CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

HC Deb 20 May 1835 vol 27 cc1255-66

Mr. Gillon

rose to present Petitions from thirty-five different bodies in Scotland, against any grant of money out of the public funds for the purpose of extending the endowments of the Church of Scotland. These petitions had, almost all emanated from public meetings; they had been subscribed by above thirteen thousand five hundred individuals, all males, and above twelve years of age. In many instances, none had been allowed to sign who were not known to be above the age of sixteen.—The most ample discussion of the question had been courted, and the greatest pains taken to explain the true meaning of the petitions. In these respects they formed a striking contrast to the secret and hole-and-corner manner in which the petitions had been got up. These had not, in scarcely any instance, emanated from public meetings. The promoters of them were afraid to face the public. The petitions were carried round by the established clergymen and elders, who used every means of entreaty, or otherwise, to act upon weak minds. The signatures of females were received, who were peculiarly liable to be influenced in this way; and many were induced to sign under erroneous impressions, who, when the matter was fairly explained to them, endeavoured to get their names erased; and when this was not permitted, as was generally the case, they adhibited their names to the petitions against endowments, being the only means left in their power of undoing, in part at least, the evil they considered they had done. In proportion as he had been honoured by the confidence of a great number of his countrymen, from the English border to the Islands of Orkney, who were in conscientious principles opposed to this grant, he had been malignantly assailed by the promoters of this purposed act of injustice. He trusted the House would, therefore, indulge him for a few minutes, while he alluded to certain particulars connected with this subject, which he was bound to bring under their consideration. In formerly presenting a petition on the subject, he had adverted to the circular of the Committee of the General Assembly, from which, in fact, all the petitions for endowments had emanated; for there was no spontaneous movement on the part of the people of Scotland on this subject. The General Assembly's Committee had sent round forms of petitions to the different parishes, to suit their supposed circumstances of destitution of religious information, with instructions to the clergy and elders to use all means in their power to get signatures attached to them; and it must be confessed these functionaries had most zealously followed out these directions. The Committee had also published certain statements of the destitute condition of certain places in regard to the means of religious instruction. He could not speak to the whole of these, but he had selected one instance, namely, Hamilton, one of the burghs he had the honour to represent. In this place the population was stated in the circular of the General Assembly to be 9,513, necessary Church accommodation 4,576, present ditto 800, deficiency 4,200. He had then stated that not only were the whole of the seats in the dissenting places of worship kept out of view, but those also in a Church lately built in connexion with the Establishment. He had since learnt that in this statement he had been led into an error. The additional Church in connexion with the Establishment was not completed at the time the circular of the General Assembly was issued, but it was in process of building; it had since that period been opened, being suited to accommodate 640 persons, and galleries are now either being constructed, or at all events have been contracted for, which will accommodate about 460 more. To this extent he was willing to confess that he had been led into error, but what would the House or the country think of the fairness of the statement of the General Assembly which, in giving the amount of Church accommodation in Hamilton, kept out of view all that supplied by the Dissenters, amounting to nearly four thousand, and suppressed the fact that another Church was actually then being erected in connection with the Establishment. What an effect a statement such as that of the Committee of the General Assembly was calculated to produce on the minds of the Members of his Majesty's Government, or of this House, not acquainted with the local circumstances! At Hamilton alone, a place containing 9,513 inhabitants, a deficiency of church accommodation is exhibited amounting to no less than 4,200. Any one will immediately see, that this is a state of things which cannot be permitted to continue; and that at any expense to the country, the people, who are thus perishing for want of religious instruction, must be supplied. But when it shall be made apparent that the accommodation provided by the Dissenters has been altogether omitted, amounting to nearly 4,000 seats; and that the fact has been suppressed that a Church was in progress in connexion with the Establishment which now contains 640, and will shortly contain between 400 and 500 more—when this monstrously alleged deficiency of Church accommodation shall, on close inspection appear to be a very considerable surplus above what can possibly be required for the whole population, must not every candid mind agree with the sentiments of his constituents, the inhabitants of Hamilton, who say, they can view such conduct in no other light than that of intentional misrepresentation? But it had been said the General Assembly's Committee were not informed that this new Church, in connection with the establishment was begun. If so, it was their own