The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-09 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY

EVENING,

JUNE 9, 18.52,

Mr. YORKE—That is denied by Mr. Crtittvrell.
-- Ssrßriffittli--It was denied-by-Mr:-Miller, but stated by
Mr. Cruttwell. • But. this was not the real question at;
ssue.
The real question was, what were they to do in these lament-
able circumstances? In his district there was a Protestant'
..clergyman who, althongh•performing Divine service in the
Church of England, attended a Roman Catholic place of
worship Sunday'after Sunday. A gentleman who sawto hire
.declared his' readiness to come forward and verify tho
that he crossed himself, made the various genuflexions, and
remained during the whole time of service ;. that he went
there again the following Sunday, and'- yet that • man per-
formed Divine service in the church °ESL Andrew's, Wells-
street.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") It was said, why did
they not* go into the ecclesiastical Court of Wells ?
But would anybody,, under such circumstances, go there,
when the Bishop had just appointed his own son to preside
over it. He believed 'Sir. Bennett had keen the means of
converting many persons to the• Church of Rome. - Did the
Hon..Geetlernan not know that, connected with the- church .
of St: Barnabus was a conventual establishment, and that
the daughter of a Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman, once
a Member of that House, was at the head of that establish.;
meat—that the father of the lady had begged of Mr. Bennett-,
to use hii influence-and 'endeavour to induce her to retrace -
her steps ? And did he, not know that that Rev. Gentle-
lain, who was,nnly the
.pastor of From, had refuted tnlisten
to the prayers d the parent; and that.the,daughter,. and all
the ladies associated with her, had gone Ord to the Church
of Rome.--(Hear, hear.)..., Did not Lord Colchester cite the
case of another lady where a similar result had taken place ?.. ,
This man had' been proved to have been , trifling for some
time with 'Sir John Harrington, of whom .they had begin
told by,the ,Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for the
Univeraity of (ford, that he had been justified, in leaying
the Church of England, because he had a congregation of.
his own—_ _ _

Mr. GLADSTONE said that lie had distinctly contra-
dicted that statement before.
Sir B. HALL wad not aware that the Right Hon. Gentle-
, man had done so, or. he would nop have made the observa-
tion. He would ask .the Right Hon. Gentlenian (Mr. Glad-
stcne) to say candidly what ought to be done under such
circumstances? Let the Bishops, who were the persons that
ought to be most, desirous of reforming the ecclesiastical law
of the country, exert themselves in their places in the other
House of:Parliament to effect this object. The Government
,had.intimated that even if they appointed a Commission to
inquire.into this subject, the Bishops would not answer the
questions that would be put to them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—No, no. . •

