The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-21 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The Speaker took the chair at 12 o'clock.!
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

On the motion of Mr. CHILDERS the order for the
second reading of the Street Railway Bill was discharged,
and the bill was ordered to be read a second time on the 9th
of April.

The following bills were read a second time :
Bognor Railway; Brighton, Uckfield, and Tunbridge
Wells Railway; London and North Western Railway
(Additional Powers) ; London and North Western Railway
(Cheshire Lines) ; London and North Western Railway
(Liverpool Lines) ; Londonderry and Lough Swilly Rail-
way ; Morayshire Railway ; Newcastle under Lyme Marsh
Lands ; Peteraield Railway (Deviation) ; Sneyd's Branch
Railways ; Tiverton Roads ; Tyne Improvement ; and
Exeter and Exmouth Railway.
Some railway and other private bills were also read a first
time.

QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES BILL.
Mr. lIADFIELD, in moving the second reading of this
bill, said that the qualification which he proposed to abolish
was a relic of the barbarism of former times, when the
sacramental test of 1662 was introduced in the case of all
persons employed in the military and civil services of the
country. So distasteful was this test that 2,000 clergy..
men resigned their ministry rather than conform to it.
In 1828 that test was repealed, but the qualification clause
was introduced. By this qualification the party taking
office declared, on the faith of a true Christian, that he
would not use any power, authority, or influence he might
possess to weaken the influence of the Established Church,
as by law established in England, or to deprive the prelates
and clergy of such Church of the privileges they at present
enjoyed. Now this qualification declaration was required
to be taken by magistrates, which was a practical griev-
ance, as it tended to exclude Dissenters who might be
desirous to serve their country as magistrates, and

referred to certain cases which had come under his
observation to illustrate this position. None of the
members of any Government in this country made this
declaration, and they got rid of it by pleading ignorance of
the law which required such declaration to be made within
six months after the acceptance of office, for which an act
of indemnity specially provided. He contended that this
was most unjust, for there was no reason shown why the
exemption should not be extended to those who occupied
humbler stations than that of Ministers of the Crown. Such
difference in respect to a statutory requirement was a dis-
grace'; and so far from the members of the Church of
England endeavouring to perpetuate such an absurdity,
they should turn their attention to the heresies and dis-
sensions that prevailed amongst their own clergy, some of
whom were accused of not having any belief in revelation.
Having referred to the course of legislation in respect to
this bill, which had been passed by this house but rejected
by the House of Lords, he concluded with his ruction.
Mr. BAZ LEY seconded the motion.

Mr. NE WDEGATE opposed the bill. The alleged
grievance which this bill proposes to abolish related to the
case of persons accepting corporate offices who were merely
required not to use their powers against the Church' of
England which was a constitutional element. Now, he
considered, there was no hardship in such a declaration,
and was the ground on which they had acted for the last
32 years in admitting to office persons who were not mem-
bers of the State Church. He appealed strongly to tke
house to follow the example of the House of Lords, and
reject the present measure merely for the sake of what was
called religious equality. He concluded by moving that
the bill be read a second time that day six months.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that this declaration was a mere
fanciful and ideal security to the established Church. It
was a more declaration that was not enforced by any secular
penalty, and which was capriciously administered. No man
could le indicted for perjury for a violation of this decla-
ration, and the stability of the Established Church rested
upon far different securities to that which the declaration
afforded. He would therefore vote for the second reading
of the bill, but at the same time he must state that the ex-
isting law did not inflict the practical grievances
which the hon. member for Sheffield supposed.

Mr. SOTHERON ESTCOURT said he concurred in
what the last speaker said, but he considered that it was
one of the first steps towards destroying the bulwarks of
the Established Church, and by sapping and mining to
effect the separation of the Church and State—an object
which Dissenters did not hesitate to avow. He considered
the declaration quite useless, but for the reason he assigned
he felt bound to oppose this bill and support the amend-
ment.

The house then divided, and the numbers were—
For the second reading .. 93
Against . BO
Majority
The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed this day fortnight.