The Sun.
London, England, 1825-04-15 00:00:00

IRISH PLURALITIES.

Sir J. NEWPORT rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill
to liMit the power of holding a plurality of benefice's, and to re-
peal the Statutes,. granting to the Archbishops and Bishops the
powerofforming episcopal unions in Ireland. Theonly pretences
held out for the reason of the caw in regard to _unions we*.,
continuity, weight of debt, and inability to meet the expellees.
What. would the-House say to a parish connected With another,
under these powers of union, which were eighteen roiles esuralt
He wished to draw the consideration of the House to this tlueis_
tion; because it was one which involved the well-titig of the
established church in lreland.. It teas right that 0- e bode of the
people in that country who, adhered to the.established
should have the fair means of religious instruction. What be
had tonffer to the House on this subject would be deduced from
the actual statement of the Archbishops and Bishop* of tre'a'd
themselves, contained in the papers laid before the tidvrrnment
on the:state of the church in Ireland. The Primate Of Ireland
stated, that, the union of pal ishes in that country might !mak
amongst the greateat defects of the system by' which. it• was
verned. 'The • episcopal unions, it should be observed, [nigh:
to be distinguished from those. made by the Lord. Lieutenant
and the Privy Council. The former were not placed under the
same restrictions as the latter. if the House would examine
the statements on the subject, which were laid before Parlia-
ment in 1811 and 1820, they would at once perceive the evils
arising from this system. He took the trouble to inqiiire into
thegrounds on which these episcopal unions were, formed, and
he had come to this sonclusion, that there was rihr.in reality *-
statute:allowing Archbishops and Bishops to make them. The;ai
was an Act of Parliament of the reign of Charles 11. which,
gave a semblance of that speciesof power ; hut in, his 'opinion
the construction placed upon that statute was not correct. He'
had also examined into the power exercised on this point by the
Archbishops and. Bishops of England, and he discovered that,
with the exception of the Bishop of Norwich, no sad) authority,
was delegated to the prelates of this country. If such a power
existed at all, it would be more likely to have been. allowed in,
England than in. Ireland, because here it would be more directly
controulled by the force of public opinion. The Right lion.
Baronet then proceeded to allude to the evidence which had,
been laid before Parliament relative to the episcopal,' pions, and-
narrated several cases where the parishes thus united extended.
over a very large tract of country, some of them beitig not less
than eighteen miles distant from eacliootther. . It wasimpossible,
where parishes werethus widely separit;etis
that a Clergyman.
could attend to the duties of both. In one union, three parishes,
were connected 20'thiles long, and nine miles'brved; in another
union, the tract which it comprised was Om i leSlivitg„ The condo ct
of the Archbisho
pi and lii3Oops had therefof#. 'Jaen sefy generally
4, •

