The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-11 00:00:00

PLURALITIES BILL.

On the motion of the Archbishop of CANTERBURY,
the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.
The first and second clauses having been disposed of,
On the third clause being proposed,
After some observations from the Bishop of LONDON
the Earl of RADNOR,
Lord WYNFORD said there were several propositions
which he wished to submit to their Lordships. By the Bill,

as it at present stood, no clergyman was allowed to hold tw.,•
benefices that were distant from each other above ten miles.
Now he could see no reason for that restriction ; and his first
proposition would be thAt instead of ten the distance should
be fixed at forty—five miles. It could not be contended th:.t
the duties might not be as effectually performed at a distance
of forty-five as of ten miles ; for the only function which ir:
either case would be executed would he that of controul and
superintendence over the. Curate, which might be discharged
as well in the one case as the other. His other propositim,
regarded the provision which fixed 6001. as the amount of in-
come which was to incapacitate an incumbent from holding.
two livings. He need not point out to their Lordships with
what peculiar hardship that enactment would fall upon those
whose income slightly ex weced that limit, and who would
.thereby be prevented from acquiring any increase of income ;
whilst others, whose first living was within the required limit,
would have the power of increasing it far beyond the amount
of 600.

The Duke of RICHMOND trusted thit the Right Rev.
Prelate would not consent to the amendment just proposed by
the Noble Lord (Wynford). It appeared to him an extraor-
dinary proposition that the duties of a living situated at the
distance of 45 miles from the residence of the incumbent could
be so effectually performed as those of a living only distant ten
miles. He was confident the Noble Lord must have been
thinking of the railroads at the time—( Laughter)—when he
made at that assertion ; for a railroad between the two livings
most assuredly would be necessary if 45 miles was to be the
distance fixed upon.
Lard OXFORD- opposed the amendment.
The Earl of RIPON also objected to the proposal of the
Noble Lord (Wynford). He for one was not willing that the
clergy of England should be subject to be thrown off a rail-
road whilst on a visit of charity two or three times every week.
—( Hear, and laughter.) _ _ _

Lord WYNFORD. explained. This was an attempt to
abolish pluralities entirely by a side wind. He had no objec-
tion to the entire abolition of pluralities—that might be a very
excellent measure; but then the Legislature should carry it
into effect in a direct and intelligible manner.
The Bishop of LONDON denied that this was any indi-
rect attempt. They all agreed as to the expediency of plura-
lities, were it practicable ; but, as they considered that imprac-
ticable, they had taken the next best step, and restricted them
to the utmost extent; and, by restricting pluralities, it should
be remembered, they were holding out an inducement to
patrons to augment their benefices.—(Hear.)

- After a fevv obseivations from LOrd ASHBURTON in
opposition to the amendment.

- The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said that in the pre-
sent measure they had endeavoured as nearly as possible to
comply with the requisition of the canon law, which prohi-
bited pluralities altogether. The Noble Lord (Lord Wyn-
ford) had argued with confidence that the restriction to ten
miles was equivalent to a total abolition of pluralities. Now
he denied that, because there were many parts of England par-
ticularly in the south, where several livings were planted
within the distance of ten miles.
Lord WYNFORD said that after what had fallen from the
Most Rev. Prelate he should withdraw his amendment ; and
he felt it due to that Most Rev. Prelate to state that, in re-
ference to the limit of ten miles, he had been convinced by
the statement of that Most Rev. Prelate. He came not there
to argue for victories, but to be convinced.

After some further observations from the ArcLbishop of
CANTERBURY and the Earl of RADNOR,

The Bishop of EXETER said . that, however popular it
might be to do away with plurelitics, he protested against the
limitation of ten miles proposed by the Bill. He thought
that pluralities must be endured, and regretted to see any at-
tempt made to put an end to them in deference to the feelings
of the country, however strong they might be on the subject.
If the Bill were carried to the extent proposed, it would be
impossible to give probationary employment to the Clergy.
After a few observations from the Bishop of LONDON and
the Marquis of }RITE,
The Earl of H ARROWBY said that some parishes were
not populous enough to require a Clergyman. Generally
speaking the emoluments were in the inverse ratio to the
duties, and it was only by a system of pluralities they could
maintain the Church in the state in which it ought to be.
The possibility of abstracting a shilling from the Church could
enter the mind of no one who had thought on the subject, un-
less with a view of destroying the Church.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY reminded their
Lordships that there were other parties to the passing of this
Bill, and its failure would be unfortunate. _

The Bishop of ROCHESTER moved that twenty miles
should be substituted for ten miles.

The amendment was put, and strangers were ordered to
withdraw, but no division took place, and the clause was
agreed to.
On clause 4 being put, an amendment was proposed, to the
effect that no spiritual person should hold two benefices who
had a cure of souls where the united value of the two livings
exceeded 1,0001. per annum.
After some observations from Lord Ashburton, the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, the Duke of
Wellington, and Lord Harrowby, their Lordships divided,
when there appeared—
Contentg
Non-contents

. 29

Majority in faavour of the clause and
against the amendment
The several succeeding clauses to clause 8, were, after some
verbal amendments had been made in them, agreed to.

