The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-23 00:00:00

led to rely so confidently on the continuance of the
present terms of renewal that the result, paradoxical as
rt might sound, had been arrived at, that a twenty-one
years' lease was often of the same value in the market
as the fee simple of the estate. In that case it would
be the province of the Commissioners to define the dis-
tric's where in consequence of an invariable usage the
lease would be suffered to run out on one-third instead
of one-half of the entire term. Property in houses did
not stand on the same footing as property in land; but
it was proposed to place it in a nearly equivalent posi-
tion. From the deteriorating nature of house property
it would be hardly feasible to make an addition as a re-
newed rent of half of the present value of the property
at the termination of the lease; and, therefore, it was
proposed, with respect to house property, to give the
right of perpetual renewal on the present amount of the
fines, but to impose on the lessee an additional rent,
equal to half of the new right he would thus have
acquired, and so to divide the advantage as in other cases
in equal proportions between the lessor and lessee. But
there was one species of property which it was not pro-
posed to put on the same footing as any of the others to
which he had referred, and that was the property in
tithe-rent charges. It was proposed, with respect to
tithe-rent charges, to let them run out. The Commis-
sioners were of opinion that that property stood in quite
a different position from any other description of pro-
perty, inasmuch as in the cases of tithe-rent charges
there had been no improvement in past times, and there
was no future opening for improvement. There was in
that case no plea of lands being intermixed with other
freeholds; and in general there was no circumstance of
association or attachment which connected a persou with
a tithe-rent charge, or with property in land. With re-
spect to manorial rights, he had to observe that they
could hardly be looked upon as every fitting ecclesiastical
appanage. Ia that case it was proposed to let the leases
run out, or to have them put rip for immediate sale. Pro-
visions were introduced for facilitating the enfranchise-
ment of copyholds ; and any money arising from sales,
exchanges, or enfranchisements would be vested in the
Church Estate Commissioners ; first, for the purpose of
midst.; lug the exigencies of the Act; and next, for the
purpose of being applied to the common fund for eccle-
siastical purposes. He had not yet made any re-
ference to the case of timber. There was, perhaps, no
species of ecclesiastical property which suffered from
the existing arrangements more than timber, for it fre-
quently happened that the lessee had no right to cut
and that the lessor had no right to enter to cut. The con-
sequence was that the timber on the Church estates was
generally found in a very bad and wasteful condition.
It was therefore proposed that, on the payment of the
proper value, the timber should be entirely reserved to
the lessee. There were in the Bill provisions for facili-
tating arrangements between the lessor and the lessee,
with a view to promote any improvement which would
require an unusual outlay. But with respect to the ordi-
nary valuations, they would be taken at the termination,
not as at present, of every seven years. but at the termi-
nation of every twenty-one years. He could not but
think that that alteration would be productive of mate-
rial benefit to the lessee. It would afford scope for the
improvement of property, without depriving the Church
of any ultimate advantage which might accrue from that
improvement. That provision rescued the Bill, in his
opinion, from the charge of alienating the property of
the Church. He believed, on the contrary, that a greatly
increased income would be secured to the Church by
the measure, while it would give great scope for
the accomplishment of the most desirable Church
purposes. Those were the material provisions in the
Bill with regard to the relations between the Church
and the lessee, and he looked upon them as the
most important portions of the measure. It com-
prised, however, other arrangements net wanting in
importance upon the general management of Church
estates. These arrangements were proposed chiefly
with the view of giving Effect to the intention of the
Legislature that bishops, and deans, and chapters should
have fixed instead of fluctuating incomes. That inten-
tion had hitherto been very imperfectly realised; for
some bishops hal received less than had been intended
for them, and others had received more. The estates
would be vested in the Church Estate Commissioners,
end the bishops would receive the fixed incomes allotted
to them by law, until under the operation of the Bill an
endowment of land equivalent to the incomes so fixed
could be settled on them. In order to provide for the
immediate wants which would arise under the Bill, a
power would be given to the Commissioners to borrow
money on debentures. He repeated what he had stated
at the commencement of his address, that he submitted
the Bill in order that it might receive a full and fair
consideration. If the Bill were read a second time he
proposed that it should be referred to a Select Com-
mittee, by whom its details would be duly considered.
It was not for him to presume to give advice to the Right
Rev. Prelates as to the course which they miget think
proper to pursue upon that occasion; but be could not
help stating his belief that it would be impossible to carry
through Parliament as it was at present chnetitutedame
as it was ever likely to be constituted, any measure for
enabling the heads of the Church to run out their leases
and to enter into the full enjoyment of the whole of these
estates. He should say, too, that he very much doubted ,
even if such a measure could be carried, whether it
would be fitting for bishops and other ecclesiastical dig-
nitaries to be involved in all the labour and difficulty of
letting and managing landed property. Ho believed that
the Church would receive a large increase of income
from the passing of that measure; he did not like to
commit himself to any precise calculation as to what
might be the amount of that increase; but he should
state that persons peculiarly conversant with the subject
had estimated it at double or treble the sum at present
received. Under those circumstances he would respect•
fully submit to the Right Rev. Prelates whether they
could better consult for the promotion of the important
interests committed to their care, than by giving to the
Bill a careful and courteous, but at the same time a most
searching and scrutinising consideration. lie felt con-
fident in the purity of the motives with which the Bill
had been brought forward; he felt confident in the nature
of the measure itself, and in the advantages it was cal-
culated to produce; he felt confident, too, in the charac-
ter of those to whom he had the honour of submitting
it; and he had, therefore, no hesitation in calling upon
their Lordships to give it a second reading.—(Hear.)
