The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-26 00:00:00

(711ILDS' CASE.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL that this case de-
served the serious consideration of the House, di yell for, the
sake of the oppressions which Mr. Childs appeared to have
suffered aa for the sitala!ion in which a great portion of their
fellow-subjects, the Dissai!ng placed. The
statements which had been made on behalf' ihd
wardens was this—that during the last year some gentlemen
had refused to pay the Church-rates ; their goods were dis-
trained3 but wrse afterwards returned under circumstances of
excitement and to nuit, and they therefore thought that it
would be better to take another course upon the present occa-
sion, in order that the same scenes which occurred last year
They thought likewise that it would be
better to take the case 1..t0 othet Coutts—to some judge
who would be a stranger to all parties, rstbor than to a Court
composed by persons residing in the neighbouritscrl. As was
said by the Hon. and Learned Member ( Mr. Kelly) he con-
ceived that these motives really opeesital epon the minds of
the Churchwardens. But at the same time he resist say
that he thought the decision was unfortunate, and that they
were not justified in taking this course. The first objection
was, that by this course of proceeding they were obliged to
imprison the person of Mr. Childs, an individual of the highest
respectability, who acted upon conscientious scruples, and the
imprisonment of whose person could not fail to excite the
greatest sympathy and the strongest feelings of indignation
against those who caused it. If they had proceeded against
his goods they might, as the Hon. Member for Middlesex had
stated, have brought the case before the Magistrates, and ob-
tained a distraint against his goods, and thus to obtain the
money that was due to them. He thought there was another
reason why they should not have proceeded as they had done.
It appeared to him clear that the Intention of the law of the Act
of the 53d of George the Third, that for any sum under 10/.
the remedy to be resorted to should not be the Ecclesiastical
Court. That was clearly shewn by one of the provisions
in the Act, from which it was evident that if the rate did
not exceed 101. the framers of the Act thought that they
had prevented the Ecclesiastical Court from interfering. He
(Lord J. Russell) thought, therefore, the Churchwardens had
better have adopted the remedy which they adopted last year,
and that they ought not to have proceeded to the imprison-
ment of the person of Mr. Childs. If the law teas not clear—
if it was not clearly shown to be the intention of the framers
of the Act to give the jurisdiction to the Ecclesiastical Court,
only in cases where the sum amounted to more than 101., the
sooner it was made clear the better. As he had said so much of
the case of Mr. Childs, he must say a word in consequence of
what had been said by the Hon. Member for Middlesex.
That Honourable Gentleman had stated that he hoped
his Majesty's Ministers would undertake the settle-
ment of the question of Church-rates. He ( Lord John
Russell) could not but say, after what had been stated by
the present Earl of Spencer, when in that House last year,
and the settled resolution of Lord Grey's Government, that
it was most desirable the question should be settled, and that
the rate should be abolished. There was, however, a difference
of opinion between the then Government and those who
agreed in the abolition of Church-rates, and that difference
arose partly from the assertion of a principle by Lord Al-
thorp—a principle which the friends of the Established Church
required to be enforced—that it was the duty of the State to
take care that the fabric of the Establishment should be kept
in properrepair, and therefore that that principle ought to be
maintained.—( Hear, hear.) 1, Sir, am still of that opinion.
His Majesty's Government are also of the opinion so declared
by Lord Althorp, that it is the duty of a Legislature wishing
to maintain the Established Church, to see and provide that
the churches of the Establishment are kept in proper repair.
Therefore, in any measure to which I could be a party (I will
not now enter into the question what that measure ought to
be), it would be my duty to see that due provision was made
that the churches of the Establishment should not be suffered
to fall into decay and ruin.—(Great cheering, more especially
from the Opposition..? With this state of the question before
us, it is important to consider it most deliberately ; and with
this view it is equally important to have before us all the facts
which are likely to be brought before Parliament and the pub-
lic, not only by the Church• Commission appointed by Lord
Grey's Government, but by the Commission appointed by
the Government of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, and
which Commission will, I hope, be •renewed, But, Sir,
there is something farther which I have to state, with re-
spect to bringing forward this question during the present
session, and I will state it as plainly as I can to the
House, without arguing the propriety or impropriety of what
I have to say, but leaving it to the judgment of Hon.
Members to decide upon it as it shall seem to them fitting.
