The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-04-26 00:00:00

ST. °LAVE'S TITHES:

Mr. CA IfCRA FY;aid7inii he held.; petition in his hand from
the churchwarden, and inhabitant, of the parish of St. Olave, pray.
Me the interference of the House towards the adjustment of ear.
tain claims for tither of the Rector upon the pariah. The Hon.
Member, apparently from the effects of a cold, was rather inau-
dible. We understood •.im to say that he was anxious that no
measures should be taken on the subject of dispute between the
Rector and parishioners of St. Olave before next Session, when he
trusted, after the example of St. Andrew's Holborn, an adjustment
might be aceomplirhed. The parishioners were willing to give the
incumbent in futurity •1,21K11 per annum, while the claim set up
was for LAW per year. The present Rector had, he believed.
consented to accept the sum of 1,2410/. The germ difference was
between what was now allowed the incumbent, and what would be
granted to the future incumbent of the parish. The parishioners
offered 1.2001. a-year, which they thought would be the full value
of the tithes, and an adequate remuneration for the performance of
the duties of the parish. The duties were performed by a Curate
for 1001. a year. The Rector let nut his house for offices, and the
attendance required was very slender. As lie hoped that an ad-
I jurtment would take place between the parties interested, he would
merely move that the petition be brought up.
Mr. Alderman BRIDGES complained of the hardships to
which the parishioners were exposed in consequence of the dispute
which prevailed. He never knew a parallel case.
Mr. Alderman WOOD said it was quite time that •tha House

THE BRITISH PRESS.

should know the condition of those persons who were under the
operation of the 2s. 9d. Act, as it was called. In the parish of St.
Olave, 1200 A were allowed to the Rector for performing the twee'.
stay religious dun 17,000 inhabitants ; that was unquestion-
ably an adequate rneration for the performance of such duties,
ti hen it was considered that they were unformed by a Cura:e far
100/. a year. Ile thought the sum offered by the parishioners a full
and adequate remuneration.
Mr. fi LIM expressed deep regret that the petitioners were ,
obliged to come again and again before the House, ;11 consequence
of the resistance which was made to au amicable adjustment of the
tithes in question. lie regretted the Right !lon. the Secretary for the
Home Department, who was a staunch friend of the church. was not
then in hfs place: he should be glad to know if that Right Hon.
Gentlemen would consider the quarrels, which appeared in the pub.
lie papers, and which existed in that parish, did honour or cre-
dit to the church. An adjustment had been concluded between
the parishioners and their rector ; but the Bisimpol London dis.
agreed from that arrangement, and thus interposed in a manner
,very unworthy his character instead of being a peacemaker. as
might be expected from his station, he was rather a firebrand, rid
promoter of distort:. (Cries of " Order.") It was unjust, in his
opinion, that by an Act of Henry to which that House had
given its sanction, the parishioners of St. Olave should be so highly
charged fat tithes, when other parishes were charged fid. less in the
pound. When an arrangement had taken place in the parish, to
the satisfaction of the parishioners igtd the rector, he thought it
very hard that an Impediment should he thrown in the way of that
adjnsunent by the intrierence of the Bishop.
Mr. C. W. 1V YNN said, he felt himself called upon to defend
the Right Reverend Prelate, upon whom so violent an attack had
been tpade. It was the duty of the Bishop of London to interfere,
to protect the interests of the future incumbent of the parish. The
present rector could have oo interest in the affitirs of his successor ;
the Bishop; therefore, very properly interfered, without, however,
having any personal Interest lit the subject. The law of tithes was
various: in sonic parishes they were collected by a modus. There
could 1:1;• no injustice done in the present instance, because those
persons bought the property subject to the payment of those tithes,
and were no more entitled to beexempted from them than they
were from the payment of the rent of the tenements they held in
the parishL____ _ _

Mr. DENMAN said tbat In the parish in question the
rector said he was willing to accept 12/. 10s. a year; but
the Bishop of London negatited the arrangement. If tho
Bishop of London did not think that sufficient tits the future in.
cumbent of the parish, he certainly had a right to dissent. In the
parish of which Mr. Beresford was rector, instead of t,s. 9:1. In
the pound, not mare dun IL in the pound was paid. This addl.
tional demand on the parishioners of St. Olave was the more vex.
atious. because the duties were light, and performed at the charge
of 1001. pertnnum ; and another just cause of complaint, in his
opinion, was, that those payments had only been demanded within
a few years.
Mr. W. WYNN said, in reply to some observation of Mr. Den.
man which we did not catch, that the expression he alluded to was
" firebrand."

On the motion that the petition be printed,
Sir. CA LCRAPT said, he thought that. above all things,indivi-
dual allusions should be avoided. The Bishop of London had
done all becould to bring those disputes to an amicable conclusion.
The difficulty in which he Nets placed was, that he did not think
that the future rector sh♦uid receive less than 1.8201. It was the
duty of the Bishop to protect and guard those interests of the fu-
ture incumbent, as it was that of a parent to defend those of his
children. Ile thought the Bishop of London had acted kindly in
the whole matter. Be hoped those parties would be brought to •
fair ndjustment. Ile deprecAted very sincerely the present din-
meted state of the parish. The parishioners were driven from
their parish church in consequence of it, which was in his opinion
a state of things which, if not stopped by an amicable arrangement,
would call for the interference of the House.

Mr. PEEL said he felt astonished that the Hon. Member for
Montrose should have so grossly violated the privileges of Par-
liament as he had done, by the attack he had made upon the Bishop
of London, who was universally respected for his talents and vir-
tue. ; he deprecated such violent language, which was very die-
creditable, and against decency and every propriety ; he should
have protested more strongly against the use of such language, but
that the character of the Rev. Prelate to whom it was applied
stood so high as not to require it. The Bishop of London could
have no inducement but the performance of whet he considered ne-
cessary to interfere in the case; he merely did his duty, and it was
very unfair and illiberal, that for doing his duty he should be
branded with such opprobrious epithets as had been applied to him
by the Hon. Member for Montrose. He (Mr. Peel) knew it was the
anxious wish of the Bishop of London that an adjustment should
take place ; he wished that peace and harmony should be restored to
the parish, and did not despair but that an adjustment would be
effected, which no one should prevent by throwing out unmerited
aspersions on such a character. _

31r. HUME said the parishoners would willingly pay Dr. Owen
1,200/. a ,ear. When he came to examine the statements of the
petition, he did not know how to interpret those statements without
attaching blame to the interference which had been exercised. The
petition. ra stated that they should have come to an adjustment of
those claims but for the interpositioo of the Bishop. They, more-
over stated that those tithes were equal to the entire assessed taxes
of the parish ; and, in his opinion, such conduct did not allow
heirg spoken of in very qualitied terms. lie knew nothing of the
Bishop of London, but, front what he had heard of him, Le be.
hewed Mm to be an amiable man in private life ; he believed him
to be a man of high character. Ile might have expressed himself
too strongly, but, from the representations mode to him by several
of the house-holders and am heart-burnings which extended
through the parish, it was a subject upon which he felt very
strongly ; he thought it was the duty of any Bishop to consult the
wishes of the parish ; he was sorry to have made Any personal
allusion to the Right Reverend Prelate._ (pmers.)