The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-02 00:00:00

SUN,

i then he Ist them go into the diece3c eF St. David's.
Tn hisheo'a Inc ,me wati fixed at 4 5001. a, yeer, but ells
result tee return in ,he hand of the Wgie. Iton. Gen-
flea' in would Ptscliy that instead C'f 4,5e01 a year, the
bishop received 5,5001. a year; read in order to 'leaks. the
deduction as gross us possible, if they tarn to a certain
page in that return they would find there was no rp ties
et expenditure teat could occur to the mind or men or a
bi•boo that was not set down, even to 31. 4:1. for pee-
eionres. Now w' at were the duties of the bi hap? lie
was dean of the College of Brecon, which had 7,21:31.
per annum. It was the duty of the bishop to preside
over that college, and what was the state of the church?.
He referred to the description given of it by Mr. Jesse,
who had visited it in 1847; hr, described it as " all
decay, ruin, and desolation." Such was the description
of the college church of Brecon. He risked again,
would the Reman Catholics suffer these things? Aed
when such things occurred, could they wonder that
the Pope should have appointed a bishop of Menevia?
—(Hear, hear.) Or. who could wonder to bear that
in front of this neglected edifice there theald have
arisen a place of Roman Catholic worship of admirable
design, and well qualified to meet the wishes of
the inhabitants of the district?—(Hear,) Having shown
the state of the colleeiate church, he wished next to
point to the condidue of the parish churches over which
the bishop presides. Having read a I:st of parish
churches, the lion. Baronet proceeded to say that the
plan of reform he would propose would be to make into
ono fund the whole of the ecclesiastical property, and
then, instead of giving the Archbishop of Canterbury
15,0001. a year and two palaces, he would give him the
same income as the Prime Minister. Ho would lure
the bishops out of tho House of Lords and cordite them
to their spiritual functions, and give them from 2,0001.
to 3,000/. a year; and instead of having the minor
clergy, as they were in Wales, working in the field—
putting in potatoes, driving carts, wearing clothes not
fit for a gentleman to wear, and starving upon 25/. and
304 a year, he would have no clergyman paid less than
2001. a year, nor more than 5001.; and by so doing there
would be abundant means for church extension from
the funds of the Church. They would, by so acting,
make the Church useful to the community and respected
by the people; and so doing, he said they might rely
upon it that issent would be less popular and Rome less
rampant.—(Cheers.)
Mr. MORRIS was understood to speak in terms of
commendation of the character of the Bishop of St.
David's as a man of unbounded charity, and who did
every thing that was within his power for the benefit of
the diocese.
Mr. A. B. HOPE commended the moderate and able
manner in which the subject had been brought forward
by his Noble Friend. He did not wish to be supposed
hostile to the Church extension cause, but he must say
that a greater mistake could not possibly be made than
to suppose that the service of the Church was best ac-
complished by the mere extension of district churches.
Let them further increase the staff of working clergy,
and see that each man was placed in a situation in which
he was sure to be effective. He was strongly opposed
to the sale of Lord Chancellor's livings, which he con-
ceived must necessarily operate most injudiciously under
every point of view. He could not think that tads plan
would ever be converted into a law, but as it came re-
commended by a commissioner, it should have its weight
with him, as he hoped also it would have its weight with
the House. If the episcopate was to be respected, it
must be brought back to the condition of a working epis-
copate, in which each bishop should really be the head
and centre of his diocese. Multiply the bishoprics, and
multiply their cathedrals too, but let the organization in
each be as perfect as it was possible to be with reference
to the varied objects of Church government. Under
all the circumstances, he conceived that . this WAS too
timid a remedy for a wound that had penetrated too
deeply, and which was not to be healed by the constitu-
tion of six hundred new churches, to be formed out of
the sale of Lord Chancellor's livings. He believed that
was not the time and place for such a motion, and he ,
hoped, therefore, as the Noble Lord had done all that
was necessary in the able speech he had addressed to the
House, ho would not press his motion to a division.
