LONDON CHURCHES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19904, 25 September 1926, Page 26

LONDON CHURCHES.

MEASUEE APPROVED BY PEERS. STRONG OPPOSITION. ANCIENT CEREMONY IN COMMONS. (I’ao.M Qua Own Cobrespondenx.) LONDON, July 30. Strong objection has been expressed to the measure giving power to the Church of England to remote certain churches from the City of London. The Assembly of the Church of England formulated and passed the measure known ns the Union of Benefices and Disposal of Churches (Metropolis) Measure. Two separate proposals are included in the measure: The proposal concerning the union of benefices, which is a question of ecclesiastical organisation, anti to which there is no objection ; and the proposal enabling the church, under srtain conditions, to sell churches, their sites, and their appurtenances, within the Metropolitan area. Under the Enabling Act Parliament cannot alter or amend the orovisions of a measure rent to it by the National Assembly, but must accept or reject the whole. Although the Rill passed the House of Lords, some eloquent appeals were heard in opposition. Lord Banbury, in expressing the hope that their lordships would reject the

motion, said the Bishop of London had contended that it was a Bill to prevent Bishops of London being rash, folish, and iconaclastic. But the bottom of the whole thing wae that £1,500,000 could be obtained by the destruction of some of the city churches, and it was proposed to us© (ho money in order to build churches in places where the residents would not give a shilling for the purpose. Beginning hie speech as a dove, the Bishop of London ended as a wolf Lord llanworth said (lie measure not only dealt with the union of benefices, but gave wide powers for the purpose of removing slmrches. The preservation of (hose churches did not concern the Church of England alone Deep concern bad been awakened amongst many who were not, perhaps, regular adherent, of the Church of England. Some of the cite churches had become attached to one dominion or to one colony, and some offered facilities for private prayer and for rest in the course of the day. For his part he would be very sorry either to discard that opportunity or to test the value of churches h> considering whethei or not they were *vcl- attended on Sunday THE UTILITARIAN SUGGESTION. Lord Knutsford spoke up for the Bill, making the utilitarian suggestion that a church might be removed'from an obscure hidden spot like St. Peter’s, Cornhill, and rebuilt where it could be seen, just as Crosby Hall had been removed and reerected. One City incumbent, even, had said it was no use opening churches in the City; he never had a Sunday service. “What, xsked Lord Knutsford, “dots this man do for his £4OO a year the rest of the week?” , . Even though churches were useo in the week for rest and meditation, you did not want 47 of them, with 47 incumbents, costing £40,000 n year iu salaries, cither for that purpose or for getting up concerts or picture shows. The Archbishop of Canterbury said he thought the debate had been proceeding largely on a false issue. Anyone from outside would imagine that the speakers had before them, ns a thing that they opposed, the Phillimore Report, which talked about 10 churches being pulled down, ihat report was as dead as any document ol antiquity. This measure had been based on another report, which recommended a procedure whereby a great deal of money could be sot free, and by closing some of the City churches they would be enabled to use the money for needs elsewhere. Their lordships would be taking, a grave responsibility if they withheld from the Church the possibility of administering vast funds which were at present locked up in the City of London. CITY CORPORATION CLAIM AN ANCIENT RIGHT. ■ The motion to send the Bill to be presented to his Majesty for the Royal Assent was carried by 71 votes to 54. As it will still have to come belorc the House of Commons for confirmation of the resolution that it be .presented to his Majesty the City Corporation exercised its ancient right of petitioning the Commons at the Bar of the House. This right has always been the preserve of the Corporations ot London and Dublin, and the disappearance of the latter body in recent years leaves the City as its sole guardian. All other petitions to the House have to be made through the medium of a member. When the City’s representatives arrived at the House of C nous to claim the right of direct approach the Chamber itself was unusually crowded, ibe ceremony is so rarely insisted upon nowadays that any generation of hon. members would be disinclined to miss it. The city sheriffs drove with the petition to toe House of Commons, accompanied by tne City Remembrancer. They wore their scarlet robes and chains of office oyer Court dress, the Remembrancer wearing wig and gown. After prayers bad been said and private business °L Hje Sergeant-at-Anns advanced to the table of the House and bowed three timesto Mr Speaker. In reply to the Speaker s uestion “Who is there?” the Sergeant announced, “The sheriffs of the City of Lond°Prcparations were at once made for the admission of the city’s representatives. The “Bar” itself, so seldom utilised that lew members are acquainted with its appearance, was drawn across the lino which marks the confines of th ©Chamber. It is of brass, and extends telescopically across the narrow ipac© between the two pairs ot cross-benches immediately in front of the Sergeant’s seat. •■MR SHERIFF, WHA'l* HAVE YOU THERE?” The Sergeant, carrying the mace of the House on his shoulder, met the sheriffs at the door of the Chamber, and led them with great dignity to the Bar. Addressing the senior sheriff, the Speaker asked, Mr Sheriff, what have you there? ’ Mr Alderman Batho replied; ‘A petition from the Mayor, aldermen, and commons of the City of Loudon, in common council assembled, praying that the Union of Benefices (metropolis) Measure, 1926, be not presented to his Majesty for the Royal assent.” . . Then the sheriffs delivered the petition, hearing the common seal of the corporation, to the Clerk of tho House of Common’s (Sir Lonsdala Webster). Mr IF O. Grenfell, one of tho members for the city, roso and moved that the salient points of tho petition be read to the House, and the Clerk complied. Having fulfilled (heir mission, the. sheriffs and the Remembrancer bowed thrice to (ho Chair and withdrew from the Chamber. With the replacing of (lie mace on the table, the House automatically resumed, and tho brief ceremony was at an end. The visit of the sheriffs had its customary sequel in ‘ho evening, when 40 M.P.’s, drawn principally from (ho metropolitan constituencies, dined with some members of (he corporation ns the guests of the city. Full observance of this old formality prescribes tho provision of a bottle of wine for (he “doorkeeper.”