His Majesty's present Ministers have resolved to undertake,
during the present session, to propose to Parliament a ques-
tion of very great magnitude, and of very great extent, and
I must add, of very great detail, with respect to municipal
corporations.—( Great cheering.) They have likewise under-
taker, and resolved to bring forward, in the course of no
very long time, a question regarding not only tithes in Ireland,
but the carrying into effect a resolution of this House which
I had the honour to move before the adjournment.—( Cheers. )
Now if I have gained anything from the experience of the
last three years during which I was in the Government it is
this, that I think we frequently fell into difficulties by under-
taking too great a multiplicity of business at once.—(Loud
cheers from the Opposition, echoed back from the Ministerial
benches.) And that although we were enabled to pass some
very great questions—(Cheers)--and although, in the course
of the last four years, we were enabled to propose and carry
measures through Parliament, exceeding in importance, and
exceeding in magnitude, any questions that, in a similar period
of time, were ever proposed and carried in Parliament by any
Government—(Cheers)—yet, at the same time, there were va-
rious other questions which occupied our consideration, which
were brought before Parliament by different Hon. Members,
which, at the end of the session, in the month of August,
we found we were unable to carry forward, for want of time to
give them due consideration.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore, ready
as I am to consider any of those questions which were brought
into this House by the late Government—ready as I am to
entertain and discuss any question which any Hon. Member
may introduce, yet I am not prepared, as far as the Govern-
ment is concerned, to pledge that Government to undertake
any question further than those two—municipal reform in
England and Wales, and the reform of the Irish Church, in-
cluding/the settlement of the tithe question.—( Hear, hear.)
For this reason I will not undertake, during the present ses-
sion, to bring forward any measures with respect to Church-
rates.--( Opposition cheers.) It is a question upon which my
opinions are well known, and one which I would readily bring
forward, in order to consult the interests of the Dissenters, as
well as the interests of the Established Church, but at this
time I cannot do so ; and I wish the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex, clearly to understand the grounds or, which it is that I
will not pledge his Majesty's Government to bring that ques-
tion before the Legislature during the present session.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—Sir, I have nothing to find fault
with respect to the principle which the Noble Lord has
announced on the subject of Church rates, because, if I un-
derstand the Noble Lord, he distinctly admits that it is an
essential condition of an Established Church, that the State
should provide for the maintenance and repair of the Churches.
—( Opposition cheers, in the midst of which Mr. Hume was
understood to express his dissent, while Lord John Russell
bowed in assent.) Sir, I hope the Noble Lord will be al-
lowed to be the interpreter of his own opinions; and that
at the moment the Noble Lord is assenting to my construc-
tion of his own words, I may take that assent to be the in-
dication of his opinion, notwithstanding the contradiction
which some one behind me gives with reference to the No-
ble Lord's assertion.—( Opposition cheers.) The Noble
Lord, in the conclusion of his speech, to remove all doubt
upon the subject, expressly declared that his opinions upon
this question were well known. By that I naturally inferred
(and I have no right to infer any other opinion), that as the
Noble Lord's opinions are well known, he still maintains
the opinions which he boldly declared when Lord Althorp
brought forward the measure of Church rates.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—With regard to the principle.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—With regard to the principle—
the question of principle, I apprehend, being whether the
State is bound to maintain and repair the fabric of the
churches. That was the proposition brought forward by
Lord Althorp—brought forward in the spirit of great accom-
modation to, and with the intention and practical effect of, re-
lieving the Dissenters from a great burden. The proposition
of Lord Althorp was this—that whereas he, finding the total
amount of the expenditure for the repairs of the church, and
the performance of divine service, to be between 500,000/.
and 600,000 L, he proposed, with respect to a large portion
of that sum, not to make any provision ; but said, " I will
throw upon those who are members of the Church the neces-
sity of providing for all those expenses, for which there is
hardly a legal or equitable motive for charging the country
generally, amounting to 360,0001." " But (said Lord Al-
thorp) there is another sum, I find, estimated at 250,0001.
