The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 4, 183$.

lands was necessary, and that an inquiry with that view would be
proper ; and the other, that the most advantageous mode of inquiry
would be by a Select Committee of the House of Commons. Now, with
regard to the first of those objects, he thought that no very long argu-
ment was necessary to show that there were circumstances Connected
with the existing system of managing Church property which con-
(bleed neither to the interest of the Church, to the interests of the in].
mediate holders of that property, or to the interests of the eoiriniunity at
^-.ween Church property and other property in land thcrC Was
• ' -* ncrsons holding it had only an immediate
' - their lives it went, not to
' ",ent in the sta.

large.
this obvious difreren-ce,

interest in it for their lives, and that arts.
their lisirs, bet to the individuals appointed to succeeo s—
tion in virtue of which they became entitled to its revenues. It, the.._
fore, most naturally followed that the Bishop, or other owner for the
timebeing, should seek, without any regard for the interests of those who
should hold it next, to make as much out of it while in his possession
as he could ; while on the other hand it was obvious that on general
principles a tenure which might be a short one was a tenure injurious
to the imprevement of the property. It was for this reason he
ic,ooz:vcceri vteod
itchta tc
lituhrech
iLegislatureand.9
0,, ith icnertthaei
nreciogLn
to,uf
ltHy eifiorry a
ogda %e
of'
twenty-one years of three !lees. One might suppose from that condi-
tion, and, indeed; it might have been then the prevailing notion that a
lease for twentYsritie feats or for three lives was nearly similar; but of
course they all knew diet 'One ntit the case, and that a lease for three
lives was equivalent to at least siiffe et seventy years. But the Legis-
, lature that gave the power to which he aiiiiticti at various times altered
' its conditions, making with regard to some of thoo tram rules and re-
gulations which it did not extend to others. There was e'ne of those
rules which made a very essential regulation in respect to Church 170-
eerty—namely, that which related to concurrent leases. If a Bishop
should suppose that a sufficient fine had not been paid for a twenty-one
ware or three lives' lease, it was made compeent for him, at the expi-
ration of each seven years, or of the third life, to grant what was termed
a concurrent lease, by which another life was put into the original lease.
That rule was not extended to the case of lands held by Deans and I
Chapters. The consequence of that regulation was what might
be expected—a great deal of doubt and difficulty on all sides—
in many instances much disadvantage to the landholders under
those leases ; but, chief in importance and extent, manifest dis.
advantage to the Church itself. It was obviously the advan.
tage of the Bishops, Dean and Chapter, or any other ecclesi-
astic holding Church lands in right of his temporary position
in the Church, to obtain as large fines as possible, and hence was occa- '
sioned at various times very great detriment to the estates of the
Church, and in many instances it occurred that the successor to a
bishopric found, upon his obtaining possession of his See, that its re-
venues were very much diminished from what they formerly were. He
should beg leave to read to the House some instances which had oc.
ourred of property having been injured in the manner he had described.
The first instance he should mention was dated so far back as the Res-
toration; and as it was detailed very clearly in two passages, the one
extracted from Bishop Burnet's History of the Reign of Charles the Se-
cond, and the other from the life of Clarendon, written by himself, he
should trouble the House by reading them. Bishop Burnet said:—
" Almost all the leasesof the Church estates over England were fallen
in, there having been no renewal for twenty years. The leases for
years were determined ; and the wars had carried off so many men,
that most of the leases for lives were fallen into the incumbents' hands.
So that the Church estates were in them; and the fines raised by re-
newing the leases rose to about a million and a half. It was
an unreasonable thing to let those who were now promoted
carry off so great a treasure. If the half had been applied
to the buying of tithes, or glebes for small vicarages, here a
foundation had been laid down for a great and effectual re-
formation. In some Sees 40,0001. or 50,0001. was raised, and applied
to the enriching the Bishops' families. Something was done to churches
and colleges—in particular to St. Paul's in London j and a noble collec-
tion was made for redeeming all the English slaves that were in any
part of Barbary. But this fell far short of what might have been ex.
pected. In this the Lord Clarendon was heavily charged, as hating
shown that he was more the Bishop's friend than the Church's. It is
true the law made those fines belong to the incumbents; but such an
extraordinary occasion deserved that a law should have been made on
purpose. And with this overset of wealth and pomp that came on men
in the decline of their parts and age, they who were now growing into
old age became lazy and negligent in all the true concerns of the
Church—they left preaching and writing to others, while they gave
themselves up to case and sloth." The corresponding passage from Lord
Clarendon's life was to this effect :—" The old Bishops who remained
alive, and such Deans and Chapters as were numerous enough for
the Corporation, who had been long kept fasting, had now appetites
proportionable.—(Hear, hear.) Most of them were very poor, and
had undergone very great extremities—soma of the Bishops having
supported themselves and their families by teaching schools, and
submitting to the like low condescensions—and others saw that
if they died before they were enabled to make some provision for them,
their wives and children must unavoidably starve; and therefore they
made haste to enter upon their own. They called their old tenants to
account for rent, and to renew their estate if they had a mind to it; so
otst
to the
soon
anh oea
possessionns tt
,ntaKrn King
gat
of:
;fd.aag„
what
.Itrlice,asettynot erchweaedly: e
called
aidet purchasers)fs:orlbmd because
former
ra
under
repaired a)rtei
there
ee dtnirneugtnort
uno
reasonable
remainedntreu etlyoeoer
pretence
rdne
(asaet :o sna
iciannes
infamousman
ry
iatcaa sin cee
es:teolirefseaortsneeh:e:aceni )Idu church
ba
appearedre
h,
iorcaerhs. some other
fit
fiotdertedh:ettr,taebnremd offeredt
taifod
them,
nft leaseso,tltdhhaeii,ndkc
ifoutr
rhteahht
the
refusalun-
expired,
thereof,anel caanuds es
such
they a had,
rea 0 out
na
reasonable
loef
fine a conscience,was usual,
sfuo forborne
they
to buy
othei)ed to
inhehave
nts
The other, the purchasers (amongst which there were some very
according to the clemency that was practised towards all sorts of
men, it could be thought justice that they should lose the entire
sum they had disbursed upon the faith of that government,
which the whole kingdom submitted to but that they should,
instead of the inheritance they had an ill title to, have a good
lease for lives or years granted to them by those who had now the right.