fault. In making a grave statement to the public on a very important public question they ought to obtain accurate information; and when lie saw in the circular of the General Assembly's Committee, that the authority to whom they appealed was one of their own body, one of the Ministers of the Established Church in Hamilton, who could by no possibility have been ignorant of these facts, he could not avoid coming to the conclusion, that if not on the part of the Committee, there was on his, a wilful suppression of what ought in fairness to have been laid before the public. But it was also said the circular of the General Assembly did not profess to give anything but the accommodation in connexion with the Church itself. It must, therefore, go on the supposition that the whole population of Scotland should be instructed in connexion with the Established Church.—This would involve the erecting of, at least, 800 additional Churches, and an expense to the country of about seven millions sterling. But it seemed that the Churchmen deny that such is their object, they only wished to reclaim the practical heathens, at an annual expense of ten thousand pounds, to be gradually increased; then, why keep out of view the accommodation afforded, and the spiritual instruction administered by the Dissenters? They had involved themselves in a contradiction from which they had no escape. In the statement which he had made on the occasion to which he had alluded, he had referred to the means employed by the promoters of the endowment scheme to obtain signatures to their petitions. These had been of the most objectionable kind. The petitions had been carried about from door to door, and solicitations the most urgent had been used. Misrepresentations as to the object of the petition, the best proof of which was, in many instances, the persons who had signed the petitions, signing afterwards the petition against endowments. The people were told they were merely asking for the application of unexhausted teinds. Some had signed under the coercion of those to whom they owed money—some in ignorance altogether—some from threats of deprivation of Church privileges—and the names of some were put down without their consent being asked at all, and even the inducement of liquor had in some instances not been omitted. He had been challenged to produce instances; being thus called on he would mention Biggar, Earlstown, Thornhill, Dunsay, Airdrie, Lassuade, Lawrence Kirk, Tranent, Carnwarth, and Dalserf, as places where such practices had been employed. He had heard of various others, but would confine himself to those of which he had received information. In the case of Earlstown, there was a separate petition from 26 individuals, stating that they had been imposed on by the interested representations of those by whom their signatures had been obtained, repenting their folly, in being so misled, and praying that the grant may be withheld. These were means not creditable to any cause; it was with the deepest regret he found, that party or sectarian spirit had so far blinded them as to induce them to employ these means when they professed to be advocating the cause of religion. It was proposed by this plan to endow the Chapels of Ease in connexion with the Church of Scotland. What would this be but relieving those of the wealthier classes, to whom the Churchmen undoubtedly belonged, of the burden for which they had in the most praiseworthy manner become bound, of supporting their own Clergymen, and throwing it upon the community at large? If this principle were adopted in Scotland, they must be prepared to carry it over all the kingdom, and to endow all the proprietary Chapels throughout England. Where was such a system to end? It was manifestly most flagrantly unjust towards Dissenters. Why do not the Churchmen, who are the wealthier classes, imitate the Dissenters in the exertions they make far the dissemination of Gospel truth? They provide both Churches and Ministers for themselves, they find seats for their poorer brethren, not in places set apart and marked as pauper seats, but so scattered among the rest that they do not excite peculiar observation; they provide for the maintenance of their own poor, and for the sending of missionaries both at home and abroad to reclaim the practical heathen; a more practical proof, as it seemed to him, of religious zeal, than getting up begging petitions throughout the country, and striving to extend the domination of a particular sect on the basis of public wrong and individual injustice. In one Dissenting congregation alone, that of Broughton-place, in Edinburgh, consisting of none above the middling, and many in the humbler walks of life, the sum of 1,400l. was raised annually, as stated in the petition which he had the honour of presenting for the maintenance of the ordinances of the Gospel, the support of their poor, and the extension of Christianity at home and abroad. The truth was, this was a crusade against Dissentan—an attempt to put down Dissenters, from whose ministrations the country had benefitted so much. The omission of the Dissenting places of worship in the enumeration of Church accommodation, was insulting to the Dissenting body, and fraudulent as regarded the public. Instead of cultivating peace and good will among men, the Churchmen had been lighting anew the flames of religious discord throughout the land, and he could not help thinking, that even as regarded their own interest, it would, to use the words of one of the very sensible petitions emanating from the Dissenting bodies of Edinburgh, "have been more politic in them to remain content with what they have, than by asking for more to provoke indignant resistance to contemplated injustice."

