On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
June 4 . The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved that the Report on the New Church Bill should be brought up . Colon e ] Da vies rose to oppose the motion . He adverted to the returns laid upon the table of the House to shew that even under the late erections no
attention was paid to the accommodation oi the people . He instanced the populous places of Manchester and Bristol in support of that inference . He assured the House that he could have no hostile feelings towards the National Establishment , of which he was a member ; but
he at the same time felt persuaded , that in guarding against such an unnecessary waste of the public money , he best proved his respect for its character . He then moved , as an Amendment , that the Report should be received that day six months .
Mr . Levcester supported the Amendment . It was pastors and priests that the people wanted , and not edifices of brick and mortar . The people sought for spiritual bread , and the Right Hon .
the Chancellor of the Exchequer truly gave them a stone . He objected to such demands from a richly-endowed Church upon their Dissenting brethren . It could leave no other impression on the people but the cupidity of our Establishment .
Mr . B . Cooper defended the Bill , on the ground of the accommodation in Churches , which was wanted , and the supply of which was the best method to wean the people from attaching
themselves to Dissenting congregations . He heard with regret the terms of profligate expenditure of public money applied to the measure . That appeared to him most extraordinary language—only appli *
Untitled Article
cable to brothels . If the law permitted Dissenters in that House , good sense and good taste should induce them not to speak in such unmeasured and inappro - priate language . Mr . Hume deprecated such language as was spoken , by the Honourable
Member in his concluding sentence . The Dissenters were , forsooth , to evince good taste and judgment in not protesting against the profligate demands of an Establishment which fleeced and domineered over them . No man was to be tolerated
in his sentiments unless a High Churchman . These were opinions , he could assure the Honourable Member who spoke last , no longer listened to in the growing liberality of the age . If he wished to obtain a character for the National
Church , he must make the Clergy efficient ; and the best and only way to make that Clergy efficient , was to reduce their allowances . He was quite satisfied that the House need not vote a single shilling of the public money for this purpose ; but that the whole of the sum necessary
might be contributed by private individuals . No parish in England ought to receive the smallest portion of the grant , unless it was proved to be unequal itself to the expenditure . It was in vain to build Churches , unless Clergymen were provided calculated to give satisfaction
to their congregations . The Bill would tend , not to the increase of religion , but to the increase of patronage . Nothing could be more dangerous than a servile clergy , who would attend to their
temporal interests , and not to the spiritual benefit of their flocks . On these grounds he protested against the measure . It had been , said by an Honourable Gentleman , that it was a popular measure . He had never heard that assertion made
before , either in or out of the House . It Members expressed the same opinions in the House Ulat they did out , lie was persuaded that a large majority would have declared against the Bill . Mr . B . Cooper explained . Mr . Carus Wilson supported the Bill . He contended that the measure was
highly acceptable to a large majority of the community . Large sums of money could not be better applied by Parliament than in the support of the religion of the country . Mr . Leycester explained .
Mr . Gurney was apprehensive that the money would be unequally and partially distributed . The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed that , as in the former case , the Commissioners would , 110 doubt , exercise a sound discretion in the distribution oi the funds entrusted to them .
Untitled Article
508 Intelligence . —Parliamentary : New Churches Bill .
Untitled Article
said the Honourable Member seemed to confound the Commissioners appointed in 1816 , with the Commissioners of the Newington Church . All he knew was , thai four or fiv £ years ago , there had been some squabbling on the subject , in which he had taken no part whatever . Mr . Bright wished to know what
would be the amount of the drawback on the building materials . The Chancellor of the Exchequer presumed that the drawback was not on the Churches , but the buildings . He knew there had been some drawback on stone , but it was not considerable ; and
now it was extiuct altogether . Strangers were then ordered to withdraw for a division . At the suggestion of Mr , J . Williams , Mr . James withdrew his Amendment , and the House went into a Committee . The Bill went through a Committee .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1824, page 508, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2527/page/60/
-