The North Wales Chronicle and Advertiser for the Principality

GREAT CHURCH DEFENCE MEETING 1 AT RHYL. IMPORT vNT SPEECHES BY DEAN OWEN, MR P. P. PENNANT AND MR HELM. RHYL'S ROWDY RADICALS ATTEMPT TO BREAK UP THE MEETING. FEARLESS CHALLENGE BY THE VICAR OF FKSTINIOU. FULL RBPOBT, [FBOB OuR OWN REPORTER.) The #4paoma?i Towu H»U at Rhyl was on Frilay niht crowded to its utmo aipxoay by a thoroughly representative audience who assemblei for theparpose of listening to the Bjiecohes recently delivered in the same bailrling by Mr Gaiime89 Rogers, Mr Lloyd George, M.P., and other Libern- tioninta. Tbe cb. W" take. by Mr P. P. Prnntnt. of Nanllys, thm Conservative caudidate for tne Flint Borsu^bs. Prominent amongst those pr-geutwfre:—The Dean of 8t Asaph (the Very R- Jobu Owen. M.A.), the Veu. Arohd.acoo W.lliatns, VFII, Archdeacon Tlioas, tbe Revs. Caoou Howell Evans (victr of Rhyl), W. Hughes (victr of Fentiuiog), David Rtohards, (Blaenau JKe-tinio ). E. M. Roderick, D. W. Evans, C. Whittaker, J. Thomson Jones, M.A. (vioar of Towyi ) J Griffiths. O. K. M. Green, D. Evans, Q. iffi h Jones (Mo-tyn), and O. E. Williams; Ciptain Cole, Colonel 8. Hore, Dr. Eytoo Lloyd, and Dr. Girdie-itone, Meters W. E. Helm, E. Whitley, M P. O. A. Tavtruer, W. Price, E. W. K atinge, P. Browne, A. Potts. R. B Dixon, A. G. B. fiaz. R. M. Hugh-Jones, J. P. Lewis, T. W. Bardage,W. J. Kent, F. J. Gamen, 8 Roose. Arrow- smith (Aberttle), and R. Li. Robert (Mwrog). An euih»si»stio reception was accorded the Dean of St, Asaph aid the Chairman on their making an appearauoe upon the platfotm. Immediately oetore the proce-diuKS bagan the OHAIRMAN sa.d I have been informed that Mr Herotrl Lewis and Mr Lloyd George are in the room. If they are, I hope they will come on the platform (Cries of "Platform, platform, Mr Lloyd Ge rge") There was, however, no response to tha invita- tion. The VICAR of RHYL (the Rev. Canon Howell Eva".) h-v,nL, opened the meeting with prayer, U be CHAIRMAN, who was received with an out- burst of appra ise, s"i>1; Ladies and gentlemen, Def-noa, not detianoe," is our motto (cheers), and accord ngly, a few days ago a meeting having taken place iu this bitli iu which a proposition was sup- ported in favour of the disestablishment and disen- dowment of the Cborob, we have thought it right and proper thai you should have an opportunity of bearing the opposite side of the case (applause). W- have, therefore, arranged thia meeting at which, we hope, gentlemen will be able to stand up and put before you the impression cf this matter that we think is a right one (cheers) and I am con- fident they will do so temperately, and, I believe, cleaily lurt forcibly ihear, hear). The proposition that was supported the other night was one for the disestablishment and disondowment of tbe Church. I propose to s"y a few words on both of these pomts (applause). First of all with regard to dises»ablishment. No* what was the meaning of this rather clumsy word ? Disestablishment so evidently has referenoe to the •stab i«li n'nt of the Church by law, that I t-ike it it Cleans the repeal of any statate whioh makes any rale or regulation or provision binding npon the Church. So, that if disestablishment was carried out it would not theu be necessary for an Act of Pa-lumeat to b. obtninel for making alterations wbich at the present time is not allowed hy the State to do of its own accord. One of the first poi. ti wh eb would be touched would be the appointmebt of bishops. As you know, at the present time tha Chapters in the several Dieoeses elect tbe bishops, but then they are not allowed to prcoied to thfc election outil tbey have the leave of tbe State, and theu tbey have to elect the nomiuee that is mentioned by the State therefore, dises- tablishment in that case would mean that these bodies would elect the bishop of tbe diocese without bavine a nominee placed before them which they were honnd to elect. That would make a oertain anion t of difference, no doubt. The existing arrauaamrtiit has from many points of view worked wet! and for this raaon. As you know tbe Govern- ment is held tirsf by one party in tbe State,and then by another, c >naequently the bishops are praotioally appointed by both parties iu the State, and the fact of the leaden and priccipal men in the Church being appointed in this way, and belonging more or less to 'bs two parties of the State, politics are practioally exoluded from all Charoh matters (cheers). I have attended a great number of Churoh meetings of dfferent kinds- congresses and ci)ufereLo",and meetings of other kiDdp, and in no single instance have I ever known party politics to be introduced (hear, hear). I don't say that it would be otherwise if the bishops were elected by Churobmen and not appointed virtually hy the Crown, but I know this that in crt..iu Cllnroh bodies where this piov.sicn dots rrjt exist paity politics are sometimes allowed to appear (applause). Many high officials were, appointed by the Crown. In some of the cathedra's the etinous as well as the deans were appointed thus. Of oourse, that would oease. Then, again, another result of disestablish- ment