The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-05 00:00:00

POST OFFICE REFORM.

Lord LOWTHER presented a petition, praying for reform in the
management of the Post-office.

NEGRO SLAVERY.

Mr. JAMES presented several petitions from Carlisle, and other
places in Cumberland, for the immediate emancipation of the negroes.
Lord LOWTHER presented a petition to the same effect.
PRISON DISCIPLINE (SCOTLAND.)

Mr. GORDON presented a petition from the landholders, &c., of
Aberdeen, against the Bill for the improvement of Prisons and Prison
discipline in Scotland.
REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES BILL

Mr. BELLEW gave notice (as we understood) of a Bill to amend cer.
tain parts of this Bill.

CHURCH ENDOWMENTS.

General SHARPE presented a petition against additional Church
endowments; also a petition for Post-office Reform.

LICENSED VICTUALLERS.

Mr. PHILLIPS presented a petition from the Licensed Victuallers
of Manchester, complaining of the inconvenience to which they were
subjected, in having to go to Liverpool to procure their spirits, &c., and
praying for an extension of the inland bonding system. Also a petition
from Stockport to the same effect.
NEGRO SLAVERY.

Mr. LOWTHER presented petitions from Kirkby Lonsdale, praying
for the abolition of Negro apprenticeship.
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented several petitions from Doncaster,
and other places in Yorkshire, to the same effect.
Lord GEORGE LENNOX presented a petition from the owners and
proprietors of the rivers Dee and Don against the Scotch Salmon Fisheries
Bill.

Mr. BA RNEBY presented a petition in favour of the British Manu.
facturers' Protection Bill.

Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition from Birmingham, pray.
ing for the adoption of Hill's plan for the reduction of portages.
Captain PECHELL presented a petition from an individual residing
at Brighton, complaining of•the aggression of the French fishermen
on the coast of Sussex. He was sorry, although he had given notice
of his intention to present this petition, that none of her Majesty's Mi.
nisters were present, and he begged to state that unless he had assurance
from the Noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs that he was in corn-
municaticin with the French Goveanment on the subject, it was his in.
ten tion to bring the matter before the House.

Mr. F. SHAW presented petitions against the resolutions with regard
to Irish Tithes, proposed by the Noble Lord the Seeretsry for the Home
Depar ment.

Lord DUNCAN presented a petition Qom Southampton for the abo-
lition of negro slavery.
FREEMEN'S ADMISSION BILL.

Mr. WILLIAMS brought in the Freeman's Admission Bill, whicl
was read a first time and ordered to be read a second time.

The Earl of DARLINGTON presented a petition from a parish in
Wilts, praying that all Church property might be applied to Church
purposes.

Mr. L'EAS,.. presented petiti,,ns from Stafford, Stockton, Warrington,
and other places, praying for the immediate abolition of the system of
Negro a;,prenticeship: , _ _ _

Mr. WALKER presented a petition from St. James, Westminster,
against the Wettniinsttr Paving Bill.
IRISH TITHES.

Mr. F,,rgeant JACISON presonted several petitions from various
parts of Iroiand, praying for an equitable adjustment of the Tithe
system ; alas for Us? immediate abolition of Negro Slavery.
Lora SANDON presehtcd a petition from Liverpool againEt the
Copyright Bill.

CANADA.
•
Mr. HUME gave notice that on tueßlay the Bth, he should move fur
copies of the several Acts of the Legislature of Upper Canada, in the last
SeAsion, the preservation of peace, and for, the trial of persons for
imurrectinn in that province, stating the dates on which the several
i;ilis received the Royal Assent ; also for a return of the number of per-
sons arrested :Or high treason, and the dates of the arrest. The Hon.
Memler a'so moved for certain returns relative to the revenues and ex-
penditure of the Duchy of Cornwall.
BENEFICES PLURALITY BILL,

