LORD BALFOURasked Her Majesty's Government whether they were in a position to state definitely, before the House rose for the Easter Recess, whether it was their intention to introduce into either House of Parliament during this Session the Bill for the prevention of 997 the growth of new vested interests in the Church of Scotland, which was suggested at the end of the Gracious Speech from the Throne on the 31st of January last? He said: My Lords, the subject of this question seems to mo one upon which, under present circumstances, not only we in this House, but the Church of Scotland itself, is entitled to ask for some information from Her Majesty's Government. I shall preface the question with a few remarks to show as clearly as I can the reasons which have guided me in putting it, and the justification which I conceive there is for asking for this information. Taken as a whole, this would be a very large subject, one which in many of its aspects is of a highly controversial character, and about which it is not unlikely, that before long there may be, both here and elsewhere, a considerable amount of controversy. It is not my desire to go into the matter in its controversial aspects to-day: certainly, I shall endeavour, as far as I possibly can, and I hope entirely, to avoid touching upon any point in regard to it, which is not fairly covered by the question I have placed on the Paper. My Lords, it is within the knowledge of us all that in the Gracious Speech from the Throne an intimation was given that it was the intention of Government to introduce into Parliament during the present Session a Bill to prevent the growth of new vested interests in the Church of Scotland. Now, I am sure no one will disagree with me when I say that this means an intention on the part of Her Majesty's Government to disestablish and disendow the Church, or it moans nothing at all. The only reason for making such an intimation as this is because Her Majesty's Government must have formed the intention of introducing—and I should say upon an early date—a Bill for that purpose. If I were to depart from the promise I have made to your Lordships and the course of action I have laid down for myself, I do not think it would be difficult for me to prove that up to the present time the people of Scotland have given no warrant whatever to this or any other Government for taking such a course. I am aware the allegation will be made that at the present time there is supposed to be a majority of the Representatives from 998 Scotland in the other House of Parliament pledged to disestablish and disendow the Church, but I think those of us who are familiar with the current of affairs in Scotland are able to form a pretty good idea of how this circumstance has been brought about. It has boon brought about mainly by two great factors: by the clear and distinct promises made by the present Prime Minister to his friends among the people of Scotland, that if they adhered to the Liberal Party, in spite of many of their Members being pledged to the Established Church, their votes would not be held as counting—as warranting the Government in bringing in a measure of Disestablishment. I will not labour that more in detail now; that may have to be done hereafter. But the second reason to which I have referred is that it is beyond all doubt that where candidates, have put themselves before the people of Scotland as in favour of religious equality, or of Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Church, the question has never been argued out before the people. When they have gone before their constituencies and asked for their suffrages they have studiously and carefully kept that matter in the background; they have passed it off sometimes without any allusion to it at all, and have referred to it sometimes only when questioned on the subject; but when they have alluded to it, and more especially at the recent election, they have done it in, such a way as to endeavour to calm the apprehensions of the people of Scotland to make them believe that the danger is distant, and that they need not disturb themselves about it at the present time. But I may take it a step further. No one, as far as I know, with the sole exception of the Secretary for Scotland, has ever put forward the claim that the people of Scotland by a great majority, or by any majority for that matter, have declared in favour of Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Church. My Lords, I am not going in to this at length. I simply state it as one of the grounds for putting the question I have placed upon the Paper. But even supposing I were wrong and that the people of Scotland had to some extent declared in favour of Disestablishment, which I do not admit, I still think we have grave reason to complain of the course the 999 Government have taken in regard to this matter. I say, in the first place, it is solely and entirely without precedent of any kind whatever, and I say that the existence of a great national Institution like the Established Church of Scotland should not be put before Parliament for the first time officially in what I may call the "omnibus clause" of a Queen's Speech, hustled in between an allusion to the London County Council and a reference to the traffic in gin and whisky, which we have been already hearing something about this afternoon. I say that for an Institution of this kind that is a wholly ignominious and improper position. But the matter is made worse when weeks are allowed to pass and no distinct action is taken, and no imitation given of the real intentions of the Government. I do not think I am going too far when I say that it is an open secret that the supporters of Her Majesty's Government are not particularly pleased