But the Bishops and clergy concerned had not the good fortune to please
their old or their new tenants. They had been very barbarously used
themselves, and that had too much quenched all tenderness towards
others. They did not enough distinguish between persons ; nor did
the suffering any man had undergone for fidelity to the King or his
affection to the Church eminently expressed often prevail for the miti-
gation of his fine; or if it did sometimes, three or four stories of the
contrary, and in which there had been some unreasonable hardness
used, made a greater noise and spread farther than their examples of
charity and moderation. And as honest men did not usually fare the
better for any merit, so the purchasers who offered most money did not
fare the worse for all the villanies they had committed. And two or
three unhappy instances of this kind brought scandal upon the whole
Church, as if they had been all guilty of the same excesses, which
they were far from." Now, what occurred in the reign of Charles
11. might under the existing system of Church leasing he very often
the case, and indeed instances were not wanting of something of the
same kind having occurred during the reigns of late sovereigns.
There were two similar instances on record of Bishops having made in-
ordinate fortunes by availing themselves, to the great scandal of the
Chnrch, and to the great detriment of its interests, of the laxity of the
law in regard to church leases. He might mention one instance in
which through the management of a Bishop a revenue of 11,0001. a
year was reduced to one of between 4,0001. or 5,0001. a year. Many
instances of the like nature might be adduced, but he would not fatigue
the House by reading them in detail. The consequence of all this
was, that in the end the Church property was greatly dilapidated ;
and then the State was required to provide for that for which Church
property, if it had been husbanded as it ought, would have sufficed to
provide. (Hear.) The Noble Lord cited several other instances to the
same effect; and observed that many more might be brought forward.
It
at was
smallx c
e disposaled Y dangerous to allow matters of this kind to be
left
of separate Acts of Parliament, where a pre.
bend's
incomeig l
might be doubled, where a lessee endeavoured
thee
to get the best terms he could, and where the interests of the
Church were left wholly out of the question. In many cases Church
property was so disposed of where there was an increasing popula-
tion, and where the Church Commissioners had said, and said wisely,
thrt additional means of religious instruction ought to be provided for
that population. It a hundred, or even fifty years ago, a proper course
on the subject had been adopted, the necessity for such a provision
is
;rpurbloeupdte
rhttheoycountry,c.tß
glade
find
ethiaabrd:
that
to proposed
ca::erl st:aa
that
ayt.hi:nLyienauteiekrdy. into
thirty-
five, would not now exist.—(Hear, hear.) He was glad to hear cheers from
to
the Opposition benches. Although the Gentlemen who sat there had
se,roolepu:srliettsyoihor: be better regulated.—
was conic when these thing
some of which the fee simple was frequently alienated, and in
(Hear, hear.) The number of Acts of Parliament for the regulation of
'see leases had been granted for 99 years. There was another
cosCfititviar:leaunUc: mcecbi
o'as)ft aan
tine
en
e for connectedthup•thoiic,ehrthyei
nvracsoadesirous
o
renewal of those leases of 40,0001., and another
subject bi joencgt
ed
the time
to say
in the counties of Durham and Northumberland. There was one in-
few words. Ile wailtiuhdeedhutorchthl
of a fine of 100,0001. paid to the Dean and Chapter of Durham, which
ought to have been applied to Church purposes. It was evident this
*Riney might not to have been absorbed by the Dean and Chapter of
Durham without any reference to the increasing demand for religious
which instruction. Ile had thus stated various ways in this description
of property was held, and had been applied in a Manner not conform-
able to the original intention with which it had been conferred. ft al,
that the best way in which the whole bj
geared to him ect could be in-
•
quired into was by eferring it to the consideration of a Select Corn.
mittee of the Hones of Commons. When his Right Hon. Friend
brought the subject forward last year, his estimate was that no less a
e year could be obtained from this
sum than 250,000/. source by proper
arrangements. That calculation was disputed by the other side of the
House, almost every Member of which denied its accuracy, But what
was, that one of these Right
was very remarkable Honourable Gen-
tlemen, having since had time to consider the question, had
stated that if the property in qcestion had been leased on
periods of thirty-four years instead of twenty.one, several millions
vould have been lost to the country. The reverse was Isis (Lord J.
Russell's) opinion ; and he had little doubt that by proper arrangements
an annual surplus of 300,0001. would accrue. When such, however,
were the differences of opinion, it was but just and fair that some in-
quiry should be instituted in order to ascertain the actual facts of the
case. Her Majesty's Ministers might be wrong in their calculations ;
e 11e Iloneurable Gentlemen opposite might be right in theirs; but at
least this was clear, that it was very inconvenient to enter upon any
consideration of time ultimate arrangement of the subject, while the
facts on which alone that arrangement could be advantageously founded,
were in doubt or denied. Other statements which had been made last
year by his Right Hon. Friend were denied ; and those statements also
ought to be made the subjeet of inquiry. It might be said that it
would be better to make that inquiry in another manner than by a
a Select Committee of that House. But if it were made by Government,
or by any persons acting under the authority of Government, the accu-
racy of the result, would at once be denied by the other side. If it were
made by the Church Commissioners, it would be influenced by the great
discrepancy of opinion which, as he had already stated, existed among
the members of the Church Commission as to the mode of managing the
property in question. Lett, therefore, in such hands, all chalice of a
satisfactory result might be relinquished. There was also another con.
siderati°n• The house might like some account of the past—to see
whether any thing like a provident attention to the real interests of the
Church had been manife.sted, or whether, on the contrary, these inte-
rests had been entirely abandoned for the purpose of providing for the
members of certain families. If such an inquiry as that were to be
referred to the Church Commissioners, they could not enter into it
without subjecting themselves to great odium; for they would be bound
to institute an examination into cases in which Bishops and Deans and
Chapters were concerned. It was not fit, therefore, that the subject
should be referred to the Church Commission. Ought any other Coin.