Sir William Rae

said, it was clear, from many of the petitions upon this subject, that there existed great misapprehensions as to the nature and the objects of the proposed grant. He always understood the object was to provide accommodation for those classes who were not able themselves to pay the expense of seats in the churches. The accommodation at present was utterly inadequate to the wants of the country. The establishment of the Church of Scotland took place at a time when the population was not one-tenth of what t was at present. Parishes had become more populous, large towns had grown up, in which the population was vastly increased. In Glasgow and Edinburgh the accommodation in the Churches was totally inadequate. At present in the Dissenting places of worship the price of seats was high, this being necessary to provide an adequate stipend for the Clergyman. The poor had not the means of paying for these seats. The object proposed, therefore, was, that Parliament, by some grant, should come in aid of private benevolence, for the purpose of affording to the poor the means of spiritual instruction. That truly excellent man, Dr. Chalmers, and others who contributed money for this purpose out of their own pockets, required only the assistance of Parliament, so that they should not bear the whole expense. Let those who opposed this grant look at the increase of crime in Scotland. It was lamentable to be obliged to make the observation, but depravity was fearfully on the advance there, and the consequences must become truly alarming if adequate means of religious instruction were not provided in due time for the people. The Representatives of Scotland did not oppose considerable grants, proposed for other Ecclesiastical purposes; but they were immediately opposed, though the grant for which they applied was comparatively small. This matter had produced a very strong sensation in Scotland. There was a great deal of misrepresentation and misconception on the subject, and it became necessary, therefore, that the facts should be inquired into, and the real truth of the case ascertained. He, therefore, now gave notice that he should, on a future day, move for a Select Committee to inquire whether or not additional accommodation was necessary in Scotland, to give the people an opportunity of attending divine worship.

Dr. Bowring

said, he had felt anxious to ascertain what were the feelings of his constituents upon this subject. Being sent there to represent the inhabitants of a part of Scotland, though not locally connected with it, he endeavoured to ascertain what were their feelings with respect to this grant. The majority of the petitions in favour of it from Scotland were not discussed in the face of day, at open meetings. It was not so with the petitions against it, which, he believed, represented the opinions of the great majority of the people. He was bound to say, that this was the case in the five boroughs which he had the honour of representing. A majority of them were unfavourable to the grant, and their opinions concurred with his own. He did not admit the justice of the principle that the few were to support the Church of the many. What the Dissenters of England, Scotland, and Ireland had done, and were doing, for religion arose from the purest motives, from a sense of Christian obligation and duty; and, having done so much, it was not fair to call upon them to maintain a religion from which they dissented. That would, indeed, be a happy day when every man might worship God in his own way, and give voluntary support to his religious instructors; then would the true millenium of Christianity begin—then would they see the Church, as it was in the early times of Christianity, effecting the moral good of the people through its own holy influences.

Mr. Robert Steuart

was ready to admit the advantage of keeping up a connexion between the Church and State, but he differed as to the way in which that connexion ought to be maintained. He did not think the Dissenters of England and Scotland, or the Roman Catholics of Ireland, ought to be called upon to maintain an Established Church. He rejoiced to hear from the right hon. Gentleman (Sir W. Rae) that inquiry would be made into this subject. The result of that inquiry would, he believed, be very different from what the right hon. Baronet anticipated. There were already in the Church of Scotland ample means for any additional endowment that might be thought necessary. Great additional accommodation was now afforded by the Dissenters to the members of the Church. This was the case in Jedburgh, where, out of a population of 5,600, there was but very few, ninety-two (as we understood), who were not provided with accommodation either in the Church or in the place of worship of Dissenters. He might be told the Dissenters in Scotland would not be so numerous if there was room enough in the Churches of the Establishment. The same argument would apply with equal force to the erection of additional Churches in Ireland, even in parishes where there were no Protestants. Many who opposed this grant were Churchmen themselves, and they opposed it because they thought it unfair to call upon others to support their Church.

