ducted with better temper and more harmony than on former occasions. He confessed, however, that at that time he was not sanguine of a compromise being proposed which was likely to be adopted. Holding the views which he did on the subject, he should vote for the second reading of the Bill; but in doing so, he felt it right to say that he should hold himself at liberty to abstain from voting for the third reading, should the Bill reach that stage, and if in the mean time no modification had been introduced which would reduce the measure to one for the abolition of compulsory payment of church rates. LORD JOHN MANNERS said, he hoped that the clergy and laity of the Church of England would receive with satisfaction the clear explanation given by the right hon. Gentleman of the motives which induced him to vote for the second reading of the Bill, and of the opposition which he intended to give to it hereafter! It could not, however, be very satisfactory to the hon. Baronet who had charge of the Bill, for in his temperate speech he had expressly repudiated the support of those who, while voting for the second reading, proposed to pare it down and fritter it away in Committee. From the concluding sentences of the right hon. Gentleman's speech it was clear that nothing was further from his wishes than that the Bill should pass through Committee and the third reading. He must remind the right hon. Gentleman who said that those who were against total abolition greatly exaggerated the importance of the question, that it was not by that side of the House that great importance was first attached to this mea sure. It was from those who within the walls of Parliament had been the most energetic promoters of the measure that they had first heard of the magnitude and importance of the question. At that time of the day it would not do to attempt to fritter away the importance of the declarations which had been made on the other side, and which led irresistibly to the conviction that the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary was right and the right hon. Gentleman wrong in the interpretation to be put on the measure before them. The hon. Baronet repudiated for himself all attempts to dissociate the Church from the State; but it was impossible for him to dissociate himself from the language and acts of those of now whom he was the organ on this occasion. The hon. Baronet had never shrunk from voting for every one of those measures which had been introduced by the party around him. [Sir JOHN TRELAWNY: I voted against the Burials Bill.] He was glad to hear that statement, and he sincerely hoped that the hon. Baronet's vote would always be found on the same side; but that isolated vote could not dissociate him from the general tenour of those who were his supporters on the present occasion. Until he had heard the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, he could not believe that there would be a deliberate attempt made to lessen the importance of this measure. He rejoiced, however, that all those minor issues which used to be raised on this question had now disappeared; that the discussion of it was no longer mixed up with the grievances inflicted on the individual consciences of Mr. A and Mr. B; and the House had at last come to the clear, intelligible issue, which was, nothing less than this-was the Church of England to be the Established Church of the country? It was argued by some out of doors, that the movement was simply one to set the Church free from the thraldom of the bonds of the State; but, in that instance, the question was not placed so nakedly before them. Yesterday, it was proposed that the churchyards of the Church should be open to the Dissenters; to-day it was a proposal to deprive the Church of her ancient and immemorial right to levy a church rate; to-morrow her endowed schools were to be sacrificed to the attacks of the Dissenters. Looking to all those proposals, how was it possible to come to any other conclusion than that the intention was to weaken the resources of the Church, to degrade her position, and to leave her present relations with the State in a materially altered and weakened condition. Why should that be done? Looking to the daily and hourly conflict with sin, sorrow, and crime which the Church was called on to carry on, could it be alleged that she was too powerful for her work? Could it be alleged that it was desirable to weaken any one of the spiritual or temporal influences which law or immemorial custom had placed at the service of the Church for these great purposes? He had no wish to say anything in disparagement of the voluntary principle; but whether he looked to the position of the unestablished church in America or in our Colonies, he saw no reason to believe that account of the ill-will there generated, the voluntary principle could be safely then hon. Gentlemen opposite were bound left to deal with this great work, nor any to abstain from bringing forward, year after argument for placing the Church of Eng-year, measures the discussion of which land in the same position. In arguing might raise acrimony and angry feelings in the question in that House, he was dis- that House. At the same time, he felt bound posed to argue it rather as a Statesman to say that no great Parliamentary battles than as a Churchman. As a Churchman, had been fought with less acrimony and he should be prepared to argue, that as with greater mutual self-respect than these far as the Church of England was con- church rate contests. The hon. Baronet cerned, if she were deprived of all the opposite was the pink of Paladins, and temporal rights and privileges, and if she that side of the House certainly, in its were placed in the same position as she turn, had not been deficient in the amewas two hundred years ago, when, for the nities of political warfare. Notwithstandsins and follies of the nation, the political ing all the misquotations and misrepresenancestors of