"How dare you speak to your elders?" Mr. John Bright, smiling, coolly retorted that there were only two gentlemen present who ought not to preside on that occasion. One was a person who had made himself notorious from home by the violent speech he had made against the lady they were about to congratulate, but they all knew in Rochdale that he was no prophet. A confused scene ensued. Dr. Molesworth, Mr. C. Royds, and a number of other gentlemen were endeavouring to speak at the same time. Mr. Thomas Dearden, the coroner, broke the top of his walking-stick by striking it on the table in trying to restore order. When silence was obtained, Mr. Bright continued to say that he had no objection against Dr. Molesworth for anything that had taken place since he came to reside in Rochdale, but (pulling the Times newspaper from his pocket) he had some of his sayings and doings at Canterbury. (Uproar.) Dr. Molesworth remarked that his conduct at the dinner referred to had been brought before the public by the newspapers, and he had given his reasons for the part he had taken upon that occasion. Whenever Mr. Bright began to refer to the dinner at Canterbury an uproar was raised, and cries of "Turn him out; " and at last Dr. Molesworth, after conferring with his friends, said, amid much laughter, "I dissolve this meeting," and Dr. Molesworth and his party began to leave. Mr. Thomas Livsey cried out, "Let that faction leave the room, and the loyal and well-disposed, who have never sullied their character by calumniating the Queen, remain.” (Applause.) Mr. W. W. Barton was then called to the chair, and it was decided to adjourn the meeting until eight o'clock in the evening, to give the working class an opportunity of attending. One hour had been spent in deciding as to who should occupy the chair. About four-fifths of those present were Reformers, and they were determined to resent what they considered an insult offered to the Queen by Mr. Roby at a dinner at Ashton, and by Dr. Molesworth at Canterbury. Dr. Molesworth and his friends, after leaving the Commissioners' Rooms, made their way to the Town Hall newsroom, belonging to the Market Company, in Lord Street, and held a meeting there. They adopted the address to Her Majesty which should have been proposed at the first meeting, and left it there to receive signatures. At eight o'clock in the evening an open-air meeting was held on a vacant plot of ground off Smith Street, and about 1,500 persons were present. Mr. John Bright was voted into the chair. Mr. John Petrie, sen., one of the gentlemen who had signed the requisition calling the meeting, moved the address to the young Queen, which was 1840.] DISLOYAL TORIES. 85 seconded by the Rev. A. Mackay, and carried unanimously, and three hearty cheers were given for the Queen; for men were then in love with monarchy. It may be as well to explain that on the 30th of October, 1839, a Tory banquet was held at Canterbury, and Mr. Bradshaw, M.P. for Canterbury, made a violent harangue against the Prime Minister and the Queen, saying that Her Majesty was only queen of a faction. The Rev. Dr. Molesworth was present at the banquet and proposed the health of Mr. Bradshaw in complimentary terms, and it was this that gave offence. In January, 1840, a hostile correspondence took place between Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Horsman, M.P. for Cockermouth, arising out of a statement made by the latter to his constituents that the former "had the tongue of a traitor, but lacked the courage to become a rebel," and further charged him with insulting his Sovereign. A "meeting was therefore arranged, and shots were interchanged without effect. Mr. Bradshaw thereafter caused his second to express regret for the language made use of, which he felt on reflection was unjust to Her Majesty. Mr. Roby, at a Conservative dinner at Ashton-under-Lyne, used expressions regarding the Queen and Ministry which compelled the Commander-in-Chief to bring it under the notice of certain officers who were present, reminding them that, as military servants, they were bound to confine themselves to their military duties, and when they thus ventured to connect themselves with any party association, they incurred serious responsibility and exposed themselves to the heaviest blame. On the 19th of March, 1840, a meeting was held in the Commissioners' Rooms, Rochdale, to appoint delegates to a meeting in London, with reference to the Corn Laws. Mr. John Petrie, sen., occupied the chair. Mr. Bright congratulated those present on the unanimity that prevailed in the town and neighbourhood, in opposition to the Corn Laws, and concluded by proposing that Messrs. George Ashworth, Joseph Fenton, and John Fenton should be the deputation from Rochdale to