Major Cumming Bruce

said, he would not reply to the observations of the hon. Member (Dr. Bowring) with respect to the voluntary principle. Into that question he would not enter at present. He derived much pleasure from the notice of motion given by his right hon. Friend (Sir W. Rae). The only satisfactory way for setting the question at rest was by inquiry before a Committee of that House. He lately received a letter from a person well acquainted with the subject, in which it was stated that in eight of the northern counties, the population of which was 321,925, there were out of the whole no more than 3,530 in communion with Dissenters, and acting upon the voluntary system. The same observation would apply to Nairn; and in Inverness the number of those in communion with the Church was five times as great as those in communion with the Dissenters. Much was said about the injurious and unjust nature of a tax to support an Established Church, from which those who paid the tax dissented. This was a novel doctrine, and it was the more strange when coming from the mouth of persons who did not oppose the principle of an Establishment. That House was in the habit, of voting large sums of money for education in Ireland, though vast numbers of the people were opposed to the principle on which the plan of education proceeded. In the same way large sums were granted to promote the Fine Arts. Seventeen thousand pounds was voted for the British Museum, and he heard no objection made to these grants on the ground that there were many who would never derive the least benefit from them. It might be said, let the members of the Establishment in Scotland support their own Church. They might, perhaps, fairly say, we cannot afford it; and, after all, what was the sum asked? Why, it would not amount to so much as half a farthing each from the whole of the population. A large portion of the charge would fall upon men of property in communion with the Church. The amount of the sum so much objected to was a mere bugbear, not worthy a moment's attention from the House. With respect to the voluntary principle, he was surprised to hear it spoken of as it had been by those who admitted the principle of an Establishment. The principle was right or wrong. Let Parliament decide which it was, and if it should be declared by the competent authority to be wrong, let it be done away with as unjust and unholy. They who refused to carry out the principle stultified their own conclusion. It was the duty of the State, and one of its most important duties, to see that the means of spiritual instruction were afforded to the poor. He claimed on this ground the support of all who were favourable to an Establishment. With respect to the Dissenters, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland acknowledged the great advantage and the liberality of the assistance afforded by them in the way of accommodation. When the circular of the General Assembly was sent out, there were no churches in Hamilton, and some other places alluded to in the circular. They were built afterwards. How was it possible for the General Assembly, in their circular, to mention facts which were not in existence when it was issued? In consequence of the aid afforded by the Dissenters there were now only one in thirty of the population without accommodation. Otherwise it would have been one in nine. The great majority of the Dissenting Churches were not filled, in consequence of the high rate of payment for seats. The large Churches in Edinburgh, as he had been informed, were generally filled, partly, perhaps, from the attraction of popular preachers; but the great cause was that the seats were not paid for. It was the duty of Government to encourage the principle of affording to the poor the means of spiritual instruction without expense. He knew one parish that was sixty miles in length, and twenty-four in breadth, and another forty miles in length, and embracing several islands, unapproachable at times; another twenty miles long and twelve broad. In Perthshire there was one forty miles long and twenty broad. How was it possible for the inhabitants of such parishes to attend divine worship unless Churches were built for them? The Church of Scotland made this application to Parliament, not as a poor supplicant for aid, but on the ground that the National Church was a national benefit. The application for this grant was called a Tory trick. He utterly denied that there was anything of party spirit in it.