Lard JOHN RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day fora Committee
o❑ this 11i:1, previous to which he stated, in answer to a question from
Lord Ash•ey, tl.at he intended to introduce into the Factories' Regular
Lion Bill, the Clauses in the present Act regarding Education.—(Hear.)
Mr. till ME said before rite House went into Committee on this (the
Benefices Pluralities BA!), he wished to state why he considet ed it would
not have the good effects it was intend: d to produce. the Chinch Com-
mission had not produced any really efficient measure of Church reform.
He would show in the clearest manner that it was the duty of Parliament
to take the entire management of the Church out of the hands of the
clergy who had abused the trust reposed in them. He had alwa s
stated that one of the greatest blemishes in the Church of
Englm.'d was pluralities, and the second was non-residence. Every
elergymail in his opinion ought to be resident in the parish' over
which he was appointed the spiritual pastor. From the first month he
was in Parliament he had suggested the propriety of abolishing
pluralities. It was trot his wish to meddle with existing in-
terests, but as it.was apparent to all that the Church had b.cn
mismanaged, something ought to be done to remedy it. He
found by a Parliamentary paper that the total number of benefices in
England was 10,971. Of that number 5,425 were non-residents,
and the total number of residents amounted to 5,146. By another
Parliamentary Paper it would be seen that there were exemptions from
residence; that was, taking public money and doing nothing for it, 2,255 ;
absence by licence, 1,704; sinecures and others, 450'; and absent from
duty without license or exemption, 1,016. Out of all these non-residents
it was but fair to say there were a certain number who did duty in one
parish, leaving the Pluralities to take care of themselves. Of that slumber
there were 1,466. The number who did religious duty connected
with their livings was 6,792 out of 10,791. Nov he had asked
what was the reason that all did not do their duty, and he was told
that the reason was because in certain places they had but
small incomes. The father of a Noble Lord now in the House (he
meant the Earl of Harrowbe), seven and twenty years ago introduced
a Bill for the purpose of giving Curates a proper- maintenance.
The House ought to recollect, that with the increase of population the
Bishops, and those who had the direction of the Established Church,
were bound to guard against the want of room, of which there were now
so many loud complaints; and as they had by every census proof
not to to doubted of the increase of the population, it was their duty
to add to Church accommodation in proportion to the increase of the
population. In 1812 the population was 10,300,000, but now
it was 15,000,000. Since the passing of Lord Harrowby's Bill
there had been an increase in the population of 4,700,000. Through
the negligence of the Church dissent had increased.—(Hear, hear.)
In 1812 the Dissenting chapels amounted to 4,302; in 1836 to
8,400, of which the Presbyterians had 197, Independents 1,850,
Baptists 1,231, Wesleyans 2,870, Ranters—(A laugh)-920, and
others 1,405. Now a Reverend Lecturer, Doctor Chalmers,
had stated recently that the desire of man for religious instruction was
not so strong as for other information, and that therefore an Establish-
ment was necessary to force religious instruction upon men. This he
(Mr. Hume) denied ; and he contended that in all ages and countries,
men had an anxiety for the performance of religious rites. The Rev. Dr.
wes an economist :except on one point—that of an Establishment ; and
just as many were advocates of free trade, or all subjects except those on
which they were interested, so the Rev. Doctor supported free-trade
in every thing but religion. The Honourable Member went on to
cite the authority of St. Paul in the Epistle to the Thessallonians
against pluralities—" He that will not work neither shall he eat."
and thought that that inspired writer must have foreseen the evils of
the present days, for he there guarded those he addressed against all
pluralities. Bishop Burnett likewise denounced those practices, which
he designated the scandalous practices of non-residence and pluralities.
They had it stated that the net annual revenue of the beneficed clergy
wa5.3,004,7011., and. this without including fees or Easter offerings;
but hs would have no hesitation in saying it was fully four millions
sterling.. Was it not, therefore, evident that abuse in the application
of its funds, geed not a want of means, was the real evil of the Church ?
Of benefices under 1501. per annum there were 2,017 ; between 100/.
and 2001, per annum, 730 ; between 2001. and 300/., 893 ; and above
300 e, 1,385 ; while ten Bishops alone had 70,0001. amongst them.
The numbee of beneficed Clergy was 10,000, while there were
5,230 Curates ; and of these 3,438 resided on the benefices of non.
residents. Of these, 2,019 were under 1004 incomes ; 103 were
receiving from 101. to 40/. per annum; 1,441 from 40/, to 801. ;
1,085 item 801. to 1504 It was not fit that those gentlemen should
be left thus unprovlded for. But it would be said, the livings
were so small pluralities were required to make them amount to
en)•thing ; but by a return lately made to the House it would
be ,ecn that the majority of the pluralities was in the high livings.

