The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-06-09 00:00:00

roVery he directed only against rectorial property ?
If it were necessary to increase the salaries of the
lower orders, why not do so at thezexpenee of the
Bishops, Deans, and Chapters? -It was a petty
feet of offending theni ; and the Bill only armed
them with fresh ir 'wee while it injured the rectors.
who could hart no security for their property,
wheat was in the power of any Bishop to take
soy part of his pruperty he should think fit. Such
at. act of legislatiou must tend to breed feuds
arid animosities amongst the different raiiks of
the eiergy, and must eve itually injure the church
establishment, and the cause of religion. For
what good was the 8..1 enacted ? Who requested it?
Cambridge College caw hostileto it he knew. hens
the child of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who
had published a pamphlet in its supeort. Defied
and the Clergy of London h.td exercise' their dis-
approbation of the Bill by Petitions to Parliament;
and not one city or county had expressed a hope
that it would be adopted. But the Right lion.
Gentlemae derived is support from a set men
hostile to the church establishtnent—the mem-
bers of the Foreign Bible Society--the Society for
the Suppression of Vice—and those dealers in
Missionaries who ',ail nearly overturned the power
of Britain by eteir late coeiluct in India. To
these he was tioeoiledly Averse ; but as the Bill was
almost identified with thu present Bishop of Lon-
don, he had to apprise the House that he had
given late !treat cause of uneasiness to the
.true
friends of the Church, and in particular by • late
gift of a benefice to e Missitetery of Bowers, who
was a ti ewe of Pohuel, and whom it would even
be iseceetee, to qualify :or his thus ion by a form
of that douse. Thi. had placed tlic Bill in rather
a suspicious point of view ; and from the argil-
reeete which he had weed, he found it his duty
to oppose the House goime iuto a Committee.
Mr. lioaetes contended the present Bill was no
' invasion of Church property, arid quoted several
instanees from our history, to whew that such
'hanges often took place, from the time of Richard
the eel. The proper of the Church was in filet
that of the people, and certain relative tie; Of; were
expected to be by them performed to qualify them
for their possession. In the eye of the law there
was another party with respect to Church property,
be tide the iinpropriator and the Curates ; this
was Vie prod' of the parish, who hail an indispu-
tat sight Sr) their services ; and the present Bill
only stile such a proilition for the Clergy es would
triable • ',eta to perfoen with credit epthe Church
those duties of ben. ',Diener and hospitality pre-
sents'! by u religion the. processed.
Mr. Lesseesirros supported tile Rill. It was
not emitted r the tdinintage of Dissenters, and
the Bill was framed to go as fie as any Legi-lative
Aet could go at present for the advani ement of the
inter, es ofthe ('hunch. The eropo lie, of salary
to the Curate was on'e sed proportion to
the value of the Rector's ins inse. This ae a just
principle. At Orlon' he kh iv of no ci imitioti to
it, though he y u there so bee as iast week. 'file
great source of opposit'on to the Bill had beet J e
increase of iufitiene to the nishemi. Tl.. he al-
ways wished to co tateract ; b e, in ie. present
instance be saw no cause of mown, nor were they
partie any alteration le tlit present "ill. lie
had ever objected to the systcei of appeal Com.
;he Ilikop to the A l'hhiLiiev, ofi be conceived
it an appeal rse eadesa ad emsdews. But, from a
conviction that the present Bill would be of emit
' ptstilie advantage, he felt inclined to give it his
whole support.
Mr. W. Suns, not being amemher of the Esta-
blished Church, was afraid almost to say any thing
en the subject. as it seemed to be conitectetl eith
party and religious considerations. some of which
might be conceived to involve himself; but, never-
theless, he felt himself called on to support the
principle set forth by his lien. Friend (Mr.
Creevey), that there should be no remuneration
without reference to labour. He objected strongly
to the increase of the influence of the Bishops,
mud wished that livings. both in the hands of lay
impropriators as well as others, should be placed on
• better foundation. He perfectly absolved the.
Missionaries in India from the crime imputed to
them, and thought the evils there had eirigineted
in the misconduct of those higher in rank and
station.
Lord MILTON opposed the passing of this Bill
into a law. The grand objection he had to it was,
that it gave the most improper influence to the
Bihops, who were altogether dependent on the
Crown, and who would not fail to extend the in-
terests of the Crown, through the medium of the
regular Clergy,ameng the population of the island.
This was an evil of the greatest magnitude. The
:l'utectetdion made by his Hon. Friend, he thought
not to Dissenters in name, but applied
to such as outwardly professed the Established
Church, bat dissented from the true spirit of the
39 Articles, and were the enemies in principle to the
Established Church. The more residents, he be-
Levee, the less would he the member of sectaries ;
but from the peculiar frame of this Bill, he should
propose that the Heuer should go into a Cola-
miter on the Bill, though he should vote against
its passing into u law.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT thought the present an
instance of legislative interference without being
called for. It suggested 110 remedy for the evil it
pointed out. No parishes hart preferred a complaint.
It had been urged, that it was necessary to in-
crease the salaries of resident% yet no proof had
been exhibited of this necessity. The ground on
which the Bill stood was absolutely fanciful and
whimsies! ; it went on a suppotsition of a necessity
which, it appeared, did not exist. It seemed the
Right Hon, Mover had affixed the idea of respect-
ability among the clergy. to the sort of clothes t hev
should wear, or the hospitality of their household.
Poverty had hitherto hero the badge and honour
of our religion ; but opinions had eltaneeds and
it was not now necessary alone that the clergy
should be respectable, but should also he rich,—
The Catholic religion had one established prin-
ciple in it, which bad done much for its secu-
rity and protection from encroachment. Though
the higher orders of their clergy might be possessed
of wealth, the regular and ofiieiating clergy had
01 the inllitenee over the lower order of the men-
mueity, which a similarity of lice and equality of
income must ever give them under any system of
religious government. It was tiOt the wealthy com-
peer of the 'Squire who would be found to posses