The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-03 00:00:00

, . .
part of the country. Ile could inot, either;; .see how
_any cons-
plOnt.o6l,l made to the tak!riß aWai- of dtie Bishop when
there P:rs-cs. (Rise persons appointed to perform his duties. On
the whole, he thought he had said sufficient to convince their
Lordshil s that there was no necessity for the measure of the
Noble Earl, and he should, therefore, move as an amendment
that it be-rea i a second time that day six months.
The Bishop of BANGOR Imp!tired the House to listen to
the 8f the people of Wales, and the Majority of the
People Of nigland, and not to create a thsidh of the tiei sees of
13ango'r and„gt, Aga iii. ft we illd greatly ineotivehiente him-
fteff Mild his Bi'glit Bei. Friend the Bishop of St. Asaph, with-
out either benefiting the clergy or the po, ulation of the two
dioceses. The Noble Duke, in treating this question, seemed
to consider it a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence, and
dwelt upon the money.-tailing wiiich feSttlt tilt two
dliieeStst e. WEre effected ; bill the question, in his opi-
nion, and in the opinion of the clergy arid people of Wales,
assumed a higher and more important character. It was cer-
tainly with them riot a question of pounds, shillings, and pence,
but a question bearing upon the spiritual wants of the princi-
paliq'. The people: of Waltits looked Open the union as a step
loikai'dsredueng the means afforded them of spiritualinstru
and it was upon that ground, and hat ground alone, that they
supported the measure which the Noble Earl had submitted to
their Lordships. The dice he filled, he could assure their
Lord hips, wag an)thing but a sinecure. He believed there
*ere fig sinecitre tithes or livinto in the diocese of St. Asaph,
("Mil tthiah his light Reverend Friend, who was not then
present, derivet any benefit. With regard to the see of Man-
chester, he could see no difficulty in providing funds for its
support. Whether well or ill endowed, whether rectories,
vicarages, or curaties, it was the desire of the people that the
sees sholthl remain its they ate; and as long as they entertain
a hope that they shall not be amalgamated, they will persevere
in every exertion to prevent what they conceive to be a mis-
fortune. Whatever might be the opinions of their Lordships,
he hoped that they would not. be drawn away by the eloquence
and the arguments with which the Noble Lord on the Wool-
sack was accus'omed to delight their Lordships. He would
now conclude by recommending the petitions and the feelings
and the interests of these people to their consideration.
The Earl of tVINCHILSEA felt that it etas necessary to
tall the eiiiphatic attention of their Lordships to the course
which they were now pursuing. There was no axiom more
true or which, as Christian legislators, they were called upon
to attend to, than that they should not follow any course which
Wits in itself evil, in order to produce what was in itself good,
for he ens confident that if any good did apparently arise, it
would in the end turn to mischief. What was the case ? Why,
that, they were called upon to sacrifice • the spiritual interests
of thousands fot the sake of a paltry saving of ;5,000/. a year.
The Ecclesiastical Commission might perhaps have had no
other course than that of recommending the union of these sees
at the time their report was made. But now the case was
widely different. England was. gorged with wealth, and it was
going out with its millions in wile.' he could not but term the
most shameful gambling speculation. His Noble Friend had
earned to himself that which was beyond all price in these days
f liberal, or rather he would say, of impious opinions, by stand-
ing up for those principles on which the greatness of this coun-
try had been built, and through which alone the spiritual wel-
fare of the country could he secured. He called upon their
Lordships to support his Noble Friend in this Bill, and to di,
regard all private opinions, and if it was necessary to
stand between the Ministers and the Crown, not to he,itate
to show the Crown what was the opinion of the hereditary le-
gislators•on this important. Bill. There was no vote which
would give him more hearty satisfaction than
thankedthatwich
should give on this occasion, and he earnestly
his
Noble Friend for his manly and steadfast perseverance in the
conduct of this measure.
Lori MONTEAGLE felt that he might be considered as
deficient in his duty if he did not express his opinion on this
measure.- The House was called upon to look at this question
in reference to its efficiency, and in doing so he was bound to
inquire into the efficiency of the episcopal superintendence of
those sees. In 1805 there had been only 520 dissenting
chapels in Wales; in 1810 there were 954, and in 1832 there
were 1,428. This proved that the members of the Church of
England was not a majority, as it ought tobe, but a small minority.