mission to be appointed 7, In general the Ilouse did not seem to thine
that the appointment of Commissions, where it could be avoided, was
desirable. At least he was sure that if the Hon. and Gallant Member
for Lincoln were present that Hon. and Gallant Gent. would oppose the
appointment of a paid commission.—(A laugh.) If, therefore, there
was a necessity that an inquiry of the kind should be instituted; If that
inquiry could not be advantageously referred to the Church Commission,
or to any other commission ; if were it undertaken by Governinent,
the correctness of time report would lead to endless disputes, what could
be better than to appoint a Select Committee of that House to inquire
into the facts of time case; thus laying a safe foundation, on which Pai •
!lament might observe shut
afterwards legislate ? He begged lease to
time motion, with which he intended to conclude, would not in the
slightest degree determine the future application of any increased value
which it might be found practicable to give to Church leases. Un-
doubtedly tamely, that
his opinion still remained what it was last year;
if an annual increase could be obtained of 950,000/. or 260,000/. it would
be better to apply it to putting an end to all the heartburnings and
jealousies which at present existed on the subject of Church-rates ; and
to prevent those disputes and conflicts which now annually took
place in vestry meetings. A Right Honourable Gentleman opposite
had stated that he had conferred on the subject with several of the
Prelates of the Church Commission, and that it was their opinion that
if an increased value could be given to the property in question it

ought to be devoted to the increase of the spiritual instruction of the
people. He did not deny that that was an object which deserved the

consideration of Parliament; and that if it could be accomplished it

was very desirable that that instruction should be extended to the Whole
community. It was, however, a question of preference, and the answer
to it must depend, in a great degree, on the amount that might be ob-
tained, and on the situation of the country at the time. If the amount
should be as large as he supposed it would be, and if the excitement in
the country, produced by the opposition of the Dissenters to the Church-
rates, Were not exceedingly violent, a portion of the amount might be
so app..,
"ed. But, otherwise, he thought the application recom.
mended by hisht Honourable Friend last year was the best
that could be adopted. Of however, he was sure, that after
the OreseDt year, Parliament ought to apply itself to the establish.
ment of some definite legislation on the subs,:l'—(Hear, hear, hear.)
It would be exceedingly unjust to the lessees of Churc:: property if the,
question were to be kept several years in suspense.—(Hear, heZ!') Even
in their present state their property was not so valuable as that of pet.
sons holding in fee simple. " Attempts have been made," said Mr.
Butler, in his edition of Coke upon Littleton,' " to establish an obli.
gation on landlords Is renew ; but they have not succeeded. The re-
newal, therefore, is still a matter of favour and of chance ; but is so far
valuable, that it enhances the price of property on sales." His (Lord J.
Russell's) object and wish were, for the sz.ke of the Church, for the sake of
the lessee, and for the sake of the community, that this state of things
should be altered. He was therefore prepared, in proposing the Commit-
tee, to propose that every possible light should be thrown by that Com-
mittee on the nature of Church property, with a view that, after the
Committee had ascertained all the facts of the case, Parliament might
take into consideration the best mode of legislating with reference
!G the application of any increased value that it might be found prac.
ticable :,^ Create. He had stated to the House what was the application
which he shout! prefer : but t would be most inexpedient and unwise,
in appointing a Select Committee, to bind them at all upon that point.
When the Committee had made their report then would be the time for
considering what further step to take. All that he now wished for was
a fair, full, and honest inquiry, with a view of coming su,':ecquently to a
wise and deliberate determination.—(Hear, hear.) The le;;;.1.110 Lord
concluded by moving the appointment of a " Select Committee to 'tie
quire into the mode of granting and renewing leases of the landed and
other property of the Bishops, Deans, and Chapters, and other ecclesi-
astical bodies of England and Wales ; and into the probable amount of
any increased value which might he obtained by an improved manage-
ment, with a due consideration of the interests of the Established
Church, and of the present lessees of such property."
Mr. LIDDELL, in rising to move a direct negative to the Noble
Lord's motion, felt himself in a position of extreme difficulty, in conse.
quence of his connection with the county of Durham. But lie would
Set according to the best of his own judgment on the subject. He con-
sidered the conduct of her I4fejesty's Government respecting it exceed.
ingly reprehensible. By the agitation of this question, arrangements
which had existed for three centuries lied been disturbed ; and that with.
out blame to any of the parties concerned. The two grounds on which
he should oppose the Noble Lord's present motion were—justice to the
Church, and justice to the lessee. He considered that the revenues of
the Church should be applied to the purposes of the Establishment ; and
that there was so much want of spiritual instruction in the country,
that no portion of those revenues ought to be diverted to any other pur.
pose. He (Mr. Liddell) admitted that the present mode of granting
Church leases might not, in all cases, be the way of improving Church
property. But he admitted that only to a certain extent. The Noble
Lord the Secretary at War last year came to the assistance of the Right
Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this question. The Noble Lord
had declared that on one side of the river Tyne—and be presumed the
Noble Lord alluded to his own side, Northumberland—there was the ut-
most comfort, prosperity, and happiness; while on the other side
of the river there was no improvement, but great deteriora-
tion ; and that the Nob'e Lord attributed to the neglect of the
clergy, .to whom the property belonged. Now, as far as his (Mr. Lid.
dell's) observation and experience went, he must declare that the state-
ments of the Noble Lord (the Secretary at War) with respect to the con.
dition of the country on the south banks of the Tyne were wholly desti-
tute of foundation. In answer to the Noble Lord's statement, and in
corroboration of his own, he would read a passage in a memorial pre.
seined to the Chancellor of the Exchequer from South Shields. The
lion. Gentleman here read the passage, the substance of which was,
" that the memorialists held lands under the See of Durham, and
that they viecOfd, with great alarm the proposition of applying money to
to be obtained by a C'llange in the arrangement of Church leases to the
redemption of Church-rates; that the agitation of the question had
created considerable inconvenience; and that they derived great benefit
from the manner in which the lands were let at o...e_sent." Many great
works had been commenced and were still going errs, ms. ch capital had
been expended and was still in the course of being "peruke:, entirely
upon the faith of a renewal of leases upon the same terms as :hose
under which they were now held. These works would never have beer:
undertaken, this amount of capital would never have been embarked, if
the lessees could for a moment have anticipated such a change in the
nature of their tenures, as that which would be effected if the proposition
of the Noble Lord were carried into effect. Besides, what occasion was
there for such a chauge ? Had any complaints been heard from the
parties most immediately interested ? Had any petition complaining of
grievances been presented either from the lessors or lessees ? Why,
then, should their property be made liable to difficulty and danger, not
from any fault of their own, but from the caprice of the Government ?
Leaving that part of the subject, however, he would now proceed to
make a few observations regarding the tenure of coal mines—an inter-
est of the greatest consequence in the north of England generally, and
to the county of Durham in particular ; an interest, therefore, which
naturally arrested a great deal of public attention in those parts of the
country.. The colleries on the north of the Tyne having been much ex-
hausted, the best coals were now procured in the county of Durham ;
and the Church was in possession of more than one-third of the coal.fields
in that county in point of extent, and of more than ono-half in point of
value. The Church had also a considerable property in lead mines;
but, for the present, he should confine himself exclusively to
coal.—(Hear.) Most of the colliers were worked by companies,
the capital required being generally beyond the means of individual
speculators. At the very outset the cost of sinking a pit was enormous;
and in few instances could a colliery, with all its machinery, be brought
into full operation under an expenditure of from 100,0001. to 200,000/.
