Page images
PDF
EPUB

"Having read the public statement, and knowing its utter falsehood, I think it my duty to trouble your lordship, leaving you to any further examination; and I am, with the greatest respect, your obedient servant,

"W. L. BowLES.

"P.S. Mr. Law was unwilling to take any notice of the letter, and I have written entirely from my own feeling-not on account of Christian Malford, but on account of the benevolent Society to which your lordship belongs, and on account of every parish in the kingdom, in which, probably, the Christian Observer' may be circulated. Surely, no 'Home Missionary's' report should be taken without some inquiry from those most interested in the present and the eternal welfare of their parishioners."-Bath Chronicle.

LITERATES.

A PARAGRAPH has gone through all the papers, stating that the Bishop of Gloucester has ordained five literates. The fact is, that the Bishop of London being too ill to ordain himself, gave letters dimissory to the Bishop of Gloucester. Among the London candidates were, as usual, some students of the Church Missionary Society.

DOCUMENTS.

THIRD REPORT FROM HIS MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO CONSIDER THE STATE OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH, WITH REFERENCE TO THE ECCLESIASTICAL DUTIES AND REVENUES.

TO THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY

WE, your Majesty's Commissioners, appointed to consider the state of the established church in England and Wales, with reference to ecclesiastical duties and revenues, humbly present to your Majesty this our third report.

Not being fully prepared to make a final report on all the matters which have engaged our attention, we venture to offer to your Majesty our further remarks upon that branch of the inquiry which formed the subject of our first report; because, in consequence of the number of episcopal sees at present vacant, any further delay in carrying into effect the new arrangements respecting the bishoprics will be attended with great inconvenience.

When we recommended the union of the sees of Landaff and Bristol, we were influenced chiefly by a desire to retain for the city of Bristol its ecclesiastical character, and to secure to it the advantage of a bishop resident upon the spot, or at no great distance from it. In consequence of the urgent remonstrances which were made against this arrangement by the clergy, and other persons in the diocese of Llandaff, on the ground that it would deprive them of the benefits which they derive from the residence and personal superintendence of their bishop, we were induced to relinquish that plan; and, in our second report, we recommended that the city and suburbs of Bristol, being within a convenient distance of the city of Wells, where the Bishop of Bath and Wells resides, should be united to that diocese.

We have since learned that this proposition has occasioned much dissatisfaction to the inhabitants of the city of Bristol, who have represented, in strong terms, their objections to a plan which would merge their episcopal see in that of Bath and Wells, and their earnest desire to retain the advantages of the pastoral superintendence and example of a bishop resident amongst them.

Being desirous of consulting, as far as may be consistent with the general principles of our reports, feelings which are not less honourable to the citizens of Bristol than encouraging to the friends of the established church, we have been induced to recur to the suggestion to which we adverted in our first report. We accordingly recommended, that the city and deneary of Bristol (with the whole parish of Bedminster) should be united to the diocese of Gloucester; and that a house should be provided, in some convenient situation, near the city of Bristol, so that the bishop of the united diocese may reside alternately there and at Gloucester. This arrangement will render it necessary to augment the income of the bishop beyond what might otherwise have been required.

We recommend, as consequent upon this arrangement, that instead of the new archdeaconry of Cirencester, proposed in our last report, an archdeaconry of Bristol should be created; and that the parishes of the united diocese should be divided, in convenient proportions, between that archdeaconry and the archdeaconry of Gloucester.

We recommend further, that the future bishops of the united diocese should be elected alternately, by the Dean and Chapter of Bristol, and the Dean and Chapter of Gloucester; and that the mode of confirming such acts of the bishop as require confirmation under the chapter seal should be determined upon by the Commissioners, subject to the approval of your Majesty in council.