London on the 24th of the same month. At this time many of the woollen mills were working only three or four days a week, others were at a standstill, and the distress amongst the weavers was appalling. CHAPTER IX. OPPOSITION TO CHURCH RATES. An amicable Attempt to settle the Church Rate Dispute-Struggle between Churchmen and Dissenters-Bright's famous Tombstone Speech-Seizing a Dying Man's Bible for the Rate-Bright and the Clergy-The Result of the ContestAn Attempt to recover the Rate, and how it was Finally Abolished-Contrast between the Past and the Present. MR. JOHN BRIGHT is next found opposing the Church Rates in Rochdale. The contest was of a most extraordinary character, and surpassed the struggles that have taken place on the same subject in any other town. On Friday, the 10th of July, 1840, a meeting of ratepayers was held to consider the propriety of making a Church Rate for that year. The Rev. Dr. Molesworth presided, and gave his reasons why he could not agree to a voluntary rate, which had been proposed to him by Mr. James Littlewood and Mr. John Petrie. These two gentlemen, on behalf of the Anti-Church Rate party, intimated to the Doctor that they would consent to the laying of the rate provided it was understood that the term "optional" should be annexed to the papers delivered by the collector. Mr. Abraham Brierley, the vicar's warden, moved a rate of a halfpenny in the pound. After a long discussion the motion was put to the meeting, and the chairman declared that the show of hands was in favour of the rate. The opponents demanded a poll, and it was agreed that it should commence on the Monday following, and continue every day till Friday; that the poll should each day open at twelve and close at five. On the Monday at noon the poll opened, and the voters in favour of the rate took the lead for the first fifteen minutes, but the scales then turned, and the opponents of the rate increased their majority every hour, and at the close it was found that 3,976 had voted for the rate and 4,060 against it, giving a majority against it of 84. Dr. Molesworth and his party feeling dissatisfied at the result called a meeting on the 29th of July, 1840, for the purpose of making a Church Rate. The excitement became intense, and especially when it had been stated by the Anti-Church-Rate party that children had been discharged by employers who were in favour of the rate because their fathers had voted against it. Though the meeting was announced to commence at two o'clock, several 1840 OPPOSITION TO CHURCH RATES. 87 hundred persons had collected in the churchyard an hour before the time, and there was every appearance of a stormy meeting. St. Chad's Church doors were thrown open at twenty minutes to two, when there was a dreadful rush into the church. Many who were standing on the gravestones near the church door jumped upon the heads of the crowd, and were absolutely carried into the body of the church in a horizontal position. The body of the church was soon filled with about 1,500 people, and hundreds of persons were not able to gain admittance. The noise was as great as if Bedlam had broken loose, and hats were crushed and clothes torn in the scramble for places. At two o'clock the Vicar and Mr. Abraham Brierley, Mr. Charles Butterworth and Mr. Wood, made their appearance in the gallery, and were received with marks of disapprobation and applause. Mr. James Fielden (brother of the then Member of Parliament for Oldham), Mr. John Bright, and Mr. W. W. Barton, took up a position in the pulpit, or reading desk, amidst the cheers of a vast number of persons. It was decided to hold the meeting in the churchyard instead of the church, on account of the number of persons that were not able to gain admittance. Dr. Molesworth, the Rev. W. J. ffarington (incumbent of St. James's), the incumbent of St. Mary's, the Rev. I. Gaitskill (of Whitworth), the two curates, the two churchwardens, Mr. Fielden, Mr. W. W. Barton, and Mr. John Bright took their places upon two tombstones nearly close together, within a yard of the wall which separates the graveyard from the vicar's garden, and lying between the garden door and the churchyard gate which leads into Church Stile. Dr. Molesworth and his friends stood on James Taylor's tombstone on the right; Mr. John Bright and his supporters stood on the tombstone on the left, over the remains of Robert Marriott. The sight of about 4,000 people assembled around these tombstones, some calm and resolute, others contemptuous, was indicative of a coming storm, and it remained with those present to decide whether or not a peaceful solution should be come to. This way! The wind is prosperous, do but shift your sail, Works up the billows to a foam. This way! Make towards the land! Don't you