HC Deb 22 July 1850 vol 113 cc133-6

Order for Third Reading read.

LORD J. RUSSELL moved, that this Bill be read a Third Time.

SIR H. WILLOUGHBY

said, he ob- served that it was provided by the Bill that one of the Commissioners should have a seat in the House of Commons. He should like to hear some reason assigned for that arrangement. It appeared to him to be a dangerous precedent. Again, he should wish to know, whether the Estates Committee was to have the appointment of its own counsel? whether, in point of fact, it was to name its own secretary? He also observed that the Commissioners were to lay down general rules as to the course the Estates Committee was to pursue—would the noble Lord define what was meant by general rules, and whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, as a general body, were to control the Estates Committee?

SIR G. GREY

said, that with respect to one of the Commissioners sitting in Parliament, it was thought that as the Archbishop of Canterbury, being one of the ex-officio Commissioners, had a seat in Parliament, it would be proper that one of the Commissioners appointed by the Crown should have the same privilege.; Vs to the other points, it was intended that the board should have the power of defining general rules, but should not interfere in particular cases. The board I was also to have the power of appointing a secretary, as the last Commission had.

MR. GOULBURN

said, that, not having had the opportunity of taking part in the discussion mi this Bill, he should, bad it been an earlier hour, have made some observations upon it; but as it was, he should, leave it to the other House to deal as it thought fit with the Amendments which had been introduced into it since it came down, and which had so much changed its character.

MR. J. A. SMITH

asked whether the Government intended that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should deal with the property of the Church in accordance with the recommendations recently issued?

SIR G. GREY

said, that no doubt the Ecclesiastical Commissioners would deal justly by the property placed in their charge.

MR. AGLIONBY

complained that the lessees had hitherto been sacrificed, and he recommended that the Bill should be postponed.

Bill read°.

MR. SPEAKER

then called on Mr. Hume, who had given notice of a clause.

SIR B. HALL

said, that as the hon. Member for Montrose had left the House, not supposing the Bill would he brought on after one o'clock, he should move the adjournment of the debate. Besides, he intended to propose a clause which he knew would be objected to by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, and would lead to much discussion. It was a clause to put prebendaries and canons on the same footing with regard to livings as was done by deans in the present Bill.

LORD J. RUSSELL

said, that he had stated early in the evening that he would proceed with the Bill to-night, and the hon. Member for Montrose must have left the House knowing it would come on. As to the clause to be proposed by the hon. Baronet, the principle had been much discussed already, and no notice had been given of his intention to bring it on, and he hoped he would not press it.

SIR B. HALL

then moved a clause to the effect that prebendaries and canons should not be allowed to hold livings beyond three miles from the cathedral town in which their prebends or canonries were situate, nor above the value of 500l. a year. His desire, he said, was that the canons should be placed on the same footing as the deans.

LORD J. RUSSELL

said, this clause was discussed in the Committee, and there was a great deal of argument upon it. It seemed to him the case was quite different from that of the dean. The dean was required to reside eight months in the cathedral city, and he could therefore reside only four months in his parish; whereas the canon was only required to reside three months in the cathedral city, and he could reside at his parish nine months. The case was, therefore, entirely different. He did not see any evil, but, on the contrary, much good in a rural clergyman receiving a canonry; and he believed the clause proposed by the hon. Baronet would do serious harm.

Clause withdrawn.

On Clause 8,

MR. J. E. DENISON moved an Amendment, giving to the Estates Committee power to appoint their own surveyor.

Amendment proposed, in page 4, line 37, after the word "expedient," to insert the words "and to employ such Surveyors and Actuaries as may seem fit to them."

SIR C. GREY

said, he did not think the Amendment of much importance. If a representation were made to the Estates Committee that any officer was inefficient, they would make a change.

SIR B. HALL

said, then if the right hon. Gentleman did not attach much importance to the question, he might take the common-sense view of it, which was that those who had the management of the estates should have the appointment of their own servants.

MR. GOULBURN

could speak from personal knowledge of the respectability and ability of Messrs. Dalton; and the same might be said of Messrs. Smith and Pickering.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The House divided:—Ayes 73; Noes 142: Majority 69.

Amendments made; Bill passed, with Amendments.