Page:The Annual Register 1899.djvu/128

 120] ENGLISH HISTOEY. [june

that "no person should be disqualified by sex or marriage for being elected an alderman or councillor." The usual stock arguments were employed on both sides, and the fact that women for many years had been elected as poor law guardians and had admirably discharged their duties as such was urged with considerable force, as certain matters hitherto falling within the scope of boards of guardians would in future be discharged by the borough councils. The opponents argued from the decision taken with respect to the London County Council, where women after election had found themselves disqualified from taking their seats. On the question whether the elections to the newly-created councils should be annual or triennial, the Government gave a still more uncertain lead, but it was eventually settled to leave the matter to each separate council for decision, providing that, if desired, the annual election of one-third of the actual body might be allowed. After some other suggestions had been negatived or withdrawn, Lord Hugh Cecil (Greenwich) surprised the House by an amendment which was practically a revival of the old Test Act. By clause 21 of the bill it was provided that nothing therein transferred to a borough council any powers or duties of a vestry relating to the affairs of the Church. Lord Hugh Cecil desired to substitute for " the inhabitants of the parish, " as the body in which such powers were to be vested, " such inhabitants of the parish as shall have obeyed that rubric of the Book of Common Prayer which is printed at the end of the Order of the Administration of the Holy Communion, and which requires that every parish- ioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year, of which Easter is to be one." He did not conceal from the House that the motive he had in moving the amendment was to face that most difficult question, " What was a lay member of the Church of England ? " Mr. Balfour, in declining to accept the definition, remarked that it was far more rigid than that in force in the Church of Scotland, even in a matter so important as the choice of a minister. He was one of those who desired that the laity should have greater importance in matters ecclesi- astical ; but he thought, even from the mover's point of view, that it was an inopportune moment to discuss so important a matter, which should be approached in a mood somewhat different from that in which they discussed the details of London Government. The amendment was withdrawn on the next occasion (June 8), but Mr. J. G. Talbot (Oxford University) was still desirous that only those parishioners declaring themselves bond fide members of the Church of England should discharge the duties allotted to them by the bill. This was also opposed by the Government and negatived.

The opponents of female councillors however were not dis- posed to remain quiescent under a defeat which they maintained was inflicted by a match division. On the question of the third reading of the bill (June 13) Mr A Elliot (Durham City) took the