would be that Convouation would not be inaimaned by the Crown anl at the present time Convocation is oniy allowed to take into considera- tion matters that are contained in their letters of bnsinesf, and consequently the State direota what matters ahull be taken into consideration by Con- vocation. They are unable also to reform them- selves. TI is, of course, would cease by disestablish- ment. Then, again, another importaut point. The Act (I Uniformity, whioh prohibits any alteration in the Prayer Book, exoepting by direot Act of Parliament, would oease to exist. There are other alterations of more or less importance. No alteration, sub-division or additiou to a parish can be made at the present time without an Aot of Parliament (a laugh). That, of ooarse, would oease to be. Some people imagine and have said that if disestablishment took place the Bishops would cease to have seats in the House of Lords (hear, bear). I don't think that follows in the lightest degree. The bbbops who have been :ummoned for a great number ot ages to the Councils of the Nation for their assistance and advice, and what I shtrnld like to see would bb that the leaders of the Nonconformists were summoned in like manner (applause). I consider that iu a Christian country like this religion tak cpite the first place (cheers), and from time to time it is desirable that there should be an official way of ascertaining the opinion of the different religious bodies in the country (cheers). The bishops in the Boussof Lords have the opportunity at the present moment, and I should be delighted to see the other important religious bodies in the oountry have the same oppottenity (cheers). Now we are asked to support dmstaoliabment on this gronud: on tbe ground of religious equality (hear, hear). I think I have mentioned the prinoipal alterations that disestablishment would make in the position 01 the Charoh in Its relation to the State, and you will see, and no doubt you know perfeotly well without my telling you that tbe relation between Cburch and State is almost entirely one of restriction by the State upon the Church (hear, bear); and if you were to remove them you would undoubtedly put the Church in its relation to the State in exactly tbe same position which Nonconformists are at the preseut moment; but I fail to see as some oontend that the Churoh at the present moment OMupies a higher position simply because it is oonueetad with the ctate. I believe that its connection with the Stite adds to its position in no degree whatever (bear, bear). I have a second subject to Ipak upon, and that is difcendowment. Now this is not claimed and oannot be olsimed on the satne ground, viz., on the ground of r-iligious equality, because no mention is evsrma letf disendow mentwi^hrs ;ard to the fands that are held by Nonconformist bodies (louioheers). If you are going to deal on the equality priuoiple- the religious equality principle-tben you must have diseodowment all round (loud ohenrs). This is the kind of argument which ia used, The Churoh is the national Cburob, therefore its funds are national foods (cheera at the back of the hall). Therefore, the nation can do what It likes with its own property (repeated obeers by the Liberation- iats present). That shows that I have fairly stated the ground on whinb the disendawmeDt argument is bassd. Now I am perfectly free to admit that the nation may do what it likes with any body or any thing in the nation. I has Is) the might to do it. Nobody can say "no" to that will of the nation but I say that there are certain things that the nation canuol do (applause). Tbe funds and the revenues IIf the Church were derived in exaotly the same way that tbe funds and the revenues of Nonconformist bodies were derived (loud cheers). They were the pious gifts — (" 00 ")—of individuals (keir, hear, and Name.") Although the nation has the might to alter the destination of these funds it has not tbe right to do so and use what was given for Christianity for other purpose1, such as ftealar education or the repair of roads. The Coairinan was here interrupted by a remark by one of the audience tbat if the money was fivtD for Christianity it was tadly ueed. < This created a disturbance, and there were shouts of tutu him out," but the Chairman urged the andience to leave the iuterrnpter alone. Mr PENNANT, continuing, said he would da much to promote religious equality, particularly if be was assured that it would product) closer alliance and a firmer frOL t among all Christians against infidelity, immorality, and ein, but be did not think this would be the case. The unique position the Churoh held now was in consequence of her antiquity, and her histerical position, and of the faot that she was ooeval with the existenoe of Christianity illtbi country, and had held up the lamp of Christianity and handed it down to the present time (applause). The 1)E»N OF Sr. ASAPH was accorded an enthusiastic reception. He Bald Before I commence my promised reply to Mr Guinness Rogers in particular, and incidentally to one or two othsr speeohes made at the reoent Liberationigt meeting held here, allow me