The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-25 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 25, 1856.

The Bishops of LONDON' and DURHAM Retire-
ment Bill has duly passed through Committee—
has been reported without amendments, and stands
this night for a third reading. Judging from the
division's on different points, there can be no
doubt that the measure will receive the Legisla-
tive sanction, and that these Right Rev. Prelates
will receive the very comfortable retiring pensions
of 6,0001. and 4,5001. per annum, for being re-
lieved from duties which they were no longer
capable of discharging with credit to themselves
or advantage to the community. The Bishop
of LONDON seems to have made the
better bargain of the two, inasmuch as
he is to he permitted to retain the Episcopal
Palace at Fulham, while his brother of Durham-
will be compelled forthwith to surrender posses-
sion of the premises which he has occupied in
right of his see for the last 20 years. It cannot,
however, be said that either of these distinguished
members of the Episcopal Bench have fared badly,
or that they are greatly to be sympathised with,
in the comparative poverty to which they are
about to be reduced.

We confess, however, that it would have
been apparently more consistent with the
dootrines which these Right Reverend Lords
have professed had they exhibited greater
moderation in their demands, and not dis-
played quite so much acuteness in striking a hard
bargain with the nation. The argument put for-
ward on their behalf is that, however helpless and
inefficient, they could not be got rid of without
their own free will and consent. That the
Church should endure the burden of inefficient
Bishops, however injurious to its best interests ;
and that, therefore, we ought to be thankful for
their moderation in being contented with some-
thing 'less than a third of what they could have
enforced by law. But there is such a thing as
conscience, and we must suppose that even Bishops
are not quite exempted from its operations, that
the "still small voice" will make itself heard in epis-
copal palaces as well as in the glebes of humble
curates, passing rich on 801. a year, or the cottages
of poor men, that conscience might be rendered
uneasy at the enjoyment of a princely income
where there could be no ptid pro quo, no consi-
deration for its receipt. If au inferior member
of the E.stablistneeet were to resign his living he
must do so for conscience sake, and he is precluded
under stringent pains and penalties from receiving
any pecuniary consideration, while his successor,
even though ignorant of any payment having
been made, would be liable to forfeit his prefer-
ment, and to be for ever precluded from holding
any ecclesiastical benefice or preferment.

Now why should a different me mire be meted
to Bishops, than to the inferior clergy ?
should that im • publicly sanctioned by Parlia-
ment in tine case which would be a gross
misdemeaOur in the other? It may be very
well tohenable incompetent parties to resign the
functions which they can no longer satisfactorily
perform, but unless- a general measure be intro•
duced, applicable not only to biallopß bat to every
beneficed clergyman,' a great scandal will be com-
mitted, not only on the Church by law established,
but on the Parliament, which authorised what
could only be regarded as an illegal and criminal
arrangement.

The argamcntam, ad )niscricordiam has, how.
Ow, been resorted to. Wo are asked to pity

those venerable prelates, who have not the

means of enjoying suitable comforts (luting
their declining years unless this contract be
411 y carried out. The Bishop of LONDON
is impelled to provide for large insurances,
which will form the only provision for his family

in the event of his death. Therefore the aposto-

/ilal income of 6,0001. is indispensable. Let us
see how this matter stands. We have heard,
Imre ad nauseam, of the irnprovid.:nce of iter•iry
men and badly-paid clerit-4, who do riot et aside
some portion of their incomes to provide a fund
for the evening of life and the future maintenance
of their families. There can be no excuse for
such gross negligence on the part of men who
have hid to live and educate families on incomes
varying from 1001. to 3001. per annum. But
Dr. BLOMFIELD is greatly to be pitied, because lie
has omitted that precaution, although he has
been for the last 28 years in the enjoy-
ment of an average revenue of 22,0001.
per annum, and although it was considered
by Parliament that 10,0001. a-year would be
amply Sufficient to maintain the dignity of the
high position he occupied, and to fulfil all becom-
ing acts of charity and beneficence. He has thus
received at least 300,0001. more than was re-
quired, and surely kie might have set some portion
of that enortnous' sum aside, so as to be enabled
to avoid a pauper appeal to the country.
Besides that, be had been four years a bishop
before his translation to the See of London, and
was previously Rector of the lucrative parish of
Bishopsgate ; so that he could not have come to
his present See as a poor man, encumbered with
debts which he was compelled to liquidate. Why,
then, should he not be enabled to act in obedience
to the dictates of his conscience, having received for
his own use and benefit more than 700,0001. out of
the revenues of the Church without being compelled
by the res augustce domi to enter into a bargain
so injurious to the interests ,of religion.
Dr. MiLTBY only enjoyed his seat on the
Episcopal Bench a quarter of a century, during
twenty years of which time as Bishop of DURHAM.
It is true that he was obliged to pay 11,2001.