Sir G. GREY heard with pleasure, as indeed every
one else had, the able speech of the Noble Lord, and the
great earnestness and talent with which he supported
his views. Before the House, however, agreed to adopt
the address moved for by the Noble Lord, he thought it
necessary to caution them what the effect of that would
be in the absence of any specific measure. The terms
of the Noble Lord's resolution did not very much
from measures already adopted by the House, and
unless, therefore, a specific measure was recom-
mended, the House would not act prudently in adopting
it. As to what had been said with respect to spiritual
destitution among their poor, he would not now enter
into the question, but he was free to confess that after
making the most liberal allowance, he was ready to ad-
mit a large number of the inhabitants of this city, and
other large and densely crowded towns were not pro-
vided with religious instruction. But there was no spe-
cific proposition to remedy the evil now before the
House, which Parliament could adopt. All must admit
the vest importance of religious instruction, even as re-
garded the maintenance of peace and order throughout
the country, and no exertion could be too great to ac-
complish such a purpose. The Noble Lord first pro-
posed to make some improvement in the management
of the Church property. They must all feel that, a large
amount of property was not managed in as desirable a
manner as it ought; but what could Parliament do now
more than it bad done? In 1834 and 1835 the Ecclesi-
astical Commissioners were appointed, and their object
was precisely that which the Noble Lord now proposed
to du. That Commission was still in operation, and as
to the manner in which the business was conducted, he
would not discuss it now; but certainly much had been
done. Then following out that plan was Sir Robert
Peel's Act, by which the Commissioners received
a loan of 200,0001. from Queen Ann's Bounty. In
consequence of these two measures a very large increase
had been made in the number of clergy, and also by
private grants. From a return moved for last year, by
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Wiltshire,
he found that 1,400,0001. had been granted for ecclesias-
tical purposes, both by the Commissioners and by pri-
vate grants. Then, again, very recently three Commis-
sioners were appointed by the Crown to inquire into the
best mode of subdividing large parishes, and also to as-
certain the condition of episcopal and capitular revenues.
Those Commissioners prepared two reports, and also a
draft of a Bill in accordance with those reports, which
was now on the table of the House; so that the Noble
Lord would see that great alterations were already in
course of being made. Another measure was by the
Upper House referred to a Select Committee, which
will, he believed, remedy some undoubted evils connected
with floes and renewals, on which his Hon. Friend the
Member for Marylebone adverted. This was a question
of great difficulty, because in cases were strictly legal
rights did not exist, equitable rights did; and the terms
of the Commission to inquire into the subject were, how
and by what means an amendment could be produced
which would be beneficial to the property of the
Church. With respect to the sale of the Lord Chan-
cellor's livings, if the Noble Lord meant that an
address should be presented to the Crown on the sub-
ject, he should have stated it distinctly to the House.
He was not prepared to say that the sale of some of
those small livings might not be done beneficially, with a
view to their endowment, but he should object to put ,
any of them up to public auction, to sell to the highest
bidder, more especially in the present state of the Church.
On the whole, he should meet the motion of the Noble
Lord by moving the previous question, because he
thought that though the object was good, the manner in
which it was brought forward might lead them to er-
roneous conclusions. He also objected to the amend-
ment proposed by his Hon. Friend the Member for
Montrose. He should vote against, the amendment
proposed by the Hon. Member for Montrose, and if per-
severed in he should move the previous question.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT would offer a few obser-
vations on what had been said incidentally in the
course of the debate. He was glad to notice the deve-
lopment of the principle of freedom of opinion in
spreading the Gospel amoog the people. The Commis-
sion reported in favour of the scheme of selling the
advowsons of the Lord Chancellor, to be appropriated
to the extension of the spiritual instruction in the
Church. It was said, why take away the patronage of
the Lord Chancellor? They did not say so when they
proposed a project of Chancery reform, when they pro-
posed to transfer the patronage to another member of
Government. For his part he preferred the patronage to
remain with the Lord Chancellor, because in the former
case it would become the patronage of the Secretary of
the Treasury, and would be open to the imputation that
those preferments were obtained for political services.
Notwithstanding the divisions in the Church advowsons
had fallen in value, and he, therefore, saw on that ground
no objection to have these livings in the hands of lay-
Ku When they saw the expedient of the sale of indul-
M%rc.
Church, for
by the head of the Roman Catholic
rs,
for the extension of that church in this
roptiore th
would they not take any counter measure
gee et
church extension? He had proposed a plan for re-
m
storing the functions of the chapters to promote the
educationmiddle classes, but he was not successful
in one on
made for that purpose. He did
not
on that account, but he thought they
on to affirm the motion of
the
blame
motion
oc f they
o he
m the Noble Lord as a nouns
ou
of promoting the efficiency of the Church.
Sir R. a INGLIS said that when he had brought on
a question ;last year for the church extension, that he
was thea supported by the late Government, and
though he had been defeated, yet that defeat was
carried by a mere Majority of 17. He could not now
more than before support the present resolution, be-
cause he believed that it interfered with Church
property, and also tended to reduce the patro-
nage of the Lord Chancellor, and to throw all power
into the hands of the Prime Minister, which he
looked upon to be most unjust, because such a p.operty
was the unalienable right of the Lord Chancellor, as
being one of the oldest in the recorda of this country,
and should not therefore be interfered Was it not
a well-known fact that a certain agreement was entered
into by that House in 1836, that those who were in pea-
session of the livings alluded to should eojay them with-
out any interference ? But what was the present motion?
Was it not to deprive the rightful owners cif those liv-
ings? He altogether dissented from the opinions ex-
pressed by the two Hon. Gentlemen opposite (Sir B.
