SIR G. TREVELYAN ON DISESTABLISHMENT. T HE Society for the Liberation
of Religion from State Patronage and Control—it is well never to lose sight of the full title, for it is a standing protest against the recent administration of the organisation to which it belongs—held its annual meeting on Tuesday. The attendance, we are told, was very large ; but in spite of the encouragement which this fact afforded, the older members must have felt some discouragement when they compared their present with their past estate. We do not say that they are absolutely any weaker than they were in their best days. In some respects, pro- bably, they are stronger. The proportion of Non- conformists who hold aloof from the Disestablishment agitation is very likely smaller than it was fifteen years ago. But we do say that they are weaker relatively ; that the proportion of active politicians who call them- selves Nonconformists, or who care for the things of Nonconformity, is very much smaller than it was ; and consequently, that Disestablishment occupies, in comparison with other questions, a much less important place in the popular mind. Nonconformity reached its highest point in 1874, when the full effect of household suffrage in boroughs had not yet been felt ; and though its friends hoped that the extension of that suffrage to the counties would give it back its former strength, there is not as yet much sign of the expected reaction. We do not say that the change is altogether a good one, for the forces that have taken the place of Nonconformity are of a less religious, often, indeed, of a definitely irreligious, kind. But whether it be good or bad, the change is there. The new forces are distinct from the old, and they are not to the same ex tent at the call of the Nonconformists.
The Liberation Society has, consequently, to seek for confidence in something else than mere numbers, and, in the opinion of the chairman of Tuesday's meeting, it has- found what it was in search of in the fact that "responsible statesmen like Sir George Trevelyan are prepared to take the matter up." We should be sorry to grudge Sir Walter Foster any source of consolation that may be open to him ; but cer- tainly Sir George Trevelyan does not altogether answer to our notion of a winning card. He has not quite con- fidence enough in himself ; he finds it too hard to shake off the remembrance of that terrible time when he was, so to say, buffeted of Satan and allowed to become a Liberal Unionist. True, it was not long that he was thus left to himself ; true, his eyes did not long remain closed to the superior importance of party as compared with principle. But the man who has so greatly fallen can never again be quite like his fellows. We can well believe that Sir George Trevelyan never sees two Radicals talking together that he does not suspect them of whispering,—" He was for a time a Liberal Unionist !" He is safe back in the fold now, but he never seems able quite to get rid of the notion that he is bound to justify the tender compassion which replaced him there after so tremendous a fall. Con- sequently, he wants the coolness and the discrimination of a succ2ssful party leader. He can never afford to decline a contest ; he must always be striking the shield of every combatant who appears in the field. He cannot decline to speak at a Liberationist meeting, lest his refusal should arouse suspicion, lest he should be charged with unsound- ness as regards the relations between Church and State similar to that which he once showed as regards the relations between England and Ireland. Therefore, we cannot safely draw the inference in Sir George Trevelyan's case that we might in that of some of his colleagues. He cannot pick and choose between questions, and finally identify himself with the one which he thinks most likely to win. That is only allowed to politicians whose record is beyond suspicion. The returned Prodigal must take questions as they come, and work as hard for those that are in the shade as for those that are enjoying the full sunshine.
Sir George Trevelyan had a thankless task on Tuesday night, and he laboured at it with more goodwill than success. He had to show that Wales is the victim of " a clear denial of justice, immense, cruel, almost unparalleled." This denial of justice consists, when it is looked into, of the obligation which the Welsh farmers have under- taken to pay the parson the tithe which their land- lords owe him. This is really all that Establishment in Wales comes to. The burden has been laid on the landowners by the Act of 1836 ; and if the law had been strictly obeyed, the farmer would no longer Imow what tithe means. As it is, the landlords have, unfortu- nately, contracted themselves out of their liability, and the tithe has fallen upon the farmer. He has undertaken to pay what Parliament intended his landlord to pay. But where does the question of conscience come in ? How can B become the victim of " an immense, cruel, almost un- paralleled" wrong merely by agreeing to pay a debt owed by A ? B is merely the conduit-pipe ; he is no more wronged by being used to convey certain payments from A to the parson, than he would be wronged if the money were put into an envelope, and he was asked to leave it at the vicarage as he passed by. No doubt, so long as tithe continues to be paid, it will tend to raise rents. The land- lord who has to pay it must get so much more rent out of the farmer if he is to make the same money by the land. But this is not the grievance it is sought to attack. Few people propose to make a present of the tithe to the landlord ; all that they want to do is to alter the uses to which the tithe is put. The farmer will continue to be a conduit-pipe between the tithe-payer and the tithe-owner, so far as he is not relieved by legislation; the only difference that Disestablishment would make is that the tithe-owner would be the Government, and not, as now, the clergy. Therefore, to give so much as plausibility to the alleged grievance, the complaint should come from the legal tithe-payers, from the landowners on whose land it is a burden. If the Welsh landlords were mainly Nonconformists, there would be some colourable reason in the outcry for Disestablishment. As it is, however, they mostly belong to the Church of England ; indeed, it is one of the chief grounds of com- plaint that the Church in Wales is maintained for their benefit. But if so, it is maintained out of their pockets. They pay for what they get. No doubt, what they pay for might be something which the farmers would value instead of the ministrations of a Church which, by the hypothesis, they do not value. But where would be the justice of making the landlords pay for something which the farmers would value, instead of for something which they value themselves ? No doubt there is a proportion of tithe which is really paid by Nonconformists, by Dissenters who are landlords or small owners. In their case there is the grievance which belongs to all payments which men have to make for things of which they disapprove. If Sir George Trevelyan is going to abolish this grievance, he will indeed have his hands full. His difficulty will be where to begin. Perhaps the most obvious Bill for him to introduce will be one to relieve members of the Society of Friends from the payment of any taxes which can by any possibility go to defray the cost of the Army and Navy. War is to a Quaker as horrible a thing as an Estab- lished Church is to a Welsh Baptist ; but there is not a tax that the Quaker pays, direct or indirect, that does not go in some fractional degree to raise soldiers and sailors, to make guns, and to build fortifications. Next would come the conscientious objection of many Churchmen and all Roman Catholics to undenominational education, and to Board schools as the vehicles of undenominational educa- tion. These people have as good a claim to be relieved of the education rate, which they do pay, as the Welsh Dissenting farmers can have to be relieved of the tithe, which they do not pay. Here is another statute only wanting the draftsman's touch. When Sir George Trevelyan has got these two under way, we will undertake to supply him with more. Once admit the principle that no man ought to be com- pelled to pay money of the appropriation of which he does not approve, and the legislature will have abundance of employment.
Previous page
