The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-20 00:00:00

SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY

the augmentation of the cure of souls, as far as
these might be seen necessary, due consideration
being always had to the wants and wishes of
the different districts. How, then, were the expressions
of Hon. Gentlemen justified? Here it appeared that the
Government, by diminishing the superfluous dignities
of the Church, and by abrogating the patronage of the
Crown and of the bishops, had a sum of 300,0001. per
annum, a portion of which they wished now to
devote to the extension of the English bishoprics.
He did not wish to argue again the whole merits of the
question; it was sufficient for him to say that the pre-
sent was to be viewed in the light of one of a series of
measures, and looking to the reforms which had been
already obtained by the abolition of pluralities, the
more effectual provision for the cur• of souls, and many
other reforms, he really thought that if a case could
be made out for the establishment of a new bishopric, it
would not be right to prevent the Church from the exercise
of that power which belonged to all dissentients, whether
civil, ecclesiastical, or political, viz., an extension of the
means of government of such bodies. He thought that
it was an essential part of the plan which he had hinted
at that there should be an increase of the number of
bishops beyond that of Manchester. He was fully per-
suaded of the correctness of that opinion, and
he did not purpose to take one single farthing
from the taxation of the country, or to in
-rease the power of the Church by giving those new
bishops seats in the other House of Parliament. In that
opinion he was fortified by the opinion of the Right Rev.
Prelates, who formed part of the Commission. The
whole bench of bishops were quite satisfied with the
arrangements, that there should be a creation of new
bishops who should not have seats in the Upper House.
-le trusted, therefore, that the House would not refuse
to go into Committee this evening on the Bill, especially
as he had given up the sitting of the House on Saturday
on the express condition that the House should go into
Committee to-day for the purpose of hearing the objec-
tions of the Hon. Member for Manchester, and those
)f the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Dorchester,
in opposition to the details of the Bill.
Sir W. MOLES WORTH thought that the whole of
the argument of the Noble Lord might be summed up in
one sentence, viz., " that we have hitherto done some
amount of good, and it is right, therefore, that we should
now do a little evil." He did not think that such
was an argument fitted to be used in favour of a
measure for the creation of a new bishop. He thought
,hat it ought to be clearly established to the satisfaction
of the House that there was a necessity for a new bishop
before the Bill was allowed to pass into law. So far from
inch a case having been made out, there had been
twenty speakers on his side of the House upon the Bill,
and of that number seventeen had spoken against the
' Bill. No pressing emergency had been brought forward
by the Noble Lord, or by any other speaker, for pushing
this measure forward with so much haste. The Noble Lord
said that the commission had recommended the creation
of a new bishop of Manchester upon the union of the
sees of St. Asaph and Bangor ; be (Sir W. Molesworth)
(hoaght that there might be probably something in that,
and let the Noble Lord bring in a measure to carry that
recommendation ; but there certainly could not be any
reason for pressing forward a measure of this nature,
especially when the Noble Lord had said that this was
only a portion of a great and comprehensive measure on
the subject. He thought that the better course
would be to postpone the Bill till next session,
when a full opportunity would be given
tor the consideration and discussion of the whole bear

ings of the question; and he for one would promirl
Nhen such a measure was brought forward, to give it his
best and most attentive consideration.

Mr. TRELAWNY said that he would dividm upon
every stage of the Bill; but he would not be a party to
any factious opposition.
MESSAGES FROM THE LORDS.

Messengers from the Lords appeared at the bar, and
demanded a conference with the Commons.

Lord J. RUSSELL with several other Members
then retired, and after the lapse of ten minutes returned
and intimated to the House, that at the conference just
held they had agreed to receive messages from the
Lords, in future, by one Master in Chancery instead of
two, as at present.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained.
Mr. COLLETT continued to think the measure un-
just and objectionable in every respect, and he was de-
termined to resist it in all its stages. (The Hon. Gen-
tleman proceeded to read several letters expressive of
the hostility of the writers to the creation of any new
bishoprics, which excited much laughter.)
Mr. WYNNE thought it was not in accordance with
the rules of the House that any Gentleman should
read any doccument without the permission of the
House.

Mr. HUME said that this was done every day by
Members of the Government as well as by other Mem-
bers of the House.

The SPEAKER did not think the Hon. Member was
out of order.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE hoped the Hon. Gentleman the
Member for Winchester would not proceed further with
his amendment, as he could not give it his support, being
bound by the arrangement he had made with the Go-

vernmeta on Friday last, not to give any further opposi-
tion to the House going into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. B. OSBORNE concurred with the Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Finsbury, that after what took
place on Friday night, he could not support the amend.
went of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Winchester,

and he hoped the Hon. Member would withdraw it.
Mr. B. ESCOTT said, that after what had fallen
from the Hon. Member who had just spoken, he would
not press his amendment to a division.