Hall and Mr. Hume), for the calculations to which they
edverted as to the population of the members of the
Church of England, drawn up by Mr. Mayne, were not
by any means to be relied on, for he believed that the
Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) would admit
that one-third of the population'in the large towns of
England, consisting of 8,000 people, were members of
the Established Church, and that while the Dissenters
consisted of the middle class, the Church of England at-
tended to the spiritual wants of the poorer classes. He
considered that the connexion of the Church and State
was of the greatest possible advantage, and should there-
fore support the amendment of too previous question,
particularly as there was a statute on the books of the
House by which 24 more bishops could be created.

THE

'f* looked at those ree.rns which have been heeler laid
On the table o tee _amuse, they weulii be esteund-d to
find how any gentlemen could theieseives to be
dunned in the way in wheel iney had been e-; tee secre-
tary of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners,—(Hear, hear.)
What with those bi"hops takeig more thee they ought
to have taken, and those net payine wt-:at they really
owed, there was no less a sum lean 42,500!. due to the
Ecclesiastical Commiseieners, which sheuid h toe •en
made available for increasing the income:; of small live
ings, arid paying, for instance, the poor, miserable Welsh
clergymen, who had scarcely sufficient to support their
existence. He would now pass to three of the great
sees. He would begin with two that were on the old
foundation—name!y, London and Winchester. On Sa-
turday, the 30th of May, 1837, it was decided by the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners that those bishops, who
were consenting parties, should have their incomes for
the future upon the next avoidance 10,0001. and 7,0001.
a year respectively. It was a remarkable feet that
there was no one single instance of any one of these
bishops during their lifetime having given up anything
for the benefit of their Church. They certainly deter-
mined that their successors should have as their incomes
10,0001. and 7,000/. a year respectively. Now, if these
incomes were good for their successors, why were they
not squally good for themselves?--(Hear, hear.) These
bishops had two palaces each, quite irrespective of their
in"ava' foam en years the Bishop of London should
receivel4o,oool.; but he had received 217,259/,,0r 77,2591.
more than he seas entitled to receive. Toe Bishop of
Winchester for the same number of years should have
received
151,166/. 98,000/.. instead of which he had received
, or 53,166/. more than he was entitled to re-
ceive- These two prelates had, therefore, taken from the
Church in these fourteen years no less than 130,4251.
more than they themselves had declared was sufficient
for them. Oh, but it would be said, that these were
bishops of the old foundation, and the new incomes were
not to ap
the lei.steeply until the next avoidance. When they saw
—p of London eoastantly calling upon the laity
for money for the purpose of advancing the intereses of
the Church, they would scarcely suppose that the case
was such as he had stated in respect to him. He would
take the case of a new foundation. In 1836, the Bishop
of Durham was appointed to his see at an income of
8,0001 a year, to which he assented. For fourteen years
that prelate should have received 112,0001,, instead of
which he pocketted 191,6581., or 79,6581, more than he
should have done. These three prelates, therefore, de-
prived the Church of 210,083/. within these fourteen
Years. But there was another point connected with
,this motion. He would now take the diocese of
Ely; and taking the town of Wisbeach and the
Parishes adjoining to that town, he would see
What was required to be done before they could ex-
pect to see the people come forward with large sub-
scriptions to promote church extension. In Wisbeach
the value of the living was 1,3001., the holder had also
out of aaothing living 879/., that was 2,1901. He was
absent six months in the year; besides that, the same
person was prebend of Ely, with 700/. a year; he held a
vicarage worth 500/. a year, and had in all 3,3901.; he
was the son-in-law of 'Bishop Sparkes, and his duties
were performed but fel:6 months in the year. Then there
was another non-resident clergyman in the neighbour-
hood having 3,335/., and was non-resident on the living.
There was another non-resident with 2.19(11 ; another
had 1,2001 a year, and was a resident in Guernsey; and
another had 2,3271 a year. Here there were five cler-
gymen (the Hon. Baronet mentioned their names and
raises) having 11,093/. amongst them, and yet not
tlaeig their duty—non-resident, or only atterding io
r parishes ler a brief period in each year. This oc-
curred in the neighbourhood of Wisbeach. Now, he
asked if such a state of things as this was not actually
scandalous ?_(Hear, hear.) And let him ask—and he
did_ it with grief and shame—would the Roman Catholics
do these things?—(Hear, hear.) And yet, nekicg this
question, he must say with grief and with shame, that
in the Church of England these things were going on
Tfrom one end of the kingdom to the other.—(Hear, hear.)
