The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1803-06-15 00:00:00

I?.

{PRICE SIXPENCE

Earl Radnor. The Clause passed with one or two
verbal amendments.
The nest clause, that authorizing spiritual pervms
to take houses, though not in any city; and spiritual
persons not having sufficient glebe, by licence of the
Bishop, gave rise to a very long and copious .ditcul/4-
sion.

The Duke of NORFOLK said, he had no ob-
jection to suffering spiritual persons, who chose to
lay down their clerical character, to turn farmers—
but then he would move an amendment, viz. after
the words " spiritual person," in tare second line of the
claUse, to insert the words, " having no cure of
souls."
This called up the Lord CHANCELLOR. who
gave a very perspicuous explanation of the true in-
tent and meaning of the clause, which did not say
one word to authorise spiritual persons to turn far-
mers. He said, he perceived that the Noble Duke
had utterly misconceived the whole clause and its
real objed, which arose from hit Grace's not
knowing that what is understood by lawyer', by the
words " to take to farm," is not to turn farrier, but
to have and to hold in farm, meaning the power to
demise, and the expression of "to to take to farm," is
taken from the Latin tenere infirm ana. According
to the 2! Henry VIII. a clergyman could not take
a house with garden and orchard in any village, for
his residence, without being subject to the penalties
of that Al, and therefore it was necessary to give
the power of taking such residence to every spiritual
person with licence of the Bishop.
The Duke of NORFOLK said, he saw he had
mistaken the clause, and desired to withdraw his
Amendment.
Amendment on motion withdrawn. The di,-
cussion on the clause was then considered for a
considerable time, by the Bishop of Durham, the
Bishops of Oxford, Norwich, and London, and
Lord Auckland, Lord Alvanley, the Earl of Ross.
lyn, the Earl of Caernarvon, the Eerl of Carlisle,
Lord Ellenborough, the Duke of Richmond, and
the Lord Chancellor.
The Earl of CAERNARVON objeCted to lodg-
ing the power of granting the licence to the Bishop:,
or to any descriptions of persons whatever. He ea
not mean to say this out of disresped to the Bishops.
nor to convey any insinuation of their being likely to
exercise any discretion, that might be lodged in heir
hands, in any other but the most honourable man-
ner ; but it was the principle that he ohjaled to,
and the possibility of such a power being abused
and perverted to political or other purposes.
The Earl of CARLISLE wished some sca:le
of the extent to which the Bishop should exercise
such discretion.
The Bishop of DURHAM proposed a maximum,
which should limit the extent' of the exercise, if a fit
one could be found—or if not, a minimum, below
which the Bishops should not allow their clergy to
take additional lands to cultivate. His Lordship
returned his thanks to the noble and learned Lcrd
for the luminous explanation of the clause which
he had favoured the Committee with, and assured
all the Lords present that he himself (and he was
sure he spoke the sense of his learned brethren)
would infinitely rejoice if Ite was invested with
limited and defined discretion, than with an n: li-
mited discretion, which was an invidious power,
and must put them to much inconvenience, at the
same time that it would provoke the envy and ar-
ger of their Clergy, let their endeavours to ext../ -
else it be ever .59 impartial.
The Bishop of NORWICH proposed a limita-
don, by a scale of estimation of the livings of the
inferior Clergy, and he would take them rather
largely, at 1001. for instance, to afford the Bishop
the greater latitude as to the quantity of additional
land, that he should licence his Clergy, according
to the nature of the c ne, to elite in farms. His
Lordship objeated to any limitation by the number
of acres, because from the great variety of the soil,
and the richness or poverty of the land, in different
parts c.f the kingdom, and in different parts of the
same diocese ; twenty acres in one part or place,
might be of eely different value to what it might
be in another. 'the Bishop concluded with moviree
an amendment, founded on the proposition which
he had statcd.
Every Bishop who spoke expressed a wish to have
the discretion they were to exercise, as to the power
of granting the licence under this chaise put under
sonic limitation ; and 'said, that in ri!spe:t to the
discretion in the clause, the clause itself was a
soe-
tary one, as in every other clause due limitatiLes
were provided.

Some Noble Lord proposed to limit the Bishop%
licence to twenty acres, some to thirty, and some
to forty.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought it was unjust
that the power of taking farms was not extended
to stipendiary Curates and the unbeneficed Clergy.
as well as to bmeficed Clergy. His Grace spoke
at some length on this.
Lord ELLVNBOROUGH professed himself to
have been much struck with the arguments of the
Noble Duke, and thought the Noble Duke's sug-
aestion emitled to very serious consideration.
The LORD CHANCELLOR could not think
that any wise or proper limitations could be pro-
vided, or that the clause would be altered with am-
advantage whatever. If the Committee would now
agree to it, under the understood idea that it was in
another, stage to be reconsidered, he would endea-
vour to reconcile his mind to such an alteration of
it, as so many other Noble Lords seemed to approve.
Lord ELI.ENROROUGH undertook to frame
some amendments that would meet the obje,l3ns
which had been stated by different Noble Lords, if
the Committee would agree to receive the clause.
The Duke of RICHMOND said, that a mere
proper way of proceeding would be, not to adopt a
clause which they all thought ought to undergo far►
then consideration at another time, bat to postpoule
the clause, and he moved it accordingly.
The Earl of SUFFOLK objected to the laat
part of the next clause, that of enabling spieitital
persons to bold lands and estates as property in t:-•
mallow herein provided, at hi Imo Perinar*.t:

%