The amendment was then by leave withdrawn.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
Mr. M. PHILIPS said a deputation of his consti-
tuents had with him waited upon the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government, urging him not to allow this Bill
to pass in its present form, and he took that opportunity
of requesting of her Majesty's Government, that when
they came to legislate again upon this sub-
ject, their views and statements should not be
lost sight of. There could be no doubt that Manchester
was greatly in want of spiritual education ; but he did
not think this Bill was calculated to supply the defi-
ciency. He must therefore move a verbal amendment
to the preamble of the Bill, to prevent certain parochial
funds in Mancheger being appropriated to the purposes
of this Bill.

Mr. CHOLMONDELEY regretted that this measure
had been hitherto discussed in so intemperate a tone ;
but he hoped now, that they had ~,crot into Committee
on the Bill, the merits and details of the measure
would be discussed with more temper and decorum, and
with less reference to party feeling or sectarian differ-
ences of opinion. For his own part he most. strongly
supported this measure. At present Manchester was
within the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Chester, but that
distinguished prelate had so much to do in other parts
of his diocese that he could not devote that attention to

Manchester which its wants and importance demanded.
But under existing circumstances, considering the
paucity of the funds attached to a new diocese, he
thought it would be much better both for the bishop
himself as well as the diocese, that the bishop should not
for the present be put to the expense of sustaining the
expensive dignity of a seat in the House of Lords.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it would be much bet-
ter, notwithstanding what had been said by the de-
putation of the Honourable Gentleman the Member
tor Manchester, to leave the parochial funds embraced
by the amendment to be dealt with by future legislation.
Mr. HUME did not believe that the necessities or
wants of Manchester required the establishment of a
new bishopric. Manchester was within the diocese of
the Bishop of Chester, and all the services the people
required of a bishop could be easily performed by that
Right Rev. Prelate, if the number of poor district work-
ing clergy were augmented.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. WALKER said it was his intention to give
his consent to the passing of the Bill.
Mr. HORSMAN supported the amendment. He
did not object to the creation of a Bishop of Manchester,
but as it had already been settled that a bishopric
of Manchester should not be created till the union of the

Sees of Bangor and St. Asaph took place, he did net
think it right to proceed with this Bill till that event oc-
curred.—(Hear, hear.)
An Hort. MEMBER said he had no doubt that the work
ing clergy were of great service to the Church, but it
was necessary that some supervision should be placed
over so large a body of them as were engaged in admi-
nistering spiritual relief in the large and important dis-
trict of Manchester.—(Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY,

Mr. PENNANT said he represented a portion of this
new diocese of Manchester, and he could state that the
clergy of the district which he represented were strongly
in favour of this measure.—(Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. Hume, Mr. Horsman,
Mr. Cholmondeley, Mr. Collett, and Mr. M. Philips,
Sir W. MOLESWORTH thought that there were
two questions to be considered, first, whether an in-
crease of bishons were really necessary; and secondly,
whether it would or would not be more advisable if,
instead of creating those bishops, an increase were to
be made in the amount of the incomes of the working
clergy of the country. Ha did not think that a case of
necessity had been made for the creation of a new
bishop. It had been stated by the Noble Lord that the
necessity had been established eleven years since. He
denied that such was the case; it had been proved by
the commission, which then inquired into the subject,
that in some cases there was not enough for the bishops
to do, and in other cases there was too much,
and it was resolved to unite the sees of St.
Asaph and Bangor, to divide the see of Chester,
and to create a new Bishop of Manchester.
But he would ask the Noble Lord why in the present
sheae,
have avoided
Ch e s Chester,
inflictingw hic
h
bishop,
the h °epee borio.usgth. t
AinsitaphiapeasTurhee t oG
oavdedr
nam
epnotr twi oonu
do f
hthe
s
instancels he had not, instead of proposing to make a new
owonasdthcoen ps iedoeprieed
fa sE tnogol a
nl adr gaen,
into-
jury such as was proposed
Noble Lord had gone seby
the present Bill. The
further, and said that it was his
intention to propose to
the county of C create a Bishop of Bodmin for
ornwall. But he having sat for the
county of Cornwall in one Parliament might claim to
have some knowledge Of the feelings
he felt quite convinced if there
were of that county, and
for Cornwall in the House that he wouldany Hon. Member
not dare to
rise up in his place and thank the Government for the
appointment of a Bishop of Cornwall.
would be the cost of a Bishop of Cornwall ?
INow, what
It would
no doubt be equal to if not more than 4,0001. per
Now, this sum would be sufficient to raise theper annum.
Now, this sum would be Sufficient to raise the m
incomes of all the clergy in Cornwall to the amount
100/. per annum.
Sir G. GREY said that as the proposition for a bishop
of the county of Cornwall was not yet before the House,
it would not be thought necessary for him to follow the
Honourable Baronet who had just sat down in his argu-
ments upon that point. With respect to the necessity of
the appointment of a bishop for Manchester, he thought
a clear case had been made out for such appointment by
the fact of the great increase of the population of the
see of Chester, end not merely of general population,