Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 18 February 1964.
Mr William Ross
, Kilmarnock
12:00,
18 February 1964
Mind ye, ye wouldna ken it by the way the fellow talks. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman is a member of the Episcopal Church of England—a member of the Church of England. It would be more accurate for me to say that it is amazing to find a member of, and one probably speaking on behalf of, that Church prepared to remove one of the remaining existing penal qualifications or disqualifications in respect of the Episcopal Church of Scotland.
One hon. Member mentioned what had happened in relation to the Scottish Church, which was a native Scottish Church and which had resisted for over 1,000 years the efforts of the English Church to dominate it, so much so that on the passing of the penal Laws in the eighteenth century, following the Jacobite Rebellions and when the Scottish Church found that it could not drink to or pray for or ask blessings on a Royal Family that they did not think was the legitimate Royal Family, these penal laws stated that no meeting of more than five Episcopalians under the Scottish régime would be recognised.
To get over this, many of the Scottish Episcopalians brought in from England English-ordained ministers. Others went to the garrisons of English troops which were stationed at Fort William, Fort Augustus and other places. They legalised their activities, or proclaimed their legality, by calling their Church what it is still called today—the English Church. It was not nationalisation. It is true to state that thereafter Bishop Skinner himself stated that the English Episcopal Church had a vested interest in the retention of these penal laws, and indeed did everything to prevent their removal, because it would mean the re-establishment of native Scottish Episcopacy.
It is well within the scope of this debate on Second Reading for us to be reminded that in, I think it was, November, 1783, Samuel Seabury came from the United States—let it be remembered that things had happened there, too, that did not endear them to the Establishment South of the Border—to seek consecration as a bishop so that they could control the government of their scattered community. He was refused all over England. He had been a student at Edinburgh University. He travelled to Aberdeen and was consecrated there in the back room of the house of Bishop Skinner. If anyone likes to go today to the Cathedral in Aberdeen, he will find one aisle on which there are the arms of the then States of the United States, and I believe that the High Altar too was donated by the Episcopal Church of America.
Some of these penal laws were removed in, I think it was, about 1794, but there were some strange remnants. One of the remnants is still in force at the moment. I do not know how these lawbreakers from Scottish Episcopalianism proclaim themselves here tonight, because one of the laws said that they should not any more than once in any one year—is it once or twice a year?—submit themselves to being present at a gathering where the blessing is not asked upon the Royal Family. Indeed, it may be that one hon. Member opposite should be imprisoned for at least two years. It is worth remembering that this applied to the Prime Minister as well. I thought at one time of raising this during the Kinross and West Perthshire By-election, but I felt restrained. I did not want to embarrass the right hon. Gentleman in that way.
As I have explained, these things are still in existence and it is really all part of a struggle between Churches and, of course, the desire of the English to dominate the Scots. I am glad to see that the Leader of the House has come into the Chamber. He should have been here earlier, when I was carrying on a part of this battle; when we were talking about Scottish legislation. We have spoken about this before. Having just come in, the right hon. and learned Gentleman probably does not know what is going on in relation to hire purchase and how Scotland is being treated, particularly the dignity of Scottish law.
I must leave that for another time. What we are now doing is sensible and I am glad that it is being done. It represents another measure of freedom for the Scottish ordained Episcopalian ministers. As a good Presbyterian, I am glad to see two parts of the Episcopalians getting on a wee bit better.
The Second Reading is the most important stage for a Bill. It is when the main purpose of a Bill is discussed and voted on. If the Bill passes it moves on to the Committee Stage. Further information can be obtained from factsheet L1 on the UK Parliament website.
A by-election occurs when a seat in the House of Commons becomes vacant during the lifetime of a Parliament (i.e. between general elections) because the sitting MP dies, resigns, is elevated to the peerage, or becomes ineligible to sit for some other reason. If a vacancy occurs when the House is in session, the Chief Whip of the Party that formerly held the seat moves a Motion for a new writ. This leads to the by-election taking place. Prior notice does not have to be given in the Order Paper of the House. There is no time limit in which a new writ has to be issued, although by convention it is usually done within three months of a seat becoming vacant. There have been times when seats have remained empty for more than six months before a by-election was called. The sitting party will obviously choose a time when they feel confident of success. Seats are often left vacant towards the end of a Parliament to be filled at the General Election though this is not always the case and by-elections have sometimes occurred just before the dissolution of Parliament. While a vacancy exists a member of the same party in a neighbouring constituency handles constituency matters. When the new Member is elected in the by-election, all outstanding matters are handed back. Further information can be obtained from factsheet M7 at the UK Parliament site.
Laws are the rules by which a country is governed. Britain has a long history of law making and the laws of this country can be divided into three types:- 1) Statute Laws are the laws that have been made by Parliament. 2) Case Law is law that has been established from cases tried in the courts - the laws arise from test cases. The result of the test case creates a precedent on which future cases are judged. 3) Common Law is a part of English Law, which has not come from Parliament. It consists of rules of law which have developed from customs or judgements made in courts over hundreds of years. For example until 1861 Parliament had never passed a law saying that murder was an offence. From the earliest times courts had judged that murder was a crime so there was no need to make a law.