here was, then, the see of Rochester, which had, of
llite• become rather notorious; and having alluded to
that, he would next have to refer to the see of London,
r.t.ld lastly, he would state that which ho knew of
s own knowledge of that principality in which he re-
sided. The present Bishop of Rochester had been ap-
pointed in the year 1827. This prelate hail the deanery
of Worcester and some other benefices, which it was
said be resigned in 1846, upon receiving 4.500/. It was
a curious fact, that, though it was said he had so re-
signed all these advantages for the 4,5001., still it ap-
peared he was in the receipt of 5,5701. a year. But
having shown what was the income of the bishop, he
had now to show how his duties were performed. One
of
those duties was the visitation of the cathedral. By
the statutes of the cathedral he was bound to make that
visitation. He (Sir B. Hall) had made anxious inquiries
into this subject, and he found that the bishop had never
made one of these visitations to the cathedral; and not
only ought he to do this thing, but he had sworn to do
th,settlg.—(Hear, hear.) He understood, too, that the
eetts op seldom preached in the cathedral, except upon an
54 t:ey Sunday.—(Hear, hear.) It might be said that
Fie would
these cases, if 'he were a friend to the Church,
tOuld not labous in collecting the facts respecting
4ilk_ln• His only answer was, that they lived in an age
theta'erea, if abases were not put prominently forward,
anctethwould not be any chance of redress for them;
them
terefore it was that he would persist in putting
able to eeward, in the hope that some day he would be
veins; now
• efNt the correction of such abuses.—(Hear.) But
thconduct of the bishop
be had r, shown aco
The next to look to tithe conduct of the ca.pitular body.
8 dean preached twelve times a year, and attended
ervice four times, and received 1,2001. a year. The
6001. a Year'
first canon preached twelve times in two years, and re-
ceived Another canon received 680/., and
he also took an additional stipend of 1001. a year, which
he obtained from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, be-
cause the duties of the canons were so numerous that it
was impossible to perform this duty unless there was
another 100/. a year given. Another of the canons had
not been in Rochester for three years.--(Hear.) Such,
then, was the state of the ecclesiastical body in Roches-
ter; but in order to bring their conduct up to the pre-
sent time, be bad to mention that up to the end of June,
which closed the day before, no canon had preached in
the cathedral, not even on hit-Sunday, although one
did on Ascension-day. This was the manner in which
the canons went through their work, and now the cathe-
dral was to be closed in a few days, so the bishop and
the chapter would be free to enjoy themselves. They
had amongst them 10,9001. a year for doing little or no-
thing. The case of Rochester was curious in other re-
spects; but that portion of the case to which he would
not now refer was pending in the courts of law. His at-
, tention had, however, been directed to one fact in connexion
with it, which he found in a pamphlet published by Mr.
Wiston, and in consequence of it he had moved for a re-
turn. There were six old men, who were called alms'
men and bedesmen, who were to have 401. a year. This
grant had been made long since, the payment had been
confided to this ecclesiastical body, and by the return
there appeared to be no such persons in existence. He
Was anxious to know when there had been an almsman
appointed, and he found that in August, 1774, there
had been a bedesmen, named Featherstone, appointed,
and that there had been no bedesmen since 1790; so
that 2,4001., intended for the purposes of the charity,
were taken and divided by the chapter amongst them-
selves; and yet, would they believe it, that from that
time to this the chapter-clerk went through the farce
each quarter-day of crying out, " John Featherston, come
'forth and receive your annuity"—(Laughter)—John
Smith, come forth and receive your annuity ?"—Laugh-
- ter.) And this abominable imposture was actually per-
formed before the eyes of the dean and chapter, who well
knew that both John Featherstone and John Smith who
'Were thus coiled Upon were in their coffins for fifty
Years.—(Cheers.) The consequence of the exposure by
the return had done something in the way of good. New
appointments of bedesmen were made by the chapter of
Rochester. Six poor men were so appointed, whose
ages varied from 79 to 86 years. One of these had
served with Lord Howe, and another had been at the
battle of Waterloo—men of excellent character were se-
lected to receive the 401.; and yet would the House be-
lieve it, that a few days ago, when 11. ans. 10d. was paid to
each of these poor men, the chapter-clerk of that body,
which had 17,7001. a year,actually deducted a 10s. fee from
the:ll. 105.:10d.?—( Hear, hear.) The dean alai chapter
that had been pocketing for 50 years that which was
given as charity for the poor, deducted so per cent.
trom the poor. He wondered did they who did this give
3 per cent. to the income-tax?—(Hear.) The chapter
of Rochester had control (as we understood) over the
hospital, and instead of using the funds for the purposes
of the poor they pocketed the whole; but in consequence
of the appointment of the charity commissioners, this
d
abuse
had been put an end to. The hospital waS.ln-
tende originally for lepers; but there was something
worse than that ancient disease—it was a moral leprosy
amongst the clergy, for they took the money and de-
prived the poor of those funds which were intended for
_
their relief in sickness.—(Hear, hear.) Again, he asked,
how would they get the people to press forward for
church extension when they saw such abominable deeds
'5 these done every day?—(Hear.) It was with shame
nd disgust that he exposed this conduct in their bishops
tad clergy, who ought to be the ministers of God, and
to trove that they were so by endeavouring to do good
" tin* fellow-subjects.—(Hear.) But now let them
look
to this (the London) diocese. There were certain
Prebends of St. Paul's. The duty of these prebendaries
Was to preach in turn twice in each year, That was
What the prebendaries did. There was then the property
of St. Paul's, and where was the property of the church
One? How was the property distributed in the parish
had the honour to represent? It—the parish of St.
feancras—was rated to the relief of the poor 280,0001.
