صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

desire that their high character should have the praise of voluntary, not compulsory rectitude. For ourselves, we are anxious to perform our various pastoral duties in the spirit of love, not "with eye service, as men-pleasers." We are anxious that our services should be and appear to be the free-will offerings of "love to God, and good-will towards men."

As men possessed of valuable civil and social rights, which we hope to transmit to our successors-professing at the same time dutiful allegiance to the king, and obedience to all legally constituted authorities-we are too deeply sensible of the value of the blessings which the existing laws assure to us, to yield a single privilege which our forefathers have delivered to us, till we are firmly convinced that the honour of Christ's church demands such concession from us.

We have taken the freedom to question the right, we will not say of your Commission, but of any Commission whatever, to alienate possessions which had been created by benefaction, secured by statutes, and enjoyed by long custom, because our deliberate conviction is, that the laws of God and our country are alike opposed to such violent measures; and because we think, that every rank and class of clergy have a right to expect that their feelings and judgment should be allowed their due weight in matters of so great common interest. We have wished to express our opinions respectfully; but our duty as servants of God, and as ministers of that church which we believe will be endangered by the recommendations of your Commission, forbids us to be silent. We have fallen upon a very critical period; and we hold it to be the bounden duty of every member of the church boldly to avow his attachment to her, and to express his opinion in matters which affect her interests. We are ready to hazard much for the integrity of God's heritage, and we expect your pardon if our expressions may have partaken of the warmth of our feelings.

We pray God to direct and prosper all your consultations to the advancement of his glory, the good of his church, the safety, honour, and welfare of our Sovereign and his dominions; and that the course of this world may be so peaceably ordered by his governance that the church may joyfully serve him in all godly quietness.

ATTENDANCE OF THE INHABITANTS OF UNION POOR-HOUSES ON DIVINE WORSHIP.-SPEECH OF THE BISHOP OF EXETER.

THE BISHOP of EXETER presented a petition from Macclesfield, praying either for the repeal of the poor law act, or for some very important alterations in that law. The petition was adopted at a most numerous meeting, and was signed by the mayor, magistrates, town-council, and several thousands of respectable inhabitants. The right rev. prelate then said he would take that opportunity of addressing a few observations to their lordships in relation to the motion of which he had given notice a few nights ago. He would preface what he had to say by stating that he, in submitting that motion to their lordships, meant nothing in the way of censure, or inculpation of any sort, of the poor-law commissioners. He had the happiness of knowing one of those commissioners, and he was sure that neither that right hon. gentleman nor, he believed, any of his colleagues, was disposed to act in a harsh or unfeeling manner. It had been suggested to him by a noble duke and earl on a previous evening, that he would do well to ascertain whether any such regulations as he had described had really been issued by the commissioners before he made any motion on the subject. In not yielding to that suggestion he begged to say, that he intended no disrespect to those noble personages. He was well aware that no positive and general order had been issued by the commissioners prohibiting permission from being given to paupers in workhouses to go out to attend divine worship in the parish churches on Sundays; but the fact was, that such a regulation was very generally carried into effect, and a

return which had been made to their lordships' house proved that it was in force in the union of Worcester. According to that return, one class of the inmates of the workhouse were permitted to attend divine service at chapelsnamely, such paupers as might be members of dissenting congregations, provided they returned in time to the workhouse. There was, however, established a prohibition with regard to persons not coming within that description. It was right for him to state that he had received a communication from a gentleman who, he believed, was either the chairman or deputy-chairman of that board of guardians, in which he was assured that there was every disposition in the union to accommodate the members of the church of England, and that if any application were made by the paupers who were members of the church of England to be allowed to attend divine service in the parish church, it would meet with every consideration. That gentleman was certainly mistaken on this head, for he had received a letter, which he had communicated to him (the Bishop of Exeter), stating that only one application had been made to the board of guardians, and that, too, by a female pauper in the workhouse, for leave to attend her own church (St. Swithin's) on Sundays; but her request was refused, on the ground that divine service was performed in the workhouse every Sunday, and a sermon preached by the Rev. Mr. Davies. He (the Bishop of Exeter) felt bound, in justice to the commissioners, to say, that the gentleman who had favoured him with this communication had received a letter from the board of guardians in Worcester, stating that they had not received any order from the commissioners prohibiting paupers going out of the workhouse for the purpose of attending divine worship at the parish church on Sundays. But, though no precise rule had been issued by the commissioners to that effect, yet it was clear that the whole course of their proceedings went to establish such a regulation. The union proposed certain rules for confirmation or rejection by the commissioners; and if confirmed, they then became the regulations by which the proceedings of the board of guardians were conducted. It was plain, therefore, that the regulations of the Worcester union, prohibiting paupers who were members of the church of England from attending divine service at the parish church, having been submitted to the commissioners or sanctioned by them, was, in point of fact, virtually the act of the commissioners. It would, perhaps, be in the recollection of their lordships, that he noticed a most fatal error in the execution of the poor-law act, when he addressed their lordships on presenting a petition some weeks ago; and his ground for making that statement was the notorious fact, that it was the general practice to prevent paupers from attending their own places of worship. It was not upon any slight foundation that he ventured to make that observation. He spoke on authority well known to their lordships-the Second Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners. It was stated in that Report that "attempts have been made, in almost every form which ingenuity could suggest, to evade or subvert the rule which renders it necessary for a pauper who resorts to a workhouse for maintenance to continue altogether within its limits during the time he receives relief. The most powerful of the attempts to break down this essential rule have reached us in the form of applications that paupers should be permitted to go out on Sundays for the purpose of attending places of worship." This extract of itself shewed what was the principle upon which the poor-law commissioners acted; they called the rule essential, and they said it would be impossible to maintain the rule if the important part relating to prohibition were not enforced. The Report proceeded to state-" It is clear, however, that the rule prohibiting paupers from quitting the workhouse on Sunday must apply to all classes of adults alike. There may be individual cases of exception; but we are assured, that if the rule should be relaxed in favour of any particular sect, the other inmates of the house would undergo a nominal conversion, and would at once profess themselves of the favoured creed, whatever it might be, if by so doing they could avail themselves of the opportunity which it would secure to them of going out on Sunday." He (the Bishop of Exeter) must observe, that the conduct

