§ The House then went into Committee on the Cathedral and Ecclesiastical Preferments Bill, of which the first and second clauses were respectively passed without amendment.
§ On the third clause,
§ Sir R. Inglissaid, that he wished to add a proviso. It was to meet such a case as this:—A chapter, say the chapter of Canterbury, bad borrowed 25,000l. from the treasurer of Queen Anne's Bounty. This debt is to be paid off, principal and interest, from the chapter funds. Those funds, if the number of prebendaries be complete, are divided amongst them; and each pays an equal sum, that is, receives less than he otherwise would in respect to this debt. The first recited bill provided, that the share of any prebendary who might die during the existence of the Ecclesiastical Commission should go to the general fund for augmenting, small benefices. But that corn-mission had expired; and since its expiration a prebendary had died. What shall be done with his share? If the present bill were not in question, the chapter would either divide his share among themselves, or, if they had a joint debt, would pay it to their creditor in part discharge of their obligation. The treasurer of Queen Anne's Bounty claims it not as a payment of the chapter debt, but as an instalment for other and distinct purposes. The object of his proviso is to allow the treasurer to receive the proceeds of a stall vacant under such circumstances as so much paid in liquidation of a debt. If it were otherwise, the treasurer would first take the chapter money, and then make the chapter pay interest upon it.
§ Lord J. Russellcould not consent to this proviso, which would have the effect 369 of placing the chapter generally in a better position than that in which they would have stood if the stall in question had been filled up.
Sir T. D. Aclandproposed that such a sum should be taken from the amount of the vacant stall as would have been paid as the proportion of the prebendary if the stall had been filled up.
§ Lord J. Russellassented to this proposition.
§ Mr. Aglionby moved upon the 5th clause, that the commissioners should have power to continue leases, but not as the clause proposed, to extend them.
§ Lord J. Russellsaid, that he would prefer omitting the clause altogether.
§ Sir J. Grahamthought that there would be injustice to the clause as it stood; the condition of the lessees would be much damaged by it.
Mr. V. Smithsaid, that he could not admit the term of justice to be applied to the state of things supposed. A lessor had a right to grant or refuse a renewal of the lease, and it could not be said that there was injustice in his refusal.
§ Sir J. Grahamsaid, that he withdrew the word injustice, but it would work a practical hardship.
Mr. Aglionbywas surprised at the doctrine of his hon. Friend the Member for Northampton. For his own part, he would prefer the omission of the clause.
§ Sir R. Inglissaid, that this was the first instance in which the agency of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had been recognized and introduced into these Suspension Bills. But the hon. and learned Member for Cockermouth wished for the omission of the 5th clause, and as he also on a truly opposite ground wished it, he trusted that it would be removed from the bill.
§ Lord J. Russellassented. Clause struck out.
§ Report to be received on Wednesday.
§ House adjourned.