Symud i'r prif gynnwys
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

20 erthygl ar y dudalen hon



IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ,eu S)0p4 Co]prlH„f0me.obse-vati°iia from the Lord ChauctlU-r. Latin rd Selborne Notice moved the resolution of which he had given That It <p • *aw oI burial, In the following terms; the dead in 1?- i ^»t the law relating to the burial of facilities fnr «,t a? should be amended first, by giving Oseof the R„JII ? r?leM °* deceased persons without the Sards in wWk A. 6 0< the Church of England in cturch- ot fiends ht jj e?.have a rlght of interment if the relatives secondly hw «.iDr^e 01 their funerals shall so desire and of the fuDRrai « relatives or friends having charge Mineral ,-n ° aD^ deceasnd person to conduct such had a richf„»a.n? ch^h>ard in which the deceased ^figfouf nh^JLr1terment with such Christ'an and orderly Ject, Loni c '"P68 as to them may seem fit." The sub- thelr Lorrt.Kf1*11 e 8a'^> WM one with regard to which °eed Dot wait either for the action of the 'or> enmKilior r a BUI from the Heuse of Commons, ftletttant tv18 as they did the lay with the clerical ^deration were Peculiarly well qualified for its con- lord dOn. In the course ot his speech the noble yards üfed that if dissenters had access to the Church. Marches jjould next demand the use of the Would, •„? that their admission to the Churchyards and irreligious exhibitions. He also 8 PrelimiJr suKgestion that his proposal was intended as ^Qrch^nj1^ the destruction or disestablishment of the as a charts! 88snred the House tbat he submitted it purely whatever toleration, and a declaration that every man, ^int«»»Lr ,rell8lous opinions, ought to have the right to n e r^es ^Is owa Church. 0»oM0n °f Richmond and Gordon, in opposing the Bl',1 It w ?fes'ed tllat It had been put in the form ot a tine an«„ have been a more practical way of dealing with ^fienS!?0?*. '"hat that was not dene he ascribed to the Cl'anvuia dealing with the details, which had forced Lord ^teaiia~-j .^11 back upon a resolution. With regard to that itf? grievance of the dissenters, the noble duke insisted ttujjgj was not general or even widespread, and, citing re- 'ourth. ^J™n>ation of his assertion, stated that about three- c°h8emJ! 5 dissenters interred in cemeteries were buried in 'tyectini6 ground with the rites of the Established Church, tion h« ,?ore particularly to the proposals of the resolu- to{>« who was to decide whether the services v ei^ were Christian or not, and how scenes of a thl c"aracter were to be prevented. After remarking chureht Movement for the admission of dissenters to the ■of th« ?>k* had for its ulterior object the disestablishment ^•stwarck °* England, the noble duke stated that the that th« then engaging the attention of Ministers, lettehU?' desired to approach its consideration totally un- and that they would not be able to do this if the that *»,, were passed. In conclusion he intimated tfa$gjJ* Should not oppose the first part of the motion, but j""<>ond part he should meet with a direct negative. Puw? Granville explained that he intended his motion to be on *«, and some conversation having passed ™°de of putting the motion, it was pointed out that it &KT t01 til6 fl-ouae 40 the motion into ^eforl ^^Lbishop of Canterbury, reverting to the motion Posw ftf remarked that he did not consider the pro- settli»„ tract Resolutions was the best practical mode of Itteiti8.the question, but he thought that the sooner the th WM *ettled the better for the Church of England nation, and therefore he trusted that the Govern- Attest! take into serious consideration the whole of the ■out h an<* cany it to a solution. He was not yet with- 'fceasn68 that they would bring forward some distinct at -j?