The first object of a Company was to secure a coal-field of sufficient
extent to warrant the outlay of their capital ; and when this was pro-
cured, the next object was to secure a lease for such a term as they
deemed most advantageous. The next step was to secure a right of
way from the pit-mouth to the nearest point of embarkation. This
frequently extended over a distance of seven or eight miles, and in many
instances an exorbitant amount of money was asked for it. But in all
cases where the surface of the land belonged to the Church, the neces.
sary right of way was invariably given to the coal adventurers, upon
the condition only that they should give a fair compensation to the
lessee of the soil for the injury done to his property. Even if such a
change were made as that proposed by the Noble Lord in the nature of
tenures, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prevent the grossest
injustice being done to the lessees of collieriee.
e confessed that
he, for one, had no confidence in the Government "pop this
matter. Their conduct betrayed them. He thought that from. the
beginning they had shown a determination to avail themselves
if possible, of the proceeds of this valuable property, in order to apply it
to purposes of their own. There were some other points to which he
should feel it his duty to advert. But in the first place he would state
that it was his intention, in case his first motion of a direct negative did
note ucceed, to move an amendment in accordance with that moved by
his Right Honourable Friend the Member for the University of Cam.
b. idge last s ear, the effect of which would be to direct the application of
any available funds to the diminution of the evils arising from the want
of adequate religious instruction to the people. This led him to another
branch of the subject, to which he begged to direct the attention of the
House. Admitting the great wealth of the Church in the county of
Durham, he must remind the House and the country of the charities
which had emanated from ecclesiastical bodies in that district. There
was the great Bamborough charity, and many others, from which a large
portion of the community obtained the highest advantages, all of which
had their rise in the benevolence and liberality of the Church. It
was, besides, to be recollected that the Bishop, Deans, and Chapter
of Durham had established an university, and had, moreover, devoted
large sums to the amelioration of small livings ever since the Bill of
the Archbishop of Canterbury had enabled them to do so. But in
spite of all their efforts much yet remained to be done. There were
many small livings to be increased, many public charities to foster and
support. This, of course, could not be done if they were deprived of
their property in the manner proposed by the Noble Lord. Ile would
beg to call the attention of the House to the very peculiar situation of
the population in the diocese of Durham, particularly of that part of
the population which was rapidly growing up in the vicinity of the
great collieries which were every day coining ieto operation. The
Noble Lord, the Secretary at War (Lord Howick), alluding to this
Population in the debate of last year, directed the attention of the
House to the vast number of Dissenters that was to be found in it.
" Probably," said the Noble Lord, " there is not a county in England
in which dissent is more prevalent than in Durham. Why ? Not
because there is- any deficiency in the means of instruction on the
part of the Church, but because the great mass of the property in
the county belongs to the Church, and consequently gives rise to
many and frequent collisions between the lessees and the owners of the
property.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Pease.) He (Mr. Liddell) was
not surprised to hear that cheer from the Hon. Member for South Dur.
ham, who of course could not be expected to entertain any feelings of
sympathy towards the Established Church; but he confessed he was
surprised to hear such an argument come from the lips of the Noble
Lord. He for one could not imagine that men would be so base as to
abandon their religious principles because they could not agree upon
matters of worldly interest; he was moreover fully convinced that the
dissent in the county of Durham did not arise from so base a cause.
The true cause of it was to be found in the absence of churches in those
new societies which were constantly springing up where fresh collieries
were established, and where the dissenting teacher generally con.
trived to move in advance of the Church. This afforded an addi-
tional proof that the county of Durham needed the whole of its cede.
siastical revenues to supply it with an adequate amount of religious
instruction. The Honourable Gentleman then read an extract from
the first charge of Dr. Maltby, the present Bishop of Durham,
who, in speaking of the large abstraction, amounting to no less a sum
than 13,0001. a year, which had already been made, and, as he thought,
unnecessarily, from the revenues of the bishopric of Durham, and
transferred to another part of the kingdom with which the diocese of
Durham had no connection, stated that " he did not disapprove of the
alienation of a portion of the revenues of that see, large as they were
in amount, and that he thought a reasonable deduction might be made,
with great benefit to the Church, and yet leave a sufficiency for the
personal dignity of the bishop; but he was nevertheless of opinion that
a larger sum might have been appropriated to the support of that dignity
than had been done by the Legislature, and by which the bishop might
have been better enabled to exercise that degree of liberality which
became his station." He (Mr. Liddell) considered this an important
a imission as coining from a Prelate who had obtained his appoint-
ment under the present Administration, and he conceived that
the Noble Lord, on hearing that language proceeding from one
of his own bishops, exposed himself to the difficulty of this
dilemma—either, on the one band, to feel himself bound to ac.
knowledge the truth of the Bishop's appeal, and express a desire to
concede to that appeal; or, on the other, to give over proclaiming him-
self a friend of the Church, and of holding language which he (Mr.
Liddell) could not help regarding as little short of hypocrisy, while the
Noble Lord was pursuing a course of conduct which the real friends of
that Church felt to be most outrageous against its best interests.—
( Hear, hear.) If the motion for a Committee should be carried, lie
begged to give notice that he should move, in consonance with the
course pursued by his Right Honourable Friend (Mr. Goulburn) on
this subject last year, that the following words be added to the motion of
the Noble Lord ; namely, " with the view of applying such amount to
the gradual diminution of the evils which flow from the deficiency of the
means of religious instruction and pastoral superintendence by Ministers
of the Established Church."
Mr. HUME had no doubt that the Honourable Member considered
himself to be a good son of the Established Church ; but for his part, he
(Mr. Hume) could not regard the Honourable Gentleman to be an
honest son of that Church if he sought to support it at the expense of
those who were not connected with it. Why did not the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) who was now sitting beside the Honourable
Gentleman, or the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir James Graham)
who was on the other side of the Hon. Gentleman, why did not they
when in power bring ferward a proposition to appropriate the surplus re.
venues of the Church for the benefit of the inferior clergy ?—hear,
hear, from Sir Robert Peel) Was it ever done ?—(Hear, hear, again
from Sir Robert Peel.) If it ever Was done, it had not come to his
(Mr. Hume's) knowledge.—(Renewed cries of " Hear, hear," from Sir
Robert Peel.) He did not know of any appropriation of the revenues
of the Bishops, for the benefit of the inferior clergy.—(hear, hear,
from the same quarter.) However, that had nothing at all to do with
the question before the House.—(Laughter froth the Opposition.) The
Hon. Member for North Durham haul expressed groat solicitude for the
maintenance of the Established Church. Now, if the Hon. Gentle-
man entertained any real respect for religion, and was anxious to
support that Church, which he conscientiously
_believed to be the

best, ought he not to evince his sincerity by proposing to give it
that support by means which were already in his own power ?
