§ The Earl of Rosebery moved the second reading of the Bill for the Appointment of Ministers to Churches (Scotland). The Bill would be a measure of primary importance to the religious and moral interests of a great part of Scotland, and more particularly to those of the city of Glasgow, where the want of accommodation was greater than in any other part of Scotland. The state of the city of Glasgow with regard to accommodation for religious worship was the best test that could be given of the utility of this measure. He entertained the highest sense of the Church, the purity of her doctrines, the ability, piety, and usefulness of her Ministers, and their adaptation to the people. He thought it was their Lordships' duty not to lose this opportunity of enlarging the basis of that Church, and of diffusing its benefits as widely as possible. He confidently relied on the intrinsic value of the Bill, and did not doubt that their Lordships would admit its necessity.
The Earl of Haddingtonadmitted, that the principle of the Bill was good, but the details were capable of great improvement. It was a most reasonable thing that those who took upon themselves the additional expense of erecting new Churches should possess the right of nominating their pastors; but he did not see the necessity of passing an Act of such an universal character as this. That, however, was a question which could be better argued in Committee, and therefore he would not oppose the second reading.
The Duke of Hamiltonsaid, no one could more cordially agree with the principle of the Bill than himself. He should not oppose the second reading, but reserve to himself the opportunity of discussing particular points in Committee.
The Bishop of Londonapproved of the principle of the Bill, and trusted that a Clause would be introduced directing the appropriation of a certain number of seats for the accommodation of the poor. The 1st and 2nd of William 4th, enacted, that those who built the Church and endowed it with the sum of 1,000l. had the right of presentation. The same principle pervaded 174 the present Bill. He was anxious to see the poor accommodated without prejudice to vested rights.
§ The Bill was read a second time.