some hon. Gentlemen oppo- tations of history, notwithstanding all the site were allowed to get the masters of lavish expenditure of money, and still her, she would still retain her hold over more of breath, to stir up the smouldering the hearts and affections of a devoted peo- elements of sectarian animosity, which had ple; but who would measure the loss to had characterized the recent Bicentenary popular rights, to education, to charity, movement, never since the question had nay, even to the civilization of the coun- first been raised had the Easter vestries try, if the wishes of hon. Gentlemen passed over more tranquilly. The storm opposite were carried out, and the Church which was to have swept away the whole were reduced to the position of a non- fabric, had burst without destroying a established Church. But, as he had said, he crockett or a pinnacle of the Church; and was ready to argue the question more as the sole result, upon which he did not rea Statesman than a Churchman; and he fuse to congratulate the Dissenters, was, that would ask the House to observe the effect 300 additional chapels had been opened. which would be produced by this Bill on | Might he, however, be allowed to suggest, one of the most important elements of that it would be wiser, if instead of spendEnglish social life-local self-government. ing £3,000 or £4,000 a year in maintaining In large towns, it was true that many the objects of the Liberation Society, and other objects were to be found round which thereby promoting endless malice and all the energies of the community might uncharitableness, they had devoted that cluster and be employed; but what sum, or ten times the amount, to the endowwould be the effect of the Bill on the ment of their chapels, whereby they would countless rural parishes where the rate have rendered their Ministers more indewas now so beneficially levied? In those pendent? But had this peace been purparishes the parish church was the one chased by any unworthy concession on the public building open to all, the inheritance part of the Church? Had the Church, of all, dear to all, and to all the symbol during the last few years in which the of parochial life and energy. There every question had been discussed, ceased to year the rural village met in vestry to ask for the rates, or failed to levy them? regulate the worldly affairs and fortunes Quite the reverse. Never since the of the parish church, and to that machi- question had been discussed had the nery the Bill before the House would at rate been levied in more parishes than once put an end. A more effectual blow in the current year. The good sense and could not be struck at the principle of energy of Churchmen had contributed to local self-government in 10,000 parishes bring about that result, and the general of England than the passing of the Bill. effect was that in the parishes of England Something had been said of the ill-feeling church rate abolition was fast dying away. which was said to be generated by these That, then, was the aspect of the discussions in the vestries. He agreed question without those walls. The with the right hon. Gentleman opposite Parliamentary position of the question that that ill-feeling had not only been was still more unfavourable to hou. Gengreatly exaggerated, but that whatever tlemen opposite. In 1855 the second there had been of it had been greatly reading of the Church Rates Abolition Bill diminished of late. But if free discussion was carried by a majority of 28; in were to be abolished in the vestries, on 1856 that majority had risen to 43; in and which had found its counterpart in that House, the only way of terminating that struggle was by the rejection of the Bill; and he appealed to hon. Gentlemen opposite to join him and his friends in accomplishing an object which would preserve the existing relations between Church and State-which would enable the Church, no longer distracted by these assaults on her external walls, to devote her whole resources and energy to the increase of religion, the propagation of virtue, and the promotion of the best temporal and eternal interests of the country. LORD ALFRED CHURCHILL said, he intended to vote for the second reading of the Bill, with a view to inserting in Committee a clause which would completely save the rights of the Church, while at the same time no compulsory payment of the rate could be enforced. The present mode of levying and enforcing the rate was frequently most derogatory to the Church and injurious to her best interests. He hoped hon. Gentlemen opposite would therefore not close their eyes to the expediency of assenting to a compromise; for if they would not do that, they must prepare themselves for unconditional repeal. At the same time, he wished to say that he had no connection with the Liberation Society, of whose designs he did not approve. Nor was there any desire on the part of the Gentlemen among whom he sat to assent to the total abolition of the church rate, as a means to dissever the connection between Church and State. He, himself, wished to see that connection maintained in its integrity, and that was the feeling of many who meant to vote for the second reading. He believed that the time had arrived when the question ought to be finally settled. 