annually, which is expended in the repairs of the fabrics
of the Establishment; and I consider• it to be essential
to the priaciple of an Establishment, that the State should
provide for that object. I do, therefore, propose to give
this great boon to those who couseientiously dissent from
the Established Church ; that is, to relieve them from
any charge on account of that sum of 360,000/. expended
either improvidently or for objects not properly connected with
the principle of an establishment. But with respect to the
sum of 250,0001., I will relive the Dissenters as well as others
altogether from the vexation of individual collection ; I will
relieve you altogether from occasional demands of payment to
the church-rate in addition to county-rates and poor-rates, and
will transfer to the general revenues, and merge that charge in
the general expenditure of the country, so that no one may
have to object to the vexation of a public charge, nor, on ac-
count of conscientious scruples, to the payment of an indivi-
dual charge." That was the rational, and, as it appears to
me, the just proposition made by Lord Althorp. In that pro-
position the Noble Lord and the other members of the present
Government concurred, and it had the advantage, in support
of the principle, of the speech of the Noble Lord. That
proposition, however, was met by a counter-proposition by the
Hon. Member for Middlesex,. but which was declared by the
Noble Lord and by Lord Althorp to differ altogether from
the principle they had supported. The Hon. Gentleman
proposed that the Church-rates should be abolished. He
proposed, equally with Lord Althorp, that all charges of
an equivocal nature should be removed without an equi-
valent, but he objected to the proposition of the Noble
Lord to provide an equivalent for that portion of the
rates which were not of an equivocal- nature, out of the reve-
nues of the State. He did -not, indeed, go to the extent of
saying that the Church should make good the deficiency, but
he made
_this proposition as differing in principle from the

- _ -
proposition of the two Noble Lords. It was moved by the
Hon. Member for Middlesex, " That it would be inexpedient
to take into consideration any proposition to provide means for
the maintenance of the edifices belonging to the Established
Church, untilouid tbheekrw
aiomon, unt of the funds belonging to that
and found to be inadequate to meet
that end other cliaree'L'•" Upon that proposition, involvi ngle
principle *f ari an ce with tin; one asserted by the two Nobee
Lords, the House divided, and 1 hed the satisfaction of di-,
viding with the Noble Lord opposite and Lord Althorp, and
ivu eeceeesfully maintained our common principle, in opposi-
tion to the Hen, Gentleman, by 256 to 140; thus establishing
that it was essential to the existence of the principle of an Es
Church
Es-
tablishment that provision should he made for the support °
the fanrie by the State. I have heard with the greatest satis-
faction this night, that the Noble Lord retains, though he is not
prepared to carry them out this session, the original opieil
which he last session defended with such great ability' and tat
although he proposes delay, yet upon the principles of the
e
measure he has not changed.—( Cheers.) Believing the cours
hich the Noble Lord took last year to be a wise concessicer
to the conscientious scruples of the Dissenters—and it is right
I should say this, and that I should not attempt to gain Of
popularity by concealing what I myself intended to do--he-
lieving, I say, the course of the Noble Lord to be a wise onee
I have no hesitation in saying, that although I should have felt
it my duty to have put an end to this question of Church-rates
had .I remained is office, yet it was my intention to adopt the
principle advocated by the Noble Lord—that of doing seeeY,
with all equivocal charges, and of making, in lieu of Chao
rates, provision by the State out of the public revenue-e-
-( Great cheering)—to the extent contemplated by the Nob
Lord. It is right the Noble Lord should hare the benefit, in
support of the principle which he is disposed to ineintain,
the declaration I have now made. At the same time 111 r.!
bound to say, that I should not have proposed to impose t11:50
charge upon the land-tax. That, in point of fact, ;let
use a disrespectful term, was a conundrum discovered tee
moment it was proposed. It was nothing more than an 8"
vance from the general funds of the State, and my er°P°;
sition would have been to have paid it by a direct vote eele
of the public revenue. It would have been connectl"
with a proposition for the relief of Ireland from the sr-
rears on account of tithes—( Cheers)—and also a proposil
for granting aid to Scotland on behalf of the Establish ,
Church.—(Great cheering from the Opposition.) Theusi
were the equivalents to the other parts of the empire whiek,ie
should have proposed for voting this money out of the pue'ef
revenue, for the purpose of giving a bonus to this paret..o
the empire alone. But the satisfaction with which IBed,
:Jo
heard the Noble Lord's declaration on the principle is g ree
qualified by hearing the declaration of its being intended
leave this question in its present state for another year be.