Such was the truth, and he was it.duced to ascribe this inef-
flcieney to the fact, that the parochial system had been sacrificed
to tho episcopal system, and the funds had been taken from the
parochial clergy to support the bishoprics. If the endowment
of these sees could claim, as it was represented, high
antiquity, he Should be quite ready to assent to
that claim ; but such was not the case, for a
great portion of the endowment was altogether of
modern date. The four irehdeaconries of Atiglesea Were
founded in 1685. The three archdeaconries of Bangor were
endowed at the some time ' and others in different parts of the
country were endowed in 1710, and others as late as 1813.
The endowments of those bishoprics stood on different grounds
from those of many of the bishoprics of England. There was
now no surplus fend in the Erelesiastical Commission ; and the
question was, not whether they should destroy one of these sees
in order to endow the bishopric of Manchester, but what were
they to do with the surplus,' The Commission who recom•
mended this amalgamation of the two sees had been signed by
the metropolitan of all England, by all the Ecclesiastical mem-
bers of the c utimission, by the Noble Lord on the Woolsack,
by Sir Robert Peel, and by Mr. Watkins %V. Wynne.—
(" Hear, hear," from Earl Powys.) Noble Friend cheered
at the name of Mr. W. Wynne, but he (Lord Monteagle)
attached the greatest weight to the name of Mr. Wynne,
not only from his personal weight, but from the
great connexion which he had with the principality. He
wished to bring under their notice the parochial condition of
North Wales, in order to lay its state before their Lordships'
consideration. The Noble Lord then read several extracts
from documents which he held in his hand, illustrative of the
parochial state of North Wales, and showing the necessity of an
improvement in the classification and distribution of livings. It
had been said that the Noble Duke on the other side (the
Duke of Wellington) argued the .question as one of pounds,
shillings, and pence, but whether it was so argued or not,
it was the -duty of the Government to make the clergymen
efficient in the discharge of their duties, by adapt-
ing their circumstances to the important du' ics
they had to discharge. He looked upon the religious institu-
tions of the country with as much veneration as any of their
Lordships could do, but it was one thing to love and respect
thi in, and another to look up to them with superstitious awe
and veneration. It was a matter of indifference whether the
seat of episcopacy was at Bangor or at St. Asaph, so long as
the spiritual interests of the people were properly attended to.
If they were to give way to such petitions as these, there would
be no calculating the difficulties to which it would lead.
Lord BROUG LI A NI said he was riot going to debate the Bill,
for he gave his support to it, on the grounds which his Noble
Friend (the Duke of Wellington) had stated, and on the re-
commendations contained in the Commissioners' Report. The
whole question at present was the second reading of the Bill,
which he would decidedly oppose, and would vote for the
amendment of his Noble Friend.

'I he Bishop of SALISBURY said the Government mea-
sure for the union of the sees of Bangor and St. Asaph was
founded on the Report of 1835 ; but it ought to be recollected
that the Commissioners afterwards changed their opinion on
the subject, and admitted they had not sufficiently considered
the difficulties of the case before making their report.
The dean and chapter of Christchurch, Oxford, for instance,
possessed the impropriate tithes of seventy parishes, and if the
parochial. wants of the diocese were great, he did not see why
they should not call upon the Legislature to pass an Act to
transfer these funds to the wants of the destitute clergy who
might happen to be in the diocese. The principle was the
same. If they interfered with the arrangements and appro-
priation of ecclesiastical revenues in 'Wales, he did not see why
any other diocese in England should be exempt from such in-
terference.—( Hear, hear.) The number of petitions of those
who opposed the union of those sees were to be accomated for
under the influence of the feeling that if one member of the
household suffered all the rest suffered with it.—( Hear, hear.)
It was gratifying to see how the Church had under the greatest
discouragement from princes and statesmen risen to its present
flourishing state. It now numbered twenty-two bishops, and
1,200 clergy, but if this system of interference were tolerated,
he could not indulge in the anticipation that this state of things
would long continue._.:( Hear, hear.)
Lord STANLEY opposed the Bill, notwithstanding the re-
spect he had for the Noble Earl who introduced it.—the high
charactev of the Right Rev. Prelate who had just sat down—
and the public support which it had received out of doors. It
was not a question to be looked to on local grounds, nor on its
temporal bearings, but one which must be regarded as it
affected the spiritual interests of the Establishment.—( Hear,
hear.) He would throw aside all the arguments that might
be drawn from the exercise of the Royal prerogative on the
subject, and he contended that it was for the good of the
sees themselves that this union should take place.—( Hear.)
