The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-15 00:00:00

REGISTRATION.

The,Learned Revising Barristers =resumed their sit
tings yesterday atthe London Coffee-house, Lud
gate-hill.

(Before Mr. COVENTRY.)
PERPETUAL 'AND STIPENDIARY CURATES.
Mr. COVENTRY, on entering the Court 'yesterday,
delivered judgment in the cases of the Rev. Messrs.
Fell, Hambleton, Hazelgrave, M'Kenzie, Venn, Wilson,
Burgess, M'Niven, and Howard, reser,ved from the
Islington and Chelsea lists. The Leart;ed Gentleman
said, I bavo taken an opportunity of looking into the
Church Building Acts, from the 58th Geo. 111., cap..
45, to-the 3d and 4th Victoria, cap. 60, of the last Ses-
sion (eleven in number) ; but before I go into them, it
may be necessary to say a word or two respecting- the
state of things prior to the passing of those Acts. As
to a Teeter, we know that he, is entitled to the parson.
age house, glebe, and great 'tithes, and that he has the
freehold of the Church ; for each and all of these he
is entitled to' be placed on, the county register.
Where the great, tithes are impropriate, that is,
in the hands of lay owners, there is usually a vicarage
endowed, the incumbent of which has the glebe and small'
tithes ; for these he is entitled to a county vote. At
this point it may be observed, that the pews in the
church are annexed to the houses of the inhabitants
and yield no profit to the Rector or Vicar, who are
considered as amply paid by the glebe and tithes. With
respect to a curate, lie is employed by the rector or
vicar at a stipulated salary, and is removable at plea-
sure; 'ha bas-neither a freehold -in his appointmenti, nor
anno be 4 eactrtja aasrisainCtoutrPttax lfaretledh;oll(ll%.-
thfaftorit,
paristee the great"-tithe:areimPrcipriate: and there it-
no vicarage; in 'which case the <las impropriator is
bound to appoint AL eurate, and the..,Bisimp assigns him
a stipend out of the tithes. This curate is not remov-
able at the pleasure of the impropriator, and is therefore
called " perpetual," in• contradistinction to an ordinary
curate, whose appointment is merely temporary. A
perpetual curate, then, having a benefice for life, with
a salary out of the 'tithes, I hold. to be entitled to a
county vote, We now -eomo to the Church-building
Acts, which introduce an incumbent in many respects
different from those before de'scribed, and he is called
a stipendiary curate: Stich are the' present'claimants,
and they are declared by the above Acts to.be severally.
sole corporations,, and to. have all the characters, privi-
leges, and authorities of rectors and vicars but instead
of having ,any glebe.or tithes,; they are paid a fixed
salary, out of the, pew-rents_ of. their, respective
churches; and the only question is, whether the'se
pew-rents are to • be considered profits arising
from., land.? To answer
.this question satisfactorily,
it may, be necessary. !-o,Aake a short review of the Church
Building Acts. By the two first of them, the Com-
missioners are empowered to divide large and populous
parishes, into districts, and after having built, or assisted
in building, one or more churches in each district (the
nomination to which is in the incumbent of the 4origi-•
nal parish), to appropriate the glebe tithes, and other
ecelesistical benefices, such way as, they shall think
proper, and the incumbent in each district is
then to become the rector or vicar thereof, in
the same way: as the original incumbent was
of the original church. This appears to be the
case of the Rey. H.. Burgess, whose claim to a vote
,is,
I think, clearlyr admissible. The Commissioners are
further empowered to assist subscribers in any parish to
erect churches and, chapels, the site whereof is to 'be
conveyed.to them, and the nomination of the incumbent
is to be in, the rector of the mother church. Sub-
scrihers of 1001. each are: to have pews for life or for a
term of years, dischorgedof pew rent ; but the remain-
der of: the pews are to be let by the
' chapel-
wardens (appointed as in the Acts mentioned)
according to certain Axed tables ; these officers are em-'
powered to recove!:, the'rents by action at laW, but no
renter of a pew is to continue the,sanie beyond twelYe •
'months • after he'shall have left th'e 'perish. From the
gross amount of rents thus received, the'cliapelwardena
are to pay the stipend of the minister, fixed by the 'Bi-
shop ; also the salary of the clerk (who is appointed
annually by the incurribeni), and 'all other expenses.'
The surplui, if any, is to be accumulated in the hands
of the trustees for the purpose of purchasing a bulling
or residence for the Minister ; but it' is' expressly pro-
vided that tbe Parish-shall not be -liable 'to make good
any deficiency "in 'the peW-rents, so 'that* if they fall
shert of the stipend fixed they belong wholly to the
clergyman. By another Act the Commissioners are
empowered to assist individuals in the' erection of chapels
in populous places, :provided such 'individuals will sub
scribe a .certain portion of the expense,' find deposit
1,0001. in theßank of England by way of endowment for
the Officiatinkininiite'r, Whoie appointment is terest With
this itiAividual subscriber, or with Such trustees as 'ho

