Page:The Annual Register 1899.djvu/67

 1899.] The Lords and the Church Question. [59

Russia and France had seemed to undergo but little change, but that little was in the direction of more harmonious feeling.

The House of Lords during the session before Easter had found but little occupation, and had divided its time between ritual, educational and social questions. Lord Kinnaird con- tinued his crusade against the Romanising tendencies of the Anglican clergy, and the remissness of the bishops in enforcing the law by moving (March 3) for a return of all the cases in which the bishops' veto had been exercised under the Church Discipline Act, 1840, and under the Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874 ; and he also asked whether a return could be obtained showing the number of churches in England, belonging to the Church of England, in which confessional boxes had been put up. The Archbishop of York (Dr. Maclagan) remarked that he had ascertained that in the last twenty-five years there had not been ten cases in which any English bishop had exercised the veto. The Earl of Dudley said that with regard to the Church Discipline Act, 1840, the return could not be granted, as there was no record necessarily kept of such cases. A return was, however, in course of preparation, which would give the infor- mation asked for as to the Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874. Any return as to confessional boxes must necessarily be incom- plete, as neither incumbents or churchwardens could be compelled to give the information asked for. The labour involved in attempting to obtain the return would be out of all proportion to the value of any information obtained. Under these circumstances the Government could not consent to grant such a return. The Earl of Northbrook, Viscount Clifden, and the Earl of Kimberley expressed their dissatisfaction •with this reply. The Bishop of Winchester (Dr. Randall Davidson), while courting inquiry into these matters, urged that the sug- gested return of the number of confessional boxes might possibly be inadequate and misleading because the vestries were generally used for hearing confessions. The growth of the use of the confessional was, he believed, a very real danger. After a few words from the Earl of Portsmouth, the Marquess of Salisbury said that the great importance which noble lords attached to this matter of confessional boxes, as distinguished from any other aspect of the question, ought to override the mere techni- cal objection which the Home Office very properly put forward. He deprecated and dreaded the spread of the practice of habitual confession in the Church of England. " But " he added, " remember you are dealing with a spiritual matter, and I very much doubt whether Parliament will find that its powers are adequate to accomplish the end which I believe the enormous mass of the people desire. If there were any means of repressing or discouraging the practice of habitual confession, such means would deserve all our consideration. I fear, however, that you are undertaking an effort to coerce consciences which greater powers even than the British Parliament have failed to effect,