*8 on the subject, if not in the present Session, h*to«iUVent8, at an early period, because the clergy were in »c*™y Unwilling that any great change should be made ^lelat until they knew what change was intended. The *torv '■ observed, approached the subject in a concili- shouirfu114' and they desired that a Bill in reference to it t brought in by the advisers of the Crown. He it a-jfdto the proceedings of Convocation, observing that Places ? facilities should be given for extending burial as to th different parishes, and had thrown eut a suggestion ti ™&e use of hymns. That he conceived would be taken "dication that the clergy were deiirous of settling the Woniii? in kindly spirit, and he thought that this matter aett]^ Rettled, if all parties set their minds seriously to Ho^^bishop of York maintained that the question was lie Olle of Establishment or Disestablishment, but he be- Ptt>e« a grievance existed, and that the proper mode of for its removal was by the introduction of a Bill. T*.1°°t by way of Resolution. ^iiiill5i0t'on wa* supported by the Bishop of Exeter, Lords ot Spencer, and Coleridge, and opposed by the Bishop Selsfm0 -kord Midleton, the Bishop of London, Lard *hou»K«f?d the Marquis of Salisbury, the latter saying that be hflirLj rad heen argued that a parishioner had a right to m his parish churchysrd, he maintained that right to e condition that the Service of the Church «{ *jJJoland should be read over his remains. The feelings «oulAC1!,F were STeatly excited on this qnestlon, and they Stoni» »>« Persuaded that, if the teachers of other reli- by the privilege which it was desired ,on to confer on them, a blow weuld not be given fte He did not deny the responsibility «f •Ua*ino.ern,n011' on 'be subject, but they did not despair of PtetfvnVr rea' feelings of bitterness, and taking away any "ice lor setting up a grievance against the Church. cam<TL ^borne declared that every year this question be- W. a»d more urgent, and the difficulty of settling it PlainT^ S?eater aQd greater by delay. The grievance com- Wa* Jr» olwa* a growing and increasing grievance, and there tor Krouttd for saying that Lord Granville's proposal *ttd °J the question was vague the a«w2^?Vh5^h that there was any strength In the °' the motion would lead to too.rr r Av 6 Church, and he thought it was false m issue maintenance of the Church on so On their Lordships dividing they rejected the motion by a "majority of 66, the numbers being 148 Noes to 92 Ayes. Their Lordships then adjourned. ehp!I *KE HOUSE OF COMMONS, the Chancellor of the Ex- in™?er'in answer to Mr. Peel, said he would make a state- V* 'be amount and distribution of Local Taxation "VVnrt. r "'trodnces the BUI providing funds for the Public it- e'-f^an Commissioners; and, in answer to Mr. Cawley, UtonHnV^'?ooth 8aid tbat a Rivers Pollution Bill will be n aoon a» the state of public business allows. Bilr* Itvlanrt^^lnf of the Customs and Inland Revenue <*the HowlTSSVK. a Reaolution, expressing the regret Increase of expenditure to a pronosal to adTtnty. T GoV8rnment should have led a dlMonto! ? 1T" He supported it in state ot trade^m!? Ti11 referred to the depressed creasing taxatfnn agT °Hltur,e a' special reasons for not in- °f Mr ijimSIm* i on ^E invariable extravagance *erred" f«8 -Administrations, in proof of which he re- ««>d the Suez^aalj War'the P^baseof the Telegraphs, 111 seconding the amendment, said that, Tax, it tocJ! the propriety of Increasing the Income the pronn«^M^d taxation were needed, he was surprised that Disraeilw^lr ,V10uld he made by a Government of which Mr. It In five ■<!» bead, seeing that in 1871 he had denounced quotatlo se) speeches (from which Mr. Childers made copious and he «h exemptions he regarded as a bribe, ■^come-t**0 «e ^at out of seven persons who paid °f the "«n 53? wou,d pay less—in other worts, out Sehed.ii~°rV Persons who paid Income Tax under sent vfr ovi «0,000 would pay less than at pre- *on nf th Childers then went into a minute compari- toarni^'he expenditure of this and former years, according *v "'e of his own, by which only the sums actually paid by *fje taxpayer were taken Into account, and in this way he no wed that WI yeat the expenditure is five millions and a ijaif more than In 1873-4. Analyzing the expeDdlture-wbile re admitted that the increase in the Army Estimates was Justifiable- he showed that there was an increase on every "Ok of the Navy Estimates except one, and