One prelate had granted a lease of the parish for 46
lea", and then he contrived, in collusion with the lessee,
e,° have an Act of Parliament, the consequence of which
Was, that all St. Paul's got out of that parish was 30W.
a year, when it was rated at 280,0001—e" Hear, hear,"
ilfrothMr. Goulburn.) He was glad to hear the Right
en. Gentleman say hear; and he believed the Right
°ll. Gentleman would admit that it was about as bad a
case as could be, and yet the same was going on every
daY• Why, had not the Bishop of Winchester the other
taken aY granted a lease of lives of Church property, and
heavy fine? That was a robbery of the Church
( 'ear.) That was not necessary. If the Bishop were
2rateet with his income be never would have alienated
Church property.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
must be aware
that the Commission of ecclesiastical cm-
titular revenues had for their object to do away with
ton leases. A Bill had been brought in to do away
silleheandee on leases, and the strongest opposition to that
rj been made by those who had received the fines.
--11,,,(•""•) It was only by an exposure of this kind that
e hoped to be able to shame these individuals into some
sense of duty, and to make them believe that they were
not the masters, but the ministers of the Church of which
they
he the laymen, were the vast conamunity.—(Hear,
wea" lie next came to the district with which
he
well
an acquainted, and if anybody wished to see
I—"thiple Of Church destitution and of Church
-45Ittect that was utterly disgraceful to the Establishment,

Mr. ALCOCK condierered thet it would be mot un-
just :o ei it tile eilveweons o 777 liviegs, nom tee rielit
sod oroi woo of the Lori eh, ucenor; for the purees°
of ettiiiiieg cOurcOes in Nerthwnberland or some other
rein ,te die riots where the people of those parishes have
eta benefit wnete.l ea lie knew of many or those pariehes
not to be worte two yeare' purchase, whilst meet of
them were not worth ten years' purchase. Taking, for
example, the living of Ludlow, the advowson of which
couto be sold for 1,0001., but would it be fair to build
with that 1,0001. a church at a great distance from the
place, and from which the parishioners could derive no
benefit? He did not deny that they needed six hundred
additional churches, and he had no doubt but that they
could get these, and more, if they depended upon volun-
tary contributions to carry out their object.
Mr. GOULBURN admitted that the resolutions had
been introduced with great ability, but considered that
the better course would be not to come to a division
upon them. It was one of those questions which re-
quired much consideration, and in respect of which
much could not be gained by a division in that House.
W bile he hoped, therefore, that the House would not be
called upon to divide upon them, he would take the
liberty of snaking a few remarks upon what had fallen
from the Honourable Baronet the Member fur
Mary le bono. That Honourable Baronet had made
accusations against certain dignitaries of the Church
which he consith red most unjust and uncalled
lon Throughout the greater part of his speech he had
referred to abuses which existed in certain sees, but
which had been called into existence by a different state
of the law from that which now prevailed, and it was,
therefore, unfair to tax the present occupiers of those
sees with continuing abuses, with the origin of which
they had no coucern, and over which they had no con-
trol. To prove his case he had alluded to four bishop-
rics—Ely, Durham, London, and Winchester. As to the
Bishop of Ely, when he came to his diocese he found a
state of things which he could not control, and of which,
as he had said, he was not the originator. As to the
Bishop of London, the Hon. Baronet charged him of con-
tinuing to enjoy means which at the passing of the Com-
miesion Act it was declared that he should not enjoy.—
(Hear, hear.) He felt ashamed that in the very centre
of that Right Rev. Prelate's diocese he should be called
upon to vindicate his character. The Hon. Baronet had
well said that the best test of a bishop's efficiency was
the power which he had over his diocese to extract means
for the furtherance of the Church and the promotion of
religion. He asked the House to apply that test to the
Bishop of London. Let them consider the state of the
city of London, and Bethnal-green especially, when that
bishop came to his diocese, the miserable condition
they were in for want of churches. And let them con-
sider the state of it now. He had given a large portion
of his own means for the promotion of that object, and
if he had given those means for objects so useful, what
did it signify though they did not come through the
hands of another party? The same might be said of the
Bishop of Winchester. He was a bishop at the passing
of the Act, and consequently continued to receive the in-
come which had accrued to him had no Act passed.—
(Hear.) And he could affirm that a large portion of
that income had been appropriated for purposes con-
nected with the Church. The Hon. Baronet then said
that the Bishop of Durham received more income than
he was entitled to, but ho could state that while the
Bishop of Durham was only entitled to pay 12,000/. a
year to the Commission, he paid more than that sum
out of his own private income, and from that sum, dur-
ing the last seven years, he had contributed for church
building and other purposes connected with the Church,
no less a sum than 30,000/.—(Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Gentleman then, after refuting the charges made
against the Bishops of St. David's and Salisbury, con-
cluded by hoping that the House would not be called
upon to divide on the question, but stating that, should
a division take place, he must vote against the motion.
