HL Deb 09 March 1838 vol 41 cc707-12
The Earl of Aberdeen

wished to call the attention of the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government to the subject of additional endowments to the Church of Scotland, which was spoken of yesterday. On that occasion the noble Viscount informed their Lordships that the subject was under the consideration of the Government. Perhaps the noble Viscount had since discovered, that the result of the deliberation of the Government was announced by a noble Lord in another place; but that announcement was stated in the usual sources of intelligence in such a manner that he was not very well able to comprehend the nature of the decision which her Majesty's Government had arrived at. Perhaps the noble Viscount would not object to state what course he intended to take upon the subject. He hoped the noble Viscount would not consider that he was unnecessarily urgent upon this matter, for he could assure the noble Viscount that there was no question, whether of foreign or domestic policy, that excited more interest in Scotland than this.

Viscount Melbourne

was aware of the great interest excited in Scotland upon this question, and particularly with regard to the course which it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to pursue; he was also perfectly aware, that the question which the noble Earl had put was a question asked and answered in another place; at the same time, (referring to the usual sources of information) that question was said, (whether it was so or not he could not tell, but he believed not) to have been answered in a very premature and undigested manner. This, at least, showed the ill effects of that senseless hurry and precipitation with which measures were urged upon the Government. Nothing tended, perhaps, more to foster that rash and precipitate haste than the bringing forward a great number of measures simultaneously for the consideration of the two Houses of Parliament, upon subjects of great importance, and to each of which it was, therefore, rendered impossible that they could devote due and proper attention. It was his opinion that it would be much better to bring forward measures deliberately one by one, so that the whole attention of Parliament should be given to each. A great attack had been made on the Government for the little which had been effected this Session. He could not help thinking, that measures of the greatest importance, and quite sufficient to occupy the attention of Parliament, had already been brought forward. More particularly when he considered that the other House of Parliament had been engaged on a measure of the highest importance to Ireland, namely, the introduction of a system of Poor-laws into that country—a subject amply sufficient to occupy their attention for the time it was under consideration. With respect to the Church of Scotland, he had only delayed giving a definite answer to the questions which had been put to him until he had made himself sufficiently master of the details. He could not yet give an opinion as to the exact amount of the want of church room tinder the existing system in Scotland, or as to the degree to which it might be necessary to supply that want and that necessity. But he and his colleagues in the Government were clearly of opinion that, whatever want might exist, they ought not to resort for the purpose of supplying that want to the general funds of the country, until all the property which had been for a great time in the possession of the Church, or which, at the present time, was liable and bound to make up such deficiency, and applicable to the spiritual wants of the country, had been appropriated to that purpose. If a great deficiency of spiritual assistance and church accommodation were proved to exist in any of the parishes in the rural districts of Scotland, in which the teinds were already exhausted, it was the intention of the Government to propose that assistance should be given to those parishes from that fund to which he had, on a former occasion, alluded, namely, the Bishops' teinds, now in the possession of the Crown; but in any parish in which the teinds still remained unexhausted, the Ministers were of opinion, that any further assistance required, should be supplied from those unexhausted teinds; and with that view measures would be taken to render the application of those teinds, to such purposes, more easy, and enable that to be done with more facility than it could be done under the act of 1707, which regulated those teinds. That was the general view which the Government entertained upon the subject. The answer which he gave to the noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham) yesterday might have been understood to be in the negative; and that it was not intended to propose a Parliamentary grant to supply the wants of the Church of Scotland.

The Earl of Aberdeen

supposed, from what had fallen from the noble Viscount, that some proposition would be made by Government on the subject. The noble Viscount had stated, that it was not the intention of the Government to grant any assistance to those districts in which the teinds had not been exhausted. Now, in some of those districts, the deficiency existed in a tenfold degree more than in any other part of the country. Nothing, he supposed, was to be done for the cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, where the deficiency was very great, and to which the attention of the Commissioners had hitherto been exclusively directed. The noble Viscount said, that he would not consent to supply the deficiency out of the general funds of the country, but out of the Bishops' teinds. Those teinds had become part of the hereditary revenues of the Crown, and belonged to the public. The noble Viscount might put his hand into whatever pocket he pleased, but still he would abstract the money from the pocket of the public, just as much as if he took it from the consolidated fund. The noble Viscount said, that, by an alteration of the act of 1707, he would make the division of parishes, the appointment of ministers, and the applications of the teinds, more easy; but, in those parishes, the church property might be compared to tithes, which was the property of the heritors, as lay-impropriators; and the alteration would throw upon that property the expense of endowment, which its owners never comtemplated when they acquired it. At present, if three-fourths of the heritors or owners of land concurred, they had the power of dividing parishes on application to the Court of Session, as a court of teinds. He wished that a little more of that consideration, of which he had heard so much, were applied to this important subject. With respect to urging the Government to give information on this question with unnecessary haste, there was no ground for the observation. The noble Lord to whom the question had been put had taken his own time. He said, that he would be ready with an answer at a certain period, and he had given one. He entreated the noble Viscount to consider this measure more than he appeared to have done.