Was it fit and proper to put his hands into the pockets of thil
Dissenters, and rob them of their property, in order to maintain
a Church from which they conscientiously dissented? What was the
proposition of the Noble Lord ? Nut to rob the Church; this he (Mr.
Hume) most distinctly denied; but to require it to support its own
fabrics out of its own resources. Robbers of the Church, indeed Why,.
all history proved that if there were any robbers of the Church liter
were to be found within its own fold. The Bishops themselves had
been its greatest spoliators. There was not a single Dissenter in the
country who had ever had one farthing of the property of the Church,
while on the other hand there was hardly a clergyman of the Church
who had not received some portion of a Dissenter's property. The com—
plaints of the Honourable Gentlemen against the Government, Will>
stepped forward as moderators between the Dissenters and the mem-
bers of the Church, with a view to do justice, if possible, between
them, were most ungenerous. He (Mr. Hume) had seen nothing in
property of the Church. On the contrary, he
conduct pf the Noble Lord which showed the least desire on his
part to (Mich on the
considered the bottle Lord to be one of the greatest friends of the
mo„,ove from it the
Church, by endearOttring to provide a fund for its maintenance out of
hostility of the Dissenters
its own means, and thereby
who had hitherto been obligedlo ~,;:Mort it. He had already declared
, the House to the way in
it to be his opinion that the greate,t : obbers of the Church were those
whose duty it especially was to uphold it in all its integrity. As a proof
.
of the justice of his assertion, he would refe
which the manor of Tottenham, formerly belottg;.:lB to the Church, hail
been wrested from it, and appropriated to a noble fa.mily, a member of
,
which seas, when the act of spoliation was committed, p,ime minister of
this country. By a private Act of Parliament, all the pro:rty from St.
Giles's up to Hampstead, worth nearly ,two millions of tritneY, was
alienated from the church, reserving only to the Dean of St. Pau.''s the
paltry sum of 3001. a year. To this act of spoliation it was proved that
those who were called the guardians and protectors of the Church lent
their aid. Could the Honourable Member for North Durham name to
him any Dissenter who had ever robbed the Church of one farthing of'
money, or one acre of land? This was not the only instance than
be adduced to justify him in asserting that the most professed and
ardent friends of the Church had been its greatest spoliators by
ni3,-•ropriating large portions of Church property to the benefit
of private families. With these indisputable facts before them, was
it
enot too ich that the Hon. Gentlemen should charge the Govern.
m
bringiri forward the present measure for their own peculiar
nt ~,ith
purposes?
the oNeet which the Government had in view?
y were
rg ee bodies Whatrf
menanxious to a
put
:% wit the discontent now prevailing among
la,tai,2.ished Church, deeming it neither
t between the Dissenters and
]'hey
v i _
tfiltietiimigenmobr
esresem:flythtahtatCtlhnierecxhissthhoigulds7-wtb'eallo:Yed further to go on. It
was time that the Dissenters should be no longer-
subjected to the onus
which they had for a century past been compelled to sustain. He was
told, indeed, that it was the law. Granted; but they were in a constant
state of change, and it was the duty of the Government to ada'pt the law
to the circumstances of the time. It was not intended that one single
lessee should be injured by the present measure; but he would affirm
that the present leases had been improperly made, and that an inquiry
ought to be instituted with a view to ascertain whether any surplus
revenue could be realized for the purposes contemplated by the Go-
vernment.

.....
Mr. GOULBURN observed that the House would hardly concur with
the lion. Gentleman in the assertion that his (Mr. Goulburn's) Right
lion. Friend who then eat near him (Sir Robert Peel) had, when in
office, forborne to take measures for curing the evils arising from the
unequal distribution of ecclesiastical revenues, because the House would
recollect that his Right Hon. Friend was the Minister to propose that ft
Commission should be appointed especially to inquire into the cede.
siastical revenues, with a view to remedy those enormous evils which
prevailed in the country, namely, the destitution of the people for want
of spiritual instruction and pastoral superintendence. The question
with which they had to deal was, as the Noble Lord had stated,
whether it was fitting a Committee should be appointed to inquire into
the management of the Church property; and whether, if such an inquiry
were to take place, the surplus revenues which might be derived from it
ought to be applied to the religious instruction of thepeople, or other pur-
poses. In urging his views of this question upon the House, the Nobie Lord
commenced his speech by an attempt to defend the Government, swots
whom he said the general imputation had been cast of their having a dis,in.
sition to invade the property of the Church, and to misappropriate its re..
venues. The Noble Lord stated, and stated truly, that that was the
general imputation cast upon the Government throughout the conntry.
In making that admission he quite concurred with the Noble Lord, that
he had stated what was the general feeling; and if he (Mr. Goulburn)
were asked whether he considered that that feeling was a correct onc, he
could not deny that there was in it a great deal of truth. The way in
which the Noble Lord was dealing with the property of the Church was
well calculated to create an impression that he did not view that property
s being in its nature strictly confined to the purposes for which it was
Oribs;:ially intended; namely, ecclesiastical purposes, according to the
wants of the Church. The argument by which the Noble Lord defended
himself agatiest what he thus stated to be the general and popular feeling,
was this he first :retailed the gross amount of the revenues of the Church,
and then stated thee the Government had afforded protection to that
portion of Church property consisting of tithes, by commuting tithes
into a rent-charge; that they had secured adequate incomes to the
Bishops; and that no measure which they intended to pursue was
calculated to diminish the present amounts of those incomes. By
thus showing that the object of the Government was the maintenanee
of the present income of the Church, the Noble Lord conceived that he
had satisfactorily defended himself and his colleagues from the charge of.
having a disposition to invade that property. lie (Mr. Goulburn)
would, however, on the other hand, say, that if the object of the Noble
Lord's measure was to prevent the possibility of making any improve.
anent in Church proporty ; if it were meant that, in .111 time to come,
whatever might be the improvements in other species of property, or
however great might be the want of religious instruction by the growth
of the population and the increase of knowledge, there should neverthe-
less be no power for improving the property of the Church, and of in-
creasing the means of affording religious instruction to the people, he
would say that the Noble Lord, in prososing such a measure, and
making such a declaration,- would sufficiently show that he was not
sensible of the real objects for which Church property was
originally created, and that by doing away with the possibility of in-
creasing it by improvement he did as effectually invade the property o
the Church and destroy its usefulness, as if he had proposed to des
with the actual income which that Church at this moment possessed.