a word or two of pre- liminary explanation. For the laat 15 months I have taken some share in this controversy in con- nuotion with Welah disestablishment (applause). Now I- 8y that for my own part I have no particular love for controversy. I have been happy for several years to take part with gentlemen who differed from me in religious and politioal opiniona in general movements for the welfare of Wales (cheeis). That is a work I love to do and hope to pe on doing if I am spared (loud cheers). I also have the privilege to occupy the office of a Christian minister. That is a very important offioe, and it is difficult to spare time from its duties tor anything else. I regret that I am obliged personally to take any part in ooutroversy. An attempt h89 been m,de for man>' years in this oountry to carry certain proposals, which I, for one, in commun with moat of you,! imagine (voices, No ") consider to be detrimental to the interest of religion, and, therefore,t) other interests of the country which we all hold dear and therefore, although I do not like controversy, I have never shrunk from it, and I hope not to shrink from it if controversy is cecaa- mry. I don't think it will be very long (a laugh and cheers). Our friend at the back of the room might have waited till I had completed my sen- tence (hear, hear). I Jon't think it will be neces- sary very long to make perfectly clear to all intelligent countrymen that the proposals are uLtrne-notiiiug more than a delusion (cheers). The objeot of tie meeting which I attended in this hall -the Liberationiut meeting-and let me tell you tbat somebody or other, I know cot or care not who ri od to oast a slur upon respectable Nonconform- ists in Rhyl by saying that I was greeted with hisses when I entered his room (h Nø, no "). I am not particularly deaf (loud cheers), nor is my skin thiuner than the average skin of ray neighbotir-all I olln say, and I say it publicly in jastice to Rbyl Nonconformists, my impression was that I was courteously received (oheers). Now the object, of the me> ting held here, according to its courteous chairman, my friend Mr Herbert Lewis (and he ooght to know if anybody what the meeting was about), the objeot of that meeting according to bim was not to attaok the Churoh as a religious institu- tion, but to give a reply to oertain reasons given in the course of the first day of the Rhyl Chnroh Congress against the disestablishment of the Church in Wales. Now we are met to-night to strike about between the Congress and the Liberationist meeting, and to consider how far these who oooupied the platform on that occasion did reply to the arguments used in the Churoh Congress against disestablishment in Wales (oheers). The most prominett speaker on that ocoasion, whom I am glad to see (hisses), has at least the courage of bis oonvio ion and put in his appearance. Between the tone and matter of the two prinoipal speakers there WAS, you will agree with tne, a whole heaven of diffarenae" (hear, hear). No oontrast could be greater, I think, than the contri-.st between the speeches of Mr Lloyd George and Mr GuinneBS Rogers. Now to begin with,Mr George, not for the first time,Ijthink,was off the point. Itseemedtome Did utterances bristled with inaoenraoies. He made a certain reference to Archbishop Peokham (that was a ninor matter at the Charoh Congress), but Mr George thought that he could trip up the Arch- bishop of Canterbury in English history (loud laughter). He didn't know apparently, though lie might have known of Prince Llewelyn's letter dated Garthoelyn, Nov. 11th, 1282 (bear, hear). The Prinoe, in this letter, thanked the Archbishop for the almost unendurable toil wbich he bad undertaken on behalf of himself and the Welsh nation, and for the love whioh be showed to him and the Welsh nation, and offers him his gratitude and devotion because he had done this ou bsbalf of the Welsh, anl all the more as he had done it in opposition to the wish of the English King (applause). Llewelyn adds that the Welsh rejoiced at the Archbishop's sijourn in Wales, and that it was their desire and expectation that peace could be established by the Archbishop's eB )rto and nobody else's. Mr George evidently never heard of the results of the parliamentary audit of the self-styled Cromwtlliat propagators of the Gospel. who were heartily detested by the Welsh people (hear, bear). They are estimated to have received £345.000 of Churoh money. They failed to account for X9400 of this sum. The less Liherationists say of the doings of Crotnwellians in Wales the better for them (beur, hear). Hr George had the pre- sumption to come there to j-er at a religious belief whioh was cherishel among others by his illnstrions political leader CUr Gladstone). (Cheen). In this Mr Geirge showel not only bad taste, but obvioua wa'it of intelli- gence. Mr George seemed to regard Welsh audiences as mere exsitabla mobs, and to forget that the Welsh were an intelligent and courteous people, who had the right to dem >nd from members of Parliament speaking on a great question fair argument and at least the rudiments of good manners (cheers). He