that in Civil Service Estimates the Public Works votes been starved in order that establishments might ^increased. The actual cash deficiency on the rear, he fx.iY4* absut £ 94,000, and as this certainly would Ifw 7y the imposition of an additional penny to the ItxrK* lax' be concluded that the Chancellor of the caequer anticipated heavy supplementary estimates from cueagues. Mr. Childers concluded by an elaborate Gov of the achievements of Liberal and Conservative turvernments respectively in the way of reduction of expendi- e, remissions of taxation, and wiping off of debt. ),fr. Bunt, as Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Tele- g"Pha were purchased, disslafmed all responsibility for the Comr,w co*t* as it was the succeeding Gavernment which Pfeted the transaction, and added to it new conditions, increased the price demanded. As to the general the expenditure, he pointed out that three millions J* a half were absorbed by relief to Local Taxation, by reduc- tion Pebt, and the Education vote. Mr. Disraeli's denuncia- jOs of the Income Tax were made when it was proposed to the Income Tax from 4d. to 6d. Addressing him- to the increase in the Navy Estimates, the First Lord had J WM owl°8> 1° the main, to the policy which he JjZr adopted, with the sanction of his colleagues, of in. easing the provision for shipbuilding, and nobody was WW sponsible for this than Mr. Childers, and his un- r**6 reductions. The Liberal Government had net made f«)per use of Its surpluses; it had not lefc the Navy efficient state. He adhered literally to the OM made in 1874—that there were handed taw! t° him only 14 ironclads fitted for general purposes, Jj"1 showed that the progress made in ironclads during regime was equal to 8J Alexandras and four Timdraires. II aho! the increased expenditure in the Navy was neces- ■*y, the Government was bound to propose it, and Parlia- ment waa bound to rote it. A debate was continued by Mr. Reilly, Mr. Richard, tnii ^o^'Aeld, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Hubbard, Mr. Laing, Mr. and Mr. Muntz; alter whom Mr. Hardy rose, and jPeaking for his own Department, pointed out that he had many charges from his predecessors. For in- Jjaoee, he was called on to find guns for the Fortiflca- .•ons sanctioned by Parliament many years ago, and he also to provide the men to replace tnose who were "bout to quit the Army under Lord Cardwell's short- ■ervice scheme. He mentioned many striking instances ot It "*&t increase in the cost of the warlike material which v.yas his duty to provide. All this expenditure had already "eca sanctioned by the House with full warning from him of "hat it was doing. It was absolutely necessary, Mr. Hardy JjJ'lated, in the present state of the world, and with our re- jatlons in every direction, that our Army should be in such a ■Sate of efficiency as to be capable of rapid expansion. We oould not be safe with a smaller force than we now pos- 1e1l8ed. After some remarks from Mr. Fawcett and Sir J. Lubbock, Chancellor of the Exchequer proceeded at some length 11\) reply to the criticisms of Mr. Childers. He justified his calculations of revenue and expenditure for the year, and the re-imposition of the penny income tax which he had taken off two years ago. The abject of Minis- ters was to keep our financial system as steady as Possible, and he believed that a calm consideration of •he conduct of the Government would vindicate them In the eyes of the country. He regretted the necessity fOt increased expenditure, and especially that it had in- volved an increase of the income tax, but when that necessity Was imposed the income tax was the financial weapon that jt was right to have recourse to He refrained, however, **om discussing the question of exemptions then as it was a matter of^det&il that had better be considered in committee. On a Division the Resolution was negatived by a majority of 88,-263 to 175,—and the Bill was read a second time. The other business was disposed of, and the House ad- journed at five minutes to one o'clock.





[No title]






[No title]






[No title]