« AnteriorContinuar »
tion. The rich are, in fact, trustees for | Gentleman probably judges their feelings the congregation. Now, what is the posi- by his own. The Protestant Church is to tion of the owner of an advowson? He, be stripped, and he may think that they does not hold the advowson for his own do not care whether they get a share of the benefit: he, too, is a trustee for the benefit spoil or not. They are not to have any geof the laity, and it is his duty to select a nerous assistance for their Universities, for clergyman who shall minister efficiently to their denominational education, or for any the laity. Well, what are you going to do? of those objects which I believe they have You are going to take away the money at heart. "These things are abominations," now applied for the benefit of the laity in we are told, "but whatever you do, take the maintenance of the clergy and the ser- away this property from the Church, and vices of the Church, capitalizing the value for Heaven's sake don't conciliate the of that money, and paying it in a lump Catholics." That is what the right hon. sum to the owner of the advowson. And Gentleman calls a truly Liberal policy, and that is what you call respecting vested in. I believe, in the sense in which those words terests. Very likely the owner of the are sometimes used, it is a truly liberal advowson may be an absentee, and the policy-that is to say, it is a policy of money now spent in Ireland will in that being liberal at the expense of somebody case be withdrawn from Ireland alto- else. Ireland says, "You have injured us gether. I think that when you come to by bad laws, though that is a thing of the discuss this question arguments such as past, and we ask for some compensation." these will not hold water. There are "Give us," some say, 66 a re-settlement of points which will require a great deal of the land question." "Give us," say others, discussion, and the views which are now so some advantages in the matter of taxaglibly put forward as to the compensation tion, or in the matter of expenditure, or in you will give and the vested interests you grants for education." "Give us," says are going to recognize will be strictly cri- another section, "a denominational system ticized. Then, what are you going to do of education for ourselves. Give us a Uniwith the property of the Church? That versity which will meet our wants." But is the great question which the right hon. upon all these questions the great Liberal Gentleman himself asked in 1865. He party are greatly divided. They cannot be has not absolutely answered it now; but, brought together on any of these points. so far as we can glean from his statement, All they are agreed on is this; they say, the money is to be devoted to secular uses, or, as he vaguely says, to some Irish object. What in the world does that mean? There is one Irish object which we often hear of. I rather think we are told it is in the Act of Union. It is that the money should be spent upon Cork harbour. Are you going to take the property of the Irish Church, which now supports churches in Connaught or in Ulster, and spend it upon Cork harbour. Then there is an object frequently mentioned in the Committee which sat some years ago upon Irish Taxation, and that is the injustice which Ireland suffers from the high rate of spirit duties. Perhaps if the general benefit of Ireland is to be consulted in the appropriation of Church property, some of it will be applied in the reduction of the duty on whisky. This at all events is clear-you are not to give any of this money to the Roman Catholics. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe) dislikes the Protestant Church much, but apparently dislikes the Roman Catholic Church still more. Whatever else we are to do with the money, we are to give nothing to them. The right hon.
Take away the Irish Protestant Church;" and, as in former days when two nations were about to make up their quarrel, they propose to cement their union by offering up a victim on the altar of friendship. There was one thing very remarkable in the course of this debate, and that was the difference in the tone of hon. Gentlemen opposite. Take, for example, the speeches of the right hon. Member for Calne (Mr. Lowe) and the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright). In the speech of the hon. Member for Birmingham there was an evident desire to tranquillize Ireland, to do something which, at all events, might give satisfaction to the great body of the people. But the tone of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Calne was quite the contrary. That right hon. Gentleman would only throw in elements of strife; he would not treat Irish dissatisfaction with soothing remedies, but rather by a method of counter irritation. He would not pacify the Catholics, he would irritate the Protestants. And then the right hon. Gentleman talked about the Establishment, and said, "We do not want an
796 Establishment in Ireland, because Ireland | different articles and formularies were byof all other countries is adapted for the and-by adopted by Convocations in that voluntary system." And he spoke of the Church-a danger restricted and prohibited Roman Catholics as voluntaries. But I by the conditions of an Establishmentwould like to ask Roman Catholic Mem- and that the Church in England was prebers, whether they consider their Church vented from following the example of her a voluntary Church? If an Establishment freer sister, what would be the consewere merely a money question, I would quence? I venture to say that there admit the position of the Roman Catholic would arise a state of things which in a Church in Ireland is that of a voluntary short time would be found to be intolerChurch. [Mr. STUART MILL: Hear, hear!] able. Suppose, for instance, that such But does the hon. Member for Westminster questions sprang up as those that were (Mr. Stuart Mill) think that money is lately raised in the Ecclesiastical Courts in the only thing