wa* glad to find that the leading Liberal organ in North Wales published within Mr George's own oonst 'uency took him to task for his "regrettable want of g^od taste at Rbyl," and pointed out th,t his cause could not be served by rhetorical boomerangs. Mr George brought a charge against the Church Congress committee of making money by the sale of beer. He would content himself with giving NI, George the most direct and urqmlified contradiction (cheers). There was not a partich of truth in the charge. Welsh Liberationists of the stnip of Mr George would do well to take to hesrt the manly sentiment expressed this autumn iu the Times by Dr. Parker, who was as sturdy a Liberationist as any in the land. Dr. Parker s4id he knew of no folly this side of the bottomless pit so great as to try to promote disestablishment, by blackening the character of the olergy (oheers). The principle for which Welsh Churchmen cjntended in this osntury had been accepted with practically unanimous consent through Christendom for 15 oonturies. Surelvitwas not tos mnch to ask Liberationists to pay thecollec- j tive wisdom of Christendom the modest compliment of acknowledging that it was possible for Welsh Charohmen to stanl by those old truths without being animated by pride of place, or love of lucre, or passion for strifs. The W-Ish bishops without exoeption had been subjected to scurrilous abuse because they exposed the fallacies of Liber»ti"niat ntteranoes. The obloquy now cast npon Welsh bishops was but a feeble in lication of the torr.mts of p-inegyrio which would be poured upon them if bishops oonsented nnly to betray their trust. He was glad to say that Mr Guinness Rogers te'- the example of pleading his oaase in a manly an I Christian manner (hear, hear). Mr Rogers w-s content to confine himsolf to argument, and h > was glad to meet him on this ground. Mr Rogers d -pre- oated the Primate's app;a' to history and tbe bishop's oppe.it. preaent dy f..ots and figure. M? R iger3 forgot that theLiberationistSocietv had been all tie ?l-I years engaged in a travesty of Wehh and English history, and the issue of most wonderful figures and still more wonderful facts. When Liberationist history and figures and facts were riddled with criticism, Mr Rogers came there to deprecate history, figures, and faots. The Archbishop of Canterbury proved beyond dispute that the Church in Wales was no alien in any cense of that obnoxious word. The whole history of Wales witnesses to this, that Wales was most Welsh when she was most identified with the Church. If the Churoh Rnv- whers was a national institution she was national to Wales (oheers). His Grace also proved tlut the Churoh in Wales and in England was beyond di? ate in every sense one. As the Arobbishop oon?d not be answered from history, Mr Roeers banished history to the planet Saturn, bM' t ".0i2?'br Englishmen nor Welshmen had yet been eduoated to ignore their history. Mr Rogers's obscurantist argument answered itself (cheers). The Bishop of St. Asaph, at the Congress, proved point by point the inaccuracy of the information carelessly sup- plied by Liberationist last February to Mr Gladstone (hear, bear). No attempt was made by the Liberationists to prove that the Nonoonfo mists were more than half the people of Wales, or that the Church was nit as a matter of ftot in Wales as much a Churoh of the poor as of the rich or that the Welsh Nation was auanimous for disestablish- ment when in the two last general eleotions for every three votes that ooold be claimed for it, two could be olaimed against it (cheerB). All the reply tbat Mr Guinness Rogers attempted to the Bishop of St. Aispb was to say that" there was nothing so delusive as figures except facts (laughter). It was futile to sneer at facts and figures until the Liberationists scooeeded in disproving a single faot or a single figure adduced by the Bishop of St. As.iph (cheers). Mr Rogers mads io serious attempt to argae tbe esse for separate disestablish- ment in Waleg. The justice mast be done him to say that he did not, like some of his baser brethren, eudeavour to discredit the undeniable progress of the Churoh in Wales (hear,-hear). He took his stand in the first place upon the principle of religious equality and upon the expediency of moderate disendowment. Mr Rogers's silence was even more instructive than his words. He did not trot out the old-stock arguments of the Liberationist Society, the laissez faire theory of the State, and the sbort-sightel exposition of the Scripture which made religion synonymous with sheer individualism. The power of modern democracy bad killed the laistez faire theory. Modern exegesis, not to speak of Noncoafermist I conscience, had broadened the popular oonoeption of the soope of Christianity (cheers). Whether religious equality could be manufactured by Aot of Parliament or not, he failed to see how the application of what was called a religious principle -it really was the off,pring of R iussean—could be limited to four dioceses. Morality was not a question of geography, and disestablishment in Wales oould not be supported by arguments equslly applicable, whatever