§ Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
§ LORD REDESDALE,
in moving the second reading of the Consecration of Churchyards (No. 2) Bill, said, that its object was to obviate the necessity for re-consecration in the event of land being added to an already consecrated churchyard. A right rev. Prelate objected to the Bill, in the form in which it was originally introduced, that its operation would involve the desecration of churchyards by Act of Parliament—the very last thing that he (Lord Redesdale) would desire to do. He had, therefore, withdrawn that Bill, and had introduced the present measure amended in such a manner as would, he hoped, remove the objection of the right rev. Prelate. When an addition was made to a church which had been consecrated, it was held that the enlargement did not necessitate re-consecration; and, indeed, it was obvious that if further consecration were required, great inconvenience would be experienced. It seemed to him that the principle that was accepted with regard to churches might also be accepted in regard to churchyards. All that the Bill did was to say that there was no legal impediment to the application of this principle; but it left it quite open to the Church authorities to do what they liked, and either to adopt re-consecration or to dispense with it. He believed the passing of the Bill 1366 would be regarded by the Bishops as a great relief to the Church.
§ Moved,"That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Chairman of Committees.)
§ LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY
said, he was much obliged to the noble Lord for the pains he had taken in reference to this subject. Great difficulty had been occasioned by requiring re-consecration when a churchyard was enlarged. It often happened that a landowner would give the land to be added to the churchyard, but neither he nor the Parishioners would incur the expense of re-consecration. The Bill was a most important one, and it would be very gratefully received. In the absence of the right rev. Prelate who had at first objected to the Bill, it might probably be taken for granted that the grounds of his objection had been removed.
§ THE EARL OF DERBY
said, he had no objection that the Bill should be read a second time, but hoped that the future stages would not be taken without consulting the right rev. Prelate who had urged the objection.
§ THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY
also said, that, in his opinion, the Bill would confer a great public benefit.
§ Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.