The Press.
London, England, 1856-09-20 00:00:00

" CLERICAL DISTRESS."

IT is totally impossible, within the limits of a
single article, to notice a tithe of the com-
plaints and recriminations which have been
recently addressed to the public journals on
this subject. A general impression seems to
prevail among a certain class of corre-
spondents that curates are very badly paid on
1001. a year, and that their stipends should be
increased by deductions from the incomes of
the superior clergy; while, on the other hand,
certain rectors and vicars, apparently taking
alarm at this way of viewing the subject, have
written, in their turn, to show—not, indeed,
that curates get enough, but that they them-
selves are by no means the affluent class
which many persons imagine, and that, con-
sequently, any systematic reductions in the
value of livings would be merely remedying
one kind of injustice by another quite as
great. _ _

- This is pretty much how the case stands at
present, and, in our opinion, the incumbents,
as far as they have yet gone, have reason on
their side. A living of the actual value
of 6001. a year by no means represents
an income of equal amount at the
free disposal of the incumbent, any more
than the 2001. or 3001. a year of a Civil
servant, subject, as it is, to superannuation
deductions and various other burdens, repre-
sents the resources on which he can depend
for his livelihood. Yet certainly 6001. a year is
considered one of the prizes in the Church.
There are comparatively few livings up to that
amount ; and, taken with such limitations as we
have described, it cannot be reckoned a very
exorbitant income for a man of education,
ability, and industry to obtain from his profes-
sion by the time he is forty years of age.
What surgeon, barrister, or solicitor would not
consider himself a failure if he were not reap-
ing a better harvest than that after a similar
period of probation ?
As to the foolish observation which was
permitted to creep into the Times to the effect
that the clergyman was generally the idlest
man in his parish, it is so manifestly founded
in ignorance of a clergyman's life and duties,
as to require little or no exposure. Most of
the Times readers are likely to be better in-
formed than the writer of that article, and to
know that visiting his parishioners is one of
the most responsible and laborious of clerical
functions, and one, in fact, on which very
often the whole efficacy of his ministration
will depend.
To recur to the case of the eurates, it is
obviously true enough that 1001. a year is but
small pay for the work required to be done.
But the question is, whether the proposed
remedy be the right one. Nobody thinks that
Mr. Briefless is badly treated because he gi.ti
nothing, while a judge gets 5,0001. a year ;
or proposes to dock the salary of Lord
CAMPIIILLL to enable the above-mentioned
gentleman to indulge in luxuries with
which his own exertions are unable
to supply him. Ninety pounds a year is
n considered too small a salary to maintain
a young gentleman in the army. And no one
his ever suggested that a sum should be an-
nually deducted from the colonel's pay to be
d ,tributed among the ensigns. Is it not pos-
e ble that the right remedy for the evil com-
p wined of may be found in bringing the work-
lag of the clerical profession more into accord-
ance with that of the army or the bar, in which