see How black the clouds are yonder, how the shower Hangs ready to burst over you, while here Prevails eternal sunshine and fair weather." After Dr. Molesworth had explained the object of the meeting, Mr. Abraham Brierley, the vicar's warden, read an estimate of the expenses for the year, which made a total of £447 15s. Od., and in advocating the amount to be raised said that these repairs were absolutely required; for the foundations of the steeple and the church were unsafe and giving way. (Laughter.) Mr. Thomas Holden moved, and Mr. Charles Butterworth seconded, the motion-"That a Church Rate of a halfpenny in the pound be made to cover the expenses." Mr. John Bright, who was received with cheers, then said :— "In addressing myself to this immense gathering I am under the influence of feelings of a widely different character. I feel shame that any of my townsmen should have so far disregarded common decency as again to have called the ratepayers of this large and populous parish together after the decision to which they so lately came, and I feel a consolation in contemplating this immense assemblage from the evidence it affords that the subject of Church Rates and of Church oppression generally excites a lively interest amongst you. I proceed to the question before us, and first I refer to the opinion which the Vicar of this parish has promulgated as to the law of the case, or rather as to the intention of the law. He owns that the law does not and cannot compel you to make a rate, but asserts that the intention of the law is that you shall make a rate; and that, therefore, unless you agree to this exaction for the enriching of the Church of which he is a dignitary, you are guilty of an evasion of the law and of an abandonment of your duty as Christians. Now as to the intention of the law I know nothing; all we have to do is to obey the law, and that law is acknowledged not to exist. It is hardly possible that the Vicar can have any very accurate information as to the intention of those by whom the practice of levying Church Rates was commenced, and certainly the parishioners are not and cannot be bound by this interpretation of a deeplyinterested person. It is probable, when the practice first commenced, that all the parishioners could assemble in the parish church, and that all agreed with the principle and practice; therefore to them there could be no injustice in levying a fair rate for its repair and maintenance. But now things are greatly changed, the population of the parish could not pack themselves in twenty churches like the one before you, and more than one-half of the parishioners are Dissenters. A law now to compel rates from all to support the church of one sect only could not be carried, and the House of Commons has more than once decided that Church Rates shall be abolished, and a very just and excellent method of abolishing would have been carried but for the interested and selfish opposition of the clergy and Tories. It is enough for us now that we are not transgressing any law-even if the law did exist it would not make Church Rates just, and the man who expects us to submit to what is manifestly neither lawful nor just ought to have lived three or four hundred years ago. Lord Denman and four other judges have decided unanimously that the power to make a Church Rate exists only with the parishioners, and we know too well to what purposes the wealth of the Church is devoted, voluntarily to tax ourselves for her further aggrandisement. But as to the intention of the law I will put a case for the consideration of this meeting, and particularly for the refreshment of the Vicar. Once on a time it was ordered by law that whenever a clergyman came into possession of a living he was to pay over the first year's income to a fund for extending the usefulness of the Church. At that time the Vicarage of Rochdale was worth under £100 per year, and the first fruits were paid on that amount. Now was it not the intention of the law that in all future time the first year's income should be devoted to the purpose I have just mentioned? Certainly it was. But what does the Vicar and the rest of his brethren in the Church? Has he paid, or does he intend to pay, his first year's income, or will he content himself by paying under £100 to that useful fund? How does he satisfy his conscience that he is obeying the intention of the law? (Loud cheers.) I will now direct your attention to the state of the rate question in this parish. For many years you are aware that large sums were annually raised by the wardens, which sums were generally spent in feasting and drinking, to the great scandal of the parties concerned. This amount has been gradually lessened, and in 1834 the attempt to obtain a rate was defeated |