Ey that return it appeared that the number of clergy holding livings,
one of whic.ti was under .501. and the other under 2001. per annum, was
only 98; of those holding livings, one under 1001. and the other under
2001., there wet e 447; and of those one of whosa livings was under
1501. and the other' under 2001., there were 352. The number of those
whose livings both exceeded 2001. were 643; while there were 353
holding three livings, 5 7 holding four, awl three holding five. By this
return, also, he found that 4,6(:8 were without parsonages or any place
of living. Within the last two years, notwithstanding their profes-
sions, the number of pluralities continued by the Ministers of the Crowns
was shameful, and showed that the remedy was incurable unless the
House took it out of their hands. There were 952 livings la the pa-
tronage of the Crown, 1,248 in the hands of the Archbishops and
Bishops, 787 in those of the Deans and Clsapters, 1,x+.551 ;its the disposal
of the other dignitaries, 751 in the Collegel and hospitals, 53 in corpo-
rations, and'' ,096 in private individuals. Within the past two years
there had been 25 pluralities created by the Crown, end 40 singa<e AP-
poiiitmeo ts. The Hon. Member concluded by moving that it he an in.
struction tc; the Committee to provide against the appointment in pinra-
iltY to any benefice of cathedni.l preferment from and after the pasting
of this Bill.

Lord RUSSELL said it could not Le necessary for him to enter at
length upon this proposition. The Hon. Member for Kilkenny, it
seemed to him, had applied a considerable ,t)ortion of his speech in
answer to Et. Chalmers.—(Laughter.) The Nob: e Lord restryed to the
Report of the Church Commission, which stated wit.' respect t.;) /mall
livings, that 1,922 benefices were under 1001., and 3,5-28. under ,44,7,
•
To many of these benefices there were no glebe houses, ana he did nut
think in the case of so many small livings it would be expe,,ieut to
abolish them altogether. The Hon. Member was desirous of t....king
money from the large livings to add to the small. The Noble Lord I
could not consent to take the Bill on those terms, because a proposi-
tion of that sort would excite great discontent among the clergy. In
many instafices great objection had been made to the alienation of
livings. Under all the bearings of the question the Noble Lord opposed
the instruction to the Committee which the Hon. Member submitted to
the House.

Sir It. INGLIS said it was his misfortune to have fieard only a part
of the sptech of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny—(A laugh)—but to such
part ache had heard, he hoped the House would allow him to advert
briefly. The first proposition of the Hon. Membeewas that those who had
five livings (according to a return moved for by an Hon. Member), had
plundered the Church and left the working clergy to starve. That was
certainly a conclusion he could not sanction. Did the Hon. Member
understand the value of many of these livings held by one person ? He
xernembexed a case irn which six livings were held-by one clergyman,
but the whole •value al' them was no more than 300/, a year. The next
preposition .wldressed to the House was a scheme to raise the incomes
derived from small livings by taking from larger livings. The House
had no right whatever to interfere with or touch advowsons in the man-
ner described by the Hon. Member. It was possible the sale of advow-
sons might not he legal, at least, some doubts had been entertained on
that question ; but they had no right to take away the advantage which
any person might have derived from the purchase of an advowson a
Garraway's, or any other public sale. He had stated on a former occa.

THE SUN, LONDON, S

sion his sentiments. No man could deny that a resident clergy was
very desirable, and the question then became, whether or not the prin-
ciples of this Bill would accomplish the object. In his opinion that could
only be attained by sacrifices of higher objects of consideration.
Mr. HAWES said he considered that Church property was trust
property, and the public had a right•to see that it was properly disposed
of. The public had a right not only to see by whom the duties of the
livings should be performed, but to see that these duties were performed
proper*.

Sir H. VERNEY supported the Bill, and opposed the amendment.
The Bill, he said, would be a great blessing to the country, and the
amendment of his Hon. Friend would defeat the Bill.

The Gallery was then cleared and the House divided, when there
appeared—

For the amendment
Against

107
Majority —7O
On our re-admission, we found the House in Committee on the Bill.
Upon the proposition that in the second clause the word "two" should
be inserted, with a view of giving archdeacons two benefices,
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON said he should oppose the proposition.
The Committee then divided, when the numbers were—
For the original proposition... 7l
Against it
Majority
The blank was then filled up with the word " two."
Clause the second was then agreed to.
In the third clause, in which a blank had been left, to be filled up by
the specification of the highest amount of revenue to be enjoyed by any
archdeacon possessing another benefice,