Mr. HORSMAN said had it not been for one or two
points referred to by the Right Hon. Gentleman who bad
just sat down, he would not have troubled the House, as
the case in favour of the motion had already been so well
and clearly stated. The resolution contained two decla-
rations, first, that there was great destitution in the
Church, in respect of Church and religious teaching;
and, second, that there were means within the Church for
relieving such destitution. The first proposition no one
could deny, and as to the second, inquiry was absolutely
necessary.
Mr. LOFTUS WIGRAM said that subjects bad been
most unjustly introduced into the discussion, because
they implicated individuals, without notice. If notice
was given of an intention to found charges in the blue
book, they could be duly met, and he was satisfied if the
cases of many had been looked into—that of the Bishop
of Manchester especially—those individuals would be
found deserving of the highest commendation. It was
the same with the Bishop of London and the Bishop of
Ely. He (Mr. Wigram) besought the House not to
be led astray by the collateral issues that had been
raised in the course of the discussion. There
was much to deserve support in the motion, but the
amendment he (Mr. Wigram)could not at all agree with,
because before inquiry could be effectual years would
have to elapse. If the Noble Lord pressed the motion
he should support it, but he thought the object of the
Noble Lord was attained by the discussion that had
taken place. If the motion was carried it would give a
practical impulse to its object; if not, they would lose
the advantage they hoped to gain.
Mr. BOOKER regretted the absence of the Hon.
Member for Somereetshire, after the allegatious made
against the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol—allega-
tions enough to damn any man, still less a prelate of the
Church. Some years ago there was a revolutionary mob
in Bristol, in which the palace of the bishop was de-
stroyed by the mob. Difficulties were subsequently
raised ou the union of the sees; and the present bishop,
than whom a more learned and pious prelate did not
exist, was thrown back on his original rights. He (Mr.
Booker), however, bad not the least doubt that the
Right Rev. Prelate would,.suffieiently vindicate himself.
In conclusion he (Mr. Booker) deprecated the elements
of strife introduced into the debate.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said such a charge as that against
the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol should not be
allowed to pass a moment uncontradicted if it could be
denied. He therefore asked the Right Hon. Member
for the University of Cambridge, as one of the Eccle-
siastical Commission, if such was the fact?
Mr. GOULBURN said all he knew was this—the ar-
rangement which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in-
tended to make with the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol
were to put an end to; but what since became of the
lease he knew not.—(Hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN asked what arrangement had been
made with the Copyhold Commissioners?
Thera was no reply.
The Marquis of BLANDFORD replied. With re-
spect to the amendment moved by the Hon. Member for
Montrose, he believed that he had brought it forward
with a sincere desire to carry into effect the reforms which
were required in the Church; but he hoped that he would
withdraw it for the present. The objection of the Right
Hon. Secretary for the Home Department, that his mo-
tion involved no definite proposition, he thought that
objection had been fully answered by the Hon. Member
for Wilts; he did not wish to tie any Hon. Member to a
concurrence with all the views which he had expressed.
He merely wished to obtain a sanction to the proposition
that the spiritual destitution of the people was a fit sub-
ject for consideration, and as he believed that a great por-
tion of the House concurred in that view, he felt it his
duty to take the sense of the House.
Mr. HUME withdrew his amendment, and expressed
a hope that the House would agree to the motion of the
Noble Lord without a division.
Sir G. GREY agreed with the Noble Lord in thinking
that a very general concurrence of opinion prevailed in
the House on the principles embodied in the motion—
namely, that it was desirable, as far as it was possible,
to provide more effectual relief for the spiritual wants of
the people, and to extend the parochial system. On the
distinct understanding, therefore, that the House would
not be pledged to anything beyond this, ho would not
oppose the motion.
The motion was then agreed to without a division.
CARRIAGE DUTY.
Sir DE LACY EVANS moved for leave to introduce
a Bill to reduce the duty of carriages. He would not
occupy the House more than five minutes at so late an
hour; but surely a matter in which the welfare of
100,000 artizans was involved demanded some attention.