What were the circumstances under which the Commission of
1834 was appointed ? Previous to that time there was through-
out a large portion of the community a growing hostility to-
wards the Church, arising out of a belief that the Church did
not properly peform the spiritual duties attached to it, while
on the other hand, its enemies were exciting some alarm by
pointing to the revenues which the Church received. NOW,
these were the circumstances under which the Commission of
1834, was appointed. It was made up of venerable and learned
men, and after due and deliberate investigation it came to the
conclusion that it was advisable that the union of the sees of
Bangor and St. Asaph should be made. Now, he
begged their Lordships :to remember that this Commission
was appointed by no Government hostile to the Church. The
objects of that commission was to make inquiry into the
dioceses of England, and to ascertain the amount of the church
revenues. 'there Were other inquiries also, such as cathedral
dues, &c., but on that part of the question he would not enter.
The object, he it observed, was the equalisation of the revenues
en the one hand, and nt the duties tin thd other. How then
could it be said that the principle which actuated the commis-
sien was placed upon an erroneous basis? Well, then, it left
only three dioceses untouched, and the commission remo-
delled at reeognited all tie °thee dioceses of the kingdom.
The commission certainly recommended the establishment of two
new sees, but the funds saved by the union of the two sees of
Bangor and St. Asaph *ere net applied to the establishment
of eithet Of thetti, tb the ingilientation of two other Welch
bishoprics, namely, Landaff and another. But how could the
House complain of the union of those two sees? Did not the
Commission alter and disturb the see of Roe,hester in
,e similar
manner? And t,.'ett not the sec's of Bristol and Gloucester
tonsotislated? True, they were, and, notwithstanding what
hart been stated by some Right Rev. Prelates, he could assure
their Lordships that the result had proved most satisfactory to
the country. Was It Wise, then, after these eicperitnehte, Which
had given so titieh satisfactioh, td irritate or unsettle
the public; mies‘ oh thR subject ? It *ai ddiniitrd that the
alteratithi wuulst not stop here. It was intended hereafter
if this measure were carried to make a gradual increase to the
number of bishops who occupied seats in that House.—(" No,
no.") Noble Lords might say not but he told them that such
was the opiniOn edit Of dosirs,,And lie *tidied their Lercbiliips
tiot to eiesnte hn hostility in the country towards the Church,
sehich, if it did not eventually destroy, must most assuredly
prove a very serious injury to the Church. Was it wise then
eatudte,Ber the oe
present moment
of ai
to ptets tiiii resafuris? Wotild It hot
t the
ht net, Prelates who held flight
seats in that House ? Let them paute then before ,they took
a step Which was, likely id lead id disistrotis,
giti.nting that there was a necessity at the present
time for augmenting the number of Bishops, which he was
not prepared to do, he should still be inclined to think that the
consolidation of the anion of the sees of hatt,,or. and St.
Asaph nuAt net tti lie distOlied. iWesitiited together
were 360,i30, lining k,ei'y little Mere tnen half the average of
the whole of the dioceses, which was 538,1,00 souls. The-.
numbrr of benefices was 262, but this was not a fair average,
because the pointlation in these two benefices was not all equal
to the population of benefices of ether dioeeses. titie half
of the population, foe, of these bettelices, it ehotild be
reinernbertil; Were Dissenters from the Establishcd Church.
Ile should like, then, to see any Noble Lord arguing for the 11
division of the two sees, and the retention of Exeter or of Lin-
coln as one diocese. Whether it was from the want of BA_
cient episcopal superintendence, or other causes, the labours of
the dioceses of St. Asaph and Bangor were lighter than those
of almost all the other dioceses in the country. He quite
agreed in what fell from a Noble Lord the other night, that
Wales
sfr
as from
England, but that they
identical; and he should
mustthey cocuouldsindeort stehpeartatitou
countries
conceive that the best mode of distributing the whole of the
episcopal staff of the whole country, so as to equalise the
duties and the revenues of all the sees. If the principle were
to be adopted of considering the two countries as separate,
Wales would lose more than it gained, for Wales gave more
titan it got. It appeared, from the statements of the eccle-
siastical fund, that there was in favour of Wales a balance of
1,45 1. Throwing into this the revenues of the sinecure rec-
tories, which gave- 4,0001., into the contnion fund, there would
be a gain of 8,•2801. as against 7,5601. ; and there was even now
an application to the public fund for 3,0001. more. With