The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-05-22 00:00:00

Eirtperial Vartiainart.

lIOUS) O 1?
LORDS.MoNnar. .• "
Captain At.aacaat hionght-u-p the Croydon railWav bill.
A great number of- petitions were preaented to thi; House by
several noble lords, praying fur protection to the church of
' Scotland, and for a parliamentary giant to increase church ac,
comumidation in that country.
• The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved that two noble lords
(Wharnelitle and Lyndhurst) who had been members of the
building committee ex rirtate rigica, having resigned their re.•
spective ofaees. and thus- ceased to be members, should be ad-
ded to that-tommittee.—Agreed to.
The Earl of WILTON said he had the honour to present to
their lordships a petition from certain inhabitants of Mauches-
ter and Salford and the immediate neighbourhood, in which,
after conveying their assurances of support to that house, and
expressing their confidence that their lordships would maintain
the indepeudeitce of that branch of the legislature, they humbly
prayed that their lordships would withhold their consent. froth
any measure calculated to weaken and- impair,. either in its
, temporal or spiritual capacity, the established church of Eng-
land and Ireland. '(h aar, bean) To this petition were ap-
pended the signatures of nb less than 10,500 individuals; and,
whether it were considered in 'volition to the numbersi.or to the
high character, the intelligence, the wealth, and the Indepen- •
dence of those who had signed it, the petition equally possessed
a claim, upon the favour and attention of the house. But the
circumstance to which he was more particularly anxious to call
their lordships' attention was this—namely, that the individual
whose. name stood at the head of this multitude of signatures
(and let their lordships bear in mind that it was a petition in
favour of the established church) was that of a gentleman of
large landed possessions and great independence of character,
who was a Roman catholic (near, hear,) a Roman leatholie,
who availed himself •of these means of publicly testifying his
disapprobation of the attempts that had recently been made to
weaken and impair, to undermine and to destroy, the-protestant
establishment in these kingdoms. (Hear, hear.) He had the
honour to be personally acquainted -with that gentleman, and
sure he was, that he had been actuated upon this occasion by
no other motive but an anxious desire to record the grateful
sense he entertained of his full and ample participation in the
benefits of.our hithei to free constitution, and of his enjoyment,
to its.greatest extent, of that real practical liberty which was
the linthright of every 14.1ngligfunan.. (Hear, hear. He had
been deterred by no menaces, influenced by no tear of the
abuse that it was more than probable would-be lavished upon
him in consequence of this act; but disregardine., that vain-
glorious boast, that the Irish catholic members had aoverpowered
the English protestant-representatives, he now boldly an&man-
fullv, and in a manner whichhe (the Earl of Wilton) must say ,
did him both credit and honour, came forward to place his amine
among the signatures to this important petition. (Hear.) •
Lord SKELMERSDALE said it .would appear invidious, when"
one RfAiliflicatholic gentleman was praised, and justly praised, ,
for having taken this public-spirited course, if he did not de-
(Aar., that many other Roman-catholic gentle Men, residing 'in
the neighbourhood front which the petition emanated, enter-
Mined the saute opinions. (Hear.) Ile had reason also to know
that the aignatures to this petition were wholly unsolicited.
~The 'Earl, of WILTON. presented a similar petition from the I
parish of Middleton.7-Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
The Speaker took the chair at half-past three o'clock.
Lord Morpeth took tbe oaths and his seat.
The London and Croydon railway bill was read a third time
and 'passed.

THE CHURCH. •
Lord STANLEY rose to present a petition which he said he un-
willingly brought forward, because it contained very serious
charges against a person of very high rank in the church, who,
he understood, was, and had been for along time, suffering wi-
der pecuniary and family distress. The gentleman to whom he
alluded was Dr.' Webber—formerly chaplain to the house—pre-
bendary (A-Westminster, Dean of Ripon, and Rector of Kirk-'
ham, in Lancashire. From the , great extent of this parish it
would lie seen that it was impossible that any one cleiegyman
could discharge the spiritual duties connected with it beneficially.
The parish contained 12,000 inhabitants, distributed over an
agricultural district of eight miles-in length and two in breadth,
comprising an area of one hundred and thirty square miles; it
Was' divided into seventeen townships, and, so long ago as 1650,
a division of it into smaller parishes had been recommended.