His Hon. Friend (Mr. Liddell) had adverted to the property which the
Church possessed in mines in the county of Durham, and had pointed
out the impediments which would be thrown in the way of its improve-
meat if the Church were not allowed to take advantage of the increas-
ing value of such a description of property. What hope could be en-
tertained, when this measure should be brought into full operation,
that there would be means of preventing the population of that district.
from becoming barbarised and uncivilized for want of religious instruc-
tion ? He should like to know what would have beets the situation of
this country now, if previous Ministers bad acted upon a syste m
similar to that now proposed by the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) Th c
the
they Churcht,em s eso intot
prtehseent
present. measure involved the principle of converting the
udilini.tt.ahretesestaetfeshiomhslseerss,
possessed.
of
The
rent
modecliargbeys
which the e
Noble Lord proposed to augment the means which were to
be at his dispose: for public purposes was, that the clergy In future, in-
stead of being territo;:al possessors, should be the mere holders of a
rent charge issuing out o. the estates heretofore their own property,
In so doing, the Noble Lord would materially change the security oe
that property. The Hon. Member for Kilkenny had said that the Dis-
senter hail a right to object to pay monele out of his own estate, which
was to be made applicable to religious purposes which he did not approve
of. If this argument were well founded, he would ask the Hon. Gentle-
man, supposing a Dissenter to be the party by whom this rent charge
was to be paid, whether he thought that such a rent charge would not
be considered a greater grievance than the petty charge now
imposed upon him in the form of Church-rates ? In the first
I pace, then, lie contended that the Noble Lord was by the
present measure invading Church property, inasmuch as he deprived
the Church of all future increase of that property by its gradual
improvement ; and, in the next place, he invaded it by di.
minishing its security and altering its character. It was for
these reasons that he should now meet, es he bed met before, the mo-
tion of the Noble Lord with a direct negative. He agreed with the
Noble Lord that this question ought to be settled ; but was it likely to
be satisfactorily determined by the appointment of a Committee ? The
Noble Lord had said that he would not enter into the question of appro-
priation. Oh, no, that was open to the consideration of the Commit.
tee; " and if," said the Noble Lord (and he perfectly agreed with that
opinion), " atter the Committee shall have reported, the Louse of Com-
mons continues perpetually debating the question of appropriation
without coining to any decision, it will prove fatal to the interests of
the country." What, then, was the obvious courts of proceeding ?
If the differences with regard to appropriation must be ultimately set.
tied in order to ensure the tranquillity or the interests of t::e parties
concerned, was it not plain and obvious that they ought to settle first
the question of appropriation, which was indispensably necessary, Ac-
cording to the Noble Lord's own views, to the final settlement of ash:
question, and then enter into the inquiry, not by a Committee, but
through the ordinary channels of the advisers of the Crown, as
to the best mode in which the surplus should be appropriated?
What must be the necessary consequence of an inquiry before
a Committee, what were the fasts to be inquired into,
and what were the reasons on which the Noble Lord grounds his n peliea-
tion for such a tribunal ? lie thought the first reason which the
Nobly Lord had stated seas that his Right Hon. Friend near him (Sir It.
Peel) had disputed the correctness of certain calculations made as to
the value of reversions by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. To clear up the doubts on this point, it was
necessary, it was said, to appoint a Committee. Why, of wLont
did the Noble Lord mean to constitute this Committee? Waa
it to be composed of senior wranglers, men habituated to the cal-
culations of annuities, or did he mean that it should include those
only whom he seemed disposed to nominate in the course of the
last Session ? Did he think that the opinion of sixteen Gen.
tlemen of a Select Committee as to the correctness of arith-
metical calculations could add to the value of statements made to that
House? Surely the Noble Lord would not maintain that a Committee
of that House ought to be appointed simply for the purpose of ascer-
taining the accuracy of calculations, and saying whether or not rever-
sions were of a certain value ?—(ilear, hear.) But another important
object was to ascertain the doubtful point, whether the Bishops should
be allowed to take 5 or 7 per cent., which the parties paid to them for
renewal But even if the Connnittee,' when formed, should be able to
clear up the doubt as to the value of annuities, and to report the facts
relating to the question (which any man with ordinary ability, who was
willing to take the trouble might solve) as to whether 5 or 6 per cent.
was taken on fines, these were questions with which that House had
now nothing to do. When the Right Ilon. Gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequer came forward, and wanted 250,0001. last year for
Church-rates, it was Important to know whether his calculations were
accurate or not. But the question now was as to the better manage-
ment of Church lands and property, through means of a Commit-
tee. It had ceased to be matter of calculation, and it had now
become a qeestion of principle, whether, by the appointment of a Coin.
mittee, an inquiry of this kind was best conducted. The Noble Lord
had also to7d them that it was necessary to go into Committee, because
certain Acts of Parliament had been passed, dealing with Church pro-
perty in a manner of which he did not quite approve. He could not
agree in the opinion, if Parliament had interposed to give relief from
the restraints of the law when found inconvenient to the party possess.
ing this property, and this after it had bees entailed—be could not, he
repeated, concur in the view that this interference afforded any ground
whatever for instituting an inquiry as to the circumstances under which
it took place. But another greend fir this inquiry, stated by the
Noble Lord was, the great misappropriation of the large incomes which
the Deans and Pi clientis of Dii ham thrived from that See. The Noble
Lord told them that large fines were received on the renewal of
leases, and that these were not applied to the religious instruc.
tion of the people.—(Heat.) Now, whether that were the case or
not, he was not prepared to determine; but, if he were to be-
lieve the statement made by his Honourable Friend the Member for
Durham, who opened th 0 debate, lie should say that if there was any
one See more than another in which the income of the prelates had beets
ap; hid to the putPo,e of promoting the cause of religion, the Sari of
Durham was the bishop, is by which it would be found that the greatest
advantage had b.en conferred. Ile would tell the Noble ie.rd what
course Goverement ought to take. If they deemed the management of
Church property capable of improvonont, they ought to look into the
statutes connected w th the subjsct, and see an what Way it might here.
w
after be regulated. Let them sec ho the altered circumstances of the
times required that regulations should be adapted to the present state of
the property, and let them, having made up their minds as to the neces.
allyo f a change, come down and proposes to Parliament, on their own re.
sponsibility, the measures which they: might think necessary to remedy
the evil they bad discovered --s(Opposition' cheer's:) Wit the Govern:
ment shrunk from that task ; they had neither the ability nor courage KO
undertake it, and they preferred Giro .ving the inquiry on a Committer.
