The Kenyon-Slaney amendment—now a subsection in Clause 7—came up for
discussion on Thursday. Mr. Crippe, who moved its deletion, relied mainly on the arguments that it would discourage the clergy and that it violated trust- deeds. To this the Attorney-General demurred, and pro- ceeded to explain the meaning of the two propositions con- tained in the subsection. The first, which concerned doctrine, did not affect the provision in certain trust-deeds that an appeal might be made to the Bishop on what was doctrinally true or false. If there was no trust-deed, or if it contained no such provision, the final arbiters would be a Court of Law. The second proposition entrusted the managers with the control or administration of religious education. Mr. Asquith, who objected to this interpretation, charged the Government with shifting their ground; the amendment, which was admittedly intended to restrain the clergy, now rendered the Bishop supreme arbiter. Mr. Healy and Lord Hugh Cecil in turn defined the doctrine of their respective Churches, Sir William Harcourt gave a satirical sketch of the history of the amendment, and Mr. Balfour closed the debate in an admirably reasoned speech, demolishing the high clerical pretensions of Lord Hugh Cecil and carrying the great majority of the House with him in his vindication of the rights of the laity. The amendment having been rejected by 294 to 35, the remaining Government amendments up to Clause 17 were put under the new Closure Resolution and carried without debate.
Previous page