Sir ;B. HALL—WeII, then, let them have a Committee,
and request the Bishops to appear before it, and if they then
refused to do so the responsibility would be on themselves.
Mr. E. YORKE wished to make an observation in refer-
ence to thezning lady who had been alluded to by the Hon.
Baronet. His imPression was this, that the young lady her-
self was always restrained by Mr. Bennett from going her own
way to the Church of Rome.—(Laughter,) He thought
that his word was as good as that of the Iden. Baronet's.
The report then was, that the young lady. had a strong, in-
clination to go to Rome, but was restrained, up to a certain
Oita, by,Mr. Bennett. But as sown as Mr. Bennett left St.
She went to Roine.(Efear and laughter.)
NEWDEGATE next rose, amid loud cries for a divi-
sion. He thanked the Hon. Member for Cockerniouth for
the very able manner in which he had brought this subject
Under the notice of the House. Whatever might be the re-
sult of the division, he ,trusted that one good effect of bring-
iug forwardthe subject would be to lead to an alteration in
the state of the existing law, and he was anxious to hear
from her Majesty's Grovernment,whether they were prepared
to consider the state of the 'law in the next session, and to in-
troduce some measure which would prevent men from hold- '
ing benefices in the Church of England who had been con-
victed of unsound doctrines and the encouragement of Romish
practices.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—This
discussion, Sir, has tended very much to, clear the case since
it was brought under the notice of the House. We have com-
tely investigated the position of the Bishop of Bath and
WWells with respect to these circumstances, and -I think I
do not misinterpret the general feelings of the House if I
describe it as one which would be extremely reluctant, by
any -vote which it could arrive at, to throw any censure upon
the conduct of-that prelate.—(Hear. and cries of ".Oh, oh,”)
It may be certainly very easy for Honourable Gentlemen to
sneer at thatstatement ; but I think after a calm and ample
discussion, so ably conducted as this has been, we must ar-
rive at the conclusion that however many of us may regret
the institution of the individual who has become the vicar
of Frome, it is impossible for us to assert, by a vote of this
House, that it was the duty of the-Bishop of that diocese to
prevent' that. institution; nay more, I think that we have,
most of us, arrived at 'this conclusion, that had the Bishop
of the diocese thrown any--difficulties in the way of the in-
, stitution of, Mr. Bennett, he would have incurred very
perilOus. conseqhenCei. In the . present state of the law, I
think it quite impossible that the House, should come to
any vote which would in fact cast upon 'a Bishop of the
'Church of England a condemnation, simply 'because he has
done that which ill niust admit to have been strictly his
legal duty, and which if he had not fulfilled would have
involved him In the most serious injury. I consider
the question of the conduct. of the Bishop of Bath
and ..Wells to be perfectly distinct from those which have
occurred with -respect to the present vicar of ironic.— i
(Hear, hear.) But at the same time I cannot but remember
that it is only the conduct of the Bishop with which we have
to deal.--(Hear, hear.) When this question was first brought
under the notice of the House, I took the liberty of stating
with respect to the point of the ability which the parishtonera
of Frome should have of challenging the institution of one
who was to become their vicar, that if the state of the law did
not afford a remedy. then, -I thought, it was our duty to
supply one. Generally speaking, that is a principle which I
think ought tai guide us under these. most painful circum-
stances. I cannot think, with the Hon. Gentleman .the
Member for the city. of Oxford, that there is no remedy for
the parishioners. I must- still repeat, acting on the opinions
that have been given me, and confirmed by my own in-
quiries—the opinion I have expressed before in this House,
that there is a remedy for the parishioners of any living