(Cheers, and cries of " Hear, hear," from all parts of le,
House.) This is a practical question, that requires iielnis
diate settlement.—( Renewed Cheers.) And let me te le
ll o
Noble Lord that he is under a peculiar obligation to edvan ,
the settlement of this questien. You may refer to the e°°.,,
duct of these Churchwardens and to the unwillingness a !fa'
sons to pay Church-rates ; but they will refer you to rie
own Act of Parliament brought in by your Government
the year 1834, which asserted the necessity of abolish 3
Church-rates, and of providing a remedy for the
dev
arising out of their existence. Can you be surprised
the dissatisfaction with which Church-rates are /ice
Can you be surprised at the embarrassments in el uee
churchwardens are involved in the collection of st he
rates, if Government bring in a measure denouncing e
system, and which was carried by a majority of 256 to 14%,,
April 1834, and when June 1835 is approaching, the Goveltie
meet come down and say, " Although our principles nrese
question remain the same, yet we are not prepared—('t of
Opposition cheering)—to propose a practical settlernee see
it ?"—( Renewed cheering from the Opposition.) I eall o
n •
no ground, if the Noble Lord adheres to his principle, °See
which he declines to bring forward the practical result
t,;14
Session. I will suggest to him that there are imp stied
matters to be considered before the question can be set ere
and which were not considered by Lord Althorp. The luealeile
was most certainly brought in by that Noble Lord witholltf
consideration, and it confirms the statement of the Noble Lib,
opposite—( Opposition cheers and laughter)—that netwee
standing the great triumphs of the Noble Lord's Governtes, •
yet their attempts were not always unattended with diffieurse
—(Laughter and cheers from the same quarter.) .10.
always glad, when I can, to produce a practical proof ie
and
port of the arguments of a Minister of the Crown,
ad
this affords one proof that sometimes the Noble Ler,c,l bat
his colleagues did proceed somewhat too hastily, and less
reasonable men might well believe that a slower ereer
in legislation, accompanied with more mature consieee
milt= and delay, might answer the object of g:":„
policy better than extreme rapidity in bringing forwarsl,-,
sures, and an equal rapidity in abandoning them.—(Se,
sition cheers.) Lord Althorp said he would vote 250,t75e.
out of which was to be paid a debt of 60,000/., in c 0 that
quence of the Church-rates having been mortgaged tLatit
amount. But I called for a return of the real aloe
for which the rates were mortgaged ; and certainly punt-
surprised to find that instead of the incumbrance airsea
ing to 80,0001., it was nearer 827,0001.—( Laughter'
cheers from the Opposition.) The Noble Lord will fir:1110
am not wrong ; and as I have, in order to encourage the
Lord, delivered into his hands the Dissenters' Marriage Pee'
will with equal fairness, to enable him to give practical ale
to his principles, give to him all the data I have that tee
demonstrate the existence of this debt.—( Opposition chies
With respect to the Reform of Municipal Corporations, all be
about to say a word upon that subject, but I fear I eh': of
called to order. Without undervaluing the impertanc` fat
that measure, yet, so far as public order is concerned-I so'
as giving satisfaction to Dissenters is concerned--a°
ob-
far as removing from the Statute-book laws open t 0
sit,
jection, and difficult to be enforced—difficult, because„l:
vernment has pronounced an intention to abolish th_ee pee
will say there is not one question of greater irneer:tee
in its practical consequences, not one, excepting the ell`-tesisl
of the Irish Church, which so much presses for a Pra%g;)
settlement as this question of Church-rates.—( Great cheerio%
I must confess that I thought that one of the grounds „eel
which I had been dismissed from office was, that my eeeeeees
to power had a tendency to interrupt several practical Wells_ se4:
--(Opposition cheers. )—actually under your consideratioviero
which were nipped in the bud by that unfortunate frees;
took place about the 9th of November last.—(Laugielte
cheers.) It was put upon record in the most formal °en the
lemn manner by his Majesty's most faithful Commons if
amendment to the Address, that they " beg leave subulteeee-
to add, that they cannot but lament that the progrese,e „der
and other reforms should have been interrupted ant' ef°
gered—( Loud cheers. )--by the unnecessary dissolutiel.loo ,
Parliament earnestly intent upon the vigorous proseeutleeliehi
measures—( Opposition laughter and cheers)--t°,„ and
the wishes of the people were most anxious', thee'
justly directed.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
if you had askod me, upon the. most solemn obligetSseol,
what more particular measures in addition to ell ,eaer
reform, that amendment had especial reference, et 'took
have answered---." You must mean a commutation ("eie
and the abolition of Church-rates, because these were L.eofr.'
