The Sun.
London, England, 1868-03-27 00:00:00

iiIR. GLADSTONE ON CHURCH RATER

Several of the clergy in the diocese of Bath and Wells
lately addressed Mr. Gladstone, pointing out that the
clause in his Church Rates Bill giving the churchwardens
power of recovery only from those who had agreed before-
hand to the levy of a rate, would act very injurionsly to
the Church. Occupiers, especially the smaller ones, rarely
attended vestries, and were reluctant to enter before-
hand into engagements of this kind, when not really un-
willing to concur in the object proposed. In the absence
of their expressed agreement (should the provision
requiring it be maintained), it would be very difficult
for churchwardens to form any reliable estimate of the
amount to be raised by any given rate. They therefore
ventured to ask that the right hon. gentleman would re-
consider the question, whether it is impossible for him to
introduce into his bill the provision that those who desire
exemption from the charge so long sanctioned by law
should be required to claim such exemption, and that the
absence of such claim should be held to imply a continued
willingness to contribute.
_

To this Mr. Gladstone replied as follows :—" I regret that
it is wholly beyond my power to accede to the wish ex-
pressed by yourself and several other clergymen you have
done me the honour to address to me. The principle of
exemption was, I think, first proposed from the Liberal
side of the House of Commons, very nearly twenty years
ago. I spoke favourably of it at the time ; but it was
rejected, or rather effectually repelled and discounte-
nanced by the supporters of church rates in general. At
later periods, when they had become disposed to entertain
it, the promoters of abolition had apparently ceased to be
willing to accept it. To introduce it now into my bill
would be a fundamental departure from the basis of the
measure, which is this : that on the one side it abolishes
compulsion, and places church rates under the law of
voluntary promises; on the other hand, it gives the option
of preserving (or, I may add, reviving) in each parish the form
and machinery of church rates, and it secures to those who
may contribute to the church rate or fund that power of
regulating within legal limits the application of the
money which now belongs to the ratepayers at large, in-
cluding those who do not contribute to the rate. The fact
is undoubted, that except in cases of discontent or agitation,
the ratepayers do not attend the vestries. In theory, the
argument is formidable that, such being the case, the church-
wardens will not know who will pay, nor, consequently,
what rate to make. But I think it will be, and has already
been found in practice, that in parishes of moderate size,
and even in some large and populous parishes, the general
disposition is sufficiently well known to admit of calcula-
tions that suffice for action. I have been desirous in this
letter that at least it should not appear that your pro-
posal had been treated with neglect; and the more so,
because I have been compelled to answer so much less
fully than I should have wished the letters which I have
received on this subject from clergymen in all parts of the
country. I think it might be for the convenience of the
clergy, as well as of others, if you should think fit to send
his letter to some well-circulated journal."