HL Deb 28 August 1835 vol 30 cc1073-84
The Earl of Aberdeen

called the attention of the House to a subject which, in his judgment, was not second in importance to any that could be submitted to their Lordships' consideration—he meant the Commission recently issued respecting the Church of Scotland. He had some suspicion that the noble Viscount himself was not fully aware of the true nature of the course in which he was engaged, and the consequences likely to ensue from it. He thought, if he could only open the noble Viscount's eyes to the facts of the subject, that there might yet be time to arrest the evils which threatened the character and independence, if not the existence, of the Established Church of Scot- land from the nature and constitution of this Commission. His Majesty's Government had issued a Commission of Inquiry into the means and nature of the religious instruction afforded by the Church of Scotland. This Commission originated in consequence of numerous petitions from Scotland for an extension of the means of religious worship in connexion with the Church of that country. Government thought proper to issue a Commission, he presumed, for the purpose of ascertaining whether public assistance ought to be afforded in aid of the private contributions raised in Scotland for the purpose of supplying additional Church accommodation. He foresaw, at an early period, that this Commission, from its nature, could not fail to excite dissatisfaction in Scotland, and the prediction which he had ventured upon this subject was soon accomplished. The Commission of the General Assembly met on the 13th of August, and came to a resolution that the Commission, as at present constituted, was not entitled to the confidence of the Church of Scotland. It came to this resolution on the ground that among the Commissioners were the names of persons decidedly hostile to any connexion between Church and State—persons who were unfriendly to the Church of Scotland, and did not possess that knowledge and experience of the subject necessary for carrying the professed objects of the inquiry fairly into effect. A division took place on this resolution, when there were ninety in favour of it, and three against it; or, more properly speaking, three individuals were for adjourning the consideration of the subject. This was a very strong proceeding on the part of the General Assembly, which was not a political body, and seldom or never meddled in political matters unless its interests were vitally concerned in them. The majority on this occasion was composed of fifty clergymen and forty laymen of various shapes of political opinion. In fact, the resolution was proposed by a Gentleman of the most liberal opinions, and supported by others of the same sentiments as the noble Viscount. The three individuals who objected to the resolution were three Whig attornies, or, as they were called in Scotland, writers to the signet, but no clergyman could be found to support the Amendment. The Assembly proceeded to adopt this course from their knowledge of the Gentlemen composing this Commission, and doubtless their opinion must have been strengthened when they learned the terms of the Commission. In looking at the Members of the Commission, he declared that he had not the least objection to individuals belonging to the same political party as the noble Viscount—far from it, provided they entertained friendly feelings towards the Church of Scotland; he had rather there should be persons of such political sentiments on the Commission. He did not even object to the names of Dissenters among the Commissioners, merely on the ground of their being Dissenters, because he hoped the great body of Dissenters was not hostile to the Church of Scotland; but when he saw persons who were opposed to all religious establishments appointed Commissioners, he thought it a mockery to place such individuals on a Commission to inquire into the expediency of extending the efficiency of the Established Church of Scotland. He was no friend to any Church Establishment except so far as it afforded a security for the maintenance of true religion and the extension of religious knowledge; but for the accomplishment of those objects he looked upon Establishments as highly desirable, and it was his firm conviction that the Church of Scotland had fulfilled them. With respect to the opinions of individuals composing the Commission, he might refer to a book published by one of the Members, which he admitted to be very ably written, and to contain the best arguments in favour of the voluntary system that he had ever seen. This production displayed great moderation of language, but was composed in a spirit of decided hostility to every religious establishment, which the writer endeavoured to show must necessarily be unjust and unchristian. [The Earl of Minto: the book was not written against the Church of Scotland.] Be that as it might, persons hostile to any connexion between Church and State, or to any Church Establishment whatsoever, would not, in all probability, be friendly to the Church of Scotland. He believed the majority of the Commissioners to be hostile to the establishment. When he stated his opinion on the subject on a former evening, the noble Viscount appeared impressed with the necessity of giving it further consideration. He understood the noble Viscount to state, that considerable discontent prevailed among the Dissenters, and that they complained of not being adequately represented in the Commission. He thought if the Commission were established to try the merits of the case, as between establishments and