Lords Sitting of 14 March 1837

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Trial by Jury (Scotland); Affidavits Extension.
Petitions presented. By the Bishop of ROCHESTER, from a Parish in Kent, against the Abolition of Church-rates.—By Lords KENYON, REDESDALE, WHARNCLIFFE, the Bishops of LINCOLN, RIPON, ROCHESTER, the Earls of RIPON, SHAFTESBURY, the Marquess of HEREFORD, Viscount STRANGFORD, and the Duke of WRLLINGTON, from many places, against the Abolition of Church-rates—By the Puke of WELLINGTON, from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, for the Amendment of Municipal Corporations (England) Bill.—By Lord BROUGHAM, from Leeds, to the lame effect; and from Cashel, for the Abolition of Tithes, and for Amendment of Municipal Corporations (Ireland).—By Lord TEYNHAM, from Armagh, for the Abolition of Tithes and Vote by Ballot.—By Lord BROUGHAM, from Dundalk, for Small Debts (Scotland) Bill.

CHURCH-RATES.
A number of petitions having been presented on the subject of Church-rates,
Lord Broughamsaid, that he wished that some means could be devised, by Committee or otherwise, to ascertain the number of petitions, and the number of persons by whom they were signed, which had been presented for and against the abolition of Church-rates, as had been done when the Reform Bill was before the House. The petitions might be re-referred to the proper authorities, who could report the numbers to the House In respect to the number of petitions, he had no hesitation in saying, that more petitions had been presented against the abolition than for it; but it was material that they should know the number of signatures also.—[Lord Lyndhurst: And the amount of rates.] It would be very easy to have a Report furnished of the
382
number of petitions and signatures; but it would be impossible to ascertain the amount of rates paid. He believed that the petitions against the abolition, were three or four times more numerous than those in favour of it; but he was certain that the signatures in favour of abolition were fifteen or twenty times the number of those who had petitioned against the abolition of the rate.
The Bishop of Herefordsaid, the difference existed in the nature of the petitions presented for and against the abolition of Church-rates—namely, that while most of the petitions presented in favour of the abolition, came from separate congregations, five or six congregations being frequently in one town, those presented against the abolition were from separate towns, villages, and counties.
Lord Broughamsaid, the observation of the right rev. Prelate, was rather a confirmation than a contradiction of his statement; and he was sure that the number of signatures in favour of abolition was much greater than the number that disapproved of it. [Lord Lyndhurst.—No.] There would be very little difficulty in making the enumeration, and he would merely mention one instance in support of his statement—it was, that a petition had been presented from Birmingham alone in favour of the abolition, signed by 19,000 persons.
Petitions laid on the table.
The Marquess of Lansdownepresented a petition from the parish of Westbury, in South Wiltshire, for the abolition of Church-rates. The majority of signatures were those of rate-payers, and the circumstances connected with the petition proved that the Church, under the present laws, was not in that stale of security which he wished to see established, and which some noble Lords assumed, did exist at this moment. He denied that such was the fact, and he would say further, that he would never consent to any Bill that might be sent up to their Lordships, unless it was calculated to place the Church on a more secure foundation than it now rested on. There was an illustration of its present insecure situation in the statement of the petitioners, which was, that they had for seven years successfully resisted the payment of rates for the maintenance of the Church. He would not say whether they had acted properly or improperly, judiciously or in-

383
judiciously, in resisting the payment, but he considered it to be his duty to call the attention of their Lordships to this fact, which proved in this one parish (and the case was similar in many others), that where there was any disinclination on the part of the rate-payers to maintain the Church, it need not be maintained by them; and it was, therefore, a delusion to suppose that there existed under the present law that security for the maintenance of the Church which ought to exist in every parish in the country. It was further stated in the petition that these circumstances had engendered party feelings in the parish: and it was to put an end to contentions arising from such a source that he desired that some means should be adopted to effect that purpose. He would not, however, consent to any measure that would not secure the maintenance of the Churches in every parish in the kingdom.
The Bishop of Exeterpresented a petition from Chorley, in the county of Devon, praying, that if their Lordships' sanctioned any alteration in the state of the law respecting Church-rates, they would take care that due provision was made for the maintenance of the Church. This petition was signed by very few landholders, but the poor labourers residing in the parish unanimously approved of it. A gentleman of large property in the neighbourhood, the heir to an Earldom, and who was likely to be one of the most opulent men in the kingdom, if he survived the present possessor, had endeavoured to induce an individual to petition against Church-rates, and he was sorry to say he had in some degree succeeded; but the clergymen of the parish had appealed to the labourers, and they all supported the present petition.