The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-07 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 7, 1850.'

could
which it
as
d
of the
,(:14c+inscieneesefra.
yfni:ni,
eitdr
nbes
i:tppeteeresionniii
csen:i.:ipnvei:labtierlin—isii,yenhbanwsayeionaccEtt)sh o thatcountry—theifia s its
wasof onlyt Itlha eep
frni
bn
people.ac di
nl principle
The
was
dvtfserint. ruoaorbtthhi
teashhhneer
t(:e belief
f
sir eepment w,fs(olo:pewee
ore
tttrheibpso:th,el.:b.
01;11:1
tsrPb,ih;
by the Eetehlishment.—("Hear, hear," from Mr. Roe-
buck.) Therefore in legislating with regard to it, it
had always been the practice to consider what would be
calculated to promote the efficiency of the Church, the
extension of its principles, and to remedy the evils which
might arise within it, without wishing to interfere with
the freedom of other men's convictions. They would
vindicate for others the same liberty of conscience which
they desired for there elves; but they could not perma-
nently maintain the Church upon any principle incon-
sistent with paying the same respect to liberty of con-
science and belief in Churchmen which they always
extended to every community of Dissenters. The prin-
ciple enunciated by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Sheffield was a tyrannical principle. According to his
principle they would first make the Church their help in
the great work of government, and then turn round on
it and say, " We will make use of the connexion, be-
cause it is useful to us in maintaining the foundations of
society, not for the purpose of extending its efficiency
according to its own principles, but for the sake of
cramping its efficiency and preventing its extension ;
taking care it shall not accommodate itself to the chang-
ing circumstances and wants of mankind, as other reli-
gious communities are able to do. The Church shall
have no such power, but shall be kept in that state in
which it has remained for the last 200 years." It was
idle to sax that Parliament could make the requisite
changes. 'To leave it to Parliament was to say they
should not be made at all. Would that House endure
debates on questions of a purely spiritual character ? It
would be impossible, even if they all belonged to the
same religious community; besides, they were not re-
turned for such a purpose. It came to this, were they to
accept this proposition, it being impossible for Parliament
to deal with the subject; or would they assert that
nothing should be done, and that the Church should re-
main in precisely the same attitude in which it had stood
for centuries past ?—(Hear.) If there was any one thing
which caused that increase of ignorance and vice now
growing up throughout the country, it was the want of
provision for the spiritual wants of the people. The
Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield had spoken of
the convocation as though it were something new in
principle. He denied that. Every one know that it was
as much a part of the constitution that the spiritual
wants and necessities of the people should be considered
by the bishops and clergy in convocation, as that their
political wants and necessities should be considered by
that House. Every change since the Reformation had
been made by the convocation, on whose resolutions the
Parliament acted. But in the statutes passed in the
reign of Henry VIII., defining the constitution and the
royal prerogative in matters ecclesiastical, it was dis-
tinctly laid down that the Constitution of England bad
always consisted of -a temporal and spiritual element,
and that the latter was represented in convocation.
That went down to - the reign of George IL
When the Prayer-book was last revised, in the
reign of Charles 11., that Monarch stated in the
preface, which any one might see who would take up
his Prayer-book, that, as often as it should be
necessary to consider and debate matters affecting the
spiritual welfare of the Church of England, the convoca-
tion should be consulted.—(Hear, hear.) That was in
active operation down to the time of George 1., and they
all knew under what circumstances it was stopped. The
Minister of the day appointed a man to be a bishop who
did not hold the doctrines of the Church, for Bishop
Headley belonged to the class of Unitarians. The con-
vocation took up the matter, and the Crown suspended
its sittings; and from that time to the present the Crown
had, by suspending the sittings of the convocation, in
principle done the same thing as King Charles attempted
to do e hen he prevented Parliament meeting from time
time for the dispatch of business. The constitutional
law, however, remained the same, and the convocation
possessed the same functions r.s ever, and the reason
why no motion was made for its restoration was because
it was a body imperfectly and unsatisfacterily consti-
tuted, end did not furnish a true representation of the
Church of England.—(Hear, hear.) What was desired
was a practical bona fide representation of the feelings
of the Church. Was it a matter of no practical
importance • that whilst the power of self legisla-
tion had been suspended in the Church, they
had seen the great Wesleyan body impelled by
the purest motives, and the most admirable zeal
and piety, breaking offfrom the Establishment?—(Hear,
hear.) Was it nothing that they had seen the continual
growth of Dissenters from the Church, which might
easily have been checked had proper steps been taken
in time, and a persistence in the same course could not
fail to result in ever-increasing dissent. The end—if
they persevered in the same policy, even at home—
would be that they would ace the Church fall to pieces,
and the enemies of the Establishment, being no longer
opposed by the united force of its friends, would inevi-
tably prevail, simply because they refused to give the
Church sufficient internal power and energy to develope
itself in the natural way. With respect to the colonies,
the case was much stronger, because the circumstances
were different. Take New Zealand and India,' for in-
stance, where they had to deal with a large heathen po-
pulation. They had their liturgies, articles, and ser-
vices, all constructed with reference to a nation already
Christian. To say that there should be no . authority
capable of determining on the mode of operations neces-
sary with reference to the necessities of a heathen coun-
try, was in substance, to refuse that libertyand natural de-
velopment which was enjoyed by Roman Catholics,
Presbyterians, and every sort of Protestant Dissenters.
Was it impossible that the Established Church should
have the same power, and yet be useful to the State?
Look at the Established Church in Scotland. It might
be said that there, too, a secession had taken place.
Granted. But that was due, principally, to a disregard
of the religious opinion, and a desire to carry a tem-
poral law too far and beyond its province, and without
any sufficient necessity; and when they wished to re-
trace their steps it was too late. They did, however, re-
trace their steps. They came down to the House and
proposed a law that if any reasonable cause could be
shown against it, the nominee of the ratron should not
have the benefice. Had that been done at the time a
great evil might have been averted. But they had not
taken away the power of self-legislation float the Scotch
Church because of the secession. Upon all these
grounds he had no hesitation in saying that he would
vote for the motion of his Right Honourable Friend,
not merely because he conceived what he proposed to be
necessary—not only because be thought it desirable that
the Church should do the work for which it was in-
tended, bat also becaeso he believed, though circute-
starces hat induced them to impose arbitrary restric-
tions on the Church of England through a long series of
years, and though the imperfect constitution of the con-
vocation might make it impossible to restore it, that be-
fore long some such tribunal must be provided.
Sir G. GREY, without entering at length on the
great question of the connexion between the Established
Church and the State, would content himself with
saying that he totally differed from the Hon. and
Learned Member for Sheffield, who wished to see a dis-
union between them. Differing from the Hon. and

Learned Member in that, and anxious as he was to see
the Church made an instrument of increasing usefulness
to all classes, he could not help deeply regretting the
course taken by some members of the Church, which
had lei to proceedings tending to exhibit the Church in
a state of disunion—(Loud cheers)—thereby impairing
its efficiency, and diminishing its usefulness.—(Re-
newed cheers.) After the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman, he had not anticipated that they would have
been led into that far wider question recently adverted
to, because the Right lion. Gentleman based his motion
on their having no Established Church in the colony to
which it applied. All he appeared to ask was that the
Church of England should be placed on the same
footing as other denominations. Ile had listened
with attention to the speech of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, and had read the motion, and his impres-
sion certainly was that the object of it was
to enable the body which he proposed to constitute of
the bishops, clergy, and laity, to make regulations which
should have the force of laws.—(Hear, hear.) True,
they were limited to particular objects, but still they
would not only be binding on the members of that com-
munion in fot o conseientice, but have the force of law.
There was one express provision in which the prero-
gative of the Crown was saved, intimating that with
the exception of that case the prerogative was to be
curtailed. Another provision transf,rred the power ex-
ercised by the Crown to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
If there were any defects at present existing in the
power of enforcing the ecclesiastical authority by mem-
bers of the Church of Ehgland, the Bill passed by
Lord Stanley gave a remedy by application to the colo-
nial Legislature. The Right Hon. Member for the Uni-
versity of Oxford, however, was not satisfied with the
constitution of that body, because it was not composed
exclusively of members of the Church of tngland; but if
the objection was worth anything it applied equally to
the House of Commons. All that had spoken had failed
to convince him that the Church of England in Van Die-
men's Land and New South Wales suffered under any
disability which prevented its bishops, clergy, and mem-
bers from making any regulations they pleased inter se,
by voluntary agreement, which might bind them in fora
conseientim, just the same as Romanists, Wesleyans, or
any other denomination. Why, then, confer on them
the dangerous power of making regulations having the
force of laws? It had been hinted that the Church of
England laboured under some special disability. If so,
let it be pointed out and removed, and place the Church
on an equal footing with other religious bodies, and do
not give special or peculiar privileges under the specious
pretence of disabilities.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ADDEIiLEY said the Right Hon. Baronet had
challenged them to name any disability under which the
Established Church laboured. The disability was that
the Church could not meet together to pass bye-laws,
like any other corporation, under the penalties of prce-
munire. The whole object of his Right Hon. Friend's
motion was simply that the members of the Church
might be able to meet and pass bye-laws, without
licences from the Crown. That was the disability, and
if they were prepared to remove that, he asked no more.
But he contended that it was a disability, and that not
an argument had been urged in its defence.—(Hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to think that some
mysterious power was being asked for by the Church of
England, us if it were proposed by the Right Hon.
Member for the University to make a sort of intperium
in imperio of the Church—as if it were to have extensive
powers of legislation conferred upon it that would bind
every man, woman, and child, and enable it even to im-
pose penalties. But nothing of the sort was proposed.
And, with regard to the provisos, his Right Hon. Friend
had stated his willingness to postpone them, in order to
give the Government an opportunity of deciding upon
some meins of relieving the Church from the disability
of which it now complained. His Right Hon. Friend
had moved, and he (Mr. Adderley) took the proposition