the voluntary principle, that the Dissenters ought to be represented, but he always understood the object of the Commission to be limited to the expediency of the required grant, and he must say, however he might still be disposed to admit Dissenters as Members of the Commission, that the admission of avowed enemies of the Church of Scotland in that capacity was an act of gross injustice, and calculated to defeat the object of the Commission. The dissatisfaction arising from the composition of the Commission would be aggravated by a reference to the terms of the document under which the Commissioners were to act. He objected to the numbering of the Members of the Established Church and of Dissenters as directed by the Commission; for if the assistance to be afforded to the Church of Scotland was made to depend on the doctrine of numbers, that was at once an approach to the voluntary principle. The Voluntary Church Association of Scotland, which met in December, adopted a Report, written, he believed, by the author of the book to which he had already referred, in which Report the issuing of the Commission of Public Instruction in Ireland was hailed as the commencement of a happier era, on the ground that the numbering of the Members of the Established Church of that country, with a view to the regulation of the establishment by that, involved a principle which, though it did not quite come up to the doctrines of the association, was notwithstanding a large advance towards there. No doubt the present Commission must be acceptable to the Members of this Association on the same grounds. He also objected to the Commission, because it threatened to interfere with the independence of Presbyterian Church Government. The functions delegated to the Commissioners belonged exclusively to the Church of Scotland itself. It was of the nature and essence of Presbytery that the whole authority of the establishment should be vested in the Body of the Church composed of ministers and lay elders, and not individuals. The King was not the head or visitor of the Church of Scotland, and by law he had no authority in ecclesiastical matters. It was true the presence of his representative in the capacity of chief Civil Magistrate was recognized in the General Assembly; but the Assembly could meet, and did meet, without his intervention. The King could not delegate to these Commissioners an authority to meddle with the discipline and government of the Scotch Church, which he did not himself possess. He also objected to the instructions given to the Commissioners to inquire into the funds of the Established Church and the amount or disposition of tithes or teinds. In Scotland the teinds were entirely private property; some being in the hands of capitularies of teinds (persons in the same situation ns lay impropriators in this country), and the greater part being held by landowners who had purchased the tithes of their own land, and had as good a right to them as to the remainder of their estates. The teinds were not the property of the Church of Scotland, which was merely entitled to a competent stipend out of them, to be determined by the Court of Session at Edinburgh. The remainder was private property, and though the amount of teinds might be augmented, it was impossible to appropriate them to the support of an additional church or minister. This species of property was not open to the proposed inquiry. The commission, like another of which their Lordships had lately heard so much, gave very extensive powers on this head; but, whatever might be thought of the legality of the Municipal Corporation Commission, there could be no doubt here, for the King was not even visitor of the Scotch Church, and the whole powers of the Commission were illegal and nugatory. He objected to the appointment of local Commissioners of Inquiry, which was contemplated under the original Commission. If information were all that was really required, it might have been obtained without the appointment of anew Commission, and without the cost of a single farthing, through a Commission, not in existence for building churches in the Highlands, the duties of which Commission had been admirably executed for several years at no expense, with the exception of a small salary to the secretary. It was not with respect to members of the Church of England that the Church of Scotland entertained any apprehensions; on the contrary, to no quarter did she look more confidently for sympathy and support than to the right rev. Bench, and he believed the demand would be responded to. Though himself a member of the Church of Scotland, no one could be more attached to the Established Church of this country, and he felt confident that members of the Church of England looked with like kindly feelings at the establishment in Scotland. He entreated the noble Viscount to consider this import- ant subject without reference to party, and to take such steps as might be deemed most conducive to the welfare of the Church and to the satisfaction of the people of Scotland. He entreated the noble Viscount to reconsider the matter, and if he could not wholly withdraw the Commission, at least to modify and explain its objects and improve the composition of its members. If the noble Viscount would take this course, the Church of Scotland had every disposition to co-operate with the Government in the accomplishment of the objects which it professed to have in view, and the noble Viscount would find that by adopting this recommendation he would avoid much trouble to himself and his Government, and remove a cause of much discontent in Scotland.

