§ On the order of the day for the second reading of the Irish Clergy Residence bill,
§ Sir John Newportsaid, he fully concurred in the measure, so far as it went: but this bill fell very far short of the efficient purposes for which it had been framed. He thought it should make more ample provision for curates, who, in case of the non-residence of the rectors, would have to do the whole of the duty, and that the power of dispensing with, or enforcing residence, should not rest with the bishops. The person who did not reside on his living, ought to give a considerable portion of the profits to him who did reside, and who performed the duty. He was also at a less to know why this bill contained no provision to augment the salaries of curates. The hon. baronet then stated instances of curates having no more than 20l. or 25l. a year.
§ Sir A. Wellesley,in reply, said, that it was his intention to propose an augmentation to the salaries of the curates in Ireland; which he should do, either in the committee on the bill of his right hon. friend, or by a separate bill. With respect to the hon. baronet's observation against granting power to bishops to dispense with residence, he was afraid that, as pluralities must exist in Ireland, in consequence of the present state of the church there, it would be impossible to enforce residence in every instance.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, his right hon. friend had considerably limited the cases where non-residence was allowed in Ireland. And it would be for parliament hereafter to see how far the power of dispensing with residence had been extended. With respect to the curates of Ireland, it was his wish that the provision for augmenting their salaries should be 68 consolidated into a bill of a similar kind for encreasing the salaries of the curates in England.—The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday.