THIRD READING. (Hansard, 18 July 1870)

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
said, that the professed object of this Bill was to carry into effect the recommendations of the Royal Commission sanctioned by Convocation. Anything relating to public worship ought not to be regulated by Parliament merely, and probably in future such changes would be made in the same way as the changes now before the House had been made. But an Amendment had been introduced in Committee which was not in accordance with those recommendations — on the contrary, it was opposed to them. In the second part of the Bill, as it now stood, there was this passage— Upon special occasions, to be approved by the Ordinary, other Lessons may, with his consent, be substituted for those which are appointed in the Table of Lessons. The word "special" had been introduced in Committee. Now, this was completely contrary to a decision come to by the Commission after full deliberation, for on a division the recommendation as it originally appeared in the Bill was carried by 14 votes against 10. He thought that such a change should not have been made without any notice whatever. Indeed, he must protest against the introduction of any changes in the recommendations of the Commission, as it would serve as a precedent for introducing changes in Parliament next year, when the other and more important recommendations of the Commission would probably come under consideration. He asked their Lordships to reinstate the original wording of this part of the Bill by striking out the word "special."

THE BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL
said, that the introduction of the word had been made in Committee by 402 the Archbishop of York, on the recommendation of several of the clergy, who thought it would conduce to the more effective working of the Bill; and he himself had concurred with his most rev. Friend in the advisability of the Amendment; but at the time he forgot the discussion and the decision on the subject by the Commissioners; but even now he must say that he thought it would be better for the Ordinary that the word "special" did precede "occasions." The real point had been whether or not they should leave it to the discretion of a conscientious clergyman, who objected to the reading of Lessons from the Apocrypha, to use other Lessons in their stead. The danger was that if the word were omitted, the clergy would not deal fairly with the Bill. He would speak frankly as far as one man could speak for another. When he said that when clergymen asked leave to omit the Apocrypha, on the ground that the feelings of their people were much opposed to it, he should consider that a special case. After all, it only referred to one or two Lessons in the course of a fortnight in the year. He thought, therefore, that the word might be retained.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that when he recommended their Lordships to agree to this Amendment, he was not aware that the matter had been discussed by the Royal Commissioners, and that they had agreed nem. con. to omit the words. The Archbishop of York, who had also been in favour of the words, was also ignorant of these circumstances; and therefore he thought that the words ought to be struck out.

§ EARL STANHOPE
was understood to be in favour also of omitting the word.