their worth be, to England. The only religions oonoeption of equality to be dis- covered in Scripture was proportionate, equality of responsibility in all oases measured by the sum total of varied resources in each cusi. Diseodow- ment was really the coro of the Liberationist Agitation in Wales, and the more that was brought to the front the clearer would the issue be. Last February, in the House of Commons, Welsh dis- endowment was completely ignored for tactical reasons. Dr. Freeman bad exploded the Liberation- ist play upon the ambiguity of the phrase "national property," and it made clear ouca for all that the State had the same power to deal with Church property that it had to deal with other pNperty- n-itber more nor less. S) much for the high a priori Liberationist argument. The well-known Liberal writer" Verax admitted last week in a Manchester paper that "in the ordinary sense of the word the clergy are o-rtaioly not State paid, the State pivs nothing." The State. in its col- lective capacity, was never in the habit of bestowing land or money upjn the Churoh. Private gifts male the Churoh only too wealthy, and the State had to etep in with stoitets of Mortmain to check or regulate the pro- cess. No Liberationist who had a reputation to lose could at this time of day maintain that Welsh Nonconformists p°. d for the support of the ohurch (hear, hear). Lib i-ationigts who wibhod to makj the Churoh free b,- force at other times generously strove to make her poor in order that she might be pure. Welsh Liberationists used to regard the possession of corporate Christian wealth as a spiritual bugbear, though they never objeoted to the acquisition of wealth by individual Christians bnt this year Mr T. Williams, the president of the Welsh Congregational Union, from the obair at Wrexham, on July 29th, instructed his brethren in the fallacy of their old fears, which he frankly admitted having shared He added, that he did not think that there was so much barm in a little endowment as was said. The ancient respect- able (Independent) churches at Henllan, Trelech, and Bethlehem, St. Clears, possessed small farms, but he never beard anyone say that this had beeu in any way a snare to them" This showed that education was making rapid strides in Wales, and that the old belief in various kinds of ghosts was disippearing (oheers). The Cliuroh oould not be tioouaed in Wales of indolenoe through possession of endowments (hear, betr). In nine-t«nths of the parishes, of Wales £230.184 17s lid had been given intho year 1890 by voluntary offerings for Churoh purposes Irom the official year book. 925,000 at least ought, to be added for unreturned parishes making a total of £250,000. According to the Methodist statistics the voluutary offerings in WlesduriDg the same year came to £161,000. According to the Chairman of the Welsh Congre- 1,ioi3al Onion at Wrexham, on the 29?h July, ?124,825 represented the total voluntary cfferig. of Independents in Wales, the contributions of the two denominations together amounting to £285,000. He heartily admired the liberality of the Methodists and the Independents, and it was no disparagement to point out, that the Churoh, in spite of hAr endowments, stood in voluntary offer- ings for 1890 not very far behind the two denomi- nations put togel her (oheero). When the expadieuoy of Welsh disendowment, moderate or otherwise, was urged upon their consideration they had a right to ask what WA. th alternative use proposed to be made of Churoh money (hear, hear). The most extreme Liberationist organ in North Wales had devoted a leader to this matter on Nov. 20tb, which showed that Welsh Liberationists were beginning to disoovsr that it would be impossible to nationalise Welsh property by separate disendowment In Wales, as tbey had so glibly promised all these years. The following extract from the Liberatiouist leader spoke for itself: Is it possible to hinder the money that now goes to the parson from finding its way to the pocket of the landlord ? The answer is No.' Tithe being applied to national purposes, Bimply means that it would be used to ease the burden of the rates and taxes. Rent is an adjustable quantity. When the rates are high, the rents are low and vice versa." Reduce the rates and the rent will ba increased, lis (the speakeri wished Welsh Liberationists had thought out tbe praotioal issue of their nostrums before throwing Wales into turmoil for many years on the strength of promise* whioh were now openly acknowledged by themselves to be a sheer delusion. Welsh farmers and working men would have something sharp to say to these thoughtless agitators when the light whioh had dawned upon the mind of the Carnarvon Rsdioal editor should find its way down to the Welsh popular mind, as it soon must (cheers). The' nationalisation of Church property by separate diEeudowmeut for Wal.