Star.
London, England, 1805-05-22 00:00:00

STIPENDIARY tURATES.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Or-
der for going into a Committee on this Bill, and on
the quettnos being put for the Speaker's leaving the
Chair ;
Lord PORCI4ESTER oppofed it, as a meafure
which would make a rapid ftride towards ecclefiafto
eal reform, and as it would aft& the life-interett of
incumbents. It would not be denied that the reve-
rues ~f the church were as Much private property as
any other tenures, fubjea only to the condition that
the clerical duties fhould be properly performed. If
the incumbents, therefore, were not culpable, their
rights fhould not be affeaed ; and if they fouod pro-
per fubftitotes to perform their duty when circum-
fiances rendered them incapable of doing to them.
(elves, it was as much as Parliament had a right to
expeft of them. By the law hitherto in force, the
power cf the Bifhop was limited to an allowance of
soh or at moll 751. to curates, according to circuoi-
fiances, and be did not hear that any application had
been made by Curates, Rating that they had not a
proper allowatice, or by Bifhops that they had hot li
fufficient power to otant it to them. There was no
proof either that the lactrabents did not provide pro-
per perfons to perform the neceffary fbn&ions ; and
he would, therefore, afk, what occation there was for
this Bill ? If the meafure went epon an erroneous
principle, he was aware of nothing which could do
away that objeCtion. This innovation went to no lefs
than to give to Curates three times the falary that
they were allowed before, and infinitely more than
was necrittry for:providing fubltitutes. By this Bill,
the power of the Bifhop would be exorbitant; for if
he thought it right to have more than one Cnrate,
he might appropriate one third of the whole income
of the incumbent. There were, he underftood, lone
re&ories of 3cool. a year, and furely it would be
prepofterous to deprive the perfon who held fuch a
living of toool. a year, for the purpofes of curacy.
The legiflators had already amerced the incumbents
for non-relidroce, and it was rather too hard to lay
this fecond fine upon them. He ttrong,ly objeCted to
filch decifiVe authority being given to Bifhops' and
, the mo, e fo, as the Ell left no appeal whatever from
their fiat, but to the Archbifhop of Canterbury. If
fuch a principle was proceeded upon, a Bifhop with-
in his diocefe would become a more uncontroulable
defpot .han any Firft Conful or Emperor of the
French. It was defective alloy as it gave no fecurity
that the Curate thus amply provided for fhould him-
fell be rcfident upon his cure ; it did not authorife
the Bifhops in that refpea to do good, and gave
them every power of doing injury to the incumbent;
it did not go to accomplifh the ()Ned that was pro• ,
feffedly propofed by it ; and, if it was thought right
to inftitute an ecclefiaftical reform, it fhould be done
openly, and not in fo indirett a manner. He conti- '
dered the meafure to be conneaed with circumftances
of extreme cruelty, in obliging the Vicar to make
great facrificcs to the detriment of his family, whet;
grown old in the fervice of the church. The Parlia-
ment had, Come time fince, decided, that a man
who took to prieft's orders, could nut, afterwards,
turn his attention to other purfuits ; and, as the pre-
fent meafure would tend to dept ive youth of its prof-
peas, and age of its lupport, he fhould refit the ma-
t)on for the Speaker's leaving the Chair.
Mr. I. H. BROWNE defended the general prin-
ciple of the Bill, and thought, that all the t.bjetlions
made to it were fuch as might be obviated in the
Committee.

Mr. WESTERN laid he had, on a former occa.
fhottly flared his reafons for not approving of
this, Bill, and he would now, as briefly as Hllble,
tcprat his objetlions to it. He thought it was an
attack and infringement on the property oldie clergy
'which the Houle had not a right to make. Lie
thought alto, that veiling a power in the Bifhop to
give away fo much of the revenues of the Ream, as
one-filth of the value of his living, was fubjefting the
more opnlent members of the Church to a too great
dependence on the Biflops. For thefe reatOns he
lhould übjed to the Spe do!r's leaving the Chair.
Mr. BURTON fpoke in favour of the bill. He
laid, the both, the glebe, the tythes, and other pro-
perty, were not the objeit.ts of the bill the real objects
were, the duties of the Reetar, and thefe were very
neceifary to be attended to. Notting could to much

