Tithes In London.
The Times, 1824-11-10T00:00:00

lAne tolUowzng reasons, amongst others, have been laid before the Special Committee of the Corporation of the Citv of London, ap- pointed in relation to tithes, as a just and powerful inducemcnt for the union of the several parishes attempted to be rendered subject to the claim of 2s. 9d. in the pound, in ajoitit application to Parlia- nlent for the repeal or alteration of the statute. The fact of non-enrolment in Chancery of the decree made in pur- suance of the aboveyaentioned statute, is now clearly ascertained. The pretended legal support of the claim can therefore onlj rest upon the extraordinary assumption that the acting of Courtsupon the decree is equiyalent or tantamount to the enrolment of it in Chancery as required by the statute; thus presuming to give effcet to nn instru- ment,the validity of which wasoriginally defective,and, In effect,mak. inr that a law which it may with proariety be considered can only be accomplished by Parliament itself. Independently of the want of enrolment of the decree, the sums therein provided to be paid can. not be fairlv deemed exclusively applicable to the clergy and impro- priators claiming to receive them, but were in lieu of ancient obla- tions, payable for the joint purposes of supporting the poor, repair- ing the churches, and maintaining the clergy; the introduction of ch1urch and poor-rates being of subsequent date. Under this impression the several parishes in London, until com- paratively of late years, were not called upon to pav the elaiin of 2. 9d. in the pound; and even in many parishe-s where the claim is contended for allegal, the fall amount Is not taken. from an un- pression that the same would be justly considered as exorbitant, particularly as numerous parishes were originally, and ought now to be considered, as exempt from its operation, in consequence of an- cient customary payments, which in some cases had been lost sight of, and in others induced to be waved: not reflecting at the time that such waver might lead to future litigation, in subsequent in- creased claims being set up by the clergy and impropriators. In some parishes however, the full amount is taken, and in others only partiaily. Amongst the latter class, numerous in- stances occur of great and glaring inequality; different inhabitants, who are equally subIect to the same amount of claim, (if such claim were legal), pay in small .amounts, some in larger, and some in the full amount, end where the parishesin the citvand libertiesof London are not protectedl by the fire acts or by local acts, or are their own impropsiators of the tithes, disasrrous expense and litigation are con. tinually occurring, subversive of thte best interest of religion and ot' the Establishedi ChIurch. Far from imputing censure or misconduct to the clergy and ins. propriators as a bedy,.or d6tracting from that respect in which 'hey ought to be held, it is evident, from the circumstances in whichi the several parishes not protected are placed, that a general arrangement and future settlement in the payment of titlhes is loudly called for through the medium of Parliament; which arrangement would be obviously to the benefit of all parties, both as to the principle and mode of assesment, and a fair and equitable quamtzhrn of amount, at the same time liberal but not oppressive. A prominent feature in the exorbitancy of the present claim to 2s. 9d. in the pound is particularly evident in such parishes where part of the boundaries happen to be in Aliddlesex and part in London, the former paying small ancient customary sums, and the latter being attempted to be rendered subject to the*fuU amount of the said 2s. 9d. T wenty4two parishes not included in the Fire Acts, orprotected by local acts, or not theirewn impropriators. are subject to the claim of 2s. 9d. in the poundl, as now asserteg by the clergy and lay im- propritors; and whatever may be the instances in which lets thav that amount is at present paid, there is no guarantee sgainst.the in. crease of the same in future years, without fresh provisions and en- actments by the I,egilIature. All the Fire Act parishes having fixed stipends, as increased by the Legislature in 1804, are protected, and likewvise the tindermentioned impropriate ones-SSL Bride (by the fire act and local act); St. Mfary, Aldermanbury (their own impro- priators); St. Stephen, Coleman-street, (ditto); St. Sepulchre, (by the Fire Acts); St. lIaurence Jewry, (by ditto. and arrangement with Baliol College, Oxford);. St. Laurence Pountnev, (their own impropriators). Other parishes also protected.but notin the Fire Act, are-St. Catherine Cree, (by local acts) St. Bartholomew the Great (always exempt) 4 St. Dunstan in the WeAt (by local act); $t. An- drew, flborn, (by local acL) It is therefore clear that the re- maining parishes not protectedLof which St. Olave, Hart-street; St. Botoiph, All,ate: St. Botolph, Aldersgate, St. Botolph, Bisleopsgate; St. (iregory by St. Paul's; St. Giles, Cripplegate; Alihallowgs. Barking; and Allhallows, lIondon-wall, aie pro- minent examples-should be entitled to future fair and equitablear. rangements, through the medium of Parliament, wlho in their wis- dom have frequently interfered to restrain exorbitant rights, not- withstanding they may be supported by the semblance of vested in- terests, and when justice and equity clearly evince that reasonable Prosions should be substituted, to uphold the dignity and respect of the Established Church, and the peace and good- will of all parties. It is scarcely necessarv to advert, to the passing of a bill, even in tkte last session of Parliament, for the commuation of tithes in the parishh and township of Leeds, b which these important results were secured, and to numerous other instances, particularly in regard to the new churches erected in the reign of Queen Anne, and at snbsequent periods, in and. about the metropolis, as wvell as those of very late years, which have se- cured the like advantages to 'the parishes of St. Dunstan in the West, and St. Andrew, Holborn ; and it is only necessary to add, that even where satisfactory arrangements are made between the clergy and impropriators and their parishioners, in several of the pa- rishes not protected from the effect of claim under the statute and decree 37th Henry VIII., sach arrangements might continuewith the most benefieial and additional advantage.s to all parties, and at the same time prevent fture disputes and litigation, by preventing the stattute and decree from hanging over the heads of the parishion- era in future. .. TITHRS LV LOYVDON. 37Ti OtrrvNvv V TflrV