measures upon which the late Parliament were most r-e,
larly and most earnestly intent." I will add one other tesei
sure—the Dissenters' Marriage Bill. These were tra sh!.
measures which it was said I had interrupted by adh's „
dissolution of Parliament. What, I ask, is to hapPe.,„e
reepect to the commutation of tithes? That, I undees':eifor
to remain over ; the Dissenters' Marriage Bill is postr„-peeedill"i
three weeks ; and a declaration has been made by
authority—l mean the Member for the Tower Heiu'ceesstti°-
you must not touch this measure individually, bet
must consider what influence it will have upon the Cherillo -
rates and upon commutation of tithes, and then wilierf° whirl
large philosophical measure, founded upon princie) If
will give universal satisfaction.—( Opposition cheerse fuhee
had asserted that in the Speech from the Throne--7,0 Oh-
said do not legislate partially, but do nothing until Y wee'
provide for every interest, temporal and spiritual—donta, yolt
one subject till all are provided for, then icicle° die'
might have added, as an amendment, that the f g°""
lotion of Parliament had interfered with the progress ° )
measures.—( Cheers, and laughter from the Opeosititent 'll
there can be no question if his Majesty's late Governs coin"
November had turned their attention to the question o' e bee:,
mutation of tithes and of Church-rates, they might haj'esough;
prepared to bring them forward this Session. But 8'
or
the Noble Lord has anounced the principle that tithes:o pas
to be commuted, still, as in the case of Church-rates, ee pre:
intimated that that question will not be settled during t'de
sent Session. The Noble Lord ought not to have ire
declaration until he was prepared to follow it up by
practical effect. To make such announcements of P,r; to lere
before you are prepared to act upon them, tends on/ epee
crease the dissatisfaction of the people with the existilee
and to impede the progress of those arrangements betw fele"'
dividuals, which might supersede the necessity of; woe
alters`" of
of the law upon amicable grounds. But upon te sti.s prtir
Church-ratesesurely the Noble Lord, adhering to
ciple, and getting possession of all the facts necessary teioper:,
him to act upon that principle—surely, of whatever
tance corporation reform may be, or of whatever irelleet
(and I admit its importance) the immediate settleord see
the Irish Church question may be, the Noble hick (1"
his colleagues, having been parties to that Bill eljeeti"-
,s.
nounces the existence of Church-rates, and on rie it ,e;
still retaining their opinions upon the great prineif by 00
volves, and being enabled to execute that peleciPie of
smallest possible measure—namely, by a mere vote, eecl,!
hundred and fifty thousand pounds, 'surely the Noble e'
reusey in
consideration of the interests of the Established seeetestrY
andsconideration of the satisfaction of the people of
ands:te rdititi
in consideration of maintaining obedience eieieuSs
tion to the law, and effecting the supercession of tie bee
complaints against particular grievances like those fit so babe
heard this night—surely, an Executive CL.vernmellt
this greso
entrusted with the administration of the atieits oftiot
country—(Cheers)—will feel that this question oug.°aadc to
be left to the discussion of parish vestries, or to be ear,"
subject of resistance by parochial martyrs for another t
(Great cheering from the Opposition.) es it saidtbif
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUes— heerseee
he was not the least thrown off his balance by the,rehe Rjg
Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House. exelat e
Hon. Baronet certainly has made (continued the Chane get
the Exchequer) a very able speech, but he has not mate
a candid one.—(Ministerial cheers.) Let us considee_etweelit'?
as possible what is the argument of the Right Hon. Qr;;Jese
He has argued altogether as if—(and I put it tc%te vele
whether the two cases are at all similar)—as• if * esel:fi't
Government stood now in the position in which it wevvreeseet
stood—(Ministerial cheers)—if that change 00° e tseo
which took place in November last had not. Oeeurr°_;;_iifee'"
that change had not been succeeded by a geteeraltre sin 011'
(Cheers.) There is not one single word cont .lee''reseee
amended Address to the Throne which .1 "is °"l4eueeet4t4
as_ strongly es I voted for it before. If, jndeod,t