placed under the circumstances in which the parishioners of
From.° are placed, and that that is a remedy for ' which they
need not go to any ecclesiastical court, or have recourse to any
ecclesiastical law. But I will not'enter into that question again,
which we bave boforo tirgad, boonutse I Am willing to admit
that there is not sufficient facility or opportunity for parish-
ioners placed in the situation of those of Frome to obtain
that relief and redress which they have a right to expect..
But so far as the present motion is concerned, it is' really
the institution of Mr. Bennett into the vicarage—and that
is the act of the diocesan—which we are called on to inquire
into. I mast repeat my opinion that the coneuct of the
Bishop of Bath and Wells cannot fairly be called in ques-
tion. But if we were to appoint a Committee, let the 'House.
consider what will be the duties of that Committee. Their
duties would not be, I apprehend, to rake up evidence with
a view to institute proceedings against the Bishop. Well,
then, what is the duty of that Committee ? Is it to be a
Committee to consider the state of the law? In my opinion
this is hardly the moment in
.which we should appoint a
Committee to consider the state of the law with respect to
the institution of persons into beneficies, and which cer-
tainly Ido not think a Committee of the House of Com-
mons the best instrument to carry on with effect. I have
been asked by my Hon. Friend the Member for Warwick-
shire to give a pledge on the part of the Government that
they will take into consideration that important subject, the
state of the law with respect to the institution to benefices. I
am sure my Hoa. Friend will not press me to give a pledge on
a subject of so grave and difficult a character. But that it is
a subject which ,must engage, sooner or later, the considers.
tion of any Government—that the state of our ecclesiastical
laws is one that cannot be mach longer tolerated—(Loud
cheers)--4nd that with respect to the ecclesiastical courts, we
should follow the same course• of temperate and efficient
reform which we have applied to all the other means of judi-
cature in the country—these, I think, are opinions which
few of us do not share, and-certainly they are sentiments on
which the Government are prepared to act. I trust the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Cockermouth will not ask
the House to come to a decision on this motion. If indeed
he persists in so doing, although I myself most sincerely re-
gret much that has occurred at the vicarage of Frome, and
although. 1 will not at this moment go oat of my way to
offer any criticism on the conduct of other individuals con-
cerned' in these transactions, because I feel it is unneces-
sary to-night, especially when the conduct of one individual
alone is ealled in question—still, if the Hon. Gentleman
asks me to support this resolution to appoint a Committee to
investigate the conduct of the Bishop of Bath and Wells,
with respect to hiscompletion of an act which I do not think
he could have refused to fulfil, I shall feel it my duty to offer
a negative.-4 Cheers.)
. gr. ELLICE said he saw all the difficulties of the cam—
bia saw all the objections to the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee—(Hear, hear}-but he could see no other remedy for
the grievaucecomplained of—(Hear, hear)—except an in-
codry-7not. directed personally against the conduct of the
Bishop of Bath and 'Wells., but into all thefacts of the case,
in;order to, ground thereon further proceedings with respect
to the state .of ,the law,— (Hear) —which gave no relief to
parties complaining of this grievance.—(Hear, hear.) Upon
this ground he should vote for the motion, seeing no other
meani of redress.-.--(Hear, hear.)
Au.. MOODY thought that if an inquiry was instituted
into the occurrences in London it would be trying Mr. Ben-
nett twice ,over. Ans question: they had to deal with was
not, an. individual .qaestion,, but was one as regarded the
Church at large. It Appeared to him that there was a
very easy remedy in such cases as
.the one complained of.
He thought a Commission might be:issued with reference to
what had taken place abroad, as well as to what had oc-
curred at home.—(Hear, hear.)
The SOLICITOR•GENERAL said there was nothing in
ptigned the conduct of Mr. Bennett.
the
_motion which ha
It
.was. for an inquiry into the circum-
(Hear, hear.)
tution and was directed entirely
against Attending I"ltiand Walls Y
—(Hear, hear.) The
against the Bishop °.'
nßilitthe institution, had only done
Bishop, however', IW-al-beand to do ; and as far as he
what by law he
was concerned, therefore, there was no ground for the in-
quiry. ',Then as to the state of the law some misconception
existed, for if it were proved that Mr. Bennett, by preach-
ing or teaching, by act or word, showed unsoundness of
I was competent for the parishioners to
i-the
doctrine,under the Church Disco) me
law in motion against him
Act—(lfear, hear.)—and even as to his past conduct
commission weld issue in respect of anything
hear
a ° country within two years past.--(Hear, .
said
Looking, however, to the state of the ecclesiestical courts
co o
hear)—to the practice of those urts,
the. country—( He
metimes xcessive—incurred in the
and the p was loudly
Hear, heear)—a remedy.
justest proceedings--(xense—(Hear, hear.) It would be impossible to enter
called for.
into that inquiry now, but he hoped that the reform
whichhad taken °place in our courts of law andequity
would at the proper time belextended_to„the ecclesiastical
courts.--Ole%'•
DDO ted at, the answer of the
CliManr.cej?lor4rEeliVe Ewstiedisq:e7asilito fu.ture legislation-7-(He.
it of the Solicit or-General as tO the
hear),.-and'fbe sOgec encouraged any' hope of
state of • the taw, which had not
being done to place it in a more-satisfactory con.
Bd°itniething
ion.....(ilear, hear.) It wash own that the law was in-
accessible to individuals, and that,Htheerreefgorreet,tseoamtehtheisntgatwe aosf
necessary to •b d (Hear.)
which )ad been disclosed as to the position of the
things He was anxious to put an end to it,
Church—( Hear.
e time was anxious not to impute blame to
and at the ear
H ) But, as there was no hope
any party utuustly( ear• .
of any at of the law, he must, in order to promote
ect to, vote for the motion.—(Hear.)
this, obi
ur EY HERBERT could, not express how strongly
sin by the statements that had been made. He
he wt.s pained
was satisfied that the uestion before them should be strictly
oinftrood,_and
h that members of the Church should have
lookedea s
ress without the necessity of coming to that
House, which was
not well suited for questions of the kind.
hear.) The Bishop. of Bath and Wells, it was clear,
could not have refused the induction, without risking an
at law for his refusal.
notiona,. WALPOLE begged to be permitted to address one
word to the House inconsequence of what had fallen from
Hon. Member fur West Kent (Mr. Deedes).. That, Hop.
the he thought, had entirely mistaken the reply of
Oentleinae•
his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to
the appeal of the Hon, Member for Uockermanth. The in-
quiry would have been acceded to fit4iwat
obreepQrl pytletztryas
suggested by the Right HonOurftble
cur. g,
,Ltut" risen he, (1.41 Avolvie), ;elected
.lA`.l

.; ---

, -
t I uo q