Clause 9 was agreed to.
On clause 10 being proposed.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF moved a proviso, to the effect
that chapels of ease be united to the Mother Church, and
made one benefice, where occasion required.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY thought the propo-
sition bad better be the subject of future consideration—that it
had better be left as a separate provision at a future stage.
After a short conversation the clause was ultimately
a.Teed to,
*Clauses 11 to 15 were also tweed to ; as also was clause
16, with an amendment.
The remaining clauses were then agreed to.
The House resumed, the report was received, and ordered
to be considered on Friday.
The House then adjourned to Friday next.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND)
BILI,.
List of the Minority of Fifty-three, who vo
of the Second Clause.
PRESENT.
EARLS.
Camperdown
Charlemont
Cork
( raven
1:021by
Ilehester
I.e trim
Lielifie:d
At into
Oxford
Radnor
Ito.ein ry
S isconws.
Melbourne
Torrington
BA HONS.
Cloncurry
Cotten
PAIRED OFF.

ed for the retention

Cleveland
Devonshire
Grafton

BARONS
Crewe

Dinorbal
Dunally
Dunc•ac.ron
Dunda3
Fo

Leinster

Norfolk
Richmond
Sot hcrland

Mead:dime
('lanri ,rde
Cuuyngha►n
He.► fort
Lansdowne
Queensberry
U'avistock

Ci!enelg
GAdo'phin
TINT hertun
Holland
King

Lilford

Lynedoch
Seal rd
~?grave
Templemore

' EARLS,
Albemai le
Carlisle

FOU.
Earl Dunmore
lord Kinnaird
Lord Sherborne
.L:rd helhaveu
Lord Ducie
Lord Poltimo e
Viscount (Adam
Lord Mostyn
Lord Howard of Ethogham
Lord Yarborough
Earl of &sex
Lord Dormer
Lord Daere
Lord .titradbrd
Lord Teyn ham
lard Saye and Sole
FAH (:rey
Earl Thanet
Marquis of A nglesea
Lor I Denman
Lord Uxhrikte

AGAINST.
Lord Str.ithallan
Lord Leven
Earl Carnarvon
Earl Morton
Earl Breckilock
Vis,coulit Hereford
Lord Donneri le
Mike of Rutland
Lord "Wynn));
Marquis or! vie;iddale
Marquis of Aylesbury
Lord Sinclair
Earl of SI rad roke
Earl Digby
Earl of Brownlow
Lord !teay
Lord St. John
Earl cf Whichilsea
Lord Ex south
Lord Aboyne
J,ord Strang ord

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND'S AMENDMENT.
List of the Minority of Forty-five, who voted in favour•Or the
Duke of RiAmond's Amendment.
EA
Charlemont
Cork
Ilcbeiter
Leitrim
Minto
Oxford
Itidnor
ltoseberry
T I SebUNT,
Mdbourrie
U.S CONS,
(71011,11 r ry
Cortentiain
Dunally
Duncannon
Dundas
Dinorben

DITKFS.
Clevelair'
Devonshire
firafton

lit
Foley
Ci lenelg
lenlyon
Godolphin
Hathert on
Holland
Langdale
LWOW
l.vnedoch
King
Seaford
Vernon

Leitis,er

Nur°lk
Richmond
Sutherland

MA RQUISES.
Clanricarde
Con yngham
Hea tb, t
Lansdowne
Queensberry

EA It I.S.
A'ban,rle
Eurlington
Carlisle

pis:lops.
Bristol
Chichester
Hereford

There has been recently found in the mine of Michne
Tagilsk, in Russia, a solid mass of malachite carbonate of cop-
per, which is 17 feet two inches long, nine feet broad, and
seven feet 10 inches thick. There does not appear to be a
single crack in it. The greatest mass of malachite hitherto
found is that from the quarry of Furchaninoff, now in the
Museum of Mines at St. Petersburgh,
AN OPERA OF NO NOTE.—Some days since an
intincrant company of players appeared at Lucey, in France,
and announced their intention of delighting its inhabitants with
La Dame Blanche, "the piece written by Scribe, the music
composed by Boieldieu, so said the +' affiches" in letters of co-
lossal dimensions. The good people of the town in their joy
at this announcement never troubled themselves to read any
part of the bill save and except those obtrusive yet welcome
capitals. Had they done so, they would have been spared the
i
mortification they experienced, o.l)pri, on crowding to the
mTishey murmured
tobe hit the trifling
:nd refowred to
theatreomission
t hoefy
~fianillndthtehme
uopsiec7,
their play bills, and then for the first time discovered that the
gigant;e announcement before alluded to was followed by a
single tine in the smallest possible type, stating that by parti-
cular desire the music would 1w omitted, and its place supplied
by a lively dialogue. This parallel t:; the well known case of
hamlet, with the omission of the character of the Prince of
Denmark, has caused a hearty laugh against the citizens of
Lucey, who have been advised in future always to put on their
spectacles when they read a play bill,--Musical World,