kingdom, subject to the authority of the Poor-law Commissioners.
And by a second bill they farther proposed that the
registries to be thus established should be offices
at which those who desired to do so might contract
purely civil marriages. Previous clauses in it
provided that members of any sect of Protestant Dissenters
might be married in their own chapels, and by ministers
of their own persuasion. After enactments removing
all the civil disabilities under which Nonconformists
had labored for one hundred and fifty years had been
placed on the statute-book, it was clearly inconsistent
in the highest degree to retain still more offensive
and unreasonable religious disabilities, and to deny
to them the right of being married by their own ministers,
according to the rites most agreeable to their consciences
or prejudices. And though some of the details
of the ministerial measure were objected to and slightly
altered in its passage through Parliament, the general
principle was admitted by the warmest friends and most
recognized champions of the Established Church, who
wisely felt that a bulwark which is too ill-placed
or too unsubstantial to be defended, is often a treacherous
source of weakness rather than strength, and that a
temperate recognition of the validity of claims founded
on justice was the best protection against others
which had no such foundation, and that measures such
as these adopted in a spirit of generous conciliation
could only strengthen the Church by taking at least
one weapon from the hands of its enemies.
Another of the measures relating to the Church, of
which Peel had prepared a sketch, had for its object
the removal of a grievance of which the members of
the Church itself had long been complaining, the mode
of the collection of tithe. It would be superfluous
here to endeavor to trace the origin of tithes, or
the purposes beyond the sustentation of the clergymen
to which they were originally applied.[240] They had
undoubtedly been established in England some time
before the Conquest, and the principle that the land
should support the National Church was admitted by
a large majority of the population; it may probably
be said with something nearly approaching unanimity
on the part of those who really paid it, namely, the
land-owners. The objection to the tithe system
was founded rather on the way in which it worked,
operating, as Lord John Russell described it, as “a
discouragement to industry; a penalty on agricultural
skill; a heavy mulct on those who expended the most
capital and displayed the greatest skill in the cultivation
of the land.” The present mode of levying
the tithes forced the clergy to forbearance at the
expense of what they deemed to be their rights, or
led them to enforce them at the expense of the influence
which they ought to possess with their parishioners,
compelling them to lose either their income by their
indulgence, or their proper weight and popularity
in the parish by the exaction of what the law gave