' enfure their due perforetanee, si the refidenee of the
Reftor or Vicar ; and if be did not reticle there, there
thoold certainly by a regular and ample provifion for
the perfon who officiated in his place, and performed
his facred duty; which did not merely confift in read-
ing payers, preaching, yifiting the Fick, marrying
perfon.., Cce. but alto in keeping up a retpeetable and
focial hofpitality ; and ditlrtbutingalms in the neigh-
bourhood. It had been objefted that the provi-
firms in this Bill were of a novel nature and the
Noble Lord had laid it was a reform in the clerical
fyllem. The Honourable Members, however, who
foppofed this, were certainly mittaken. . in very old
times, indeed, this power had been vetted its the
Bilhops. As it would be eafy to obviate many ob-
jeftions, and to render the Bill more agreeable to all
parties in a Committee, he fhould certainly vote for
the Speaker's leaving the Chair. •
Mr. C. W. WYNNE raid, he thought there were
Come parts of the Bill which were highly objeftion-
able ; but as there might be modified, obviated, or
totally altered, he certainly thould vote that the Bill
go to a Committee.
Sir J. HIPPESLEY faid, that he did not rife to
oppore going into a Committee, but what he had to
fay was applicable rather to the high duties attacheol
to the fpiritital funftions of the Clergy, and to guard
againil their violation, than to interfere with the
temporalities of their benefices. He was aware that
Come difficulty and embarraffment was involved with
the fubjeft that he fhould mention, yet in a choice of
difficulties and evils, it was ever prudent to choofe
the leaß. It was painful to him to particularife the
circumftanceson which he founded thefe obfervations,
but it was but too true, that in the county in which
he refided, bills of indictment had been preferred
againa three clergymen, within a ffiort fpace of time,
in the fame year, for attempts to commit offences at
which human nature revolts. The motion he had to
make was, that when any bill of indiftment fhould
be found on a charge of a fimilar nature, or on any
other high offence againit any beneficed eccleliallical
perfon, on fuch Bill being certified to the Bithop, he
should have a power to appoint a flipendiary curate
ad interim; and he wiffied rather that it &mid be
thus collaterally introduced, than make it the fubjeft
of a Bill in i!ielf.

Mr. BARHAM was again({. the Bill ; he thought
it would diminifh the value of livings, and it was
therefore a direct violation of property. Another
objeaion to it with him was, that it very much in-
created the power of the Bithops. It had been Paid
there was no danger with them of that being abufed.
He had as high and refpeaful an opinion of the Bi-
finvps of this country as any man could have, and
believed them to be very good men, and highly ho-
nonrable charaders. He thouid, therefore, vote
againit the Speaker leaving the Chair.
Mr. FELLOWES (Norwich) faid he highly ap-
proved the Bill, though there were tome parts of it
which he hoped to fee improved in the Committee.
_ _ .

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
declared himfelf a decided friend to the Bill, and he
was therefore defirous it fhoul.l directly go into a
Committee, where any objedlions might be removed
by alteration and modificati,,n. He thought every
Honourable Member mutt be convinced of the vall
huportance of promoting and enforcing, as far as the
nature of the cafe will permit, the relidence of the
reflors &c. in their feveral parilhes. Nothing could
fo much tend to promote religion, and to incite and
eftablifh loyalty and attachment to the conllitution
and the Sovereign, and where, from having more
livings than one—having deaneries, prebendaries,
and various other caufes, refers or vicars could not
refide thcmfelves, it was certainly defirable that pro•
per curates Amid be ftibili.oted, and that thofe per-
fons fo officiating and relident, fhould be dilly pro-
vided for. The fum to be allowed was, at the ut-
moll, not mOlethan a filth, and this was only out of
livings of 4001. a year and upwards; all below were
already provided for; and thole higher ones could
certainly afford it as well or better than the others.
For thefe reafons he fhould certainly vote, that the
Speaker leave the Chair.
The Q2efiion being called for, a divillon took
phlCC—Ayec 37—Noes 23.—Majority 34.
The Houfe immediately refolved itfelf into a
Committee.

On our re-entrance into the Gallery, we found
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY making objeitions
to the firll claufe ; on which, after fome converfation
between Lord Porcheaer, the Attorney General,
Mr. Creevey, and Sir W. Scott, a divifion took place.,
and the gallery was not opened again.
We underaood the Houfe went through the Bill,
and the report was ordered to be received.
Adjourned at ten o'clock.