1858 it was 53; in 1859-a year memorable by the conversion, or rather perversion of noble Lords and right hon. Gentlemen opposite-it rose to 74. In spite, however, of their accession, it sank next year to 29; and in 1861 the Bill was thrown out on the second reading by the casting vote of the Speaker. In the last year things had again improved, and the revulsion of feeling in the House fairly represented what had taken place outside. He sympathized with the hon. Baronet's desire that the question should not be made a party question; but how could it be otherwise, when Cabinet Ministers espoused one side of the question, not because they approved it heartily, but because they thought there would be a majority on that side, or because they hoped to fritter the Bill away in Com mittee? In one sense he should be sorry not to see the Bill treated as a party question. Grieved should he be if the great constitutional party with which he acted should show any signs of paltering with the question; and he believed that of the 300 Gentlemen who sat on that side of the House, not three would be found to record their votes in favour of unconditional abolition. After the speech of the right hon. Baronet, it was useless to appeal to the advisers of the Crown, who were the persons who ought to stand by the ancient constitutions of the country; but he appealed to those who sat behind the Government the representatives of the once great and powerful, and still most respectable party--the old Whig country party-to take this question out of the category of party and political questions, and to show, by their votes, that they were as much attached to the Established Church as those who sat opposite to them. If, in any considerable numbers, they MR. WALTER said, that though the would vote against the measure, they question had somewhat degenerated into would at once and for ever lay the evil an annual party conflict, and had so far and factious spirit of the Liberation So- lost somewhat of its intrinsic interest, yet ciety, and would remove the obstacles the welfare of the Church was so deeply which prevented a peaceful and satisfac- concerned in its being calmly and tempetory settlement of the question. It was in rately argued that he could not refrain. that way alone that they could approach from making a few remarks on the speech that safe and temperate improvement of his noble Friend the Member for Leices which all admitted the law of churchtershire. rates required. No one in his senses could now believe that church rates were destined to fall by the hand of the hon. Baronet opposite, who himself had deprecated the longer continuance of the polemical struggle. Seeing, then, the revulsion of feeling which had taken place in the country, The noble Lord said, that the question was one between the abolition and the retention of the principle of local self-government. He (Mr. Walter) had always understood the Church, of which he had the privilege of being a humble and sincere member, was a national establishment; but if he were to accept the Colonies, he saw no reason to believe that the voluntary principle could be safely left to deal with this great work, nor any argument for placing the Church of England in the same position. In arguing the question in that House, he was disposed to argue it rather as a Statesman than as a Churchman. As a Churchman, he should be prepared to argue, that as far as the Church of England was concerned, if she were deprived of all the temporal rights and privileges, and if she were placed in the same position as she was two hundred years ago, when, for the sins and follies of the nation, the political ancestors of some hon. Gentlemen opposite were allowed to get the masters of her, she would still retain her hold over the hearts and affections of a devoted people; but who would measure the loss to popular rights, to education, to charity, nay, even to the civilization of the country, if the wishes of hon. Gentlemen opposite were carried out, and the Church were reduced to the position of a nonestablished Church. But, as he had said, he was ready to argue the question more as a Statesman than a Churchman; and he would ask the House to observe the effect which would be produced by this Bill on | one of the most important elements of English social life-local self-government. In large towns, it was true that many other objects were to be found round which the energies of the community might cluster and be employed; but what would be the effect of the Bill on the countless rural parishes where the rate was now so beneficially levied? In those parishes the parish church was the one public building open to all, the inheritance of all, dear to all, and to all the symbol of parochial life and energy. There every year the rural village met in vestry to regulate the worldly affairs and fortunes of the parish church, and to that machinery the Bill before the House would at once put an end. A more effectual blow could not be struck at the principle of local self-government in 10,000 parishes of England than the passing of the Bill. Something had been said of the ill-feeling which was said to be generated by these discussions in the vestries. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman opposite that that ill-feeling had not only been greatly exaggerated, but that whatever there had been of it had been greatly diminished of late. But if free discussion were to be abolished in the vestries, on account of the ill-will there generated, then hon. Gentlemen opposite were bound to abstain from bringing forward, year after year, measures the discussion of which might raise acrimony and angry feelings in that House. At the same time, he felt bound to say that no great Parliamentary battles had been fought with less acrimony and with greater mutual self-respect than these church rate contests. The hon. Baronet opposite was the pink of Paladins, and that side of the House certainly, in its turn, had not been deficient in the amenities of political warfare. Notwithstanding all the misquotations and misrepresentations of history, notwithstanding all the lavish expenditure of money, and still more of breath, to stir up the smouldering elements of sectarian animosity, which had had characterized the recent Bicentenary movement, never since the question had first been raised had the Easter vestries passed over more tranquilly. The storm which was to have swept away the whole fabric, had burst without destroying a crockett or a pinnacle of the Church; and the sole result, upon which he did not refuse to congratulate the Dissenters, was, that 300 additional chapels had been opened. Might