It appeared that for two of the seventeen townships there was
sufficient accommodation in the parish church; that five others.
had chapels of ease; that there was one chapel the gift of the
vicar and endowed by him; that the endowment of these
chapels averaged £l9O per annum for each; ie 1 that there were
eight townships without the means of religious instruction. It
appeared from the statement of the petitioners that, in theyear
1814, Dr. Webber Was inducted into the palish, he receiving
the small tithes of eight townships, while Christchurch received
the great tithes of all and the small tithes of nine townships.
The small tithes appropriated to the rector amounted, at the
to £2st) a-year; on that oc-
'made with the parishioners in
cpaesrLond othfeDrer.„„\,,Viseabnbearr'rsai4deuincteinont
consequence of which the rectorial small tithes were increased
from £250 to £1,090 a-year. At the time of that arrangement
being made, Dr. Webber expressed himself, in letters now in
his (Lord Stanley's) possession, deeply grateful for the libe-
rality of his parishioners,. and he voluutecied a statement
to his.parishioners, to the effect that no alteration should be
made during his hacumbeacy in the amount of those tithes,
and that nothing shwa¢ induce him to become non-resident, or
to absent himself from the discharge of his parochial duties.
Phis was tbe.coasideratiou which he promised them in return
for their liberality to him oh that occasion. From 1814 to 1829
Dr. Webber resided amongst his parishioners; but in the latter
year he was presented with a prebend in Weetniineter. At the
same period, unfortunately for his parishioners, be was inducted
into the deanery of Ripest; and limn that tame to the present,
with the exception ofoue single occasion, he had aever set foot
in the parish, though, the petitieuers observed, lie- had at the
time the small tithes were raised mule residence one of the con-
ditions under which he voluutetrily -placed himself. The peti-
tioners did not object to the fair and equitable emoluments of
their pastor, but they were anxious. to see ,st larger amount of
them appropriated to the providing sorsiciefet religious instruc-
tion for the parishioners. In the reeept instance it appeared,
that of the two curates employed 'by the rector, one was the
master of the grammar school at Kirkham, one of the funda-
mental rules of which was that the master of it should attend to
no other business but that -of tae school. The appointment.
moreover, was protested against -by four of Ale visitors of the
sChool... .This gentleman, De. Webber, notwithstanding this
protects appointed to the discharge iif parochial duties, which
the petitioners alleged were inconsistent with .the discharge of
his duties at the schtiol. 'rho petitioners further complained,
or they rather made au appeal to the. liberality and justice of
Christchurch College, .with regard to the impropriate tithes
of the parish, - It appeared that many years ago those impro-
priate tithes were valued at three thousand live hundred a-sear.
Now the petitioners conceived that Christchurch, lookiugat the
enormous extent of this. parish, and seeing that the rectorial
tithes were not sufficient to provide adequately for the religious
instruction of the parishioners, should, with a view to fulfil the
purposes for which those tithes had been -granted, allow a por-
tion of the great tithes received by it for that object. It ate-
peered that so long ago as the year 1650, the great tithes of this
parish were let to a person specified in the lease as a delinquent
papist—a person Of the name of Clifton, of a most respectable
family its Lancashire, whose descendants, curious enough, be-
ing all eatholics, continued to hold those tithes under lease from
Christchurch Coileeee.. The present lineal descendant of tliat
gentleman was high sheriff of Lancashire, and had only lately
become a protestant.. 'rile petitioners complained that of these
great tithes, amounting to £3,5(X) a year, the college of Christ-
church and their intermediate lessee enjoyed all the benefits,.
while none of them went to the supporting of the parochial mi-
nister, or the endowment of the parish. Now, the college of
Christchurch must surely be anxious to see the object, for which
those tithes were granted fulfilled. - The petitioners stated, that
if-Christchurch would adopt a different mode of leasing those
tithes, for which he (Lord Stanley) understood that they hadon
one occasion received. £lO,OOO as a renewal fine for seven
years—that if sects a system were acted upon, adequate means
would be supplied for the maintenance of clergymen for the
discharge of the parochial duties, while a sum as large as the
present would still go into the pockets of Chhh. It appeared from the statement of the petitioners,ristc that in
the year 18.39, Dr. Webber returned to the parish, but
under circumstances not .of a very conciliatory nature.