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY raid he felt
much pained at finding himself compelled to east any
disparagement upon a measure which had been proposed
by her Majesty's Government, with it view, he was sure,
to promote the best interests of the Church, and which
had been brought under their notice with so much can-
dour end ability by the Noble Berl. He felt convinced
that the Commissioners on whose report the Bill was
founded had been animated by a sincere desire to ensure
the spiritual welfare of the community at large. But he
Was compelled by a paramount sense of duty to with-
hold his assent from what appeared to him to be the
leading principle of the measure. Ho considered, like
many of his Right Rev. Brethren around him, that the
Bill as it then stood would be tintc.mount to au alien-
ation of the remaining property of the Church. They
had received that property from their predecessors, and
they felt boned to transmit it, if possible, to their suc-
cessors. Tee right of perpetual renewal which it was
proposed to give to the present lessees, appeared to him
to differ but little from the right of unlimited pos-
session, and the heads of the Church, by giving that
right, would, in his opinion, he abandoning the trust
committed to their charge. The Noble Feud had,
however, to ascertain extent, relieved him from the
uneasiness he should otherwise feel at finding that
measure read a second time, when he had told them ho
considered that those Nobie Lords who might support
the second reading would not be pledged to any thing
more than a fair consideration of the whole of that sub-
ject. If he could feel assured that that were the case, he
should feel very considerably relieved. But he had been
informed that, according to the usage of Parliament,
when a measure which had been read a second time was
referred to a Select Committee, the Committee could
not deal with its principle, and was merely empowered
to consider the clauses by which that principle was to be
carried into effect. Now, if that were the case, he should
feel it his duty to express his opposition to the second
reading of the measure. He perfectly agreed with the
Noble Earl that matters could not and ought not to re-
main as they were at present. He believed the exisiting
system was vicious in principle and objectionable in prac-
tice, and that it had no other recommendation than that
it had been in operation for a period of 300 years.
Nothinga
measure
whichgive
wouldhim cgornetartiebratpeletsoatuhree
ita3hpanrat:e support
o or.
ft_
the management of Church property
not consientiously
nation of that property; but he could
then
feel that that was the character of the measure
under their consideration. without any dinah-
The Bishop of LONDON said he
Lord acquainted with the rules of ethheegodu seem would a Noble
ex -
the principle of the Bill by
supe of giving to lessees
plain to them how far the Housretiwngouiltds
apeleendngde
rietsaedlifntgo.
He entirely objected to the principle
al.He believed that lessees
the right of perpetual henher
legally,. or morally.. The
'and more than the value of
gt
heter equitably, tpadeermet
. That interest might, he
and to it, or to its amount
believed, be easily estimated,
legitimate claim. He wished it to be
lthehasedai er
enison thesarudeeshnt eri
right
the p .
ehyatainfyhe assented to the second reading of
tuohnneldyeßriahlltaehdeedthdt id not pledge himself to the adoption of the
principle laid down in it upon that subject. No one was
more desirous than he was of seeing the property of the
Church made available for the removal of spiritual des-
titution; but that measure would diminish the resources
of the Church, and would rob her of the means of pro-
viding for that destitution in future times. The heads of
the Church held their property for the people of this
country, and they had no right to give up that property.
He' earnestly wished to see the whole of that subject
referred to a Select Come
wasmitteesuroef, their Leoarrdesfuhliipys,abeyd
whom it would be, he
impartially considered. But he hoped their Lordships
would pause before they sanctioned the principle of a
right to a perpetual renewal of leases of Church property.
4 ;The Duke of RICHMOND said he thought that Bill
was much more against the lessees than against the les-
sors. But he was ready to assent to the second reading
of the measure on the distinct understanding that the
Select Committee would not be debarred from the right
of instituting a full and fair inquiry into the whole
subject.
The lessees of Church property
were not by any means placed in so favourahl
h Act
salon as their brother lessees in Ireland. T
a clauce
of Parliament in force in Ireland contained
of
under which the lessees could insist on in. England
were tarried.
havea renewalbeen don©
the leases. That was what ought to
constant discussions upon that subject. e
he very much ob-
in this country, and then they woulothe.contt.hevlelhearde those
many details of the Bill
theytow
take the whole question into skate
jectsd; but be thought that oeuognhsitdenroattiteonr. refuse to
LdliLgUnCittfliriessaividhiet appearedt
So doeehpilmy
thaTtntehopsenekceeleefsißastitiCeo.Cl
interested in that matter ought
theugh ill
t u. ne h
toheallowed to lie
heard by counsel against himself
presented a petition the other day from the Dean and
Chapter of Westminster, praying that that privilege