Mr. Patrick Stewart

supported the prayer of the Petition for a grant, and observed that, although it had been industriously circulated that about three millions were required for building, and four millions for endowing Churches, the fact was that only a sum of 10,000l. was required. The Churches erected in Scotland had been paid for by private subscription, and all that was now asked was some assistance, in order to extend the accommodation in those Churches to the inferior classes. With regard to the petition from Edinburgh, it was eagerly signed, in consequence of the belief that it was a petition against eight millions of direct taxation, and to this he might add that a general petition from Edinburgh in favour of the grant would have been prepared and presented had not the principal parties considered that such a petition must have been signed by many who had affixed their signatures to parochial petitions, and who in consequence, would have petitioned the Legislature twice over. Such a motive in those who had taken an active part in this matter could not but meet with the approbation of the House. Some years ago Scotland was included in a Bill for a grant towards the erection of new churches to the amount of 50,000l., but in consequence of some difficulty in the other House, the Bill was not carried through Parliament. This fact, he submitted, in some degree strengthened the claim now made.

Mr. Stewart Mackenzie

declared that he was favourable to the grant. When it was shown that the spiritual wants of the people of Scotland were inadequately supplied, he could not understand the force of the argument which would refuse to pay any attention to those wants.

Mr. Wilks

said, that on the right hon. Gentleman proposing his Committee he should certainly feel it his duty to resist it, on the part of the Dissenters of the United Kingdom. He never would consent to a Parliamentary grant in cases where the contribution should be private. The claim now made was really surprising. One hon. Gentleman told them 10,000l. only would be required, and another said that if one third part of a farthing was contributed by each inhabitant, the requisite amount would be raised. If it was such a trifle, then, what need of that application to Parliament. On these simple grounds he would certainly object to going into a Committee at all

Sir George Clerk

was sure that the more frequently and fully this Question was discussed the greater success they would have in removing the groundless apprehensions of those unacquainted with Scotch affairs, as to the demands made upon the public purse. The hon. Member who had just sat down was, it appeared prepared at once to resist the appointment of a Committee. In such a view of the Question, those hon. Members who felt that an Established Church tended to advance the morality and religion of a country could not possibly join. If they had no doubt as to the advantages of such spiritual assistance, it could not be to them matter of indifference whether or not it was adequately afforded to the people. Now, the principal duty of the proposed Committee would be to ascertain whether at present there was sufficient Church accommodation for those who desired to avail themselves of it: and, if not, whether the Church of Scotland was in possession of any funds out of which such additional accommodation could be provided. This was no unusual claim. In 1818, a grant of one million was made towards the erection of Churches belonging to the national Establishment in the southern districts of the island, and in 1824 another grant of 500,000l. was made for a similar purpose. What were the chief objections to those grants? "Why," said the hon. Member for Middlesex, (Mr. Hume) and the right hon. Member for Nottingham (Sir J. C. Hobhouse), "there is no necessity for these large contributions in aid of so wealthy a Church as the Church of England. Apply the grant to the extension of the Church of Scotland, which is poor, and in absolute want of such assistance, and we shall be satisfied." That proposition was now made. Many Churches had been built by private subscription, and in order to collect an income for the Clergyman, it was necessary to place a price upon the seats. Give an endowment to such Churches, and it would no longer be necessary to continue that system. Indeed, he would readily agree to the propriety of making it a condition of the grant, that in Churches so circumstanced, a large proportion of the seats should immediately be thrown open. An insinuation had been hazarded that this was a Tory manœuvre. He would merely observe in reply, that a representation of the propriety of such a grant had last year been favourably received by the Whig Government, and it might moreover be remembered that the then Lord Chancellor had from his place in Parliament, strongly urged the necessity of attending to the spiritual wants of the people of Scotland. Let not hon. Members be led to suppose that any burden would be imposed upon the Dissenters. He was well aware of the number of those who dissented from the Established Church, and he had not been inattentive to the number of Petitions against the proposed grant. But he would affirm that hardly one of these Petitioners was at all affected by the necessary expenses for the support of the Church. The Church-rates were defrayed by the proprietors of land, who were all strongly in favour of the grant. The only class of persons dissenting from the Church of Scotland, and at the same time contributing to the payment of its expenses, were the Episcopalians, and they, he was certain, were far from being hostile to the proper supply of the spiritual wants of the people. In conclusion, he hoped that the House would not agree in the doctrine laid down by the hon. Member, who had taken a preliminary objection to any inquiry into the subject.

Petition laid on the Table.