We are disposed to suggest a slight alteration in our proposition relating to the northern dioceses, and to recommend that no part of Yorkshire, and no other part of Lancashire but that which composes the deanery of Furnes and Cartmel, should be added to the diocese of Carlisle; but that the remaining portion of Lancashire should be included in the diocese of Manchester, and that portion of Yorkshire which forms part of the deanery of Kirkby Lonsdale in the diocese of Ripon.

Further information has given us reason for withdrawing those parts of our former recommendations respecting the diocese of Gloucester and Worcester, which suggest an interchange of certain border parishes between those two dioceses.

With respect to the territorial arrangements of the other dioceses, although at present we see no reason for deviating from the general scheme which we have proposed, we are of opinion that the Commissioners should have the liberty of recommending, and that your Majesty in council should have the power of sanctioning, such variations in the boundaries of the several dioceses as may be suggested by fuller and more precise information, with respect to particular parishes or districts.

In order effectually to carry into execution the proposed territorial arrangements, it will be necessary that your Majesty in council should be empowered, when such arrangements are completed, to declare that those places which may have been transferred from one diocese to another, shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the bishop of the diocese of which they will then form a part, in all respects and in the same manner as if they had originally belonged to it; and that the jurisdiction of the bishops from whose dioceses they may respectively have been severed, shall from thenceforth wholly cease.

Power of a similar character, although varied in some particulars, will be requisite with respect to the proposed union of the diocese of Bangor with St. Asaph, and that of Bristol with Gloucester; as well as with regard to the new sees of Manchester and Ripon.

As these arrangements will necessarily affect the interests of several persons who hold patent offices in some of the dioceses, we recommend that your Majesty in council should be empowered to make such regulations for the apportionment of fees as may appear just and equitable, for the purpose of making compensation to those officers who may be prejudiced by the alterations.

We append to this report the diocesan maps, to which we referred in the

appendix to our second report, and the completion of which was delayed, by the necessity for reconsidering some of the territorial arrangements. These maps are intended to exhibit the condition of each of the present dioceses, with reference to territorial contents and boundaries; and its future condition, as to its main outlines, in the event of our propositions being carried into effect.

In that part of our last report which refers to the contributions to be hereafter furnished by the richer sees towards the augmentation of the poorer, we did not point out the particular mode in which such contribution might be most conveniently made. In some cases a transfer of estates may, probably, be expedient; but in general we think that the most advisable arrangement will be, that each of the bishops of the richer sees should pay to the Commissioners the sum which shall be fixed upon, as his quota of contribution to the fund out of which the yearly payments are to be made in augmentation of the poorer bishoprics. Objections may, no doubt, be urged against this plan, on the ground that the fluctuating amount of the episcopal incomes may sometimes make it inconvenient to the holders of the larger sees to pay a certain fixed sum; but upon the whole we think that this mode is less open to objection than any other which has presented itself to us; and it possesses the important advantage of insuring a sufficient fund for the improvement of the smaller sees.

We recommend, however, that at the expiration of every seven years, a new return of the revenues of each see should be made to the Commissioners, with a view to their revising the scale of episcopal payments and receipts, in order to preserve, as nearly as may be, to each bishop, an amount of income equivalent to that which shall have been considered, in the first instance, to be suitable to the circumstance of his bishopric; and that such revised scale should take effect upon the then next avoidance of the respective sees.

The proposed changes in the revenues of the several sees will render the payments with which they are charged for first fruits and tenths very disproportionate; and the two new sees will be free from this charge. We there

fore recommend that the aggregate sum, to be paid from this source to Queen Anne's Bounty, should remain the same as at present; but that the Commissioners should be empowered, as speedily as may be after the relative values of the several sees, under the new arrangements, shall be ascertained, to make a new division of that aggregate sum, in proportion to the respective values of the sees and that such apportionment, being ratified by your Majesty in council, should be binding on all bishops to be hereafter appointed.