Lord Brougham

observed, that though the noble Viscount on a former occasion had said that he answered a question put by him on this subject in the negative, yet the answer which he gave this night was decidedly in the affirmative of that question. What the noble Viscount proposed to do could not be done without a bill, and a most important bill. What signified it, whether the deficiency was supplied from one fund or from another, it would still come out of the public pocket, for the Bishops' teinds were now as much a part of the revenue as the consolidated fund. No matter which pocket the noble Viscount applied to, he was making the public pay, by sanctioning a grant of public money. This plan could not be effected except by a money bill. It would begin with "Most Gracious Sovereign," and it would receive the Royal assent in the usual form applied to money bills—"La Reine remercie ses loyal sujets, accepte leur benevolence, et aussi le vent." It must be a money bill, and nothing else. It would be acting most unjustly to those who had purchased these teinds to burden them with the endowment of new churches—since, when the purchases were effected, they were only liable to charges connected with the churches that then existed.

Viscount Melbourne

said, that notwithstanding the opinion which had been expressed by the noble and learned Lord, he must still adhere to what he had originally stated as to the teinds. There was certainly a distinction between the Bishops' teinds, which were formerly in the possession of the church, and the property which was at present in the possession of the Crown. That property was taken from the church by the Crown on the express condition that it should be applied hereafter to ecclesiastical purposes. During the great alterations made by Henry 8th at the time of the Reformation, property was taken from the church with that precise understanding; but the Crown did not keep its word, and some of that property was given away by the Crown in grants to individuals in England and Scotland. That property could not be touched again; but that which remained in the possession of the Crown could be applied, he maintained, to the purposes of the church. What was the landed property of the Church of England? He did not pretend to have a full knowledge of the matter, but he believed the property of the church was that which had been wrested from it by her predecessors, Henry 8th and Edward 6th, and which Queen Mary restored to the Roman Catholic church, and which afterwards became, as it was still, the property of the Protestant Church. He took that to be the property of the Established Church, to be applied to ecclesiastical purposes. He thought the inhabitants of Scotland would hail the measure contemplated by the Government with gratitude; and he believed that there was a general feeling among the landholders in favour of this among application of the property for the better instruction of their fellow-countrymen, and the supply of their spiritual wants.

Lord Brougham

protested against the principle of spoliation laid down by the noble Viscount, and begged him to reflect upon what he had said, for he might depend upon it, that he would hear more on this subject. He had never heard the principle of spoliation so openly avowed before. Did the noble Viscount think, that because a man bought those teinds, he was liable to——

Viscount Melbourne

He bought them with an onus on them.

Lord Brougham

Yes, with one onus, that of supporting the existing parochial churches. But did the noble Viscount mean to say that he bought them liable to be called on to support new churches? They were not liable to any demand of the kind, unless three-fourths of the heritors concurred. It was a mere chimera of the brain to suppose, that the teinds were liable to such spoliation. Such a doctrine no lawyer in Westminister-hall would presume to propound. He appealed to the noble Lord on the woolsack whether his estimation of that doctrine was not correct.

The Earl of Haddington

did not know whether his noble and learned Friend intended by his speech to compliment the noble Viscount, or to throw out some sarcasm against him; but he agreed with his noble and learned Friend that the principle laid down by the noble Viscount was a principle of spoliation. The liability of a landholder to give up his property, and what he might choose to do as a Christian man, were two very different things. It was true, as his noble and learned Friend had stated, that the landholders would be liable to give up their property for the augmentation and support of churches whenever the Court of Session should, as a court of teinds, make a decree to that effect. He regretted to hear, however, one part of the statement made by the noble Lord, because he inferred from it that the wants and necessities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, and every other great town in Scotland, were to be overlooked by the State. He believed, that as in other parts of the conduct of her Majesty's Government, they were much influenced by the pressure from without; not that they were not friendly to the Established Church, but they feared to offend the Dissenters and the supporters of the voluntary principle. With respect to the teinds, he so far concurred with the noble Viscount that they were a very natural source of the means for providing for the education and religious instruction of the people. He was surprised that after so much delay, and the report of the Commissioners had been so long in hand, the Government were not going to do something which would be more satisfactory to the people of Scotland.

Lord Brougham

again rose to explain. It was a pure fallacy to suppose that this was not a public fund, as far as the persons who had to pay were concerned. The people of England would have to pay as well as the people of Scotland, who did not pay many taxes, he believed. The distinction which had been drawn was a mere nominal distinction.

The Archbishop of Canterbury

observed, that it was perfectly true, as stated by the noble Viscount, that portions of the church property were bestowed on various persons by that arbitrary monarch, Henry 8th. But with regard to the property of the church, he begged to remind their Lordships that the Church of England was the national church, and if any revolution should take place, by which the Romish religion should be re-established in this country, there would be no transfer of property from one church to another; the property would still be held by the church as being that of the national church, returning, in that case, to its ancient corruptions.

Conversation dropped.