shall name id the Sentence of consicratien. This minister
is also to be paid a stipulated salary out of the 'pew'
rents the same as the others. By -the !fat' Act; S'and"
4' Victoria, Cap: 60, large-powers are givertle charit-
able Persofis 'to "endow these -stipendary curacies with
monies, lands, or tenements, not exceeding the annual
value of -800/:,` without- any license in mortmain.
Hence we find a new beneficed clergyman intro.'
duced,' called stipendiary curate, whose appoiht,
ment is for life, and who is created a sole corpo-
ration by 'Act bf Payllameht.' His eninlitm'ent is derived
from a source unknown to the common law, namely, the
letting of pews in his church annually, and the only
question is whether this is a mere personal salary or a
profit derivable froni land. The distinction between
real and personal 'estate is broad and well-defined.' From
the earliest periods 'the 'owner• of -personal -estate • has
been denied a voice in Parliamentary elections,. and -no
grievance cantle made of this, as areal qualification can be
so easily purchased. - The income' derivable from
an endowment in the funds must therefore be dismissed,
but 'an income from real estate is not to lose its cha-
racter frchn being •blended with that which is-purely
personal: Fees payable for the performance of the mar-
riage ceremony, or that of baptism, or burial, are purely
personal; and a sum paid for opening a tomb is not an
annual inecitne. -. • All, then, rests on the pew-rents.
Now it has been held that a pew is an easement,
affording no right to vote ; how, then, it is asked, can
the'rent of such-an easement confer a greater right than;
the thing itself? ' To this it may be answered that the.
owner of land may -grant an easemeot—of land for a,
term at a stipulated rent, and though the easement,
itself-'may confer no right, the rent would give`
the e:wner of the land a vote ; moreover,
that this doctrine of an easement is- applicable
to the common law only, and not to a state of things
newly introduced by statute. The owner of an acre ot
land adjoining a -fair`may parcel it out into natiaerous
sheep pertepancl.foor times a year receive a considerahht
paysaent,from cattle. salesmen. Twenty. owne.ss—tlf ia
piece of ground may erect a building upon it, and by

!citing out the interior-in-small parcels derive enough
annual profit to qualify the whole number. The most
inconceivable portion of land is sufficient to give a county
vote, if the annual value of it be equal to the fran-
chise. I pay ten- guineas a year for my pew
in Saint ' Pancras; .Church, . which is supported
by a, single pillar, yet . that is sufficient to confer
on the freeholder of the ironed upon which that pillar
stands, a county qualification. I-think a pew rent, like
any other lent, must be considered a profit derivable
from land ; for the pew stands upon, or is supported by
a given space of earth, which is used for no other pur-
pose, and yields no other profit than the pew rent. The
only thing that remains to be done is to connect the
pew rent with a freehold estate in the land from which
it issues. This, in the present case, can only be effected
in a circuitous manner. The freehold of the
church or , cbapel,. is, in. , the Commissioners, and
the right to receive and recover the pew rent
in the church or chapelwardens. The rent
itsellis undoubtedly enhanced by the popularity of the
minister, but ,it must .be, considered the profit of the
land;. and not as fees for preaching the sermon.- In
this Court, upon the best' construction' we can give the
Reform Act', we admit trustees in actual possession and
reject the cestuique trust who is out of possession ; but
if the cestuique trust is entitled to the rents in another
character, as in virtue of some office or benefice, then I
helahinii admissible-as such, upon its being proved that
he is in for life, and that .he derives, either 'legally br
equitably, forty shillings a year from a freehold estate.
That is the present case, and without pursuing the sub-
ject further I think -the whole of these claims ought to
be admitted.—Names retained aeccirdinglY.' • -
Mr. Coppock would not then -attempt to question the
decision, just given by: the Learned Barrister,_ but, with
great respect, he would ask upon what principle were
dissenting clergymen excluded ?
Mr. CoVENTRY—I hold they have no, office within.
the meaning of the Reform Act.
Mr. Coppock—But, Sir, dissenting -clergy`man
ceive pew rents.
Mr. CovErrrav!—You can only admit them as ces-
tuique trusts.
Mr. Coppock—You only admit these-clergymen, Sir,
as cestuique trusts, because you say the legal estate is in
the Commissioners, and the receipt of the rent in the
churchwardens. ,
Mr. COVENTRY—No, I say they are officers within
the meaning of the Act. Mr. Burgess receives no less
than 6001. a year.
Mr. Coppock observed that the case of Mr. 'Burgess
was very different from the others, as that gentleman's
might be considered, a separate district church, but
he ought to apologise for making.any observations after
judgment had beenpronounced.
Mr. COVENTRY' said 'no apelOgy whatever was neces-
sary, for he was always happy to hear any observations
Mr. Coppock had to make.
Mr. Coppock would next year object to them on
stronger ground