Viscount Melbourne

admitted the great importance of the subject introduced by his noble Friend. His noble Friend seemed to think that he had made some impression on him, and that he was disposed to make concessions in consequence of what fell from his noble Friend on a former evening. Now, his noble Friend's observations always made a considerable impression and had great weight with him; but on the occasion referred to his noble Friend had brought forward the subject without notice, and he was wholly unprepared to discuss it, so that any appearance of yielding or concession was owing to his ignorance of the matter, and to his having placed greater reliance upon his noble Friend's observations than, on further consideration, he found them entitled to. He was aware of the decision of the assembly on this subject—of the dissatisfaction felt by the adherents of the Established Church—and of the discontent of every other religious denomination in Scotland. After universal content and agreement, he did not know whether the next best testimony to the impartiality of a proceeding such as this, was not discoverable in the universal dissatisfaction of all parties, for that feeling showed that the commission was not exclusively or partially constituted. It would be well, in reference to this as to other subjects, if they could find persons to act as Commissioners who stood entirely aloof from prepossession or a suspicion of partiality; but that was absolutely impossible—for if you had an impartial Commission, in other words a Commission composed of persons wholly unacquainted with the subject, you must also have an ignorant Commission, one unacquainted with the subject of inquiry. Fail- ing an impartial Commission, it became necessary to look for truth from the conflict of adverse opinions, and on this principle he maintained that the Commission was fairly composed. The speech of Dr. Macfarlan in the General Assembly corroborated his view of the case. That Gentleman stated Mr. Dick, to whom his noble Friend had alluded, to be a very respectable man, and that his book was the best on his own side of the question. Now, he did not think that the fact of this Gentleman having put forth the doctrines imputed to him temperately, moderately, and in a philosophical tone and manner (for no bitterness or acrimony was charged against his production) should disqualify him from forming one of the Comsion. Besides, he had always found that the best way of mitigating extreme opinions was to employ the parties holding them in the public service, not that he supposed the modification of sentiment to arise from sordid motives, but because he was aware that when such men came to be practically acquainted with business, they saw the un-wiseness and inexpediency of extreme measures, and as they were persons of vigorous intellect, they became useful public functionaries. With respect to the other Gentlemen on the Commission, as his noble Friend had not gone into particulars, he should abstain from touching on their individual opinions. On the whole, the Commission appeared to him as fairly constituted as such a body could well be, but it was impossible to satisfy conflicting interests. One party, that of the Church, required that every body on the Commission should be favourable to the required grant.—[The Earl of Aberdeen: No: but that they should not be unfavourable to the Church of Scotland.]—Well, he apprehended that was much the same thing; for persons favourable to the Church would be desirous of procuring it the grant. But the other side was equally unreasonable, and required that none should be on the Commission but persons unpledged or hostile to the establishment. The application for a grant of public money originated with the Scotch Church; its friends said there was not sufficient accommodation for its numbers, and its opponents declared that there was more Church room than the present worshippers could fill. Those assertions were made so decidedly by each party, that the Government thought it wise to inquire into the real state of the case before taking any further step. Perhaps the terms of the Commission had been extended somewhat widely in consequence of a subsequent application. His noble Friend said that the Commission was contrary to the fundamental principles of the Scotch Church, and that it assumed powers which the King himself did not possess; but without pretending to have mastered the whole subject, he declared that he could not see how the Commission violated the rights or privileges of the Scotch Establishment. He did not wish to say anything which could be construed into an attack on the fundamental principles, or on the practice of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland; but did the noble Lord mean to say, that if ever any allegations were made respecting the existence of abuses, or respecting the mode of reforming abuses in that Church, it was not in the power of either King or Parliament to inquire into those allegations? If the noble Lord meant to say that, it was a reductio ad absurdum. It was a higher pretension than had ever been set up by the advocates of the Roman Catholic Church against the principle of he Reformation. It was exactly the objecton which that Church had urged against the proceedings of the early Reformers. They said, "This cannot be done by the laity—the laity cannot reform the Church—the Church must reform itself." That had been the objection made by the Roman Catholics to all the proceedings of Parliament during the progress of the Reformation. The power of Parliament to inquire into the abuses or alleged abuses existing in the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, extended also to examine into the amount of its property. The teinds were a property which belonged to the Church of Scotland—[The Earl of Aberdeen—" No, no,"]—Well, that was a complicated question of Scotch law, and he must confess that he did not exactly understand the statement made upon it by the noble Earl. He was, however, inclined to think that it was a property as liable to be inquired into as any other species of property. His noble friend had complained of the power given under this Commission to the persons named in it to appoint others to carry on this inquiry: but he thought that his noble friend would admit that it was impossible that an inquiry of this extent and character should be carried on without assistance. But the main question was this: the Church of Scotland had demanded a grant of public money. If it meant to establish its right to that grant in order to carry on the spiritual instruction of the people of Scotland, had not his Majesty and had not the State a right to say to the Church, "Show us what your funds are, and let us see whether your property is or is not sufficient for the purposes to which you would apply it?" These were the grounds on which the Commission was issued. The zeal of other parties had taken advantage of the fact of a Commission being issued, and had required that the inquiry should also be directed to other purposes, which might wisely be inquired into; and for that purpose the inquiry had been made as extensive as possible, and the Commission had been constituted as their Lordships now saw it. His noble Friend had said that the powers granted by this Commission were at once illegal and nugatory. They might be nugatory, for they were not compulsory, but he was quite certain that they were not illegal. He likewise must assert that the Commission was constituted properly and impartially. He was concerned to hear that the appointment of this Commission had excited discontent in Scotland, but he was consoled to find that that discontent was not of a party nature, but that it was extensive and universal. It was one of the strongest proofs that could be given of the impartiality with which the Commissioners had been selected, that no party was pleased with them. It often happened that things which commenced in discontent ended better than was expected, whilst things which commenced in universal satisfaction often terminated in general discontent. He hoped that the discreet and prudent manner in which the Commission would be executed would fulfil its objects without producing any of those disagreeable effects which his noble Friend had anticipated.