-s was a sheer sham. Mr Guinness Rogers left this point disoreetly alone. The Libera- tiouist fditor had the courage to say, even after his brilliant discovery that II the great fact is that disendowment must be got." What became of the money was bagatelle to him. The great fact was that the money voluntarily given to the Church by Churchmen must be taken away from hur, though the nation gained never a penny by the process. If this would not be the statesmanship of ppite, he could not conceive what spite meant. The hurry of the Welsh Liberationists was perfeotly obvious. They were afraid to argue the question thoroughly out lest Welsh farmers and workiugin in should know as much as Radical editors (oheers). Welsh landlords, to their credit be it recorded, scorned the bribe proffered to them by Welsh Liberationists. Tbey were men of honour in the first place—tbny were also men of sense (hear. hear). They oonld Be quite well that Liberationist gifts were gifts of Danai, gifts of tithe in order to undermine pro- perty and land. He kUAw his countrymen quite as wall as any Liberationist iu Wales (hear, hear). He kne v that Welsh Nonconformists had Lot so far lost the religion of their fathers nor Welsh oommiii- sense as to endorse a disendowment polioy of spite to suit the peculiar fancies of a koot of wire-pullers, or to encourage half-intelligent doctrinaries ia the oonfusion of ideas, whioh they now must admit to have characterised the lacubrationaupon disendow- ment in the past. It was rae that Welshmen were impulsive, but it was equally true that they were houest an4 shrewd, and their honesty and their shrewdness were safe to correct before many years the momentous impulse given to a section of Welsh- men-say, three-fifths—liy the impottunate assi- duousness of rhetorical boomerangers (applause). Loudly as the Liberationist bounced, qualified judges of political affairs on both sides saw prac- t oally no chance of Welsh diseatibliahment being rushed through the British Parliament (cheers). Plenty of time would be Riven for Welshmen to find out how they have been unconsciously duped by agitators who qualified themselves for their business by first duping themselves. He made DO reflection npon Liberationist honesty, but be did dis'.inctly l \me their want of th rough thought. Men who di, not think had no right to lead Welshmen. His last words to the Welsh Liberationists were:—"Never in the history of Wales have leaders once discredited regained popular oonfidenoe. Welshmen are enerou., and they trust their leaders far but they are shrewd, and they never truat them twice. The Liberationi-t leaders will run tbe day they glibly nationalised tithe in Wales (Iond cheers). In cinelusion the Dean, said he h»d the lionoar ti propose the following resolution" That this meeting expresses its strong disapproval of tbe movement for the disestablishment and disendowment of the Charoh in Wales, and pledges itself to use every just, honourable, and charitable effort in defence of the Old Church." They defied no one, but they stood up to defend the Old Church of the land. Mr LLOYD JONEa said the Dean had pone sn fully into the matter, and there were other speakers to follow that he would simply content himself by seconding he resolution. He know that most, of those whom he was add.essing came there with their miolis mads, ItP, but he hoped that there were ma-iy more them tint n,j¡t wru., after hear- ing the speeohes, would support the Churoh. He oalled upon them to oarry the resolution by an overwhelming vote (cheers). The CiuiKMiN put tbe resoiuiiau, and declared it carried. A great disturbance here ensued. The Rev. E. Lloyd. Jones and Mr Amos, a Radioal newspaper proprietor, leading the Liberationists. AmiiiJt the loui oheers of bis oipporterp, the Rev. E. L.'oyd Jones made his way t > the plat- I form, which he ascended, and he there had a con- versation with the chairman. Wlrtt passed between them oould not be beard owiug to tbe incessant din which prevailed. It is, however, understood that the rev. gentleman requested to aain put the motion. The CHAIRMAN complied, and again declared it oarried. The soene wiiioh eutued was of the wild- est deception, and the Radical section of tbe audiauoe utterly refused to aooord a bearing to the Rev. David Richnrds (vicar of FeBtiniog), who attempted to address the gathering in tbe vernaou- lar. The Liberationists s ing He is a jolly go id fellow" in honour of the arch disturber of the meeting, and it was clear that they had resilved, if possible, to break up the meeting. The police were sent for, but their presence did little, if anything, to restore order. With a view of quelling tbe turmoil, Tne Rev. O. T. WILLIAMS, a C-ilvinistio Methodist minister, asoended the platform, amid ories of" Three cheers for the Bishop of Vale-road." He appealed for fair-play for the speakers, bat did not suoceed in produciog the desired result. The Rev. LL>YD JONES, who looked fearfully excited, got upon his ohtur in tbe osntre of the room, and attempted to sak. The Rav. DAVID KKM4RDS Will you quietly say in two or three war, Is what it is you want ? The Rev. E. LLIYD JuNii Said something to the eff-ct that Mr Riolurda was the autoorat of the universe who measured what every man aid. Mr fiiCBASDJ said ho should be happy to discuas any part or aspect of this great question with Mr LI .yd Jones at tbe shortest notice, at