with the course taken. At any rate, I can assure noble Lords opposite that there are scores, hundreds, perhaps thousands, of individuals in Scotland who, while they may be in favour of this measure of Disestablishment, do not like the particular way in which it has been brought forward. All I ask for the Church of Scotland is that we should have fair play. No one can deny that it is a great national Institution. It is thoroughly national. It is, perhaps, if I may say so, the only remaining emblem of our former independent nationality. At any rate, this is certain: that if you write the history of the Church of Scotland, you have written the history of the nation, the history of all the national struggles for the attainment alike of civil and religious freedom. Moreover, there is no charge brought against the Church of inefficiency or neglect of duty—at least, if any such charge has been brought I have not noticed it; and if it should be brought, I shall be happy to do my humble duty in endeavouring to refute it. What I want to make clear, my Lords, is this: that in putting this question and asking for this information to-day, I am asking for no favour; I am asking for no consideration; certainly, least of all am I asking for anything in the nature of mercy. I ask for what I conceive to be simple elementary justice: that we may be told 1000 accurately, and without doubt, what are the real intentions of the Government in regard to this matter; and I may go a step further, and say that if the Government do not see their way not only to introduce this Bill, but to press it to such a point that Parliament may express its judgment upon it, it is not consistent with justice that great interests such as this Church of Scotland should be disturbed. I say, in short, to Her Majesty's Government, "Take which course you like—introduce the Bill or toll us that you are not going to introduce it." I am perfectly willing to take it either way; but I think we have a right to object to the uncertainty in which we have been kept for so long. My Lords, if I am told that the block of Business in another place is so great that room cannot be found for the Bill, then I think I might answer, "That is not the fault of those who are interested in the Church of Scotland." But if it were admitted that it cannot be introduced in another place, perhaps noble Lords opposite would consider the propriety of introducing it here. I can promise them, if they will accept the promise from me, that I will do my best in as fair and earnest a way as I can to make clear to the people of Scotland its provisions and what its effect will be. To this I ask the attention of the Government. Whatever course they take we do not intend to let this question go by default. We mean, sooner or later, and by some means or another, to get a fair and clear decision upon the point, unencumbered by other issues, from the people of Scotland. It may not affect our convictions upon the matter; but undoubtedly it might affect the course we shall deem it our duty to take. I do make an earnest appeal to Her Majesty's Government that if they do not moan to introduce the Bill and press it to such a point that Parliament can take action upon it, they should toll us; and that the Church of Scotland should be allowed to go on in peace with the excellent work it has been doing for the people of Scotland.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBEKLEY)My Lords, I am exceedingly sorry the noble Lord opposite should think that the Church of Scotland was treated in an ignominious manner by 1001 the place it occupied in the Queen's Speech. I am quite certain, as far as the importance of the question was concerned, Her Majesty's Government would have been very glad to have given it a place of the greatest honour. I think it would be exceedingly inconvenient if I were to attempt now to debate the thorny and difficult question of the Scottish Established Church. I will only make one remark: that I heard with satisfaction from the noble Lord he thought it was most important that the decision opinion of the people of Scotland should be ascertained, and that, as I rather gathered from him, we should act in accordance with that opinion. Now I believe it has been the invariable principle, adhered to in all statements which have been made by those with whom I have the honour to act, that their great desire is to be guided by the people of Scotland; and by that principle we shall abide. With regard to the question which the noble Lord has asked me, I certainly am not in a position to make any announcement different to that already made. The measure to which he refers was announced in Her Majesty's gracious Speech, and, as far as I know, no change of intention has taken place on the part of the Government with regard to the introduction of that measure. With regard to the fact that it has not been introduced up to this time, the noble Lord said that no one concerned with Scottish questions was responsible for the block of Business in another place. I do not mean in any way to infer that Scottish Members have taken any peculiarly prominent part in the block of Business which has occurred, but I would venture to suggest to the noble Lord that possibly those who belong to the Party with which he acts may have some responsibility for the Business in the other House not having proceeded quite as fast as we desire. However that may be, we certainly have shown no sort of reluctance to press on the measures which we have considered it necessary to propose to Parliament; and I can assure your Lordships that, as far as Her Majesty's Government are concerned, no effort will be spared to promote and, if possible, carry the measure announced in the Gracious Speech from the Throne.