Mr. COVENTRY then revised the lists for the parishes
of St. George.in the East, Christchurch, Mile•end New
Town, and St. John, Wapping.
(Before Mr. SHADWELL.) '
The Overseers.of Norton Folgate appeared, and said
they had
.neither claim nor objection to hand in. the
list was therefore passed.'
- .
111I.E.END, OLD TOWN.

The Overseers of. this parish had objected to 14
names on the list, or the ground of removal all of which
were allowed-.
Several objections were Made' by third parties, but no
point of interest ocetirred,

~~

THE FLEET .D ITC-Hs °

Oa Tuesday a meeting of the City Commissiocers'of
Sewers took place at the Guildhall, for' the purpose of •
taking' ° Cori side ratioa Mr.. Walke es4pl an of a-
vert at the mouth of Fleet Ditch, adjacent, to Black-
friars-bridge, as a- remedy for the very great nuisance
occasioned by the want of some scientific application.
Alderman and Sheriff Gibbs in the Chair. .
A deputation from .Bridenell and. Bethlem Hospitals
attended the Board of Commissioners, consisting of
Mr. Price, the Treasuier of the Hospital*', Mr-. Laurie,
and others; in favour 'of the improvement..undertaken,
upon the. advice of Mr, Walkeri the President of
,the
Society, of. Engineers.
The 'following itePorevias, on the preceding day, laid
before 'the 'Governors of the Hospitals, and. determined
that body to advocate, as forcibly as ppssiblo, the plan,
a model of which was exhibited
" 12,1tegent-street, Oct. 12, 1840.

" Gentemen,—Having perused, according to your
request, the printed proceedings relative to the Fleet
Ditch Sewer ; having examined the works recently
executed at the mouth thereof, and having given the
subject an attentive considreation, I beg leave to report,
to you the following few observations :•-•
• " The subject has been so deliberately and fully en-;
tared into, and the facts bearing upon it. have been so
ably stated. by 'Mr. Walker on the one side, and Mr..
Kelsey on the other, _that I cannot hope to throw any,
now light upon the matter, although the leaning of my
judgment is rither opposecrio Mr. Kelsey's views. I
cannot but express how highly I estimate the wane of
his reports. on this, subject, and I trust it may not be
. unbecoming in me to add, that the Commissioners of
Sewers of the City of London are; I think, much in-
debted to him for the zealous . regard he has, shown for
their interests.

" Owing, doubtless, to an imperfect apprehension of
the nature of the proposed improvement,. some needless
objections have been raised. The flaps above the cul-
vert are not tide-flaps—therefore, there is as free ingress
for the river water' on its rise, and as free egress fur it
on it 4 ebb, as at,any former-.period ; and the ,same
would be equally; true if the whole of the improvementts
proposed by Mr. Walker were carried out. So also
there is ce► tainly nothing in what has' been•done,.'nor
in what is proposed to be done; that would prevent an
examination of the interior of the sewers in a punt, as
heretofore. .