of the Worcester union did not seem to accord very strictly with those precepts of the commissioners. He rejoiced, however, that the guardians of the union had deviated from the principle of deviation; for if they had not so deviated, there would have been committed a most serious violation of the common rights of liberty belonging to the members of the church of England and to the dissenting inmates of the workhouses, as well as a grievous infringement of the principle of toleration, inasmuch as the latter would have been prevented from attending their own places of worship, whilst they would have no opportunity of assisting in public worship within the walls of the poor-house. It was stated in a letter addressed to the poor-law commissioners by an assistant-commissioner, Mr. E. C. Tuffnell, that," in fact, divine service performed in the workhouse only differs from that in parish churches by the room being smaller and less decorated, the absence of an organ, and the inferior pomp and circumstance of the celebration. These are points which may possibly be of importance in a religion of forms and ceremonies, but are assuredly worth little consideration to a protestant population, who profess a religion of the heart, and who worship God in spirit and in truth." If that letter merely expressed the individual opinion of the writer, he would not have called their lordships' attention to it; but the strongest approbation was bestowed on the writer's sentiments by the commissioners in their report, so that the letter is announced as containing the views of all the commissioners who were empowered to regulate all the unions within the realm. He would appeal to their lordships whether the only difference between divine service performed in a workhouse and a church consisted in a less or greater degree of pomp and circumstance. Their lordships were well aware that that constituted only the smallest part of the difference. Their lordships knew that the great object why paupers should attend their parish churches was, that they might return thanks, with their superiors, to their common God and Father. It was then that the pauper's heart swelled, not only with gratitude to his Maker, but with contentment, and thanks for that dispensation which offers to him beyond the grave, it might be, a happier and better lot than would befal the greatest and proudest whom he saw around him. (Hear, hear.) He need not attempt to describe the feelings which naturally arose in their lordships' minds when joining in prayer with their humble fellow-countrymen in the house of God, in which all were equal; but he asked them, would they allow that the poor man should be prohibited from attending his parish church, and joining with them in common worship of their common God, and having his feelings of gratitude heightened by the consciousness that there, at least, he stood on an equality with the proudest in the land? (Hear, hear.) But was such the case according to the regulations established under the poor-law act, and was the protestant population of this country to be called on to sanction those regulations? He, for one, as a protestant, repudiated them. (Hear, hear.) He must say, and he said it with shame and grief, that it was disgraceful to the reformed population of this land, that there did not prevail so strong an idea of equality of ranks in the house of God as did exist in Roman-catholic communities. (Hear, hear.) Their lordships were aware that in Roman-catholic churches the highest and greatest noblemen in the land kneeled in prayer by the side of the most destitute pauper. He grieved to think that it was owing to our system of pews that the same practice did not prevail to the same extent in the protestant churches. (Hear, hear.) Whatever advantages the " pew system" might have, it was attended with this enormous disadvantage, that it led to a most grievous usurpation of the best rights of the poor, because in many places it made it difficult, and in some places impossible, for the poor man to worship his Maker in common with his more wealthy neighbours. (Hear, hear.) But was this a reason why another step should be taken in the wrong direction, and the poor be excluded, not only from pews, but from their parish churches, if they were so unfortunate as to require relief from the parish? (Hear, hear.) He protested against the prohibition established under the poor-law act, and he was sure their lordships would be of opinion that some mode must be devised by the

