The Sun.
London, England, 1833-03-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE LORDS, MeRcE 29.
On the Eirl of SHAFTESEUKY taking the Chair, a few
minutes hvfore five o'clock,
Lord WESTERN presented two petitions for the better
observance of the S ibbath.
The Bishop of DURHAM presented a petition from
Long Hoariby, in the county of Durham, to the same
effect. . . .

Lord DACBE presented a petition from the agricultural
labourers of Nierione, praying for relef.
The Rt.yal assent was given by Commission to the Ex-
chequer Bills Bill, Sugar Duties Bill, the Appropriation
Bill and twenty-three private Bills.

The Cammis•inners were the LORD CHANCELLOR, the
Duke of RICHMOND, and the Mar4tth of LANSDOWNE.
The Earl of HARROWBY moved for a return of all
the small livings in all different dioceses of England and
Wales.---Granted.

Sir J. WaorrEsLET, and other Members from the
Commons, hrnupht up a Bill for cleansing and paving the
town of Chdtenham.
Earl FITZWILLIAM moved for certain accounts re-
lating to the quantity of corn imported during the last
year, and the duty paid thereon.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said. considering that the
motion of the Noble Earl was made with a view to the
alteration of the existing system of the corn laws, it
world be very desirable that the Noble Earl should move
for more extended returns.

Earl FITZWILLIAM had no objection, undoubtedly,
10-eitend his motion to further the accounts.—( Hear.)
He:had carefully looked over the different accounts,
k said 'had selected those which appeared to him of the
...,greatest value. The Noble Baron (Ellenborough) was
aware that some days ago it was agreed that there
- should be laid before the House those returns that
had already been laid before the House of Commons,
hut he would not have the slightest objection to extend the
`Motion down to the latest possible period. The only
reason: why he had not moved for all the returns
that had been laid before the House of Commons
Was,' .tlcat he was told it was the Par liamen-
. tary course only to send for those papers that could not
le.t_ got otherwise, or those that were of an official cha-
racter having been taken before a Committee of the House.
However, he would he very glad if the Noble Baron and
all those who agreed with him (Earl F. ) or disagreed
with him on the subject went! I most minutely weigh every
information that had been laid before the House of Com-
mons.—The returns were er tered.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petitio❑ from the
parish of St. George's, Bloomsbury, for the better ob-
servance of the Lord's Day.
The Earl of RODEN presented a petition from a
parish in the county of Cork against what he called
the church spoliation Bill. The petitioners prayed
that their Lordships would address. his Majesty, that
be might be pleasA to order a Convocation of the
Bishops and Clergy, in order that they might take the
subject into their consideration.
The NOBLE EARL then presented a petition to the
same effect from Carrickfergus.
The EARL of WICKLOW presented a petition from
the parish of Wicklow, to the same effect.
Earl FITZWILLIANI begged to observe that the peti-
tioners dill not go half far enough. The Bishops and
Clergy dill not constitute the Church—(Hear, hear)—he
and the people generally were a part of it.
WELCH CLERGY.

The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, on presenting a
petition from the inhabitants of Chester and its vicinity,
praying that no clergymadhence'orward be appointed to
a benefice in Wales who was ignorant of the Welch lan-
guage, commenced with stating that be did not consider
himself bound to adopt all the arguments which the peti-
tioners had used in stating their complaints. The petition
appeared to him to he respectfully worded, and it was de-
serving of their Lordships'serious consideration. He be-
lieved it was signed entirely either by Welshmen or
persons intimately connected with the principality. They
e,mpl ined of many abuses of the Church, and a trihuted
some of them to the system which had so long continued.
They also complained that the Bishops and many of the
clergy were ignorant of the Welch language—a circurn
stance leading to great inconvenience. He regretted that
there was not one common language spoken throughout
the country; but as such was not the case, he thought the
clercy who officiated in Wales ought at least to be tandlar
with the tongue of the great mass of the inhabitants.
The petitioners likewise complained of pluralities, and
non-residence—both proper subjects of complaint, if such
were the case. They also asserted that in some large
and populous districts there were no incumbents at all ;
and surely this must be admitted by all to I,e an evil
which ought to he remedied. In conclusion, the Noble
Marquis arid he really thought the petitioners bad made
out a prima facie ca'e for investigation, and he trusted
that the petition would he so considered by the House.
On the motion of the NOBLE MARQUIS the petition
was read at length by the Clerk.
The Bi,hop of BANGOR was glad that the Noble
Marquis had preserved the petition which their Lord,hips
had beard read, as it afforded an opportunity for contra-
dicting the allegations of a petition sitnil ir in character,
though he believed aorn,wli it Jiff-rent in terms, to one
presented in the other House of Pardam.nt by the Noble
Lord the Member for the city of Chester (Lord Robert
Grosvenor). It was alleged and insinuated, amongst
other things, that the benefices of tie Welch trio-
eeses were chiefly- i❑ the patronage of the Bishops
and of lay impropriators, who gave them to relatives
of their own, who were not natives of the country,
and could not speak the Welch language, but who re-
sided in England, and left the performance of their rleri.
01 duties to poor Welch curates. Now he could state
positively, that in his own dioce,e; as well as that of St.
Asaph, no clergyman had obtained a b-nefive who was
not well acquainted ,sits the Welch language. In the
diocese of Bangor there happenAl to be three clergymen,
and three only, who were natives of England, an I each of
those gentlemen, before he obtained his living, underwent
is strict examination b. fo,e persons well versed in the
Web 1 inguage, who certified that he was sufficiently at,