et vorhatte with that which they ought-to pursue; for though
Airy made those unions, they must have seen the evils that
arose froin them., In Kilcoolv, six parishes, several miles dis-
tent from each other, were united in 1809. The Hon. Baronet
tine adverted to cases of a similar description, which had tic-
. awed in Roseoinnion and Sligo. In one instance. where, be-
-fere aariah was united to another, there were 16,000 inhabit-
ants, the number was increased by the Union to 22,800. The
Curate of the pariah of sfgle, in the diocess of !'ham, was
called tapir. to ao&iill the duties of that parish, after it had been
united with another Pne of those parishes was 26 miles long,
the other eight (trflee in length. Povernment had, however,
Oinen toit. credin'aivided that 'union into three perishes. The
ereolorvients derjeed!rfrorn them unienit were very great. He
.Iteiew an instance where four parishes were thus united, the
tirit Of which produced stlol. a year, the second, 2801. ; the
.11tierd, 1001. ; and the fourth, 7201.—making an annual revenue
of' 4pwards of 1.5001.. year ; and yet the duties were inefficiently
I)&l4:wilted. The incumbent of one of these unions, is the dio-
ease of Hilmore. held 20,000 acres of land, besides 500 acres of
glebe. The conduct of the present primate had gone a great
way in.reforming this abuse. He first endeavoured to dissolve
al onions within his own power. He disapproved of the rea-
sorisfot which they were first created; but notwithstanding the
meritorious conduct of the ptimate or of any other prelate, he
-4Sir J. Newport) thought the House itself ought to provide by
againet. the recurrence of this evil. Ile conceived that no
faculty should be granted, allowing any individual to hold two
livings; while one was sufficient for his maintenance. He be-
lieved the• Bishops were at present-doing all they could to place
the established church in Ireland on a proper foundation ; hut
he thought the Government ought to put it out of their power
,to grunt faculties for the union of parishes. That power should
orating:l by law to the Lord-Lieutenant and Privy Council.
was aware that if this right of granting faculties were abro-
gated, Dr. Ratcliffe, the present Judge of the Prerogative Court,
w euld suffer a diminution of his income, which in part arose
- feoroloes, paid on Rsuing those faculties. But for the sake of
hat learned gettleman, and for the respectability of the office
-itself, the aituatiohong'nt to be placed on a better footing. At
prestetehesalaey of the .Judge partly consisted of fees ; and he
thnught it indecent that any person holding such an office
should be partly paid by tees and partly by a fixed salary. If
the reform which he (Sir John Newport) recommended in the
church took piece, Dr. Ratcliffe wonld lose between five and
six -hundred pounds a-year,'.and it was proper that Parliament
should provide for that loss.' The present Primate, greatly to
his eiraisee had written a letter to that excellent Judge, regret.
tine that •by certain arrangements which had been made, he
(Dr. Ratcliffe) was likely to he deprived of his fees, and offering
to-make up the lose out efehis own pocket This, however,
Dr. Reeefnsed. He thanked the Right Rev. Prelate for his
kindooss, tint expressed hiadetermination to rely on the fiber-
aiity. of Parliament. The salary of Dr. Ratcliffe ought, in his
opinion, to beta fixed one, altogether independent of fees. It
was certainly unbecoming a Judge to be obliged, as Dr. Rat-
cliffe was, to practise as a barrister, which he was allowed to
. do. lie did not, indeed, plead in open Court, hut he gave his
legal opinionsdie private. a therefore called on the Bight
Honourable Gentlernan-i(M.r. Goulburn) to place the office held
by Dr. Ratcliffe in the same situation as other judicial
offices were. He again adverted to a variety of unions, which
ne thought ought, if poisible, to. be put an end to. Some, he
knew, could not be dissolved but by the consent, or on the
death of the present incumbent.; and there were others, granted
by way ofdignity, -which the bishops themselves could not dis-
roiee. -lie-saw no.reason whatever for giving to the prelates of
Ireland a power which the Archbishops and Bishops.of Eng-
land did not possess. He then alluded to the opinions of the
. Bishops of Kilmore, Meath, and some others, who had de-
clared that they thought this power ought to be revised ; and
concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to effect the
purposes' which lie had stated in the commencement of his
speech.
Mr. GOULBURN stated that he did not mean to oppose the
motion of the Right Hon. Bart. Whoever had attended to what
fell from him, whenever the Church of Ireland came under the
consideration of the House, would. do him the justice to say,
that he had always shewn a disposition, where abuses appeared
to have crept in, to correct them. If cases of abuse were made
- out, he would not be backward in advising what course 'ought
to be taken for the purpose of checking them. At the present
moment lie believed it was felt by the clergy themselves, that
the church was in a progressive state of improvement ; and he
.was sure that Government would. do all that could be done to
--accelerate that improvement. The only difference between him
and the Hon. Batonet was, whether the Hon. Baronet was pro-
posing that which was best for producing improvement. He
wished particularly to call the attention of the House to the evi-
dence which hack been referred to the Hou. Baronet.—
Prom this it appeared, that whatever was the conduct
of the incumbents; very great efforts had been made by
the Bishops and by the Government to improve the system.
. Ile admitted that formerly considerable abuses existed, and
that many livings were given to unworthy individuals for pri-
vate reasons, but the- present primate acted in a very contrary
manner. He allowed no unions in his diocess. It was a great
inconvenience that-the same individual should be allowed to hold
two livings, situated. at extreme parts of. the kingdom. But the
Primate ha& put an end to this, by issuing a cannon similar to
that Which existed in England, fbrbiddingpersons to hold livings
situate at a greater distance from each other that was allowed in
this country. By his arrangements, the Primate had curtailed
. the income of one of the most able and learned men at the Irish
or any other bar—he meant Dr. Ratcliffe. That gentleman
consented to forego those 'emoluments which were incidental to
his office as Judge of the Prerogative Court. The whole of his
emoluments amounted to about 2,0001. a year; and that part
of diem which consisted of fees, amounted perhaps to 600/.
Those fees he had lost :.and though the Primate offered to
make up the deficiency. Dr; Ratcliffe had declined the offer.
Ile said he acquiesced in the alteration, for the benefit of
the Church. lie .(11r. Goulhurn) concurred in the sugges.
tint., of the Hon. Bart., that the office held by Dr. Ilatcliffe
should be put on the same footing as other judicial situa-
tione in Ireland ; and he meant, next Session, to introduce
A Bill for that purpoei. He was at present waiting for the
report of the cominissioners appointed to inquire into ecclesia.s-
-f icaloffiCei in Ireland, and' that report would not, he believed,
lie completed until the end of the session, and till it was ready,
he could not bring in the Bill to which he had alluded. He
was well pleased to find that no abuse cited by the Honourable
illarottio • occurred later than 1809-16 years ago—a circum-
• stave& which showed the improved state of the church.
Dr. WSIIINGTON was glad that the lion. Baronet had
introduced this question, for it was right that some arrangement
ahould be resorted to for the purpose of curing the defects in the
rids church, which had been pointed out. He agreed in the
truth of the observation, that those who held high situations in
the church had made many attempts to remove existing abuses.
In addition to the hastances already cited by the Hon. Baronet,
where improper unions had been made, he could speak of one in
diecess of Down andConnonwhere five or six benefices had
,been united for many years, and there was no resident on any
of thern. At length the'circumstance came to the knowledge of
the bishop, who appointed- a clergyman to each of them, and
;gave to the individuals so appointed the tithes of the different
paritnies. In other cases, clergymen who held pluralities *ere
not deprived of them, but were compelled to reside for a cer-
tairk time in their parishes. The proposed Bill he conceived to
be extremely necessary, because though some exemplary pre-
iat ^r all they could to reform the church, yet their successors
might fall into error. Looking at the evidence lately laid before
the House of Cortnions, he found, in one instance, a tract of
.97 square miles described as having but one resident incumbent
• .on it. Those who complained of the increase of Roman Ca-
thoLcs is Ireland ought not to allow so large a district as this
to be without -a, proper noniher of resident clergymen. He
would not, on this subject, trust to the conscience or dispose':
lion of any Bishops. He hoped such a measure would be
brought in as would effectually prevent the enjoyment of plu-
ralities. Non-residence he considered as the great cause of the
increase of Dissenters in Ireland.
fflr. T RA NT exoressed himself in fevour of the motion.
'Air. V. FITZGERALD thought there was sufficient evi-
, deuce before the House to induce them to legislate on this sub-
ject. In his opinion even the union of benefices by means of
faculties wile not so obiectionahle as episcopal unions. The
Bill ought rather to deal with unions than pluralities held under
faculties. The Hon. Gentleman then alluded to the praise..
worthy exertiohs'a the present primate of Ireland ; and ob-
..aerved, that, to prevent the union of parishes -without the con-
-sent of the Lord-Lieutenant and Cueecil, was not, in his opi-
nion, going too far. He was quite convinced that the Marquis
-Wellesley, and the present Government of Ireland, would do
all in their power to carry-the intentions of the Legislature into