involved in an Establish- this country, and that certain decisions ment? Very far from it. That is almost were given as to the effect of the Articles the only point that has been dwelt on in of the Church of England which were unthis debate; but there are many others satisfactory to a great number of its memwhich it will be necessary to raise before bers, who, nevertheless, would be prewe have done with this subject. We cluded from making any alterations in must hear, not only about the property, those Articles, and suppose our brethren but about the form of worship and the in Ireland entertaining similar opinions discipline which are necessary for an Es- were to alter their formularies, what think tablishment, and upon these points not you would be the effect of that upon the one word has been heard from the right people of the Church of England? I venhon. Gentleman who has brought for- ture to say that the consequences would ward these Resolutions. Now, will he tell be such as the advocates of disestablishus when he has disestablished the Pro- ment are not altogether prepared for. To testant Church of Ireland, whether that certain minds, no doubt, they may seem Church is to continue an Episcopalian good, and that this enfranchisement of Church or not? And, if so, if she is to the Church from the restrictions imposed have Bishops, by whom are they to be by the State in Ireland can do no harm; appointed? Are they to be elected by the but to me it appears that the effect congregations, or appointed by the Crown? would be to produce such excitement here To what law are they to be subject, and in as would aggravate and intensify all the what way are you going to insure uni- evils that we are at present troubled by; formity of doctrine and worship in that and members of the Church of England Church? Remember that these are not must make up their minds that in destroyin the present day mere matters of form; ing the Established Church in Ireland they are very important questions, which they are striking at the root of the Estabwill undoubtedly be raised in substance; lished Church in England also. I do not and it seems to me that one of the great put it now upon the miserable proximus difficulties we have to contend with, and ardet argument. I do not say that, because upon which, before this matter is finally your neighbour's property is taken, you settled, we must have a distinct and cate- must look after your own, though the gorical answer, is, in what position is the same principles that are recognized as an Established Church in Ireland to be when excuse for taking away the property of it comes to be disestablished with respect the Established Church in Ireland may of to the questions of discipline, doctrine, and course be used with equal effect in England form of government? We do not want also. I do not put it upon that ground; to have another South Africa in Ireland; but I say this-if you open the vents, you and I think that English Churchmen who let out the waters of controversy between are apt to look upon this question as a thing Church and State to an extent you are not apart, and to say that it would rather prepared for. The discussion we are now strengthen than weaken the Church of Eng- upon is, whether it is desirable to go into land if the Irish branch of the Church Committee at this time; and the reason were disestablished, have hardly pictured why I have entered upon these questions to themselves what would happen if this is to show the House the enormous extent long-established branch of their own of the ground we shall have to cover if we Church were destroyed. For, do what you do go into Committee. For, although the will, these Churches are united. Suppose right hon. Gentleman may say, "If you go
into Committee, you will merely have to vote my first Resolution, and the others which are to give effect to it," he cannot say that he will prevent these questions from being fully discussed before he embodies his proposals in a measure. Therefore we feel it our duty to warn the House and to take its sense whether it is desirable when we are approaching the Easter holydays, and the state of business is so little advanced-to enter upon this extensive field of controversy. But if the House, after full consideration, decides to go into Committee, we shall then be ready to enter upon the discussion, and depend upon it these questions shall be fully and fairly argued, and all the collateral issues raised, before the whole matter is allowed
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. MORRISON, in moving that this Bill be read a second time, explained, that in 1866 a hybrid Committee of the House was appointed upon this subject. Report the Government founded the Bill of last Session, which was referred to a Committee of five, and, after a lengthened and expensive inquiry, miscarried at a time when the representatives of the companies and those of the public appeared to have come as nearly as possible to an agreement. It was therefore thought expedient that the Bill should be re-introduced this year, and this Bill was in the MR. COLERIDGE moved the adjourn-main a reprint of last year's Bill, with
ment of the debate.
MR. GLADSTONE said, he wished to make a suggestion with regard to the course of business to-morrow. On ordinary occasions, the usual practice was to take the Motion relating to the holidays before the main business of the evening. Now, although he was sanguine in the hope that nothing would occur to prevent the adjournment for the holydays to-morrow, it was plain that it would not be desirable to settle the matter before the main business of the evening was brought to a conclusion. It would be convenient | and satisfactory to the House if the questions could be taken after the main business was concluded, when it might be hoped that that important question would have come to an issue on its first stage, and that they should know something of the mode in which the Government proposed to deal with its future stages.
