The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-22 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

Messengers from the Lords brought down certain
Bills.

DISSENTERS' CHAPELS BILL.

On the motion that the order of the day for the House
resolving itself into Committee on the Dissenters' Cha-
pels Bill being read,
Mr. WARBURTON presented a petition from the
Mayor and Corporation of Kendal in favour of the Bill.
Mr. PLUMPTEE had clung to the hope that her Ma-
jesty's Ministers would have given up this Bill. He be-
held the progress of this Bill with the deepest pain. He
had hoped that what had taken place out of the House
would have induced them to withdraw this Bill. The
petitions against the Bill had received 350,000 signa-
tures, and the petitioners comprised members of the
Church Establishment, Wesleyan Methodists, and all
classes of orthodox Dissenters. He considered the Bill
as of no ordinary nature, and was surprised that it had
received the sanction of her Majesty's Government. A
large body of their general supporters had opposed them
on the last occasion. If the Government had depended
entirely on their general supporters, he doubted if they
would have carried their measure. If a measure of this
kind had been proposed by the Noble Lord opposite when
he occupied the Treasury benches, it would have met
with the strenuous and the united opposition of the
Gentlemen who then occupied the Opposition benches.—
(Loud Opposition cheers.) The appropriation clause of
the Irish Church Bill was absolute honesty—(Renewed
Opposition cheers)—he repeated it, absolute honesty,
and perfect purity compared with this measure. To
withdraw means from the Church of Ireland, and apply
them to the purposes of the general education of the
people of Ireland, was absolute honesty compared with
a measure which would apply funds, left for a religious
purpose, to a purpose of a totally different nature. The
Attorney-General had said that the Bill was not well
understood. Now, although the people could not follow
a lawyer through all his legal subtleties, yet they tho-
roughly understood that the object of the measure was
to legalise a violation of a sacred trust, and to operate
practically in favour of a class of men whose opini@ns
were held by the great majority of the Christians of this
country to be an awful and a fatal heresy. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said that, although a considerable feel-
ing existed at present on the subject, he trusted that
that feeling would soon subside. He could assure the
Right Hon. Gentleman that the wound inflicted by this
Bill was not a superficial one ; it was deeply and keenly
felt, and would not be soon healed. The Right Hon.
Member for Dungarvon had said that they now wished
to hunt Socinians as formerly they had hunted
Papists. There was no hunting of Socinians or Papists
now; but it was one thing to hunt a Socinian, and another
to endow and establish him. The most offensive part of
the Bill was, that it went to the vitals of our Christian
constitution. He should not have spoke thus if he had
not felt the matter most acutely. The majority of the
Christian community of this country regarded a measure
like this, for the endowment of the Socinians, as a
withdrawing of the keystone from the arch of Chris-
tianity. The Right Hon. Gentleman who had succeeded
him when the subject was last under discussion, had
taken occasion to run him down. He knew he was not
able to compete with the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he
would honestly, however feebly, always express his