The reduction to be made in the incomes of the sees of Durham and Ely, which are now vacant, requires a corresponding reduction in the sums which the bishops, whom your Majesty may be pleased to prefer to those sees on the present occasion, will, immediately on taking possession of their temporalities, become liable to pay for first fruits. For this purpose we submit, that as soon as the incomes of those sees are fixed, the Commissioners should be empowered to relieve the bishops from the excess beyond their due proportion of payment, and to order that the residue of the sums due be paid out of the surplus funds arising from the respective sees.

The vacancies to which we have adverted in the sees of Durham and Ely, afford an opportunity of carrying into effect many of the changes which we recommended in our former reports. From information received since the date of our last report, as to the probable future proceeds of the property belonging to the sees of Durham and Ely, we are led to believe that, if the future income of those sees be reckoned at 8000l. and 5500l. respectively, the fund intended to provide, either wholly or in part, for the smaller bishoprics, will receive annually from Durham about 12,000l., and from Ely about 5000l. Understanding that the see of Bristol will become vacant, we recommend that the bishopric of Ripon be created without delay, and that an income of 4500l. per annum be assigned to the bishop of that see. The Archbishop of York, VOL. X.-August, 1836.

2 c

whose consent to this arrangement has been signified to us, would thus be relieved of a considerable part of his too extensive and laborious diocese; and portions also of the diocese of Chester, which are most inconveniently situated with respect to the episcopal residence, would, with the consent of the Bishops of Carlisle and Chester, be detached from that diocese, and placed under the superintendence of the Bishops of Carlisle and Ripon respectively.

We further recommend that, with the consents of the Archbishop of York, and of the Bishops of Lincoln and Norwich, which have been signified to us, the counties of Huntingdon and Bedford, with those parts of Norfolk and Suffolk which were specified in our first report, and the small portion of the county of Cambridge which is now in the diocese of Norwich, should be forthwith annexed to the diocese of Ely; and the county of Nottingham to the diocese of Lincoln.

The vacancy of the see of Bristol will render it necessary to provide for the administration of that diocese. With the consents of the Bishops of Salisbury, Oxford, and Gloucester, we recommend that the proposed union of the city and deanery of Bristol with the diocese of Gloucester, and the transfer of Dorsetshire to the diocese of Salisbury, and of Berkshire and Buckinghamshire to that of Oxford, be carried into effect as soon as possible.

The recommendations which we have already offered for the creation of new archdeaconries, and for confining the jurisdiction of the several archdeacons in England and Wales within the limits of their respective dioceses, will make it necessary to alter the extent of the existing archdeaconries. The present archdeacons will not be affected by these changes, except in the surrender of procurations, received upon visiting some parishes, which will then no longer be within their jurisdiction; and as the expense, from which they will thus be liberated, is not now met by the amount of these procurations, we have no hesitation in recommending that a power be granted to your Majesty in council, upon the recommendation of the Commissioners, forthwith to make the proposed alterations.

Adverting, however, to the small portion of territory which will remain within the jurisdiction of the archdeacon of Rochester, when the proposed alteration of that diocese shall take effect, we think that an exception may, in that instance, be made from the general arrangement contemplated with respect to archdeaconries; and that archidiaconal power may, with advantage, be given to the Dean of Rochester within that part of Kent which will remain in the diocese of Rochester. Should this suggestion be adopted, we recommend that a new archdeaconry should be erected at Maidstone, in the diocese of Canterbury, which will, under the new arrangement, be too extensive for the efficient superintendence of one archdeacon; that the stall in the cathedral of Rochester, which is now annexed to the archdeaconry of Rochester, should be annexed to that of Maidstone,

We also recommend that all the archdeaconries of England and Wales should be in the gift of the bishops of the respective dioceses in which they will be situate. With respect to the competent endowment of these important offices, to which we have already adverted, we reserve for a further report our distinct recommendations.