qt+taititerf with it. One of those three Englishmen did
not reside in Wales, but on another living wh•e!r be
held in the diocese of Lichfi-ld ; but the two others, who
had most important hemfices, resided on their bene-
fices ; and he undertook to say that they could not be
more z •alous or active ministers, and that they were per-
fectly well versed in the Welch language. It was a most
unlaunded imputation on both the Bishops and lay im•
p • thrs in Wales, therefore; to say that they had given
the pre erments in' their gift to their own friend,

who were unacqua:nted with the language of the
people.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Out of 65 benefices in
his diocese, 55 were in the gift of the Bishiip, six of
the Crown, and four of lay impropriators. The Noble
and Learned Lord on the woolsack had the nomination of
those in the gift of the Crown, and he could assure their
Lordships that, if persons had been appointed by the Noble
and Learned Lord, who had not understood the Welch
language, he (the Bishop of Bangor) would have felt it his
duty pot to have confirmed the appointments. As to the
Don-residence of the Welch clergy, he could only say that
in his diocese there were 125 clergymen holding pie-
ferments of different descriptions, and of that number only
Live resided out of the diocese, tour of whom held livings so
small as to be hardly worth ret lining. It was said that
the Bishops did not understand the Welch langu ige, and in
his own case he was obliged to admit that such was the
tact; but lie had a Welch chaplain, who read the ser
vice in Welch after he had read it in English, and
there were two services in Welch, and two in English

ev,ry day in the Catlit-dral of Bangor. lie emu d not

conclude without adding that there was now no part of

the principality in which some of the population did rya
understand English, from the establishment of English

school.. There was another allegation to which it wa.
his duty to advert. It was said that, from the manner

In which church preferments were bestowed in Wales by
the Bi.hops, the poor Welch curates, who were the work-

. .
ing clergy, had no chance nor hope of church preferments.
Now, he believed he might state that there was no dioce.4e
in England in which there were so many curates pro-
moted to benefices, as in the dioceses of Bangor and St.

Asaph ; in fact, it was quite notorious that .very zealous
and well-conducted curat- was almost certain of getting
preferment, such as those preferments were ; fur he begged
it to be unders'ood, that none of the Welch livings were
very productive.—(Hear, he ,r.)
The Bishop of ST. •ASAPH believed the petition had
come from a gentleman residing in Chester, who had
written a hook,, which contained many gross and exagge-
rated statements concerning the clergy and church of North
Wales. It stated, amongst other things, that the Chapter
of Christ's College, Oxford, derived an income of 4,7001.
a-vear from the tithes of a dis riet in Wales, whereas the
whole of the tithe!' of that district only amounted to '4,000/.
per annum, and the Chapter of Christ's C.diege only re-
ceived 500/. a year. It was rather singular t' at petitions,
complaining of the state of the Church of North Wales,
and its management, should emanate from the uioce,e of
Chester, and not from the Welch diocese. It was very
kind, however, no doubt, of those gentlemen in Chester no
take so much trouble as they did about tne Cr,urch in
lA ales. They Complained greatly of the incomes enjoyed
by the Welch Bishops ; and when he heard this part of the
petition be could not but feel some degree of surprise that
the Noble Marquis was not clarmed lest th,,r!re pet sons who

