The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAT, JILT 14.
Tile Loan CSANctiLLonPUBLIC took his seat at he reekek.
BUSINESS.
PETITIONS PRESENTED.
BCCLiAtAferteaL TITLES ASselleTlon BILL.—By Lord
SEDESDALE, from Limerick, in favour of. The Earl
ref ABERDEEN, front a great many places in Ireland, and
Ole Reiman catholic archbishops and bishops in Ireland ;
O".
G PAPAL Anoithsvioa.—By
the Duke of RICHMOND
(2), from Auchinamos and Elgin, in Scotland; audible Earl
OLENOALL, from South Shields, against.
Fan. TRAWL—By the Duke of RICHMOND (2), from
Betel, and the millowners and millers of Queen's County,
nirmiaa•
KS/40100e Tthrs.—By the Duke of RICHMOND,
tram Aberdeen, against the abolition of.
CITSTAL PALM'S. —By Lord CAMPBELL, several
Praying for the removal of the Crystal Palace, which he
supported by some observations respecting the propriety of
keeping the promise mode to that effect at the beginning,
the hisslubrity of the eilitice:if employed as a winter garden,
and its inutility for any other purism,.
BOOTY TAKEN IN INDIA.
The Earl of ELLENIIOItOUOII wished to ask the noble
lord at the head of the Board of Control with reference to
the 131,0(101. booty taken at the l'uojaub, whether the
usual course had been adopted by the Directors of the
East India Company, of memuriabsing the croon us to its
distribution ?
Lard IIItOUGHTON replied in the affirmative.
THE HORFIELD ESTATE.
The Bishop of OXFORD moved for certain papers with
reference to the llortield estate, his object being to state
certain fact. with reference to it in consequence of some
statements which had gone forth to the public with a view
SO damage the character of his right rev. friend the Bishop
of Gloucester and Bristol, who was now absent
an the continent The charge was that whereas
vim the see of Bristol was united to the see of
Gloucester the property of the See of Bristol was,
under power given by acts of parliament, made over to
the waited see of Coloususter and Bristol; that Hatfield
Manse Mod, if not legally yet equitably and morally della:-
rest from any other property of the see, and that his right
rev. friend an taking powasioni of the me was lesund not to
deal with that estate as with the other property in the see.
That sailor such uhligatiows he first endeamuned to tell Ms
tight is that estate to the ecelesiaatical commissioning; that
they, in order to prevent greater scandal. committed to dual
tar that right; that an agreement was entered fats which
arm at AM private, bemuse it would not hear the public
eye; and upon its avian to the solicitor of the oar
ouwitmera, he felt so aahamed of the transaction
that he refused to be a party to the carrying of
It out, arid the rontraissioners were driven, in spite of
themselves to go for an order in council to ea ry it out.
That within tweuty-four hours of the agreement Icing cone
pleted, a member of the other Howe of Parliament, who
had discovered this treachery, called the attention of the
Aftorney.tieneral and the First Lord of the Treasury to
the job shout to he peril trend; that it wu at the last me
meat defeated, and the bishop kat the bargain. And there-
upon, it try, said, be meld do nothing until the sue me
awning life dropped ; and, upon the dropping of all Ilk
contrary to all moral oobligatiooe, he renewed the lease wan
three /awe levee—wad he begged their lordships to met
the full amount of the imputation, it was added that us
man bet a dignitary of the church would dare ft
do oath a thing and show himself anemias bt
public aro an honest Man, Now, the first sethement
was that the situation of his right rev. friend was, as to this
estate, woolly different front the others, because his two
preolecewure had refuousl to renew the lease. The tirst of
those endive sours we, Bishop Grey, and here he must say
that of the many eases of misrepresentation which met his
eye, be had never seen one in which every single in-
cident had lean so misrepresented and which bad
led to vo Glee an issue as in the present ease. le every
one there was at first the appearance of truth, which
was this most damaging thing. (Hear, hear.) But if they
cloudy and minutely ciamineol the incidents, the mid-state-
menu. wo re made most palpable. The statement wan, that
when the first lill dropped Bishop Grey intended to renew
it, when there was wily one vacancy, but when there Ise-
tame two Sae:Weiss he did nut consider himself able to re-
new them. Now what was the fact ? Nu ecirotiations of
my kind had taken place between Bishop Grey and the
luso, until after the second life had dropped and, in the
swored plan., there never was a breaking off of that one
segeeiatioes, fur Bishop Grey died while that our negotia-
tion was in peogress, and be had the statement of Bishop
Shadwell that the negotiation was nut broken off, and that
the live. would have been renewed but that the bishop
died. Then it was said that Bishop Allen gave the re.