to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, having been

appointed after the Act fixing the income of the
see at 8,0001. per annum. But the returns show
that by some clever arrangement he continued
to appropriate to his own use some 13,0001. per
annum, or, during the 20 years, about 100,0001.
more than he was fairly entitled to. The public
will, in his case, also think that, with common
prudence, he ought not to be compelled to sue
in forma pauperis in his old age.
The entire matter is greatly to be regretted.
It will afford a handle, not only to the oppo-
nents of the Law Church, but also of re-
ligion, to sneer at disinterested professions
on the part of those absorbing large
shares of the loaves and fishes, and supply a
striking illustration of the sincerity with which
the nolo episcopari is uttered, when the position
will not be surrendered in one case for less than
6,0001. and a Palace, in another at a lower rate
than an annuity of 4,5001., secured on ample
revenues, and therefore in the nature of
chief rents, that must be punctually
paid under any circumstances whatsoever.
It would be well for the Church and the Parlia-
ment if the bill could be postponed until it was
made part of a general measure providing for all
bishops, priests, and curates in the Establishment.

Unless in the estimation of Sir T. Wlmow there
be a magic charm in the number three which may
operate as a temptation to complete its multiples,
we fancy the defeat of his twentieth attempt to
obtain power to build on Hampstead-heath must
have put a final extinguisher on his efforts in that
direction. The obligation of the inhabitants of
the metropolis to insure indisputable possession
of the Heath remains, however, unimpaired, for
the tenure on which they hold it is the precarious
one of the continuance of a single life, so that
were Sir T. WILSON to die to-morrow they would
be completely at the mercy of his succa3sor, who
would do what he liked with it. The precise,
position, therefore, of the metropolis public and
the worthy Knight may be assumed to be this :
the former have the strongest inducements they
possibly can have to purchase his rights on fair
terms, and he has none whatever to reject their
offer. Under these circumstances we most earn-
estly entreat that no time be lost in entering into
a communication with him and endeavouring to
ascertain the precise amount which would induce
him to dispose of his interest. That on a prime 2
facie view of the case he is at their mercy
by no means insures the purchase of it on any
terms ; consequently, believing that liberality is
the best policy, we trust he will be dealt with in
a liberal, not a stingy, any more than an extra-
vagant spirit. The price ascertained, the ques-
tion "How is the money to be raised.?" will then
acquire increased importance, and on this head
we will only remark, as we have done before, no
scrupulosity as to any of the modes hitherto
proposed ought to be entertained, provided the
attainment of the object in view be not likely to
be endangered. The immense importance of
possession of the Heath cannot but be admitted
by all who know anything about the subject,
and an additional proof of its value is agorded in
the fact that the name of those who feel interested

in its preservation is Legion. Every one, in
short, admits its valgp,,—will not every one
ia -0
con-
tribute in whatevlVay may ultimately be de-
cided on to enrol 4ts title-deeds among the public,
we cannot say municipal, archives? In all our
dealings with metropolitan questions we cannot
call to remembrance any particular one of at all"
corresponding importance on which a greater
unanimity of feeling existed; Londoners well_
deserve to be the laughing-stock of -the entire
country, if the Heath after all slips through their
hands.