Stockton Herald, South Durham and Cleveland Advertiser. — 1874-07-11 (Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, England)

THE CHURCH PATRONAGE (SCOTLAND) BILL. The Losb-Anvoopx, in moving the second reading of the Church Patronage (Seotlano Bill, said that the law of patronage in England differed from that of Scotland, and in some respects so essentially that the same principle could not be applied to both. In the ease of Scotland they had a system of ohurh goviinment which was founded upon election from bodies composed by both c ergymen and laymen. He then reviewed the history and constitution of the Church of Scotland from the earliest times. The present Government had determined to attempt and settle the question on what appeared to then( tg be a fair and equitable basis, which they hoped would put an end to the differences which had prevailed on this question of patronage, a quesion which had been one of the chief causes, if not the only one, of the schism which had taken place in the Church of Scotland. The bill had received the sanction of the Queen. It had been approved of by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and it now came to them in tl.e shape in which it had been ratified by the House of Lords. Mr BAXTER said he was aware that many on the Liberal side of the House regarded the bill with favour because it abolished a system which the pen. pie of Scotland had protested against from the first. Others went still further, and were of opinion that the bill ought to be supported because in the end it must result in the (Reestablishment of the Church of Scotland. He moved as an amendment—" That this House is of opinion it is inexpedient to legislate on the subject of flatronage in the Church of Scotland without further inquiry and information." Mr DALRYMPLE gave a general support to the bill, and observed that the hon. gentleman could nut want information for himself, and as for the Scotch staple, they had declated their view., most plainly  people, upon it. Mr GLADSTONE, who was greeted with cheers on rising, said: Sir, I am exceedingly sorry to find myself involved in a new ecclesiastical controversy. had hoped that this question might have been dealt with in a preliminary manner, and with that degree of care that, when it came before Parliament it might be capable of being considered solely with reference to the provisions of the bill itself, and in such a manner as might be consonant with the general opinion of the people of Scotland. I was one of a number now very small, who watched with the greatest intere:t the controversy which began in 1834, and erded in 1844, and I did not scruple to state in print my opinions of it, so far as the original Scotch Reformation was concerned in those writings. I said that those who afterwards became the Free Chnre whatever might be said about coinpatabi its' of views as to a national Est kblishment, they were politeal heirs of those connected with the Scotch Reformation. (Hear, hear). If I could see any open, clear, and general declaration of the views of the poeple of Scotl tnd on this luestion, that would be each a recommendation to  one of any particular plan that might be proposed, .. Episcopalians, and very -... He should asuudppporrut, itehnecea.men. iment as showing there , . w. - ilful murder of his wife. Evidence was called to were other steps to be taken in the interests or Justice, I should feel the utmost reluctance to apply any opposition to such a odin, and further, I think even show that the couple had lived very, unhappily guhsmaroestr'orfesubyStmeraiaynbse, it pie our duty to treat Mr M. J. STEwART and Mr FRASER sRACIIIII'Kuan ... __ _ together, and on Friday night the prisoner, while in few wtheout supported the Bill. such a manner that de4th resulted in a few hours a state of intoxication, beat and kicked his wife in this question in perfect good faith in the interest n- f ,4 those great Presbyterian bodies, awl that any After some further discussion, afterwards. On U illJwing day he gave infertileplan tending to an honourable and fraternal union Mr DISRAELI rose to reply to the speech of Mr Cola of his wif..'s s., ,len death, but a post martens of those bodies would, in my opinion, have the Gladstone. He said that the late head of ii.M.'s examination of the oody disclosed oircurnsttnees strongest possible claim for favour, (flear, hear.) Government had desired that the destruction of the which led to his arrest. He was committed for trial 1 These are the general conclusions by which I would Irish Church should bo inscribed upon his tombstone, g the Assizes.