) But
he (Mr. Parkes) denied their liability under the law ; to say the
least, it was doubtful ; whatever it might be, it ought to be in
these times resisted. He had obtained, on Thursday, a copy of
the case submitted by Mr. Whatley and Mr. Arnold for the opi-
nion of Sir James Scarlett : he paid for it 2/. 15s. He did not im-
pute to those legal gentlemen any intentional unfair statement
in that case, but he contended that some representations were
erroneous ; thus the case stated the church was " nearly de-
stroyed." The notice convening the present meeting declared
it to be " destroyed." Now this was a material question, as
Sir James Scarlett, in a marginal note on the case, very perti-
nently observed, that " it is impossible to repair what did not
exist."--(Loud and continued cheers.) He boldly declared
he would do all in his power to defeat a law so abhorrent
to the spirit of the times. He held in his hand a letter from a
well-known and public-spirited friend of the liberties of the
country—a Yorkshireman. He stated, that at Leeds, the people
never would sanction the exactions for these new churches,
sought to be levied indiscriminately on Churchmen and Dis.
senters ; that they had always and successfully defied all legal
threats to enforce them. He wrote further, that at Sheffield
the rate-payers met annually, and after a few minutes adjourned
for 365 days : that a member of the Society of Friends, a
Quaker, the customary Chairman of these Movement Parish
Meetings, was lately dead, but that doubtless other friends
would be found this year to take his place.—(Loud cheers and
laughter, and cries of " We will adjourn.") Two hundred
pounds in that enlightened town now defrayed the church ex-
penditure, which was formerly 2,000/. ; and that which its libe-
ral inhabitants refused to do by legal extortion, they did mu-
nificently by public subscription.--(Loud cheers.) Mr. Parkes
then declared that he should support the amendment, and oppose
the resolution for the rate.—(Loud cheers.)

Mr. WHATELEY, solicitor to the churchwardens, next
presented himself. They were told by the opponents of the
rate, that the destruction of the church amounted to an entire
demolition, and that under such circumstances the parish were
not liable for its re-erection. What, could a building be said to
be totally destroyed when the four walls and even the tower
were still remaining, and when the cost of its repair would only
amount to half the expence of its first erection ?—(1-tear, hear.)
He (Mr. VJ.') had nothing to conceal, and, therefore, he might
further state, that Sir James Scarlett and Mr. Pollock add, that
' if the parish refuse to repair, the Court of King's Bench can,
and will, by Mandamus, compel the churchwardens to make a
rate necessary for the purpose.—(Loud hissing and yelling.)
Mr. PRA KES would merely remark, in reply to Mr. Whate.
ley's statement that he (Mr. Parkes) hail approved the case,
that he had distinctly said the negative. Particularly he had
remonstrated against that part of the case which stated that the
church had been fitted up. Now, if that meant that the church
was pewed, it was incorrect ; the church was delivered up com-
pletely and gratuitously to the parishioners. On examining the
vestry book, he contended the following items certainly were not
fairly to be considered fittings :
Communion Plate £los 4 0
New Bell
Beilby and Knott, Bibles, &c.
Smallwood, Communion-table
Curate's Garments
Communion Linen
Clerk's Gown 8 0 0
Mops, Mats, and Brooms
King's Arms l2 12 6
[During the reading of these items there were repeated
roars of laughter, apparently at the sums, and the last item
especially was received with the same expression of merriment.]
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD declared his determination to sup-
port the amendment brought forward by Mr. Edmonds ; and
he hoped to God, churchman as he was, that he should yet live
to see the day when the Church of England would depend upon
its own members for support.—(Cheers.)
Mr. RUSSELL would never consent to borrow money from
the national purse for the purpose of re.erecting a church.
Mr. MUNTZ declared that if the rate was declared legal, he
for one would not pay it, though he would subscribe to the
amount of his levy.—(Cheers.)
Mr. EYRE LEE protested against the doctrine laid down by
the Rev. Gentleman (Mr. Morgan) that the country were chiefly
indebted to the Church for the instruction of the people.

The amendment was then put and carried amidst the most
tumultuous applause. From six to a dozen hands only were
held up against it. The Chairman was about to put the ori-
ginal resolution, when
Mr. EDMONDS rose upon his scat, and, amidst great eon_
fusion, protested against the Chairman taking the sense of the
meeting upon the original resolution. If the meeting were
tricked into a vote they would have to rue the consequences.
The CHAIRMAN persisted in his determination to put the
question.—(Hisses.)
Mr. PARKES implored the Rev. Chairman and Mr. Whate-
ley not to press the motion. If the original resolution was to
be persisted in, it must not be negatived ; he would move an
amendment every time, and sit it out till midnight.—(Loud
cheers, and cries of " We'll stop till midnight.")
Mr. MOSELEY and Mr. WITATELEY (as we collected in
the tumult) still pressed the resolution.
Mr. PARKES then asked whether the Rector was deter.
mined to revive the old adage—that lawyers never went to
law, doctors never took physic, and the clergy never acted what
they preached.—(Loud cheering.)
Mr. WILLS thought it right to admit, that if the gentlemen
thought proper to press the motion, they had a right to do so.
He saw what their object was, and would defeat it. They
wanted to drive the meeting to a direct refusal to grant a rate,
in order that they might lay the foundation for an application to
the Court of King's Bench for an act of Mandamus.—(" They
shan't do it.")

Mr. WHATELEY dissented.
Mr. WILLS, while he admitted their abstract right to press
the original motion, should avail himself of the unquestionable
right, admitted in all deliberative assemblies of claiming priority
for a motion of adjournment. Let them get out of that if they can.
(Cheers and laughter.) " I move," said Mr. Wills, " that the
Churchwarden's report be referred to the Committee to be ap-
pointed in pursuance of the first resolution, and that the fur-
ther consideration of the question by this vestry be now ad-
journed." (The most deafening and tumultuous cheering fol-
lowed this proposal, which continued for some minutes.)
Mr. EDMONDS rose and withdrew his amendment.
The motion for adjournment being seconded, Mr. WHATE-
LET and the RECTOR conferred together, and afterwards a
long and angry discussion ensued, which we consider best con-
signed to oblivion. Ultimately tht, Chairman admitted that
Mr. Wills's motion had a right of priority. The question was
immediately put from the Chair and carried by tremendous
acclamation.
The CHAIRMAN declared the question of adjournment
carried.—(Loud cheers.)
On the motion of Mr. EDMONDS, a Committee was ap-
pointed pursuant to the first resolution.
The Rector then left the Chair, which was taken by Mr.
Wills.
Mr. PARKES, after complimenting the Rector for with-
drawing the original resolution, proposed a vote of thanks to
the Rev. Gentleman for so doing, and for his general conduct
in the Chair. •
The RECTOR objected to any vote of thanks grounded on
his withdrawal of the resolution.
Mr. PARKES for some time persisted on the form of his
motion ; but on a suggestion from the Chairman that a vote of
thanks ought not to be expressed in terms objectionable to the
feelings of the Rev. Gentleman, he consented to its modification.
The motion was then seconded by Mr. EDMONDS, and
carried by the assembly ; after which the meeting broke up.