and trusting to a chsepter of accidents to see whether the termination
of the inquiry, after three or four Sessions, might be such as to

enable them afterwards to take advantage of it.—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord admitted that the Commission of which he was a Hem_
ber did not think it right to enter into the question of Church leases,
and for that reason the Committee now appointed would have to invese_
gate what were the advantages and disadvantages of Church property,
with a view of deriving increased means to assist the Established
Church in the quarters in which it was found most deficient. The No-
ble Lord thought the Commission unfit for the consideration of such to-
pics, as an inquiry into private concerns, and was unwilling to impose on
it so invidious a task. What, then, was the Committee to inquire into
matters which were considered of too invidious a character to be sub-
emitted to the Commission P Were they to have dragged before the
Committee those private concerns which the Noble Lord refused to al-
low to be investigated by a Commission of which he was a Member, in
common with several Prelates ? He would not detain the House by fur-
ther arguing against a Committee. He would only offer a few obser-
vations as to the second motion, which referred to the appropriation
of the surplus which might ultimately result from ese Improved nea-
nagement of this property. He did not think it
cation to discuss the question whether cedes;;.
:;' - .:.ecessary sir that oe-
devoted to the general purposes of the 'cleat property ought to be
point were well known and remained• ,ate. His opinions on that
that
every man in the House w!;"' •mattered ; but this he thought,
mated that if there were lees- , ever addressed it on this subject ad_
ought in the rest instance
.nds on the part of the Church itself, they
to be satisfied. He asked the Noble Lord,
least let the mann-
then, if he were deter, '
emed to undertake the hazard of an inquiry, at
-
priated, and lee '
t-"* .be defined in which the money was to be appro-
found to s it be strictly applied to the uses of the Church, if it were
.nd in need of it.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord's resolu_
doth'eugh they entered into a variety of other topics, entirely omit_
:y reference to the interests of the country at large in the appro.
Ineestion of religious instruction to the people. He asked the Noble Lord
whether he had forgotten the statements which he himself made with
respect to the wants and necessities of the people? He would
not weary the l louse with details, but give a few statements put forward
by the Commissioners in their Report. They said that in one diocese
there were four parishes the population of which amounted to 166,000,
with only eleven Clergymen of the Established Church, and in which
the accommodation was limited to 8,000. In another diocese these
Were twenty-four parishes, containing 730,000 inhabitants, cr....rusted
to forty-five Clergymen, with accommodation for little more than
60,000 persons. In another there were 230,000 Persons, and only
nineteen Clergymen ; proving on the whole th::c there was only one
instructor to 16,000. When, then, they ;sand that the Church ac-
commodation, aided by the spiritual aeedstance of the Dissenters, fell
short by six-tenths or seven-tentes ee; supplying the wants of the people,
this was the first object to se.
directed. nich he thought their attention ought to be
--(H
se-earo ee'c Hon. Gentleman (the Member for Kilkenny)
said, " All this ig Peery well; but the getting rid of Church-rates is a
Pre-eminent r-onsideraticn, because the payment by Dissenters is a
grievance nr. which they have a right to complain."—(Hear, hear.) He
agreed `r:ith the Noble I.ord that this was a case in which they were
he'un'li to make a preference, and to choose between subjecting the pro-
tleety of Dissenters to a tax of 50,0001, a year, and depriving one mil-
lion of the people of the means of religious instruction.—(Cries of Oh,
and hear.) He should certainly vote for such an amendment of the
resolution as to prevent the appointment of a Committee ; and if, un-
fortunately, that should be lost, he should most cordially support the
proposition which called on the House strictly to define the objects to
which the surplus property should be applied.--(Opposition cheers.)
Mr. W. EVANS thought the Right Honeeirable Gentleman who had
just spoken came to rather an extraordilerry conclusion when he stated
that there were a million of the peeple wanting religious instruction,
and yet refused to afford the only means by which spiritual relief could
be adequately suPPlled.—(reeud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now surely
the most rational and prudent course was first to determine what
was the real extent of the property, and then to see in what mode
it might be best applied.—(,Hear, hear.) He looked upon it as no
small object of the inquiry, that it might show that there
was not that enormous sum belonging to the Church, in the county of
Durheare, which was generally supposed. The deans and chapters of
that :ee did not, he believed, receive more than one-fourth part of
the:ir nominal income. He thought it extremely desirable that every
facility should be afforded for the improvement of Church property;
and it was his persuasion that leases of twenty-one years, renewable
by fine every seven years, afforded the best means of accomplishing
that object. In conclusion he should merely say that he should sup.
port the resolution of the Noble Lord with the greatest pleasure and
satisfaction.
Sir R. H. INGLIS did not deny that it was true, as it was stated
by the Noble Lord, that there was in this country a general feel..
mg that a portion of the property of the Church might be taken
away from it----(Hear, hear)—but he thought that in the debate
this evening some Honourable Members had omitted, in consider-
ing the questicn which was for decision, to call the attention of the
House to a very material point, for it was said that they must first
sonsider what was the value of the property tefore they proceeded to
take it from the church. He, however, submitted that there was one
primary question for consideration before the House came to an inquiry
upon the value only of the property, and that was the right which they
possed to interfere with it at all.—(Hoar, hear.) If it was admitted to
be public property, then, indeed, the single question for consideration
won el be, what was the value of it, and how it could be best appropri-
ateee but he contended that is was not public property, because the Go-
vernment gave it to the church, and made it the property of the church,
RS much as the Honourable Member for Kilkenny had obtained posses-
sion of any of the property -which he now enjoyed ; and therefore he held
that the House had no more right to investigate that property than they
had to institute an i"equiry into the effects of the Honourable Member.