The Earl of Haddington

expressed his surprise that his noble Friend should have congratulated himself upon the universal dissatisfaction which the appointment of this Commission had created in Scotland. How far the issuing of a Commission, which on its first appearance had produced universal dissatisfaction, was likely to produce hereafter general content and religious reconciliation, he left to his noble Friend's ingenuity to discover. He would not pretend to decide to what extent the authority of Parliament ought to go in inquiring into the condition of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. This, however, he would say without fear of contradiction from any person who knew any thing about the Presbyterian religion, that Parliament had no right to interfere with the religion or with the religious polity of the Church of Scotland. He would not pretend to set bounds to the practical omnipotence of Parliament; but this he would say, that no wise and prudent legislator would ever interfere with the Scotch church without great and crying necessity for interference. He complained that the issuing of this Commission had put the Scotch church upon its trial, and had placed its enemies in the situation of its judges. He admitted that when the Scotch clergy came forward to ask a grant of public money, Parliament had a right to enter into the statistics of the question, and to call upon them to show that the funds under their control were not sufficient for the purpose of administering proper spiritual instruction to the laity placed under their superintendence. They stated, and they stated with much truth, that there was in Scotland a great deficiency of places of worship for the members of the established Church. There was no doubt that Parliament had a right to examine into the correctness of that allegation; but Parliament had no right to go further. This Commission, however, went a great deal further, and therefore he was sorry that it had been appointed. It was not only a nugatory, but also an illegal commission; and it was illegal, because under the generality of its wording it was competent for the Commissioners, if they so thought fit, to inquire into matters connected with the Scotch Church, into which no lay person had any right to inquire. Again, there was a just ground of complaint in the manner in which the members appointed to act under the Commission had been selected from Gentlemen who were known to entertain opinions hostile to the Established Church. Besides the hon. Gentleman whose pamphlet the noble Earl had quoted, there was on that Commission a Gentleman who from scruples of conscience, had refused, when appointed to act as a member of the General Assembly, and another, who had written a pamphlet to prove that it was expedient to sever the connexion existing at present between the Church and State. That was the very madness of the day in Scotland, and had taken its rise from the general measure which was passed four years ago, and which had added very largely to the number of seceders from the Established Church. Previously to that measure the number of seceders in the country districts—he was not speaking of the large manufacturing towns —had very much diminished, and religious peace was generally prevalent throughout Scotland; but since that measure dissent had again reared its head; and from the manner in which this commission was worded, and in which the appointments under it had been filled up, he thought that the return of that religious harmony which prevailed some years ago would be postponed to a very distant day. That Commission would awaken a sleeping lion in Scotland, and so far from leading to future harmony and conciliation would leave their Lordships to seek next year, as they were seeking now, for the best means of restoring religious quiet to that country.