his own time and place, and the discussiou should be oonducted either in the Welsh or the English language and he guaranteed that for his part he should be acoorded a p "itlut. hearing He added to his challenge that Mr Lloyd Jones muht seleothia own chairman from any onapel in Rhyl and he would sueak under that chairman all,1 bow to bis decision. Nay m Jre, he would let him select a committee with not a single Churohman or Conservative upon it, and he would promise to bar him out to the bitter end an.1 hiie his faoi in sorrow and shame, for his igno-anoe if he was uosuooessful (oht ers and counter che irs). It was alm)at impossible to reaure a correct record of what was said by the speaker. Mr RICHARDS asked them to pass a cordial vote of thanks to the Chairman, who hai attempted to oonduot the proceedings fairly. If Mr Lloyd Jones wished to speak, he oould do so with the permission of the Coairman at the end of the meeting. The CHAIRMAN said, as they knew, a few nights ago tbere was a meeting held in that hall, when tbe I s terred:b:eeJn d::I:n;n put forward, and they desired to put forward their oase. Tbey thought it WAS only right and proper to have the whole evening in which to do it. They bad never attempted ill any way to interfere or interrupt the meeting, and the Dean on that oooasion seoonded the vote of thanks to the Chair man. Tbey did not intend, aud he thought that at meetings of tbat kind it was not the right thing tbat any amendment should be moved, but thM persons dissenting from it were ut liberty to vote against it. It was for the meeting to deoide whether they should go on or whether thev sbould stop) and he purposed asking them to vote on this question. (Loud crits of "go on were here raised). The CHAIRMARF, wearing an amused expression upon his face, said I think tbe go JUS" have it. This <wea»ed a good deal of langhter, and Mr Helm was allowed to speak. Mr W. E. iftlm prefaced his remarks by observ- ing that they must conduct this controversy in a ssemly and orderly manner. Any other mode of oenducting it was unworthy of Englishmen. Welsh- men, Churchmen, or Nonconformists. He cared not to discuss that question in any other mode and ID any other spirit, and he thought all who were present would allow that from the beginning of the meeting to that moment that, was the way iu whioh they had endeavoured to discuss the question (bear, hear). They should at least deal with it from the point of fact, and from the point of argument and reason. There should be no heat, no anecrapulons misrepresentation; no abuse. This was a most grave controversy, and it should be regarded as such. Uuless they could recognioetbis, they had far better leave tbe controversy alone. They were there that night to deal with the meet- ing which was held for the promotion of disestab- lishment, and for the professsd purpose of dealing with the Church Congress. He had read the reports oftbatmeeting, and after careful examination be had discovered no argument whatever bearing upon the question of disestablishment. He oonld find no tangible reason for disestablishment (cheerr). A gentleman moved a resolution beginning with it having been demonstraled," but there was no attempt to prove that tbe great maj irity of the Welsh people desired disestablishment or any pro- positions mentioned in the disestabliabment resolu- tion. There was no attempt to prove that the figures which the Dean of St. Asaph produced at the Congress were fallacious there was no attempt to prove that an unjust pisitinn was take. up. What was done? The chairman exhibited a good deal of emotion, and be told the meeting that he was very much surprise! and shocked at a political sermon delivered by the Bishop of Manchester. The ohairman was followed by Mr Lloyd George, who made a frantic demonstration, and concming whom one ?ad said: I have ssu him jump 00 I the platform, kick up his heels, aud wriggle nd twist about lik-) ft man with hydrophobia." Wtmt did he talk about ? First of all he started a burial grievance; then be said something about tbe bigotry of the Church clergy then be ridiculed ^>oatolic sucoesaion; then ho took the history of the Archbishop of Cinterbury in hand; then he made some reference to beer which was sold (sup. plisd by a Nonconformist minister who was present and supporting bim on that particular occasion) (Cries of No, no," and disturbance). He should, if necfs5ary, be able to produce living testimony of his words. After Mr George Mr Mostyn Williams moved a resolution, but said nothing (laughter). Then another gentleman said the Church authori- ties bad bad the audacity to go to the house of such an august personage as Mr Gee, of Denbigh, and take away a couch, and because tho oouch was taken the Rev. J. Williams said that the axe must be laid at the root of the tree-th-it the whole Obnrob must fall. Then they bad another rev. gentleman, who was bold enough to stand in the presence of a dean and declare that bishops were In anomaly, and the e letnias of the people (a voic3: "Tbcy are"). lis (Mr Hlm) asked that rev. gentleman if lie had ever h-iard of the English bishops who had been