Star.
London, England, 1829-06-23 00:00:00

meat in his place. because it would be remembered
that he (Mr. Home) had put a question to that Gale:
man as to whether there would be any objection to lay
before the Hnese a return of the income and expendi.
' lure of the different Colonies belonging to thie king.
Om ? . The Right Hon. Secretary. then answered that
there would be no objection, and he (Mr. Home) there-
fore expected that the return would by -this time have
been laid before the House. As it appeared to him that
thereinto Was of considerable importance, be begged
leave to move, that there should be laid, before the
Hesse sopies or abstracts of the statements which had
- been made before the Finance Couinsiuee with respect
• • to' the British Colonies ;as also an account of the
charges,ioorred for the Colonies since the date of the
accounts lid before the Finance Committee.
Mr.„l-HiRRIES seid be perfectly semembered the
questithr which the Hon. Member had put, and the
answer which bad been ?slurped to it. There would
be no objection to giving the infoematibn required, but
be much doubted whether the. motion would answer
the purpose which the Hon. Member supposed it would.
If he would be content with receiving the identical in-
formation which bad been laid before the Finance Com-
mittee. it would of course be forthcoming immediately;
but if be were anxious that the accounts should be con-
tinued to the present time, as his motion imported, he
thought it would be impossible for human labour to
prepare them by the nest Session.
Mr.BERNAL said it was exceedingly important to
ascertain what the charges for the Colonies really were;
but be almost doubted whether the whole of the Hon.
Member's present motion could be carried into effect.
Mr. HUME said he had thought that the accounts
bad always been made up annually ; but as that was not
the case be should be content with the account which
had been laid before the Finance Committee.
REV. MI6 WRAY'S CASS.
Mr. HUME rose to move for a Return of the number
of Archdeacons of the Established Church in each Dio-
cese of England and Wales, showing such as had been
Resident and Non-resident doting the whole of the year
1828. He observed, that this motion was the more
necessary, in consequence of the correspondence that
bad lately taken place between a Clergyman in Lin-
eoloshire and the Bishop of his Diocese. Looking at the
number of beneficed clergymen in Lincolnshire, it cer-
tainly appeared, that the selection of Mr. Wray's case,
to say the least of it, was invidious. By papers presented
in 1814 it appeared, that out of 10,602 beneficed cler-
gymen, only 3,198 were resident; to which number
might be added 1.900 who,though non-resident.did duty.
• Making some further allowances on various grounds, the
result of the whole was, that 4,800 beneficed clergymen,
did no duty whatever. Nhen certain Returns, for which
he had already moved, were laid upon the table, it would
,be seen whether any, and shat improvement had re.
• cently taken place in the system of residence ; but they
. would not give him the information he wished to pro-
cure regarding the Archdeacons. It appeared that a
solitary individual had been removed; andhe (Mr. H.)
was willing to believe that the motive had been the
promotion of the welfare of the Church. He wanted to
know how many others were similarly circumstanced,
KO had not been tetnoved. It seemed that the Arch-
deacon, at whose instance the 1t.,. Mr. Wray, Vicar of
Bardney, had been removed, did not himself reside
within the diocese of Lincoln, but at Bexley, in Kent.
There were 1,254 benefices in the diocese of Lincoln,
u hich included six counties ; but the Bishop was him-
self the M4ster of a College, and not being. himself,
therefore, resident, some little fellOw.feeling might be
expected for Mr. Wray. The non-residents by execnp-
tion in that diocese was 367, the non-residents by license
354, and the non-residents without exemption or license
178. In the whole there were 861 non-residents who
did no k nd of duty, and,only 628 who resided and did
duty. The individual serving the parish church of
Birdnel received 601. a year, and he had a small
addition from a neighbouring parish, and he was told
that he could not superintend the interests of two
parishes. He had thirteen childrenj and although in
a public point of view this fact presented no peculiar
claim, yet it did afford a plea on the score of huma-
nity, and it might be supposed to have bad some weight
with a Bishop and an Archdeacon. The individual
also in this case had been ready to do the two duties.
mid for the sake of his large family be might have been
permitted so to eke out his income. It became, therefore,
accessary to see how far the Archdeacons discharged
their duty; and if, when the Return for which he moved
was laid before the House. it should appear that this
particular Archdeacon in question was himself non-
resident, every body would be at liberty to draw their
own conclusions how far the interests of the Church
were promoted by their example of severity ; and, whe-
thee it would not be proper, in the next Session, to call
upon the Bishop and all others to proceed with the
same strictness in other cases. He need not again quote
. opinions he had before cited on the evil of non-residence
and pluralities. His calculations in 1E22, formed with
the assistance of two Clergymen. shOwed 5,843 indi-
viduals held all the livings in England, and that the
number of Curates was 6,420. The case of the Rev.
Mr. Wray might be a hard one, under all the circum-
stances; but it was an excellent example on some as-
counts ; and be trusted the House would take care that
it was followed up; and, by preventing non-residence,
c•impel Clergymen to pylorus their sacred, (vacuous.
The Honourable Member moved an Address to the
Crown for the information required. •
Mi. HERRIES objected to the motion, on the ground
that Archdeacons were not botind to ',side, did tun re-
side,' and ought not to reside in their diocese. Their
duty was not confined to a particular spot, but to make,
visitations at stated periods. An Archdeacon; not ha.
bitually *evident, was on some accounts to be preferred.
He ought, on some accounts, to' be a stranger to those.
whom he waste superintend. His duty in the Church was
something similar to that of aStaffOfficet in the Army ;I
be was not attached to any particular place—bet• was
employed to inspect a district. He ought not, pet-Imps.
to be constantly interchanging familiarities and civili-
ties with persons who were subject to his authority ; at
all events, the rules of the Church did not impose resi•
deuce as an obligation upon an Archdeacon. The Hon.
Member, therefore, was' asking for something worse
than idle; and ars public abject or principle could be
answered by complying with the motion. If the Hon.
Member could enily his inquiries to the point, whether
the Agehdeamem discharged their duties and performed
- their visinstioni? something might be gained. The Hos.
Member mo for general information, in order to
a obtain parti intelligence regarding one individual.
sogr
This was tether en objectionable mode of proceeding in
itself; b* at present no dilate had been made out
against t&i Archdeacon., and least of all could it be
said, us the/gement ofthe Hon. Member, that he had
beets.ritt in the performance of his duty. In the
coons of Mt remarks he had not dealt fairly with one is.
divide/A doocerned, but he (Mr. /ferries) was sure that
the H. Member bad only acted upon "'IWO'
He had treated the Bishop of Lincoln with decidedkr.
justice, whoa he alluded to him as hiving singled out