and should Tote upon it simply as it stood, that it
should he lawful ter the
,bishops and officers of the
Church of England to meet together without incurring
penalties. The Hot. nod Learned Member for Sheffield
appeared to think, which he (Mr. Adderley) had
never heard before, that it was essential to the character
of the Church of England to be connected with the
state. This was the lion. and Learned Gentleman's
whole and sole argument—that whereas the Church of
England was connected with the state in this country,
therefore it should be connected with the state in the
colonies ; that it should be put on a footing of
equality with the Jumpers. He did not know exactly
what the Hon. and Learned Gentleman meant by that;
but the position of the Church in the colonies was, that
whereas it was not fairly connected with the state there,
in England it was connected with the state; that in the
colonies it was only partially connected with the state,
and that the connexion was such that it had all the dis-
ability and none of the advantages. That was the simple
position of the Church in the colonies. It was just so
far connected with the state as to be unable to act for
itself, without a single privilege being given in return
fur that disability ; and it only asked that it should be
placed upon the same footing as other religious denomi-
nations, aad have the power of making bye-laws for itself
in the same manner us any common corporation in this
country, and no more.
Mr. HUME said he took it for granted that no court
of justice in the colonies would allow a prosecution for
promunire; and he thought that nothing could be more
dangerous to the peace and welfare of the colonies than
for Parliament to give any one sect privileges such as
were now asked for.—(Divide, divide.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that if he were
of opinion that the rejection of the clause would impair
the Church of England in the colonies, it would not be
opposed by him.--(Hear.) As he understood it, the
principal objection to the existing system was, that the
members of the Church of England had not a church
government to refer to—that having the establishment
and the ministry of the Church, they had not the courts
of the Church to control and direct them. It was true,
that, on the first institution of bishops in the colonies, it
was thought that the Crown could give them the power
of establishing these courts. But upon further investi-
gation it was ascertained that it could not be done. He
apprehended, however, that it was by no means necessary
to the efficiency of the Church in the colonies that
there should be ecclesiasticrl courts and ecclesiastical
censures, or any of the various modes for the govern-
ment of the Church which were established in this coun-
try; and that it was quite enough, if there were grounds
of complaint, that parties connected with the Church
should be placed on a footing with other denominatiens
The Hon. Member for Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley) had
stated that there was an objection to the parties meeting
together and arranging the conduct of the affairs of the
Church, because they were apprehensive that they would
'render themselves liable to a prcemunire ; but surely the
Hon. Gentlemaa must be aware:that trio statutes of pre-
munirs were territorial enactments, and were not applica-
ble to the colonies at all. If these parties were to be
upon an equality with other persuasions, let them do as
other persuasions had done, establish rules amongst
themselves, by mutual consent, for their own govern-
ment. But if this were not adequate, what, then,
was the proper course to be adopted in this
Bill? The principle of the measure was that
of self-government in the colonies, and yet it was
now desired to insert an exception to that principle, and
create a concurrent authority to make particular :laws
upon particular subjects. But, in order to see the dan-
gerous character of the proposition, it was necessary to
loek at the terms of the Right Hon. Gentleman's mo-
tion. He did not propose that the bishops, clergy, and
laity should meet and -establish a simple Church
government for the conduct of their ecclesiastical
affairs, but meet from time to time, and when
they did meet, to make provision for meeting for the
same purpose thereafter. What aid the Right Hon.
Gentleman mean by the conduct of ecclesiastical affairs ?
Did he mean the alteration of the Church service or the
making of regulations for the direction of those who
were members of the Church ? Ho left the question
entirely vague. It was impossible to understand it. But
if they took the provisos it would be seen that they gave
power even to impose pecuniary penalties. It they
adopted a clause of this sort, as applicable to the colo-
nic,, why not have a similar enactment far thit country ?
It was supported neither by practice nor precedent, and
ought not to he adopted.
Mr. WALPOLE could not bat think, from the re-
marks which had fallen from Mr. Labouchere, Sir G.
Grey, and the Attorney• General, that the object of the
proposed clause was totally misunderstood by the Go-
vernment. If the object were, as it was supposed, to
give pre-eminence to the Church of England, he for one,
considering the circumstances of the colonies, would tot
assent to the proposition. But he thought he could
satisfy the House that, in point of fact, this clause
simply proposed to put the Church of England upon
the same footing in the colonies as the other religious
denominations, so that they might manage their own
affairs. His Hon. and Learned Friend had stated that
if they chose to meet together and form arrangements
for themselves, they could do so without subjecting
themselves to any fine; but he forgot that by the sta-
tute of Henry VIII., whereby the clergy were to
submit to the Crown in all their proceedings, none of
the clergy or members of the Church could meet to-
gether and make regulations for themselves without
the assent of the Crown, unless they subjected them-
selves to severe fine or imprisonment. He presumed
that when a colony was constituted in a distant pos-
session of the Crown, and the Church of England was
established there, it carried with it the laws of the
Church, and that the Church could not have free action
except in obedience to and in compliance with those
laws, the consequence of which was, that if a clergyman
in the colonies disobeyed the injunction of the spiritual
head of his Church there were no means whatever of en-
forcing obedience. The motion would not establish
legislative authority in the Church, but merely allow
it to make its own arrangements, and then enforce them
in the civil courts in the same way as the arrangements
of any other religious body might be enforced in those
courts. That being so, surely it was moat unreasonable
for the Government to refuse their assent to the motion.
Let them remember that they did not want to establish
consistorial courts. The Church merely asked, not
preeminence, but equality, and if that equality were
denied, it would remind him of those days when, in the
history of our own country, there was toleration granted
to everybody but members of the Church of England,
and they were refused the free permission to use, either
in public or in private, the common prayers of the Church
of England.—(flear, hear.) _ _