gimlet pledge. Now, on the authority of the bishop
Glow
of Gloer...ter he could state that Bishop Allen applied
to God Melbourne on the subject, who told him that he
saw no impediment in the way of his renewing the lease,
and he lilt 1 at liberty to act as be thought best, in con-
sequence of which Bishop Allen was about to renew it when
be was translated to the see of Ely. lle had the evidence
of Mr. Charles Clarke, an eminent solicitor at Bristol, who
offend to tender his father to prove that lie was employed
by Bisbee Allen to renew the lease. The no a. statement was
that in 1512 it began to be rumoured that the present bishop
want to renew the lease, and the melt-anodic:el com-
missioners desired their secretary to write to the bishop
stating that t0.0.y hoped such was not the case, and that the
bishop replied that he felt himself insulted at such
an insinuation, and that if he did so it would
leave a luting reproach on the character of a
hi.). op. Now, after basing gone through every
document at the ecclesiastical commissioners'-office
that morning, he asserted that no communication of any
kind passed in 1812, ur for five years afterwards, between
the eerie.isstieol cuiumbeioners or their secretary and the
bishop. What authority thertture could be attributed to the
statement of those, who, to say the least of it, were so
imbineoruinl ? Now, what did happen? In 1817 mew
scheme, hail been started by the commissioners as to the
charge, which ought to be lewitelon certain see., it had bees
thought that the united diocese of Gloucester and Bristol
ought to bear a larger charge; and it was intended to add
the Hoortielel Manor estate to the episcopal haul, after the
prevent bishop should be removed. To that he hail ob-
jected as being unjust to his *evacuee, and some negotia-
tione aewordiegly took place between him and the com-
missiono-rs, with the view of euteriug upon some arrange,
Went relative to the property. The bishop had considered
that the peculiar holding of that estate was a most injurious
tenure to the church. inasmuch as it prevented the possi-
bility of improvement. Ile hail never intended to renew the
lease use the same terms upon which it had been originally
granted, but never entertained the idea of not granting
some kiwi of is lease. The right rev. prelate here referred to
and rowl some extract, from letters from the bishop of
Gloucester to the tominisaioneno, in which he had stated
that he treated the imputation of renewing the lease
o. we heretofore " with eontenipt. Another aceusatiea
was that in 1841$ the ecclesiastical coniroiesionen having
desired their secretary to remind the bishop of his moral
uhlvetation not to renew the base, the bishop answered
that he knew nothing of any moral obligation on the
subject, hut that he had a legal right, winch he would
no; alienate except fur 11,5001. Now nut only wet
uu letter of the kind alluded to written by the secretary,
but the bishop himself, in Februaty, 1818, opened a neg...
tidiest with the commissioners, and offered to tart with his
interest to them. 'that proposal was referred to a select
committee, of which Sir J. Graham was the chairman. They
entertained the proposal, and a communication wra made to
the bishop announcing to him that the proposal had been
brought before the Game committee, and that they had
expressed au opinion of the liberality of the offer. (Hear.)
The negotiation went en. It had been asserted that the
eammilsieenen endeavoured privately to transfer the estate
to themselves, but that when the deed of transfer had been
trausmitted the solicitor refused to be party to the affair.
The Get was that the commissioners having satisfied them-
selves that there was neither equitable, legal nor moral
restraint on the bishop to act differently with ;he llortield
estate trent the other estates of his see, consalted
one of the most eminent conveyancers as to the best mode
of transmitting it, who gave an opinion that the proper way
of tranemitting it wall not by deed, but by order in council
(War.) Such an Order SIAS drawn up, and sent, as is usual
in such eases, for the approval of the law (Alen of the
crown, who at the end of the month returned it with the
answer that there were legal difficulties in the say, in con-
sequence or the limited power given by the act of parking
such an order. On that ground alone was the order in
council set aside. (Hear) Feeling that the matter might be
misrepresented, the bishop called on the commissioners to
repress, their opinion on the subject; and at a meeting of
the Giant, at which the Archbishop of Canterbury was
prebend a, chairman. a resolution was drawn up and
to, to thee diet that the bishop, having been under noir:We!
tion, legal or otherwise, to deal with the Horfield estate
differently from any other estate of hisser., and having made
with regard to it a most !item' offer, the board had besek
anemia. to avoitiall needle's delay iu bringing the negcseillidea
to a clew. (Hear.) The enflaming charge' was that es ibe
dropping of the last life the bishop hail renewed the lease bt
a way ilk which be had said he would never do. Now, if Ids
right rev. friend had evaded the law by selling it to a
second party In • way to allow him to transform it into a
lease for three lives, then he would hare doss the thing
with which he had been charged ; but, to peeves* tint, be
had pat the name' of his secretary in the leans, rettlodsg
hi. own hands full power to Carry on these improvements
which teem the first it hail been his object to effect, and had
already laid out a large sum in enfranchising the cupyhuld.
la order to avoid soy reproach of graoping at income. he
nave up his legal claim to what he held in ivasetendain to
an amount equal to what he retained. (Hear) On this
point it had bevn remarked that what be held io ton nte tufa ;es
was mil)y for his own life, and that it would not benefit his
children to the same extent as the renewal of the lease.
The to nu. which his right rev. friend had stipulated for in
hos ne goteasion with the conareesioness was t 1,5011., and he
had seeidentally learned the way in which he proposed to
apply that amount. It appeared that he had engaged to ad-
vance a sum of 5,000 f. for the erection of a college at Bristol,
mended it we-re repaid to his children. Circumatances
occurred which rendered it problematical whether his
ehildnm would receive it, and in case they did not he pr
posed that of the 11,5001. the sum of 5,00111. should go tell
family, and 6.500/. to endow small livings in the di
ueses e(
Bristol. (Ikar.) Such was the answer he had to
to the charge brought against his right reverend trio:ad. In
a letter which his right reverend friend had written to him
he stated that unsler presento, circumstanceswith hree.p,shvotultod nhOtis
ester upon any promise or vav
particular view. and intentions on the subject. " These,"
said his right hun. friend. " must he inferred from what I
hare already dune. Spedensur nyriesio. True, I have ulte-
rior views; but I will not at present make any engagement
with regard to them ; for if I were to do so it would be
attributed to teasel him wbo,perfor s Infos, is detemiasst