noble Lord as its defender, he must at once | nance of what the right hon. and learned give up that idea, and regard it only as an Member for Dublin University called a establishment which was to be supported "national fabric" depended upon the conor abolished at the good will of the majo- dition of there being a majority in favour rity of each rural parish vestry. He did of the rate in each rural parish? He denot wish to be misunderstood on the mat- fied hon. Gentlemen opposite to escape the ter. He had no sympathy or connection difficulty which their argument involved, with the party from which the Bill ema- of placing the Church of England upon nated. He had never looked at the question the most humiliating and narrow basis. from the Dissenters' point of view. He He, as a Churchman, could not conceive a had never admitted that the Dissenters worse position for the Church than to be had a grievance-indeed, he had uniformly reduced to appeal to a majority of this or denied that in the abstract they had any that parish whether there should be a grievance. If they had one, they certainly Church at all. It stood to reason, that if had had many opportunities of redress, but the Church of England was to be regarded they had uniformly declined them. They as a national establishment, the maintenance had not only maintained their rights as of the fabric (if that were an essential conEnglishmen to the use of the parish church, dition, which he denied), must be preserved but, while refusing to pay the impost, they by some rules and regulations by which wished to obtain peculiar privileges. He the Establishment would not be subject looked upon the church rate question from to the arbitrary and capricious vote of a a Churchman's point of view. He asked majority. It should be a compulsory tax, himself whether the present position of and the church rate was originally a comthe church rate question was a source of pulsory tax for the maintenance of the strength or weakness; and he believed it fabric. Such was supposed to be the old to be a source of great weakness. He had state of the law, until that law was realways understood that in military strategy versed, not by the House of Commons, the great object of the defenders of a be- but by the highest legal tribunal of the sieged place was to destroy and remove country. To return to the old state of out of sight every weak outpost, every things, they must repeal the decision in the position which the enemy could occupy, in Braintree case; and unless they could which they could effect a lodgment, and reverse that decision, church rates were from which they could perhaps endanger nothing more than voluntary taxes, levied the safety of the defenders of the city. in the most invidious manner possible, Such, he believed, was the condition of the because nothing could be more invidious, church rate question. The Dissenters had especially on a question in which religion effected a lodgment in it; they could an- was involved, than to give the majority noy the Church from it, and they could power to tax the minority. It was putting not be dislodged. The duty of Church- the Church of England upon the same men, therefore, was to examine carefully footing as a gas or a water or any company whether the retention of that position was of that kind. What would be the best of essential consequence; and if, after care- substitute for church rates was the practiful and dispassionate inquiry, it was found cal question, and it was better to consider that it was not, they ought to remove it the subject in that point of view. There out of sight at once. They ought to de- were various opinions as to what would prive the Dissenters of the grievance which be the best substitute. He had one progave them such an advantage, and then posal which he knew was unpopular, but defy them to do their worst. It had been he thought it was founded in justice. He said that church rates were essential to the thought that the Church ought to be Church as a national establishment; but maintained chiefly by those who used it, the whole course of the argument proved and he saw no objection to a modified the contrary. His hon. Friend the Mem- system of pew rents, whereby those who ber for Leominster asked that things should occupied the best seats should pay for be left as they were. "Why can't you them, leaving the greater number for the leave us alone?" he said, "We don't wish free use of the poor. He had no faith in the to revive church rates in the large towns compromise of a voluntary rate, which was like Birmingham and Manchester, but let a contradiction in terms. But if things us keep them up in the rural districts." came to the worst, a system of voluntary What became, then, of the Church of Eng- subscriptions properly organized would land as an establishment, if the mainte- afford an ample substitute for the aboli

Church desired to see her the church of a party, much less of a political party. He could not assent to the proposal made by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Alfred Churchill). It was substantially this-to continue to the churchwardens the duty of maintaining the fabric of the parish church, but to deprive them of the means of doing so. It was an Egyptian proposal to maintain the fabric without the means. With respect to the present Bill, his objection to it was as strong as ever; he considered it to be based upon the principle of spoliation, as one not only affecting the rights of the Church, but as depriving the parishes of the country of a right and privilege which they had exercised from time immemorial. To the violation of such a right he never would consent, and he should therefore give the Bill his firm and consistent opposition. It was painful to him to see hon. Members opposite, who were firmly attached to the Church of England, placed in the false position of voting for the second reading of the Bill. He hoped, however, by the measure he should submit on the following Wednesday to relieve them from such a difficulty. He did not wish to see the Church of England act in the intolerant and uncompromising spirit of the Church of Ronie, and he hoped the House would soon arrive at a satisfactory settlement of the question.

n of church rates. There was no or- question should be settled, and the more nized machinery for collecting voluntary so as it was degenerating into a party ubscriptions; and when his hon. Friend question, and no well-wisher of the poke of the difference between collecting subscriptions for the maintenance of old churches and collecting subscriptions for the creation of new churches, it was because there was no organized machinery for the purpose. The difficulty would not exist if there were proper machinery for making the collection; and he believed that if church rates were abolished, diocesan boards would be established for the purpose, and would collect larger sums for the maintenance of the fabric than were then collected by church rates. Since he had been in the House he had noted down the number of churches within fifteen miles radius of the place in the country where he resided which had been either rebuilt or entirely restored during the last twenty years-more than half of the whole number being within the last ten years. Of thirty churches within a radius of fifteen miles twenty-six had been rebuilt or restored, half of them being either new or entirely rebuilt, and the lowest sum expended on those churches was £60,000. That had been done independent of church rates altogether. What was the case in parishes where the church rate was the only resource? Why, the clergymen of such rural parishes could not keep the roof water-tight, the walls became green with damp, and appeals were constantly made to assist in staying the progress of dilapidation and decay. As a Churchman, he contended that it would be greatly to the advantage of the Church, and a great discomfiture for her enemies, to get rid of this grievance. He wished the House could banish from the consideration of the question all party feeling, and look upon it with the eyes of common sense, for he was confident every one would then see that the right course was to abolish church rates altogether.

MR. NEWDEGATE said, he did not wish to detain the House; but as he had been alluded to in the debate, he wished to remind the House that on the following Wednesday he hoped to move the second reading of the Bill he had prepared on the subject, and he regretted that by the forms of the House he was precluded on that occasion from describing its provisions; but on Wednesday next he should be prepared to meet every argument that had been advanced by the hon. Member for Tavistock. He felt that it was time that the

SIR JOHN TRELAWNY, in reply, said, he wished to understand whether the hon. Members opposite who were opposed to him were anxious to set up the cry of "Twopence, and no surrender." If so, he thought the country generally would decline to support their views. He trusted that the Conservative Members would well consider what they were about before they rejected the Bill. They might, by so doing, save their party; but they would inevitably lose the Church of England.

Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."

The House divided:-Ayes 275; Noes 285: Majority 10.

Words added.

Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.

Bill put off for six months.