The hilly objections that appear to me to have any
weight whatever are two :—the one is, that the culvert
may be impeded by bulky subsitances stopping the way ;
the other is, that there may be an accumulation of foul
and inflammable air pent-up within the,tewer. • •

" On.the first,. I would remark, that,. even granting
the possibility of the whole culvert heing completely
and solidly stopped up, still the sewerage 'would go on
just as freely :as heretafore,• over the .top of the. oulvert.
But my conviction is, that. the force of,the current, when
confined within the limits of the culveri, would be fully
adeqaate to remove every impedirhent. One of the foremen
of, the works informs me, that he has, seen stones .of
one.hundred weight. carried along by the current of the
sewer. You are aware that about two years 'ago I
received the authority of the Governor of Bridewell
Hospital, to pla'de a large heavy iron..tide-valve at the
mouth of the .sewer which drains a part of the Bride-
well precinct ; the evils predicted as likely to arise
from this measure haVe never been realized ; and, al-
though the ordinary current is of course extremely
feeble compared with that of the Fleet Ditch. sewer,
it has always been sufficient to prevent any accunful'a-
, ,
tion or stoppage. •
« With regard to the 'second objection, I think it

certainly merits great attention. There is no doubt
. but that if the mouth of the sewer be closed, as pro-
Hposed, and its other extremities also shut up by stench-
traps, there will arise from various sources a body of
foul and inflammable air which will be confined with-
in the sewer, totally incapable of being breathed,
and liable, to cause explosion on being set light to. I
admit that this bad air would be always in some degree
diluted at low water by a portion of the culvert being
open for the passage of fresh air, and the flips them-
selves would at their interstices be permeable to the
outer air ; still, however, it is, I think, almost certain,
that the atmosphere within the sewer would generally
be quite unfit for respiration.
" The only eligible remedy that suggests itself for.this
evil, is to establish a rule that no person should descend
into the sewer without previously purifying the air by
setting open all the, flaps, a complete and effective
provision for doing which ought certainly to forrn'a part
of the plan, and no doubt does so, although I see no
indication of it on the model.
" When such a provision is made, I can conceive no
Jvalid o a
bjection whatever to full and fair trial being
given to Mr. Walker's proposed plan. Should these
flaps. prove liable to objections too serious. to be sur-
mounted, they can but be abandoned ; but should they
Trove otherwise, I think that every individual Concerned
swill feel gratified in having contributed towards correct..
ing a most pernicious public nuisance.
I am, Gentlemen, your most obedient servant,
" SYDNEY SMIRKIL
" To Sir Peter Laurie, President, and
Ralph Price, Esq., Treasurer, &c."
After some discussion in the Committee, the Com-
. missioners of Sewers a'greed to the 'adoption of. Mr.
Walker's•plan of the culvert; by.a majority of about 15
to 3. The apprehensions so generally entertained of
the opposition of the Commissioners of Sewers to the
enlightened project of the President 'of the Civil Engi-
neers, are thus very agreeably and permanently removed.

The ;Bride of Messina is withdrawn by Madame
Vestris tor the present, in ConsequenCe of the indisposition
of Miss Ellen Tree.

In the storm of Monday night (28th ult.), th.,
James Louis, of Newry, a find new vessel of 200 tons
burden, wai driven on share on the Point of Sdllachan,
in Ardgour. At daylight on Tuesday morning she was
discovered to be aground by some men of the neighbour-
hood going to their work. They' immidixtelY went to her,
and finding that she had been abandoned by-her ere", and
no trace of them to be seen, they took possession, and
sent to inform the nearest Magistrate . On his going en
board there were nine or ten on the deck '•• and upon ex-
amining them and the vessel, he found, to his great satis-
faction, that not an article either on deck or below bad
beep meddled with; even a plate of, biscuit and.a bottle of
brandy, with a glass half, full, standing on the cabin table,
were`untouched, just as left 'by the crew. These men,
wba'are the farm servants, of Sallachan and Cuil, were in
the sole posseasion of the vessel from daylight in the morn-
ing-nntil four in the afternoon, with every part'of the yes- 1
'nettitien to them,.and not the value. of a ..ropet's •endwas
touched..—Edinburgh paper.