Mr. GLADSTONE, in reply, said all he asked was,
that the House should give to the members of the
Church of England, in the Australian colonies, the same
power, neither more nor less, and the same means, nei-
ther more nor less, which were at this moment possessed
and exercised by every other religious body in the colo-
nies.—(Loud sheers.) And most willing was he to sub-
mit to any limitations, and any phraseology which could
be devised or suggested, for the purpose of scouring that
he should gain nothing more than that object.—(Hear,
hear.) Moreover, he could say this, that if he received
from her Majesty's Government a pledge that they would
examine the subject with the means they possessed,
would ascertain, to the best of their power, the state of
the law, and would engage that that same power arid no
other, which all voluntary religious societies possessed
in the colonies, should be secured to the members of the
Church of England in the colonies, he would withdraw
rho clause.—(He.tir, bear.)
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it
Majority
_

The clause was accordingly lost.

Mr. ANSTEY moved the addition of the following
clause:—" And be it enacted, that the said island of Van
Diemen's Land shall, from and ef,er the passing of this.
Act, be named and styled Tasmania; and that the said;
island, together with the several dependencies of the.
same, shall form one and the same colony, and be styled;
and reputed as the colony of Tasmania." He thought
that as the name of Port Philip bad been changed to.
that of Victoria, that of Van Diemen's Land might be
changed to Tasmania—the name that was generally{
adopted in the colony itself.
Mr. WYLD seconded the motion.
Mr. LABOUCIIERE would prefer that the old name
d e:
to which they wore accustomed should be continued. 1
was hardly worth while, however, to raise a discussion
on the point without the opinion of the colony being ex-
pressed upon it.
The clause was negatived without a division.
Mr. ANSTEY said the next clause he bad to pro-
pose was one on which be really must take a division.—
(Laughter.)
It was as follows:—" And be it enacted,
that the first writs for the election of the several legis-
lative councils of the said colonies of Victoria, Van
Diemen's Land, South Australia, and Western Australia
respectively, shall, as soon as conveniently may be after
the passing of the several ordinances constituting the
same, be issued by the governors, lieutenant-governors,
or persons actually administering the government of the
said colonies respectively, and that such ordinances shall
have and obtain the force of law from and immediately
after the passing thereof respectively, anything in the
said recited Act contained to the contrary in anywise
notwithstanding."
No Hon. Member having seconded the motion, it fell
to the ground amiist the laughter of the House.
Mr. WYLD moved the addition of clauses for the pur-
pose of creating an executive council in the colony, corn-
posed of the principal officers of the state, who should
have the direction and control of the convicts there.
In this case also there was no seconder, and the mo-
tion was therefore not put from the Chair.
Mr. E. DENISON and Mr. MOWATT both postponed to
the third reading of the Bill the amendments of which
they had given notice.
The report on the Bill was then received, and the Bill
ordered to be read a third time on Monday next.

DISTRESSED UNIONS ADVANCES AND RE-
PAYMENT OF ADVANCES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the order of the day for the third reading of this
Bill,
Mr. DISRAELI asked if the Irish Franchise Bill,
which was fixed for Friday, would come on first on that
day
Sir? G. GREY said it was the intention of his Noble
Friend to bring it on first.
Mr. DISRAELI—The Stamp Acts Bill was also fixed
for Friday?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would
state on Friday what he should do respecting that
measure.
Mr. STAFFORD said relative to the Bill before the
House, that in order to advance 300,0004, they made the
property of Ireland to the amount of 4,700,0001. liable,
and placed it solely at the disposal of one man, instead
of the measure being a boon to Ireland, it was going
upon the old, miserable, disastrous system of compelling
those unions that managed their accounts well to pay for
those that managed their accounts ill. He wished to
know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would

hnsfa any objection to lay before the House a copy of the
directions to the county cess collectors in Ireland ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCLIEQUER—Not
the least.

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
THE DEFECTS OF LEASES ACT AMENDMENT

BILL.
This Bill was rca.l a third time and passed.
SLAVE•GROWN SUGAR.

Sir E. BUXTON stated that he had received that
evening a notice from the First Lord of the Treasury to
the effect that be was indisposed, and it would be incon-
venient for him to attend in the House to-morrow. This
induced him to postpone his motion respecting slave-
grown sugar. Whilst he intended then to put off his
motion he threw himself upon the generosity of the
Noble Lord and of the Government to give him another
day, so that the subject might undergo discussion during
this session.

Mr. DISRAELI observed that the Hon. Baronet
spoke of the generosity of the Government, when, in
point of fact, they in a spirit of justice ought to offer
another day to the Hon. Baronet.—(Hear, hear.) Ho
was sure it would be very agreeable to the House that
they did so.—(Hear. hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
that there could be no doubt the Government would feel
itstlt bound to give the Hon. Baronet another day.
MONEY PAYMENT OF ADVANCES OF WAGES
(IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee.
REGISTRATION OF DEEDS BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee,• To be re-
committed on Friday.
CONVICTS' PRISONS BILL.
This Bill was read a second time. To be committed
on Monday next.

SUPPLY.
Mr. DISRAELI wished to know what day would be
fixed for a Committee of Supply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied
it would not come on before Monday .
ASSESSED TAXES.
Mr. BLACKSTONE gave notice he would bring on
his motion to-morrow (this day).
PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.

A brief discussion took place as to the second reading
of the Bill, which was finally agreed to. To be com-
mitted that day fortnight.