He returned, notwithstanding the arrengement which he had
made in 1814, feeling it his duty, and he (Lord • Stanley) be-
lieved that he did feel it his duty to his successor to du so, to set
aside those moduses with whichhe had formerly expressed him-
self so satisfied, and to raise those tithes which hail then already
so greatly increased. l'he parishioners naturally resisted this
attempt on his part. He then made a proposition to the effect,
that lie would 41hstain from all legal proceedings, provided the
parishioners would defray all the expense which he had already
incurred by those proceedings; that they would pay a certain
suns for the improvement of the rectory-house; and that they
would raise the tithes from £1,090 to £1,600 a year, Ile added
to them, that upon these terms Christchurch would be willing
to enter into terms to divide the parish, but upon no other. The
parishioners felt deeply aggrieved that Christchurch should
.thus be found to act contrary to the spirit that had dictated the
original grant, and that it would not make an appropriation out
of. this £3,300 of great tithes, so as to enable the parish to
be divided in-conformity With the report of the commissioners
in 1650. The petitioners prayed the interference of the house
for two specific purposes.
,The first was,—and lie (Lord Stap-
ler) trusted that his majesty's ministers would,-without loss of
time, introduce a measure with that views—that snore especially
where clergymen were adequately provided far, residence sheuld
be strictly enforced. , (General cries of "Hear, hear.") The
next was, (and he was afraid that practically it would be more
difficult to accede to it,) that the hiship of the diocese,' or some
other competent authority, should make it imperative on ins-
prupriate rectors and vicars to make endowmeots, in conform-
ity Leith the 4th OT-Willihm IV., for chapels of ease in the
parishes belougingto them, where they were necessary. (Hear.)
After some further observations the petition was read. On
the question " that it do lie on the table,'
Sir ItoneriT Iteolos 'said his noble friend had stated the
amount of tithesreceived from this parish, bnt the amount of
tithes in a given parislr; or I heir reasonableness, or whether the
parishioners paid inure than they ought for the spiritual benefit
they received, or whether the vicar Should receive £loooa-year,
or Christchurch, Oxford. £3.500 u-year, was not the question
before the house : the question was, whether, as the law re-
mained, the patties entitled to those tithes called for or received
a single shilling more than their value, or than they had a right
to. His noble friend had said that it was only reasonable to re-
quest the college.of Christchurch to • snake over those tithee, or
a portion of them, to the purposes for which they were origin-
ally destined. Now, he, (Sir R. Inglis) was perfectly willing
to rest the case of the vicarage of Kirlshani on those grounds
only, provided that his noble friend on his part would engage
to endeavour to make the property of every other proprietor of
church -property convertible to the Caine purposes. ("Hear,
hear," from the opposition.) He did not see the noble lord the
secretary for the home department in his place. (A laugh.) -Ile
hardly knew,. indeed, whether at present that mible lord would
find any place to return bins to parliament. If, however, that
noble lord was in his place, and if his noble friend the member
for North Lancashire should make a motion to the following
effect, he was sure his noble friend would find a ready seconder
for such a motion in the male lord the secretary for the home
department—namely, that all who held church property under
grants of Henry vim were bouud to provide for the spiritual
benefit of the ziariehes front which such property was derived.
(Cheers from the opeositie„. Ile was extremely sorry that on
the present occasion the noble lord the secretary for the home
department was net iu his place. At the fitting time he (Sir
Inglis) would be ready to meet him on the question. The
question in the present instance. was not whether the amount
paid was too much or too little, but whether the petitioners were
made to pay more than they were legally bound to pay. With
regard to what had been .said by his nade friend as to the com-
pact entered into by-the rector of Kirkham with his parishioners,
he (Sir ft. IngliS).appeeheuded that.the .character of that agree-
Meta this-=that: if, t'ney, the parishioners of Kirkham,
should' give bins, the vicar, LIAO a-year to be paid without li-
tigation, •he promised on his part not to ask for an increase of
Ndaf that condition had not been bond fide adhered to by
the parishioners of Kirkham, and he (Sir R. Inglis) believed
that the vicar had been obliged to issue summonses in many in-
stances to enforce the payment of his tithes. His noble fiiend
lied stated the difficulty of providing spiritual instruction in this
parish, owing to ite great extents He (Sir It. Inghs) felt that