The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-06-27 00:00:00

ABOLITION OF CHURCH-RATES.

On the order for thetsecond reading of thechurch-rates
AMition Bill,

Mr.,PELLATT,alidlfr. MURROUGH spokein support of
thebill, urging the ,Ohnoxious and oppressive character of
the rate as a compulsory tax.
Mr: GOULEURN expressed his astonishment that leave
should have been given .for the introduction ofa bill which
he regarded as unjust in principle, and as inconsistent
with political wiSclem as with Christian charity. This
bill was avowedly a—step towards the separation of the
State from the Church. It was a bungling anode of legis-
lation., to evade the difficulties in the way of. an amend-
ment of the. law- by:abolishing the rate altogether. He
moved to defer the. second reading for six months.
Mr. M. T. LIDDESL seconded the amendment. He
could net agree with the argument used on a former occa-
sion by Lord Stanley, Ilia as church-rates were ,rapidlye
repealing themselves, it was high time for parliament to
provide for their abolition. It might be true that anany
of the large towns in the;kingdom had refused these,rates,
but was it not also tree that they Were still voluntarily
and cheerfully paid in thousands of country parishes ?
The case of 'Liverpool, *here a church-rate had lately been
refused, hadsbeen very .much relied on, but the circum-
stances attending that 'refusal very much weakened , the '
force of the argument. which memberS opposite strove to
deduce from it, for they showed that, though it certainly
indicated great:indifference on the part of the Churchmen
in that town, ittlid .not indicate any such great change of
mind in the inhabitants on the subject as would at .first
sight appear. The parish of Liverpool, before it ,had
attained to its present .populons state, had originallybeen
a township in the parish of 'Walton. Afterwards, how-
ever, as the town increased-two rectors were appointed for
it, and provision was made for their stipend by a parochial
-rate, which was secured 'by ,varions sstatutes. According
-to the arrangement, two .rates ought, therefore, to have
'been collected sin Lis-erpoel—sone for the stipend of the
,rectors, and the other the ordinary church-rate for the
.maintenance and repair of the parechial churches. _ Both
these rates, hoWever, For .convenience sake had been col-
lected in one rate; but last yearovhen a second rate was
proposed for the purpose of liquidating an arrear of £3,000,
,caused by the purchase of a .new,cometery—not for the
benefit ,of Churchmen only, it must be remembered, but
for,thessrhole town—the opponents of church-rates took
advantage of this advanced demand, and being an active i
and well-organised party, they succeededin persuading the
parishioners to reject the rate. He believed this success of
theirs would only be temporary, and thatmext year a very
different ,result would be witnessed there. .So far the result
of this rejection of a church-rate had been very much to
awaken the good feelings and energies •of 'churchmen in
that town. ,(Qheers from the supporters .of,the bill.) He
believed he ,expressed the sense of the House and the
country when the said that this question -required some
adjustment. He would trust Lord S. Russell to under-
take that adjustment, because he believed that be was
impressed as :much as any man with a conviction that it
was necessary to rualtatain the established Church}, which
ever since the Reformation had been the mainstay.of the
religious feelings and institutions of the country. He
believed, if the national Church were dissevered from ,tike
State, there would ensue jealousies and struggles for pre-
eminence among the different sects which would be most
dangerous to the interests of true religion ;.and, believing
this bill to be one step towards that disseverance, he most
cordially supported the amendment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that
there was a wrong in this matter, which ought not to be
left without a remedy. He agreed that the case for a
change of the law of church-rate was irresistible, and, not-
withstanding the difficulties of the subject, the govern-
ment would encounter them, and endeavour to make an
equitable and fair arrangement. In any case, one thing
was indispensable,--that, if in all or any parishes church-
rates were to be abolished, the measure should not stop •
there, for the church would then be left in a condition of
nominal equality, but of practical inequality ; and it would
be most unjust not to allow the ratepayers to take into '
their own hands the management of their own funds.
• Mr. BHIGHT professed that he was puzzled to know to
which side of the qUestion Mr. Gladstone intended to
address his arguments. He should vote for the bill, and
should do so if his opinion respecting a church establish-
ment had been different from what it was, it being acknow-
ledged that the law was bad and unworkable. If the rates
were abolished, the paralyzing influence of old customs
would be removed, and a better principle substituted ;
religion would acquire a fresh impulse, and sects and
churches live in harmony.
Lord J. Ilussrm, defended the opinions he had expressed
regarding this bill, and insisted that the whole tenor of
the debate confirmed his argument, that the unconditional
repeal of church-rates was designed to forward the views
of the enemies of the Established Church.' He denied
that he had used the word " compensation " in the former
debate ; what he then said and now repeated was, that, in
abolishing church-rates, some provision should be made
for maintaining the fabrics of churches erected by our
ancestors as places of worship for the whole people. The
Dissenters of former days, so far from complaining of
church-rates or of the Established Church, considered
that church as a bulwark of Protestantism, and desired
its mainter.ance. The quarrel of the last quarter of a •
century was not with regard to the ancient parochial
churches, nor to the law of church-rates, bat as to the
remedy. To abolish these rates altogether would, he
thought, be inconsistent with the principle of a church
establishment, and a hardship upon those who used the
parish churches. Whatever plan was adopted for the
amendment of the laW, one principle ought to be adhered
to, Panieln that the church should retain the right of

calling upon the land to sustain the parochial churches;
and this principle he was disposed to maintain.
The house divided, when the amendment was carried by
209 against 182 ; so the bill is lost.
The house adjourned at a quarter to six o'clock.