COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 22 March 1887)

THE BISHOP OF LICHFIELD
, in moving that the House do now resolve itself into a Committee upon the said Bill, said, that its object was to remove from the Statute Book an enactment which concerned the Church of England alone, and enabled it compulsorily to acquire sites for churches. the Act was passed 70 years ago, when a great deal of church building was going on throughout the country; but from that date to the present time, in only one instance, and that within his own diocese, had it ever been put in operation. He did not believe that there was any chance of the Act being ever again made use of, and on that ground it ought to be removed from the Statute Book. In addition to that there was no doubt that the existence of the Act furnished a serious and continual grievance to Nonconformists; and it was frequently stated in public that it was unjust that the Church of England should possess this power. The Church of England did not seek any special privileges of this kind, nor did it need any such powers to be granted to it, as it had sufficient influence to obtain all the sites it required. The Church only desired the same freedom to build as was enjoyed by other Bodies, and had no wish that this enactment should remain on the Statute Book.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, that he could not help feeling some doubt as to the expediency of the House going into Committee on the Bill. As far as he could make out, it was not said that any harm had resulted from the Act proposed to be repealed, but only that it had been put in operation 1132 on only one occasion. But the second, and he imagined the chief, reason why the Bill was introduced was, that the Act afforded some ground of complaint to Nonconformists. He did not go into the question whether a general Act should be passed, giving compulsory powers for the purchase of sites to all religious Bodies; but still, if the present measure were to become law, while the particular grievance arising out of the exceptional treatment of the Church of England was removed, the complaints of other religious communities would be left untouched. He thought, therefore, that, as the object of the Bill was rather to remove an argument than a grievance, in the interests of the Church of England itself this matter had far better be left alone.

§ LORD GRIMTHORPE
said, he also thought that the Bill was unnecessary. It was founded on an altogether mistaken assumption, which was put forward in "another place," as an excuse for a Bill to enable Dissenters to seize land anywhere to build chapels; that the Church had that power under the Acts named in the Schedule to the Bill, of which the first was in 1818, and the last of the Amending Acts in 1831. The rig-lit rev. Prelate had said that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners—who alone had the power to take land by this so-called compulsory purchase—had done so once; but he could add, from the information of their secretary, that in that one case they had not acted in invitum; and he was quite sure that they never could or would. The Acts contained none of the old-established machinery or proper words for that purpose, but only enabled the Commissioners to get over all difficulties of absence, bad titles, and the like. Besides that, he could show, if the Bill went into Committee, that it went too far, and destroyed some really useful powers for no object whatever. He was not present when the Bill was road a second time, or he should have given their Lordships that information then.

§ LORD HERSCHELL
said, that this Bill would perpetuate an inequality between the Church of England and other religious denominations.