he, however, be allowed to suggest, that it would be wiser, if instead of spending £3,000 or £4,000 a year in maintaining the objects of the Liberation Society, and thereby promoting endless malice and all uncharitableness, they had devoted that sum, or ten times the amount, to the endowment of their chapels, whereby they would have rendered their Ministers more independent? But had this peace been purchased by any unworthy concession on the part of the Church? Had the Church, during the last few years in which the question had been discussed, ceased to ask for the rates, or failed to levy them? Quite the reverse. Never since the question had been discussed had the rate been levied in more parishes than in the current year. The good sense and energy of Churchmen had contributed to bring about that result, and the general effect was that in the parishes of England church rate abolition was fast dying away. That, then, was the aspect of the question without those walls. The Parliamentary position of the question was still more unfavourable to hou. Gentlemen opposite. In 1855 the second reading of the Church Rates Abolition Bill was carried by a majority of 28; in 1856 that majority had risen to 43; in and which had found its counterpart in that House, the only way of terminating that struggle was by the rejection of the Bill; and he appealed to hon. Gentlemen opposite to join him and his friends in accomplishing an object which would preserve the existing relations between Church and State-which would enable the Church, no longer distracted by these assaults on her external walls, to devote her whole resources and energy to the increase of religion, the propagation of virtue, and the promotion of the best temporal and eternal interests of the coun LORD ALFRED CHURCHILL said, he intended to vote for the second reading of the Bill, with a view to inserting in Committee a clause which would completely save the rights of the Church, while at the same time no compulsory payment of the rate could be enforced. The present mode of levying and enforcing the rate was frequently most derogatory to the Church and injurious to her best interests. He hoped hon. Gentlemen opposite would therefore not close their eyes to the expediency of assenting to a compromise; for if they would not do that, they must prepare themselves for unconditional repeal. At the same time, he wished to say that he had no connection with the Liberation Society, of whose designs he did not approve. Nor was there any desire on the part of the Gentlemen among whom he sat to assent to the total abolition of the church rate, as a means to dissever the connection between Church and State. He, himself, wished to see that connection maintained in its integrity, and that was the feeling of many who meant to vote for the second reading. He believed that the time had arrived when the question ought to be finally settled. 1858 it was 53; in 1859-a year memorable by the conversion, or rather perversion of noble Lords and right hon. Gentlemen opposite-it rose to 74. In spite, however, of their accession, it sank next year to 29; and in 1861 the Bill was thrown out on the second reading by the casting vote of the Speaker. In the last year things had again improved, and the revulsion of feeling in the House fairly represented what had taken place outside. He sympathized with the hon. Baronet's desire that the question should not be made a party question; but how could it be otherwise, when Cabinet Ministry. ters espoused one side of the question, not because they approved it heartily, but because they thought there would be a majority on that side, or because they hoped to fritter the Bill away in Com mittee? In one sense he should be sorry not to see the Bill treated as a party question. Grieved should he be if the great constitutional party with which he acted should show any signs of paltering with the question; and he believed that of the 300 Gentlemen who sat on that side of the House, not three would be found to record their votes in favour of unconditional abolition. After the speech of the right hon. Baronet, it was useless to appeal to the advisers of the Crown, who were the persons who ought to stand by the ancient constitutions of the country; but he appealed to those who sat behind the Government - the representatives of the once great and powerful, and still most respectable party--the old Whig country party-to take this question out of the category of party and political questions, and to show, by their votes, that they were as much attached to the Established Church as those who sat opposite to them. If, in any considerable numbers, they would vote against the measure, they would at once and for ever lay the evil and factious spirit of the Liberation Society. and would remove the obstacles which prevented a peaceful and satisfactory settlement of the question. It was in that way alone that they could approach that safe and temperate improvement which all admitted the law of church rates required. No one in his seuses could now believe that church rates were destined to fall by the hand of the hon. Baronet opposite, who himself had deprecated the longer continuance of the polemical struggle. Seeing, then, the revulsion of feeling which had taken place in the country, MR. WALTER said, that though the question had somewhat degenerated into an annual party conflict, and had so far lost somewhat of its intrinsic interest, yet the welfare of the Church was so deeply concerned in its being calmly and tempe rately argued that he could not refrain from making a few remarks on the speech of his noble Friend the Member for Leices tershire. The noble Lord said, that the question was one between the abolition and the retention of the principle of local self-government. He (Mr. Walter) had always understood the Church, of which he had the privilege of being a humble and sincere member, was a national establishment; but if he were to accept the |