With regard to episcopal patronage, since any changes which may be made under this head will only come into operation as the proposed arrangements of the dioceses shall be carried into effect, and will be in some measure dependent upon the details of that arrangement, we recommend that power should be given to your Majesty in council to sanction such alterations as may be recommended in each case by the Commissioners, upon the principle of providing for the relative magnitude and importance of the several sees, and affording an adequate portion of patronage to the bishops of the new sees.

The various recommendations and suggestions which we have humbly offered to your Majesty's consideration, being diffused over our several reports-in many cases interwoven with explanatory statements and remarks-and in

some instances not expressed with sufficient precision-we deem it expedient to separate from the text such of them as come within the scope of this report, and to present them again to your Majesty, in the more convenient form of distinct propositions; accompanied by such other suggestions as appear to us necessary to their being carried fully into execution.

PROPOSITIONS.

1. That commissioners be appointed by Parliament for the purpose of preparing, and laying before your Majesty in council, such schemes as shall appear to them to be best adapted for carrying into effect the following recommendations; and that your Majesty in council be empowered to make orders, ratifying such schemes, and having the full force of law.

2. That the diocese of Canterbury consist of the county of Kent (except the city and deanery of Rochester, and those parishes which it is proposed to include in the diocese of London,) and of the parishes of Croydon and Addington, and the district of Lambeth Palace, in the county of Surrey.

3. That the diocese of London consist of the city of London and the county of Middlesex, of the parishes of Barking, East Ham, West Ham, Little Ilford, Low Layton, Walthamstow, Wanstead St. Mary, Woodford, and Chingford, in the county of Essex, all in the present diocese of London; of the parishes of Charlton, Lee, Lewisham, Greenwich, Woolwich, Eltham, Plumstead, and St. Nicholas, Deptford, in the county of Kent, and St. Paul, Deptford, in the counties of Kent and Surrey, all now in the diocese of Rochester; of the borough of Southwark, and the parishes of Battersea, Bermondsey, Camberwell, Christchurch, Clapham, Lambeth, Rotherhithe, Streatham, Tooting, Graveney, Wandsworth, Merton, Kew, and Richmond, in the county of Surrey, and present diocese of Winchester; and of the parishes of St. Mary, Newington, Barnes, Putney, Mortlake, and Wimbleton, in the county of Surrey, and in the peculiar jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury; together with all extra parochial places locally situate within the limits of the parishes above enumerated, except the district of Lambeth Palace.

4. That the diocese of Winchester be diminished, by the transfer of the parish of Addington to the diocese of Canterbury, and of the before-mentioned parishes to the diocese of London.

5. That the whole of the parish of Bedminster be transferred from the diocese of Bath and Wells to the diocese of Gloucester and Bristol.

6. That the city and deanery of Bristol be united to the diocese of Gloucester, and that the southern part of the diocese of Bristol, consisting of the county of Dorset, be transferred to the diocese of Salisbury.

7. That the diocese of Ely be increased by the counties of Huntingdon and Bedford, now in the diocese of Lincoln, by the deaneries of Lynn and Fincham, in the county of Norfolk and diocese of Norwich, and by the archdeaconry of Sudbury, in the county of Suffolk and diocese of Norwich, with the exception of the deaneries of Sudbury, Stow, and Hartismere, and by that part of the county of Cambridge which is now in the diocese of Norwich.

8. That it be declared that the Scilly islands are within the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Exeter and of the archdeaconry of Cornwall.

9. That the sees of Gloucester and Bristol be united; and that the diocese consist of the present diocese of Gloucester, and of the city and deanery of Bristol, of the deaneries of Cricklade and Malmesbury, in the county of Wilts, and now in the diocese of Salisbury, and of the whole of the parish of Bedminster, now in the diocese of Bath and Wells.

10. That the diocese of Hereford be added to the deanery of Bridgnorth, now locally situate between the dioceses of Hereford and Lichfield; and that those parts of the counties of Worcester and Montgomery which are now in the diocese of Hereford be transferred to the dioceses of Worcester, and St. Asaph and Bangor respectively.

« PreviousContinue »