Hide Articles List

22 articles on this Page

SECOND DETAINER AGAINST THE…

GOItllAM v. THE BISHOP OF…

SECESSION OF THE .REV. JOII…

[No title]

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TUISDAY,…

News
Cite
Share

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TUISDAY, MAR. 20. BISHOP OF DURHAM'S PATRONAGE. Mr. Hons MAN moved an address to her Majesty, praying for a commission of inquiry into the allegations contained in the peti- tions presented to the House from the parishioners of Bishopwear- mmth and Sunderland; and that the commissioners be directed to take into consideration the agreement stated in Parliament (on the authority of the patron of the living of Bishop wear i ii,) utii) to have been entered into between himself and the present incum- bent, whereby the surplus income of the living, over and above the sum of £ 2,0 )0 a year, reserved as the income of the incum- bent, is to be paid over to trustees and to report on the best mode of appropriating that surplus to spiritual purposes connected with the two parishes, and of glvmg legal effect to such appropriation. The hon. member desired to impress on the House that his motion was prospective, and not intended to be, in any degree, retrospec- tive. He stated that the income of the living was £ 5.000 a year, yet the parishioners complained of the wantof spiritual instruction. There were four district chapels, with four half-starved curates, whilst the incumbent was able to keep a sumptuous table (hear). The result of the existing arrangements was. that there were only five piaces of worship belonging to the Established Church, con- taining 4,200 sittings, while there were eighteen places of Dissent- ing worship, with 14,350 sittings (hear, hear). The parishioners, therefore, required Parliament to take the temporalities of the rectory under its control. The noble lord at the head of the go- vernment was the first statesman who ever asserted the doctrine of episcopal irresponsibility (cheers). Lord J. RUSSELL denied that he ever laid down the principle of episcopal irresponsibility. While he declined to give any opinion whether the arrangement made was the best possible one or not, he thought it would be better for Parliament to make some ge- neral arrangement with respect to such temporalities than to single out an individual case, which could not fail to have an invidious aspect. The noble lord defended the Bishop of Durham from the imputations cast upon him, and bore testimony to the right rev. prelate's fitness for his high office (hear, hear). Alderman THOMPSON had hopes that the noble lord would have been authorised by the bishop to state that lie was ready to deal with those temporalities according to the wish of Parliament. Lord H. VANE considered that the introduction of a bill would be a better mode of carrying the object in view into effect than an inquiry into a single case, which would have a personal aspect. Mr. DISRAELI recommended the Government, as the opinion of all sides of the House and of the Prime Minister himself was in favour of the proposition, to bring in a bill to regulate the distri- bution of these temporalities. Should the Government give a pro- mise to do so, it would save the House from the painful duty of dividing on this individual question, which he, for one, would ra- ther avoid, if possible. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not give any such assurance. Sir R. PEEL would not do anything that could reflect on the conduct oi the Bishop of Durham; but he could not retrain from stating bis concurrence in the general principles laid down by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Horsman). The right hon. baronet advised an act of Parliament to regulate the temporalities. Lord ASHLEY heartily concurred in the principle of the motion, but he recommended that it should not be pressed to a division, but to leave it to the good sense of the bishop to introduce a bill in accordance with the expressed opinions of the House. Sir Francis BARING moved the previous question, and the House divided- For the previous question 52 Against it 39 Majority 13 The only Welsh member presentat the division was Mr. liichard Richards, who voted against Mr. Horsman's motion. Mr. SLANEY was then proceeding with a motion relative to the condition of the working classes, when the House (at a quarter past eight) was counted out. 36 members were present.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNESDAY,…

FINANCIAL REFORM.

SMALL DEBTS (IRELAND) BILL.

.INSOLVENT MEMBERS BILL.

HOUSE OF LORDS,—'THURSDAY,…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY,…

MOLDAVIA AND WALLACHIA.

HOVSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY, MARCTI…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY,…

NEW MEMBERS.

PETITIONS.

MUTINY BILL.

THE NAVIGATION LAWS.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY, MAIICII…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MOXDAY,…

THE NAVIGATION LAWS.

THE REV. JAMES SHORE.