The main objection to the present duty was, that it
caused not only a diminution of revenue, but also a
diminution of trade. He did not propose a total repeal
of the tax, but only a modification; and he had no
doubt that the revenue would not suffer by the
change. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was well
aware that the carriage trade and the revenue derived
from it were in a declining state, and the only head
under which an increase appeared was the head of ex- - --
eruptions. Ten years ago their amount was 25,000, and SOCIETY FOIL IMPROVING THE CONDITION OF THE
now, they amounted to 45,000 ; but this was not a fair LABOURING CLASSES.—The seventh annual meeting of this
statement of the actual number, which was, probably, society was held on Monday at the Freemasons Tavern. The
not least than 200,000. It was only necessary to look at Earl of Shaftesbury took the chair at two o'clock. Amongst
the advertisementr of carriages fur sale in the the noblemen and gentlemenr etiathe platform were the Mar-
newspapers to see that it was not the poor who bens-Radstock,ter Earl
quis of Westminster,
theLoitsheelpddeo toarndches
fired by these exemptions. Many Hon. Members whomG the Hon. W. Cowper, M.P., Manchester,
was then addressing enjoyed the exemption if they
rat Bowles, M.P., the Earl of Feversham, Sir homas Hest-
kept dog-carts. Without detainihg the House longer, rEt:rasinventeonr,
jogs, R.N., Honourable and Rev. S. G. Osborne, R. D.
he would briefly state that the Bill which be sought to Grainger, Esq., J. D. Paul, Esq., R. Slaney, Esq., M.P.,
introduce would substitute for the 13 classes of duties Montague Gore, Esq, the Rev. Dr-Cumming, &c. The
now levied three classes only. He proposed that four- Secretary (Mr. Wood) read the report, in which the com-
wheeled carriages with two or more horses, should pay mittee congratulated the society on the success of its labours
a duty of 31.; four-wheeled carriages, with one horse, —on the grant' of 'the charter of incorporation—on the ex-
-21. ; and two-wheeled carriages, 11. ; and he proposed tension of cottage and garden allotments—and on the pros-
that all carriages employed in agriculture and trade Perity of its affairs in detail. The Marquis of Westminster
should be untaxed,
moved the adoption of the report, and passed a warm pane-
In who had induced his officers
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed F
toYrsiuebrcriLboerdto thge gestreoo'd work of improving thebrother condltion of
the motion, and reminded the House that already a the poor. The time had passed away when young officers
number of taxes had been repealed, and the effect of the would laugh at the broaching of so philanthropic a subject
present proposition would be to bring in carriages at the mess-table. Captain Scobell, M.P., seconded the
which were now exempt from duty. Ho did not think resolution, which was supported by the Hon. Mr. Cowper,
in the present year that'll° ought to be called on to re- M.P., and unanimously adopted. The meeting was also ad-
duce more taxation than he had done, the more pertieu- dressed by the Hon. and Rev. S. G. Osborne, Dr Cumming,
larly when he remembered that the continuance of the Lard Ebrington, &c.; and thanks having been voted to the
income-tax was perhaps problematical, and the present chairman, the meeting adjourned.
state in which the question was, rendered further reduc- I THE ALLEGED LUNATIC'S FRIEND SOCIETY.—On
tious unadvisable. Monday the annual meeting of this society was held at their
After a few words from Mr. HOME and Mr. P. offices, 44, Craven-street, Strand; Captain Digby, R.N., in
HoWARD, the motion was withdrawn. the chair. Mr. Perceval read,the report, which set forth that
Mr. HUME then broughtat she will be pleased to give forward his motion for an in April, 1849, they had a balance in hand of only 101. les.
address to her Majesty, that
Bd., and subscriptions, donations, &c., received since that
period to June 1, in the present year, amounted to 263/. 2s.
directions that the granite obelisk, given by the late
lying on the beach at Alexandria), may be brought to
Mahomet Ali to the British nation (which obelisk is now
,reun,h,icipirlenftinagt,)Lanlacreieesi
6dnadmedak2i6n9gl.inlsa,ll 237d3/. 'flBs. 2dt.; ou.t
printing,
which they had ex-
-41.
England, and that this House will grant such funds as Ild., which sum had gone towards defraying the expernses
may be requisite to bring it to and erect it in an appro- -of the presentthat the society is - •
P-eenses, advertising,.
meeting, so
priate situation in England. without any funds at their disposal. The report went ou to
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER op- I show their exertions were as much needed as ever, owing to
posed the motion, and quoted the authority of Sir G.
the cruel and oppressive
manner in which patients were
Wilson, to the effect that it was not worth the expense
of removal. He also understood that the obelisk which they were in Fiance treated in private asylums in England, compared with what
and the Channel Islands. The report
had been removed to Paris had suffered materially
was adopted, and urgent appeals were made by Captain
from the change of climate. He could assure his
O'Kelly, Mr. Selby, Perceval, and several other gen-
tlemen to the benevolent, to assist the society intheir
present difficulty. A vote of thanks was unanimously
passed to the Gallant Chairman, as also to Mr. Perceval
Hon.
. subject. Friend that every inquiry should be made on the
The motion wan withdrawn. for his labours on behalf of the institution, which terminated
Mr. Whiteside next moved for returns relating to the , the proceedings.