' were so anxious to get a part of the atnall property enjoyed
by the Welch Bishops, might take it into their heads to
deprive the Noble Marquis of some part of his large Pos-
sessions.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) As the pro-
perty of the Bishops was so often referred to, he might
be allowed to say thus much of himself, that since he
came to the Bench he was a much poorer man than be-
fore he came to it. If he had not laboured for many
Iyears as Hetci Master of Westminster School, when that
school was in its most flourishing state, and managed at
that time to save a little money, he should have been re.
duced to berg iry whets he was advanced to the S-e of
Exeter. During the time he filled that See he had never
been able to live one year within hi, income, and when his
.health required it he really was not able to afford to keep a
saddle horse. Since lie had been promoted to the diocese
of St. Asaph, which was, certainly, more profitable than
that of Exeter, he had been obliged to expend so much in
fees upon entering, expenses of repairing his house, and
other matters, that even if he lived to a great age he
could never hope to replace the money he had expended.
It was for their Lordships to decide, therefore, whether he
had too much for his support as a clergyman?—(Hear,
hear.) Now with respect to the charges contained in the
petition. It was said that the Welch Bishops bestowed
the livings in their gift on their own relatives, who were
Englishmen, and resided in England. Now it so happened,
in his case, that he had never given any thing in the way
of church preferment to a ref tam of his own, or to at y
Englishman. In nearly every instance since his appoint-
ment he had presented Welch curates to the vacant bene-
fices. In one instance he had presented his own Welch
chaplain to a benefice. —(Hear, hear.) In another ease he
had presented a Welchman, who had been for 17 years
resident in London as the Chaplain of Sr. George's Hos-
pital, This was the first appointment which came into his
gift after his elevation to the see of St. Asaph. He had
received the most satisfic•ory testimonials of the gentle-
man's fitness from the medical officers of St. G orke's
Hospital, and others on whom he could depend ; and if it
was not trespassing on their Lordship.' indulgence too
roue!. he should relate a little anecdote of the person to
whom he referred, which tended to prove that he was not
quite ❑nworthy of the patrtiniee bestowed on him. Whilst
he filled the situation o►' Chaplain to St. George's Hospi-
tal, this individual was passing through some fields in the
neighbourhood of St. Pancras, late in the evening, when
he was set upon by four rubbers, who demanded his
money. He was much alarmed, and stated that lie was
willing to give his purse, if they did not ill-treat h,rn,
when one of the robbers—who it appeared had r. cognised
him—interposed, and desired his bellows to leave, saying
that they should not take a shilling from this clereyman,
and that lie would see bim to a place of safety, for he
never could for get the kindness and humanity which he
met from that clergyman when he was a patient in St.
George's Hospital.--(Hear, hear ) Like his Right Rev.
Friend, lie (the Bishop of St, Asaph) must plead guibry to
the coarge of not understanding the Welch language; hut
he could assure their Lordships that no practical incon-
venience resulted from his ignorance of that language.—
(Hear.) The Right Rev. Prelate concluded by saying
that there were no grounds fur the charges contained i❑
the petition, and regretted that the Noble Marquis bad
made such strong remarks in presenting it..

Lord KING was rather surprised at the course pursued
by the Right Rev. Prelate. Why refer to the petitions
presented in another place, when the identical petition was
presented i❑ their Lordships' House ? Wily refer to a
speech made in another House, when nearly the same
words were used in that House ? There had been three
charges made, and not one of them had been answered.
The Noble Marquis (lid not blame the Right Rev. Prelates
who had spok.'n for giving, livings to rel(tives. The
charge applh-d to other and former Prelates, and therefore
they had no occasion to defend themselves. With regard
to that which fell from the Right Rev. Prelate about
the property of the Noble Mat quis being in the same
conditio❑ as Church property, he could only say that they
bore no similarity. The one was private—the other
public property. He must also say, that the Right Rev.
Prelates hid given no answer to the ch ,rge made against
clergy m n spending their incomes out of the parishes from
which they received them.
The Bishop of ST. ASAPH said the Prel rtes of the
Church made a point of choosing those persons whom they
considered best qualified to fulfil the duties of clergymen.
They did not act like some lay patrons, who appointed
persons to livings because they had the least of the clerical
character about them.

After a few words from the Bishop of BANGOR,
Lord KING said, if the remark made by the Right
Rev. Prelate (St. A•aph) about appointing a person to a
living, because he had the least of a clergyman about him,
was meant to apply to him, he would only say, in answer,
that the charge was a falsehool. Something of the
kind had appeared in the papers, but there was not a word
of truth in it. The clergyman wham he had appointed
to the living was, in every way, of the highest respec-
tab;lity.

The Biihop of ST. ASAPIT was glad to hear the
Noble Lord's disavowal, and thought the Noble Lord
ought to feel grateful to him fur afftrding him the
Opportunity.

The Margois of WESTMINSTER briefly replied, rind
contended that none of the charges had been answered.
The petition was then laid on the table, and the House
adjourned at eight o'clock.