—(Hear, hear.) He would beg to ask the Noble Lord whether, in the
event of his succeeding in this motion, he was not himself to have the
naming of the Committee, and whether he would not take
good care that the majority should not consist of such
HonOtirabie Members who were pledged, he did not mean by
any dishonourable means, but by their known and expressed
Opinions, to such means being adopted as he himself desired ; and be-
lieving this to be the fact, he trusted that no Hon. Member would vote
in support of the motion who was not prepared to accede to the proposi-
tions which the Noble Lord had made in his address.—(Opposition
cheers.) It was a highly popular doctrine that the amount only of the
means in the possession of the Church should be inquired into, with a
view to its being ascertained what they had to deal with ; but he hoped
that Hon. Members would excuse him for calling their attention to the
fact, that the Noble Lord had, in his observations to the House, pre-
judged the question, and had stated the views which he entertained upon
the subject.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord, he must confess he thought,
seemed extremely desirous of postponing the consideration of this ques.
tion ; and that this was his object, he thought, was plainly exhibited by
the course he had taken in this and in former Sessions. In 1637 he did
not attempt to take the sense of the House upon the subject until the Ses-
sion had advanced five months, and now, although Parliament had
assembled in the middle of November, it was the 93d sitting day of the
House before he brought forward the question—(llear, hear)—now,
having announced to the world, in the most formal manner, that the
coronation was to take place on the 28th of June, and there being a
very strong and not unreasonable impression that the sitting of the
House would be prolonged much after that event. The Noble Lord, ins deed, had told the House that he did not propose to legislate on this
subject during this year, and even if he were so disposed the extensive
and intricate subjects which were involved in the matter for consi-
deration were of such a Nature as to prevent the Committee ter.
minating their inquiries in less than two stesions; for although the
question did not extend itself to the mieior details alluded to by the
Hon. Member for North Durhaea, it was yet sufficiently long to
occupy a Committee more 'than during the remainder of this
session and the whole of any subsequent session of any ordinary
length. The whole of the arguments of the Noble Lord appeared to
be in reference to 'the rights of property of the possessors of cathe-
dral interest, and would apply as much to any other life tenants what-
ever; but the Noble Lord had drawn a distinction between ecclesiasti-
cal proprietors and lay proprietors, and he was prepared to say that a
distinction did exist, although he was prepared to contend that the dis-
tinction was not of such a nature as to entitle the House to rob the one
and to protect the other. All the instances of abuses which the Noble
Lord had stated were created by Act of Parliament, but at the same
time they were the abuses of individuals, but they gave no right to take
away the property of all for the delinquency of a few. Let the wrong
doer be punt-sped, but why should the innocent man suffer? The Hon.
Member for Kilkenny had asked the House why the Established Church
shoul'e be supported at the expense of other parties P He wouid answer
tie',s question by another, and he would inquire whether the Established
Church asked to be supported by any means but by its own ? Did it re-
quire more than the unfettered exercise and appropriation of its own
property P Even with regard to the church rate question, now, no per-
son would dare to say that the rates did not of right at common law be-
long to the Church, and therefore he had a right to say that the Hon.
Member was not justified in accusing the Church of robbing the com-
munity of its money, or of depriving the Dissenters of what they had a
right to retain. The church-rate was not on the Dissenter as such, but
it was tin the property which he held, and the same amount of property,
if it were held by any other persons, would be liable to the same amount
of tax. The alleged object of the Commission was to inquire what good
might he done by the proper application of Church property, but he was
of opinion that if the Church had the power of disposing more freely of
its property, infinitely more good would be done than could be done by
any means as were now suggested. Ile concurred in the opposition
offered to the present resolution of the Noble Lord by the Hon. Mem-
ber for North Durham, and he concurred also in the terms of the second
resolution which that Hon. Member had expressed his intention to pro-
pose, in the event of thet of the Noble Lord being carried, and he
did so because that resolution did not pledge the House to any pe-
culiar mode of appropriating the surplus funds of the Church—at
least it limited it only to a certain purpose, without stating that the ad-
ministration of them should be in the hande of the commission—for,
objecting as he did to the commission, he certainly should not concur in
leaving to its administration any surplus which might be raised from the
Church property, bttt lie should agree to the resolution of the Hon.
Member, which did not pledge the House to take the property out of the
hands of those who now possessed it. He would offer but one further
observation, and he sincerely trusted that no Hon. Gentleman who dif.
fermi from the Noble Lord in his intended appropriation of the property
would be misled by his proposition for a Committee. —(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord had already communicated to the House what were his
own ideas on the subject, and they all well knew that if the Committee
were granted the Noble Lord would have the nomination of it himself.
Therefore it was that he desired that no Hon. Member would deceive
himself into a belief that the Committee nominated by him would be
nominated for any other purpose than that of carrying into effect his
own views and dcsires--(Eiear)—to take the property of the Church.
Mr. I'EASE said—With regard to the remark which had fallen as to
the state of ecclesiastical property, he was much surprised to find that
any doubt should be entertained on the subject. No person who was
acquainted with the state of the county which he had the honour to
represent could be ignorant of the fact that it laboured under very
great disadvantages on this subject of ecclesiastical property, and
there was no man, he was persuaded, who was not desirous that
it should be placed in a position by which justice could be ob-
tained both to the lessors and the lessees. It was said that no
petitions had been presented on the subject, but he had had the: ho-
nour to present one from Durham, praying the House to take into
consideration the whole subject; the petitioners stating themselves
to be followers of the doctrines of the Church, but alleging that
nothing would redound more to its credit than that sonic alteration
should be made in that particular. These persons, too, were placed
in a position which would enable them to take a just view of the case,
and their opinion was, in consequence, entitled to more weight, for
they held their lands from ecclesiastical landlords. In those lands the
amount of septennial fines per annum was '2,247/. 17s. 50., the amount
of out-rents 3371. 13s. 1 1 p , the amount of corn tithes, 7931. 7s. 10d.,
and the amount of modus in lieu of hay tithe 21. 14s. 10p., while the
turn of 2,22e1. 3s. 6d. was received for other rents of lands and small
tithes; so that the annual income which was derived by the Dean and
Chapter of the Cathedral was 5,6091. 17s. 7P. No person who went
through the lands situated in the parish of Billington could avoid re.
marking the striking difference between the state of the farms and the
farm buildings there, in reference to these which were held under lay
landlords ; and he was fully prepared to say that it would be infinitely
snore advantageous to the farmers that they should hold under a
tenure different from that under which their lands were devised to
them, and that an alteration in the law in this particular would
be advantageous both to the lessors and lessees, for both parties
were now frequently brought into collision with each
ch other, in a
Manlier highly unsatisfactory ; feelings of disrespect being thus induced
in the minds of the lessees in reference to those whom it was their duty
to honour and obey.— (Hear, hear) Ile knew that in most instances
churchmen could not be co
bad landlords, but in many in.
stances sentiments suchashnidesleilled daesseribed were produced by their
conduct. In a letter written by Mr. Gregson to Lord Dungannon, in,
reference to this subject, after referring to the acts which had been
passed for imposing restrictions on the renewal of leases by ecclesiastical
persons, he said, "To all this, I take it for granted, you will answer,
that the acts to which I have referred were intended for the benefit of
the Church ; be it so, and in my opinion so would a proper adjustmentconu
for the redemption or the leeaehol4s. I apprehend that no man of
atm fence",fence",hie Inulhaeod or become entitled, by decent or other