The Earl of Minto

said, that the chief point which their Lordships had to consider was, as to the objects of the inquiry, and to the manner in which that inquiry should be conducted. He knew from his own knowledge that the majority of the Commissioners were favourable to the continuance of the connexion between Church and State; and he knew them to be gentlemen of such temper, moderation, and prudence, that he was sure no fear need be entertained but the inquiry would be conducted in the most proper and impartial manner. They represented no particular class of opinions or feelings, and he was convinced would conduct the inquiry just as it should be conducted. As to the statement which was made by the noble Earl that the number of Dissenters had increased since the passing of the Reform Bill, he gave it an unqualified contradiction, for he was persuaded that the numbers of persons connected with the Church of Scotland was greater now than it was three years ago.

The Duke of Buccleuch

objected to granting such extensive powers, as were given by this Commission, to persons who were totally unknown to the Church. As to the Commissioners, he knew nothing of them, with the exception of one for whom he entertained the highest esteem, and in whom personally he could place the greatest confidence. This, however, was only an individual feeling. He still looked upon this Commission with great distrust. If it were not actually illegal, it went as nearly as possible to infringe those Acts of the Legislature which had been confirmed by the oath of the Sovereign, who had sworn to leave inviolate the Scotch Presbyterian Church as settled by law. This Commission had given great dissatisfaction to every class in Scotland. The General Assembly looked upon it with suspicion, because they apprehended that injury would be done by it to the Established Church of Scotland; whilst the Seceders were dissatisfied with it because there were not more persons in the Commission who were for the destruction of that Church altogether.

The Marquess of Breadalbane

admired the constitutional zeal of the noble Duke; but if the Commission were, as it had been said by a noble Earl opposite, completely nugatory, of course nothing could result from it. The dissatisfaction which had been spoken of was grounded upon the individuals composing the Commission, and yet, after all, only one of these individuals had been pointed out as being opposed to the Established Church. With respect to the rest of them, the only objection was, that some of them were very young men. Perhaps it would have been better if men had been appointed who were older and more experienced; at the same time, he had no doubt that though young, they would give a true and faithful Report of the facts they had to inquire into; for they had only to report on facts; they were not called upon, he supposed, to give any opinion on the subject of their inquiry. He thought, therefore, that all that had been stated against the Commission really amounted to very little.

The Marquess of Bute

objected to the Commission not on the narrow ground that it was illegal as applied to the Church of Scotland, but that such a Commission was inconsistent with the principle of an Established Church altogether, and, therefore, with the Established Church of Scotland.

The Earl of Aberdeen

expressed his disappointment at the very little assurance which his noble Friend (Lord Melbourne) had given him as to any alteration being made in the terms of this Commission. Still, however, he did not despair; but trusted the good sense, candour, and good wishes of his noble Friend for the exercise of his authority in so far modifying the Commission, at least in the practical execution of it, as that it should not lead to those consequences which, he could assure his noble Friend, were but too generally apprehended by the people of Scotland would result from it.

Subject dropped.