the means of freeing the slaves he os'xed him if h-i ha I ever heard of Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canter- bury, who wrung from a despolio king the Magna Cbarta. That was pretty much all that was said at that meeting, and when he read the report hi a^ked himself: Is this really intended to produce any effect in favour of diaJ8t"b!ihmJnt? He thought not on the oontrary, ha thought that the best au ury of the success of tb Church in her appeal to the masses was in the production of euch plor stuff as was heard at tbat disestablishment mseting (applause). H" felt sura that the English eleotors would never dissBtablieh the Cnuroh ou such poor stuff as issued from thti lipa of the speakers and so he asked himself tha question Was that meeting comedy or burlesque (cries of burlesque"). Mr Alderman La nis eid they didn't att,,i the Churoh as an institution, they only desired to sever ita connection with the State. He (Mr Helm) ven. tured to say this: that if Mr Lewis only spike for himselUhinking tbat he were a fair spokesman of his party, he was exceedingly ignorant of the intentions of his party (a Voice: He's the coming member for Flint,") Well he (Mr Helm) was afraid he was 81t coming that night. He wished he wera (laughter). The speaker proceeded to say that th3 Liberationists wanted to do something more than free the Churoh from the State they wanted to free the Churoh of its property. That was their main aim and main inteny-tbtj and, therefore, he set asid-i Mr Lewie's remarks when he aaid he didn't wish that the Cburch should sacrifice any endowments. The property. of the Church was given to it for its own pablia purposes. A Nonconformist would strongly repsl any attack upon his property, because he woald assert that that property was given by Nonconformists for Noncon- formist purposes, to Nonconformist trus'.ees t) bil used according to tbe formularies and rules of that putioular communion. That was just the Churchman's right and claim to his property (loud cheers). But with this difference the Churoh offered everybody privileges in that pro. perty. Mr Guinness Rogers lectured the Bishop of Manchester for ("eaching a political sermon. There was a great deal of hypocrisy on the part of their politioal opponents when they reproachod them with politioal action. Mr Guinness Rogers stated that the whole work, from beginning to end, was a political work (laughter). When he noted the way in which t!ie ilvinistio Mithodists, Independents, Baptists at Jeir gatherings passed politioal resolutions an; preached political ser- wons he couVwot help miling. The obj -ct. of the Liberationists was to sweep the whole of the Cnrcb endowments into the maw of the Society (applause). Mr Helm alluding to the statement made by Mr Lloyd George, with regard to tbe burial cadal at LlanfrotheD, be explained that the grave had been dug in the ground left by a lady to the Church, and on oertain conditions that no burials should be made in that ground, dug in aooordance with tha rites and ceremonies of th Cuaroh of England. The Dean of Bangor was simply a trustee, and had nothing to do with the scenes that touk place in the burial ground. The Itev. O. T. WILLIAMS, amid cheers, said that the statement of Mr Helm was not complete. Llanfrothen was the parish in which be (Mr Wil- liams) bad lived in 1880. He was asked by a pafisbioner to oonduot a burial in the very part of the cemetery whioh was now in question. In their case the gates were not looked. As in 1881 the gates werj open, the grave bad been dug, and ha bad the privilege of oondaoting the faneral service. The fee was tendered to the Rector of Llanfrothen and he declined it. They left the fee with a parishioner and expressed their readiness to aocept the responsibility for what they had done. But no oase if trespass was brought against them. Then came in 1881 the agreement by which Mr Owen eulieavoured to enable the Church party to do what they could not do legally in 1880 (cheers). Mr HELM: The statement whioh the gentleman has made on this matter does not alter either the legal or moral bearings of tbe esse, and rather corroborates my position. Concluding Mr Helm said they could meet their enemies in the Rate; but they raaat be allowed a fair and open platform. If they had a fair field and no fear they well knew who would win the victory (loud obeers). Canon HOWELL EvANS moved & vote of thanks to the chairman for the fair manner in wbich he had ainduoted is preMidings. Mr E. WHnLY. M.P., who spoke amid great disorder, seconded the resolution, and said tbat during the 28 years of his public life be bad never seen any disturbance at a public meeting, and extremely regretted the demonstration of that evening. He was a firm believer in the established Church of this country, and belie7ed its disestab- lishment would be detrimental to the interests of the country—a feeling which he knew was also shared by a good many Nonconformists (oheor3). The motion was unanimously carried. The proceedings, which lasted about three hours, then terminated, the Radioals creating further uuaeemly scenes as they quitted the hall.