Lord J. RUSSELL having moved that in the blank the sum of
1,0001. should be inserted,
Mr. HUME said that he would oppose that proposition, as he intended
to move the insertion of the sum of 500/.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the insertion of 1,000/.
Against it
Majority —2l
Mr. HUME proposed to add to the clause—" Provided such living be
not more than fifty miles from the Cathedral."
Mr. GOULBURN opposed the motion.
Lord F. EGERTON said the Hon. Member for Kilkenny did not take
into consideration the expeditious travelling by railroads.—CA laugh.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said the incumbent could not be more than five
months absent from his benefice, and therefore he did not think it of
much importance what the distance from the cathedral was.
The clause was agreed to.
On clause four being read,

Mr. RIPPON said there were 2,000 curates performing the duties of
'pluralists. An end should be put to this trading in religion—this pros-
titution of the service of God for the purposes of gain.—(Hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman moved an addition to the clause " That no clergyman
should accept a second benefice, unless its income was insufficient to
support a minister."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said by the Bill livings held in plurality
must not be more than ten miles asunder :—at present liirings might be
held forty-five miles asunder: that alteration would probably diminish
the present number of pluralities to one-fourth. Cowper, the poet, in
a letter to the Rev. Mr. Unwin, gave his opinion that he might .2on-
scientiously accept a second living, as it was not more than ten miles
distant from the one he held, and he could therefore superintend the
religious instruction of the people. He should adhere to the clause of
the Bill.

Sir E. SUGDEN-said the present clause related only to distance, and
the Hon. Gentleman who moved the amendment could not introduce in
it a quest:on of value, It was evident he.had no plan by which to at-
tain his object.

Mr. WALLACE objected to all pluralities. In Scotland, he ob-
served, that as soon as a clergyman looked for temporal emolument he
became a less efficient minister.

The question was put that the'words be added, and negatived without
a division.

Mr. PRYME then moved, as an amendment, the omission of the
words " distance of ten miles from," and the substitution of the worils
" contiguous to."

Mr. GREEN opposed the amendment, which, he contended, would
not meet the contemplated object.

After a conversation, in which several Hon. Members took a part;
the amendment was withdrawn. •

Co?mei SILITIIORP then moved. to fubMitute the words " fifteen
miles" for" ten miles." •

Lord J. RUSSELL opposed the amendment, ten miles had been
unanimously agreed to as a re..smable distance by the Commissioners,
and he could not consent to the present proposition.

. .
The amendment was negatived without a division, and the clause
was agrced to.
On clause five,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, as it had been suggested to hlm by the
Hon. idember for Killtenny and by many other persons, that a joint
value woul.l be better than a separate one, be would, therefore, move
that the fulbwing mortis be substituted, " and be it enacted that any
spiritual person holding a benetieL, may hold another within the above_
mentioned distance, provided the .amount of souls does not exceed
3,000. and the joint value not exceed 1,0004"

After a few words from Mr. Hum and Mr. EVANS, the amendment
was a&r.,c(l to. The clause was also agreed to.
Clauses Ii and 7 were then agreed to. .
On claltise 8 (against allowing dispensations,)
Mr. GLADSTONE opposed the clause; he thought it ought to be
omitted, and should therefore resist it.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he could not agree to the omission
of the clause. •

After a sbott conversati^n, in which Mr. GoutatTax, Sir R.
&c., took part, the Committee divided,
The liumbers were.
For the Clause
Against it
MajOrity for the Clause ----i22_
Mr. LAW, on clause 9, morel the omission of the words as to Cst.
sthedral refertnents, and to add that the clause shall not be construed
to prevent any persons who, at the time of passing the Bill, shall be in
the actual possession of two benefices from resigning one of such bene-
fices, west from taking another in lieu thereof, &c.
Mr. HUME hoped that the suhjcct would be well considered before
such j,..lThing and exchanging were allowed.
Lord .1. RUSSELL Said that he must resist the proposition on the
ground tint it broke in upon the principle of the Bin, without pr,:ducing
any corresponding advantage.

Sir E. SUGDEN submitted that thy; amendment would only be the
admission of an exception ; it might produce advantage—it could be of
no disadvantage.
Mr. HAWES hoped that the original clause would not be omitted;
according to returns lately made there were upwards of 2,000 pluralists.

After a desultory conversation, in which Sir It. INGLJS, &c., took
part, the gallery was cleared for a division.
The numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority . . —56
The clause was agreed to; also causes 10, 11, 12, 13, 14; 15, 16,
17, and 18.
Clause 1!) was postponed, and also clause 20.
The House resumed. The Committee to sit again on Monday.
SUPPLY.

The !rouse resolved into a Commit,ee of Supply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the sum of
20,04-1,530/. be granted to her Majesty for the payment of outstand.
ing sums.