effect.' -
Mr.-S. RICE bore testimony to the wise line of conduct
,which had been adopted by the Primate of Ireland. He had
heard it said, thatlasliad4aken steps to Prevent the introduction
of professed OracifteAten into the Church of Ireland. He did
net Assert this positisfiir; but if it were the fact, it was highly
4.lhonoutablb• to that R*t Reverend Prelate.—The motion was
PARLIAMENTARY DOCUMENTS.
Mr. S. RICE rose to move for theappoin mem of a Select Com-
duittee on the stite,of the., papers wint ed by ottierof the 'House of
„-Colinmatit from- the tear 180iYtd the" accession c f his present M a
jesay.i 1-lii obasivea; thit sir/et:dui year 1880, the .Pacrtaarton rary
Pipers laid :nikbeeaCeillated.or,arrang4. A Committee had, in
1802 been appostifed to in uiie into:the state of the Papers pro-
-itnited to the j-IMnye?,,atid m ephsequenie of,the Report., a that
.thaninitteiliteildoOvaiests were selected and classed. .The,
gapers thknf —supngedwere 'known bk the title of "The Seven-
teen Volumeabfr RePorth." A ntitnhel. .fricit 'valtable docu-
grents were at that time preserved and put in order, which were
now accesible•ta. the House and the public. From that period
.40 the accession of his present Majesty, many important docti-

ments had been presented to Parliament ; hut they had not yet
been arranged so as to render diem essentially useful to Mem-
bers of Parliament. His mokiin, therefiwe, was for ,the ap-
pointment of a Committee toselect from those documents such
as appeared to be the most alnahle and important. The-Ho-
nourable Gentleman observed, that the House had derived
great benefit from the library which had been established by.
the late Speaker ; and the effect pf his motion would be, to give
still greater scope to the arrangekent which had originated with
that individual. He concluded by moving for the appointment
of a Committee
Mr. BA N KES and Sir J.,NEwroRT expressed themselves in
favour of the motion. They hoped, however, that care would.
lie taken to select only such papers as were really valuable.-
Mr. S. RICE said he would confine his motion to reports and
other important papers, excluding the journals and Index.
Mr. V. FITZGERALD said there was an absolute neces-
sity for the motion.
Mr. CROKER gave the motion his most cordial support.—
The documents alluded to, would form one of the most curious
illustrationa'that could be imagined of the history of this country.
He believed that the truth of very few political facts connected
with the history of the reign of George 111. could be correctly
ascertained without the assistance of those documents. There
was, -he conceived, much propriety in this Motion, and he
thought the Honourable Gentleman deserved the thanks of the
House for calling their attention to the subject.• There were,
in the Tower and other public places, many documents which
well deserved attention. An ingenious individual had lately
made researches connected with those papers, and had disco-
vered a great deal of extraordinary matter. He thought no
vote of money, in a literary point of view, could be better ex-
pended than one which would enable the individual to whom he
had alluded to give to this country a Volume of those ancient
records. Amongst other things .he had discovered that, in an-
cient days, the Members of the House of Commons voted by
proxy. It was a practice which he (Mr. Croker) did not wish
to recommend ; but, looking •to the extreme thinness of the
House at that moment, it would not perhaps be a bad plan.—
(A laugh.)
The motion was then agreed to, as was a second, making it
an instruction to the said ComMittee to look out-for some proper
place for the safe custody of the books and papers, to which
the Members of the 'House could have the most convenient
access.