The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-16 00:00:00

SCOTCH BURGHS BILL.

Ou the motion of Lord SHAFTESBURY, the time for
affixing signatures to the Protest against the Scotch
Burghs Bill was extended until to-morrow (this day).
COLLECTION OF TITHE ARREARS.

The Bishop of CHICHESTER availed himself of the
opportunity of presenting a petition (the nature of which,
owing to some confusion in the House, we were una-
ble to comprehend) to refer to a report of certain pro-
ceedings of the other House of Parliament last evening,
from which it appeared that the whole body of the
clergy in general, and the order to which he belonged in
particular, had been made the object of unfounded and un.
merited attack. It was stated by an Hon. Member, and
the statement was corroborated by another Hon. Member,
that several thousand actions, between seven and eight
thousand he believed, had lately been brought in the
Court of Exchequer by clergymen for the recovery of
tithes, under a clanse in what was generally known as
Lord Tenterden's Act. Now he (the Bishop of
Chichester) felt it his duty in the strongest terms to
deny, as far as his knowledge went, the ccrrectness of
that statement. In some tew cases it [night have been
found necessary to proceed by action, but that actions to
the amount of several thousands had been commenced
he could not think possible. At all events, he had never
heard that such bad been the case ; and his principal
object in alluding to the statement at all was to correct,
as far as he was able, the misimpression it was likely to
excite in the public mind. But, tint content with a
general charge against the clergy, a special one bad been
made against the order to which he belonged. It was
stated in unequivocal terms that the clergy who had so
commenced suits for the recovery of their arrears had done
so in consequence of a unanimous recommendation of the
bishops, agreed to at a general but secret mee ing of their
body. Now, if he was unable to give a decided and posi-
tive contradiction to tree general charge against the clergy,
be was not so situated with regard to the particular charge
against the bench of bishops. He did most positisely
assert that at no meeting of the bishops at which he was
present—and r many months past no meeting had taken
placeat which he was not pres-nt—was there a single word
said, much less any unanimous recommendation made,
with reference to the line of conduct which the clergy
should pursue in the collection of their arrears.—(Hear,
hear.) As to the bishops holding a secr.t meeting of
their body, he would only say that at none of their meetings
had any business been transacted which might not, with
perfect safety to their characters, be publicly posted at
Charing-cross.

The Bishop of LONDON thought the Episcopal Bench
had great re .son to complain of the kind of clamour raised
against them on the present occasion, more especially as he
was prepared to assert that the charges brought against
them were totally and entirely without foundation._
(Hear, hear.) It had been said that many thousand suits
had been commenced in the Court of Exchequer for the
recovery of tithe arrears. If such was the fact, it was the
first he had ever heard of it, and he confessed the in.orma-
don came upon him altogether by surprise. That some
few actions might have been commenced was probable, al-
though he had no knowledge of the fact; but that their
number could amount to seven or eight thousand, as had
been stated, was, he asserted, wholly improbable. Indeed
the only way he could account for the statement was that
in 800 e parishes, in order to obviate some technical
objections, it might be necessary to commence suits
against two or three thousand periwig, with a view to
the recovery of arrears in two or three cases, and thus the
statement that seven or eight thousand suits had been
commenced might be easily accounted for. By Lord
Tenterden's Act a specific time was given to the clergy for
the collection of their modus of tithe, an I as that time
was newt) expired, it was not to be wondered at that tl ey
should adopt, in some cases, where there was no prospect of
obtaining their rigs is by fair means, the most summary
process which the law provided. With respect to the
charge that the Bench of Bishops had at a seer. t m eting
come to a determination of recommending their clergy to
pro,ecute their claims, he had only to state that it was en-
tirely groundless. He had at ended every meeting of Bi-
shops for some time past, and had never heard one word
sail on the suhject. Whether any individual Bishop had
recommended his clergy to adopt such a course he could
not say. but as tar as he was himself concerned, he denied
having done so. At the same time, however, he was free
to confess, if one of his clergy came to him and asked
what course he should adopt to recover certain rights of
the Church then lying dormant, and likely to be altogether
la.t, in default of a proper prosecution of the claim within
a limited period, he would, without the slightest hesitation,
have recommended him to avail himself of the most
urnmary process the law allowed.—(Hear.)