[ocr errors]

poor-law commissioners for carrying their measures into effect which would not interfere with the rights of the poor. (Hear.) If what he had stated was not sufficient to convince their lordships of the impropriety of the rule to which he had called their attention, he might appeal to the state of the law on the subject. Of course it was with diffidence he offered his opinion on a point of law; but, nevertheless, he felt it to be his duty frankly and fairly to declare what was his own strong conviction. He believed, then, that the prohibitory regulation of which he complained was contrary to the common law of England. Their lordships needed not to be told by him that the canon law of England before the Reformation, in so far as it was not repealed by the statutes of Edward and Elizabeth, was and is now part of the common law of the land. Now, it was stated by one of the greatest authorities on ecclesiastical law, he meant Gibson, Bishop of London, that "by the common law or practice of the church of England no person can be duly discharged from attending his own parish church, or warranted in resorting to another, unless he be first duly licensed by the ordinary by licence under seal, which licences are very common in our ecclesiastical records." It was not his intention to suggest that that law should be carried into effect. All he stated was, that such was the law; and that, consequently, it could not be permitted that any regulations in defiance of the law should be made or sanctioned by the poor-law commissioners, however great their powers might be--and enormous and unparalleled they certainly were, except by the authority which was conferred on the commission in the reign of Edward II., enabling that body to govern the country with all the powers of royalty. But, supposing he was wrong in his notion respecting the common law of the land, he certainly was not deceived with regard to the statute law. By the 1st of Elizabeth, chap. 2, by the 23rd Elizabeth, chap. 1, sect. 5, by the 3rd James, chap. 4, the duty of attending divine worship was strongly enforced, and very severe penalties were imposed for neglect by the statute of James. He might be told that that was a very old law, and he confessed that he should be unwilling to see those provisions imposing penalties carried into effect. But it had pleased the legislature to keep that law on the statute-book; it had not been retained by mere inattention, for a distinct enactment had been passed, the 31st George III., chap. 32, sect. 9, declaring that "all laws for frequenting divine service on Sundays are confirmed, unless such persons frequent a legal dissenting congregation." Such being the law, it is not within the competency of the poor-law commissioners to set it aside. Before he sat down he would take the liberty of reading another extract from the report of the poor-law commissioners. They stated that "It is necessary for us, however, to add, that in workhouses in which no chaplain has been appointed, and in which no adequate accommodation exists for the performance of divine service, the rule has been relaxed, and the inmates of the house have been, for a time, permitted, under certain regulations, to go out for the purpose of attending divine worship." It therefore appeared that the prohibition had been in some cases relaxed, and he should include in his motion a demand for a copy of the regulations which were now enforced when the rule was relaxed. He thought that he must have convinced their lordships that a general prohibition to attend divine worship was established under the express sanction of the poor-law commissioners, and he had not therefore wasted their lordships' time by calling their attention to an evil which had no existence. The right rev. prelate concluded by moving, "That there be laid before this house a copy of any rule or rules made by the poor-law commissioners, preventing the pauper inmates of workhouses from attending divine worship in their several parish churches on the Lord's-day. Also a copy of any regulations adopted by the board of guardians of any union or parish to the same effect, which may have received the sanction of the poorlaw commissioners. Also a copy of any regulations under which the pauper inmates of workhouses may have been permitted, under the sanction of the said commissioners, to go out on Sundays to attend divine worship."

RETURN to an Order of the Honourable the House of Commons, dated 2nd March, 1837; for

A RETURN of the Number of Notices for Commutation received by the Tithe Commissioners for England and Wales, from the date of their Appointment to the 1st March; stating what number of such Notices have been received during each calendar Month, and the Names of the Counties in which the Parishes or Districts are situated, for which such Notices have been given :-Also, Return of the Number of Agreements received by the Commissioners up to the same period; stating what Number of such Agreements have been confirmed, and what Number rejected, together with the grounds for such rejection; also, what Number of such Agreements are at present under the 'consi. deration of the different Diocesans or otherwise waiting confirmation.

[graphic]
[ocr errors]

Glamorgan Merioneth Montgomery Pembroke Radnor

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Under consideration of Diocesan, or otherwise

waiting con

firmation.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

N.B.-In addition to the Notices for Commutation received by the Tithe Commissioners, as above stated, they have good reason to believe that a great number of Notices have been given, of which they have not received copies, but which are intended to be sent up with the Agreements for Commutation, if such Agreements are completed.

The Agreement not confirmed was rejected, because it contemplated only a partial Commutation of Tithes, and because the Patron's consent was defective.

VOL. XII.-July, 1837.

WM. BLAMIRE.
T. W. BULLER.
RD. JONES.

N

« السابقةمتابعة »