MR. DISRAELI said, that the Government had no other wish than to suit the convenience of the House. He might say that representations had been made to him as much from one side as the other, that Gentlemen were very anxious that the usual holydays should be observed. He had thought of putting on the Paper tonight a Notice to that effect, so that the House might express an opinion upon it. He had no objection, however, to adopt the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman, if it was acceptable to the House; but he must express his own opinion that there could be no doubt that the debate would conclude to-morrow.
Motion agreed to.
certain alterations. Very grave exceptions had been taken to certain parts of the Bill, and there had been a conference with the representatives of the gas companies of the metropolis, who had determined to offer no opposition, on condition that the promoters consented to certain changes. On the part of the promoters he was ready to consent to these changes, which involved the striking out of a large portion of new matter incorporated with the Bill. These changes embraced the clauses dealing with the amalgamation of the existing companies, the supply of gas in bulk, the substitution of permissive for compulsory powers of purchase, and the damages to be paid by a company in case of accident. There was already an Order of the House that Bills having reference to the supply of gas to the metropolis should be referred to the same Committee; three Bills had been read a second time and referred, and it was therefore desirable that this Bill should be similarly dealt with at once. He moved that it be read a second time, and to-morrow he would move that it be committed, in order to insert the Amendments agreed upon, and have the Bill reprinted.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Morrison.)
MR. GREENE said, he had remained in the House for the purpose of opposing the Bill; but having heard of the arrangement he would not do so, at least at this stage.
MR. WYLD called attention to Clause Debate further adjourned till To-morrow. 100, as follows:
"All costs, charges, and expenses preliminary to and of and incidental to the preparing, applying for, obtaining, and passing of this Act (including those incurred by the Board of Trade in relation to the Metropolis Gas Bill introduced in the first Session of Parliament in the year 1867) shall be paid by the Metropolitan Board of Works as the Board of Trade direct."
He believed the ratepayers of the metropolis would object to the payment out of the rates of the expenses incurred in promoting the Bill of last Session; and, indeed, it was improper to charge the ratepayers with the expenses of a Bill which the House did not pass. In Committee he would move the rejection of this clause.
Motion agreed to.
Public Record Office
Poor Law Commissions
Mint, including Coinage
Copyhold, Inclosure, and Tithe Commission
Bill read a second time, and committed Inclosure and Drainage Acts; Imprest
SUPPLY-CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES. SUPPLY-considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
That a sum, not exceeding £1,200,000, be granted to Her Majesty, on account, for or towards defraying the Charge for the following Civil Services, to the 31st day of March 1869 :Class I.
British Embassy Houses: Constantinople, China, and Japan
Third Reading-Marine Mutiny ; Mutiny *;
Royal Assent-Consolidated Fund (£6,000,000)
BANKRUPTCY BILL.-QUESTION. LORD CHELMSFORD asked the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, Whe1,000 ther it was his intention to refer the Bank7,000 5,000 ruptcy Bill to a Select Committee? not, he trusted that those noble Lords who 30,000 proposed to move Amendments would have 3,000 them printed during the Recess, in order that they might be considered.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he stated on the second reading of this Bill, 6,000 20,000 that if any of their Lordships expressed a 6,000 wish that it should be referred to a Select 1,000 Committee, he should be quite willing to accede to that course. He had since understood from noble and learned Friends, who took great interest in the subject, that they did not think much advantage would be gained by sending the Bill to a Select Committee, and therefore at present he did not intend to take that course. A noble and learned Friend who was not present (Lord Romilly) had been good enough to put on the Paper and have printed a number of Amendments which, no doubt, would prove of great utility, and he hoped that any noble Lord who wished to move any
Resolution to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow. COUNTY GENERAL ASSESSMENT (SCOTLAND)
On Motion of The LORD ADVOCATE, Bill to abolish the power of levying the Assessment known as "Rogue Money," and in lieu thereof to confer on the Commissioners of Supply of Counties in Scotland the power of levying a "County General Assessment," ordered to be brought in by The LORD ADVOCATE, Mr. Secretary GATHORNE
HARDY, and Sir JAMES FERGUSSON.
Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 84.]
Amendments would also cause them to be printed, in order that the House might