The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-09-22

An everlasting Of The way the haxhops Of the
British church raase th< msslvsu ~ u Ally paid,
ia now going on Ia England II began Ia the
House Of Commons gu motion OF Lord Bland
ford to provide for the spiritual destitption Of
the people, by founding ne " bishoprics and par
ishes and building churches, the expense to be
met partly from the present income Of the church,
and partly by private subscriptions, hsreuPon
Mr.. Hume moved for return Ut tho exact
amount of<he property and the incomes belong
ing to the various bshopsics and ecclesiastical
bodies. His desire was TO see the funds Of the
church applied as they ought to be- BY report
made in 1881 while the average income Of the
$50 curateS employed in the kingdom was
1896 each, the bishops had from $4,000 to
$4,000. In order in some measure 10 remedy
this, law hid been passed limiting the lowest
bishops revenue to S22.500, and the highest.
that of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 175.-
900. But thisl law had been grossly evaded, and
the funds which ought to have gone to the minor
clergy, had been taken from them. The facts
ought TO be exactly ascertained.
Hereupon Sir B. Hall made speech, In which
he handled the reverend prelates without reserve.
They had all got great deal more money than
the law allowed them. The Bishop Of st. Da-
yid's was to have $22,5O0 a year, but in seven
wears Ut Uhu poChcLcu qpOtOSV usVAO tusu Mai
sum. The Bishop of Norwich was to have the
same, but in seven years he had got S35, 800 too
much. The three Bishops OF Oxford, Rochester.
and Salisbury had cribbed $4,000 more than
their proper revenues. The Bishop Of London.
in IA years, had taken 1886, 1875 to which he had
no good right; and in the same time the Bishop
of Winchester had outrun his just income
$225,S30, and the Bishop Of Durham $a98, 800.
Ii other people were to do such things, 1t would
be called robbery. So too in some minor Offices
Of the church In the DIOCESE Of Ely there
were FIVE clergymen, whom he named receiving
together 1856, is year, who did no duty ut all,
and one more receiving $l6.a50, who did duty
only "a it suited his convenience.
In this way Sir b. Hall went through the
abuses of the church, and showed up the more
prominent with an unsparing hand He went
for reforming them ALL The state Of things was
disgraceful in the highest degree. An end
should be put to such system Of clerical specu-
lation. lie would propose to take the property
of the bishoprcs, deaneries and ecclesiastical
bodies, all and singular, and pay the clergy pro-
per incomes, leaving no chance for them to get
more by trick and management. Instead Of
$T50 cO year, let the Archbishop of Canterbury
have no more salary than the prime minister.
AS for the bishops, turn them out Of the House
of lords, give them $4,000 to $4,000 year, and
make them net in their spheres a. good parish
priests would. IL respect Of the inferior clergy.
he wnnld have none of them allowed to starve
on $3.50 or 5000 year, without clothes fit to
be seen none Of them should have lens than L.
900 nor more than $4,000. By this means the
church would be made useful, respected and n
blessing to the country at large, while there
wonld be ample funds for its extension.
This speech, as well as one Of similar sort.
made subsequently,, in the same debate by Mr..
Horsman, could not but provoke replies from
the prelates in question: and the public press has
been widely occupied with the subject. The
bishops defend themselves with spirit quite
vehement and irate, hut apparently with no
great success New York Tribune.