ANALYSIS OF THE DIVISION ON MR. DIS-
RAELI'S MOTION.
Majority (Oilers iocluded)--=
Liberals .. .
CoOservativea

... ... ... ... ... 214
... 30
- 244

Minority (tellers included)—
Protectionists ... ... 121
LibQrsis 2
Irish Brigade

- 131

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE BRADFORD

REFORM ASSOCIATION.
(EVERY MONDAY AND WEDNESDAY.)
Sir,-0a Monday the 30:h of June, " the great
Chicory question" was once -more brought before the
Hou:se. The universal English nation is crying out with
one united upro:r of voniteratiou, that chicory may not
ho mixed with its coffee. It may have a coffee-mill for
one and ninerience, but it prefers continually to cry.
The British portion of the world is going to ruin, be-
cause chicory is mixed with its coffee, and nobody cares
to prevent it. Such at least is the representation, from
those whose burning patriotiam is heated by the recol-
lection of coffee plantations ‘,7ithin the tropics. The
madness of tile public is equal to its suffering. "My
public," that unprotected emale," goes to the coffer:-
shop and says. " Let .me .aa,re some of the Treasury
Mixture," having at the same time full power, if pos-
sessed of the smallest portion of a market-woman's
arithmetic, to calculate from the prices of the respective
commodities, the exact prole 'lion of each which is con-
tained in the Mixture demanded. "A coffee-dealer
would mix," as the obstim is° trader was always por-
trayed in Walkinghame's well-thumbed page, "coffee at
two shillings a pound, with chicory at eightpence,
to make a mixture which should be sold at one and four-
pence. I desire to know, how much there was of each?"
The babes in market-making can solve the problem; but
if Parliament' will not interferti to stop the Chancellor of
the Exchequer's ruinous laissez faire, the prosperity of
the country is at an end. :Such were the statements
from tho coffee zealots. Whether the House likes the
Treasury Mixture, or for other reasons, the motion for
restriction on the liberty of the coffee-pot was rejected
this time by 199 to 122. -
On the same day was a repetition of the sort of de-
monstration which has come in so many forms from the
Conservative side, with little visible purpose but that of
measuring strength in what racers call "a training gal-
lop," and showing off the gilts and graces of the leaders
in the display. The proposed object, so far as it was
expressed in words, was something peculiarly misty; for
the pith of a rather lengthy motion was to oblige the
Government, during the existence of a Committee on the
Income Tax, " not to make any material sacrifice of
public income in effecting such changes as may be
deemed advisable in other branches of Taxation." Who
'can tell what is " a material sacrifice"? where will
ten men be got to agree upon what is meant by " a
material sacrifice"? Altogether it was wonderfully like
the movement of the little boy inside the carriage, who
thinks he could drive a great deal better than John if
Mama would let him. Yet there were accessories mixed
with it, which are worth the noting. There was a visi-
ble abatement of hostile demonstration against the pre-
sent tenants of the box, a kind of volunteer admission of
their perpetuity in their places, which looks as it it
came by cause. Is the nominal leader of the Conserva-
tives quarrelling with them; or is he trying to alarm them?
Unless it is a specimen of the " blundering organization
that does what It did not intend," which he so unsparingly
ascribed to a political adversary ortMonday night, there is
something coming which time will explain.
The real substance of the proceedings, was to hold a
field-day on the Income Tax. And here it was lament-
able to see, how that large portion of the community
which consists of the Working Classes paying at ten or
eleven times the rate of the rich on articles which they
consume, and the least wealthy owners of incomes and
houses who share in the same injustice, was left utterly
without a fragment of representation in the debate.
Not a voice was lift up, to hint that such things were;
but dumb dogs all. Surely the times are coming, when
this will not be so. The Income Tax is a struggle
between the house of Have and the house of Pay; with
the object of making the former pay a rough approxi-
mation to their share, by the exemption of the smaller
incomes. And then stand up what pass for the peo-
ple's champions, and cry, " An Income Tax ought to
be universal, as the direct taxes are ;" the universality
of the direct taxes consisting in the poor paying ten
or eleven times as much as the rich. Whether this is
ignorance or wilfulness, the . harm is much the same.
Meanwhile the Queen's Ministers at this moment are
the only quarter where the Working Classes and the
small incomes meet with any consideration; though they
are obliged as diligently to hide it, as a maiden who is
letting concealment " prey on her damask cheek." The
movement on the present occasion was a failure for the
projectors, for it ended in a division in favour of the Go-
vernment, of 242 to 129.
On Tuesday the whole evening was given to a debate
on the spiritual destitution existing throughout England
and Wales, and an Address moved to the Queen for re-
medying the same out of the resources of the Esta-
blished Church. A laudable object, if Addresses can
accomplish it.
I am, Sir, yours very sincerely,
AN OLD REFORMER.
London, July 2. 1851.