THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S. (Hansard, 11 July 1851)

§ MR. MONCKTON MILNES
said, he was requested by the Bishop of St. David's to give his unqualified contradiction to an assertion which was made the other evening by the hon. Baronet the Member for Marylebone (Sir B. Hall). The hon. Baronet asserted, without any proof, that that distinguished prelate had prohibited his archdeacons from visiting that diocese. Now, he (Mr. M. Milnes) was authorised to state that the right rev. Prelate had never forbidden them to visit 570 any portion of his diocese. When the Bishop of St. David's came into the diocese, it was true that the archdeacons were not in the habit of visiting. One of them was the vicar of Carmarthen, a large parish with a very poor living; and another was the master of an academy in Edinburgh, and therefore lived out of the diocese and the jurisdiction of the bishop. A third (Mr. Davies, he believed) was in the continual habit of visiting his archdeaconry. He (Mr. M. Milnes) was quite sure that the distinguished Prelate would be the last man in the world to wish to impose upon the House in any way, as to the condition of the diocese. He (Mr. M. Milnes) believed that the right rev. Prelate was agreed on all fundamental points with the hon. Baronet as to the miserably neglected condition of a large portion of his see; but this arose from circumstances over which the bishop had no control. The archdeacons had not been appointed by him, nor could he dismiss them; and therefore the hon. Baronet really had no grounds for bringing an accusation against a prelate not more distinguished by his European reputation for learning, than by the simplicity and frugality of his life, and his genuine Christian charity. On a former occasion the hon. Gentleman had made an attack upon the right rev. Prelate, which, however, on further reflection, he had withdrawn, namely, that he (the right rev. Prelate) had appointed himself Dean of Brecon; and he (Mr. M. Milnes) therefore hoped that the hon. Baronet would also withdraw this assertion, which was equally unjustifiable.

§ SIR BENJAMIN HALL
I have been asked by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Pontefract to withdraw this assertion. I decline to do any such thing. The statement I made to the House was this. In describing the condition of the diocese of St. David's, and quoting from the Report to the House of the Commission which was appointed by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon (Sir J. Graham) to inquire into the state of education in Wales, and which had reported on the most lamentable condition of the churches in that diocese, I said, that notwithstanding this Report had been laid on the table of the House, and that the greatest publicity had been given to it—notwithstanding that it had been brought under the notice of the right rev. Prelate himself, and notwithstanding that there were four archdeacons in the diocese— 571 there had not, to the best of my belief, and I believe so still, been a single visitation during the eleven years Dr. Thirlwall had been in the diocese. I also stated, that I was informed in conversation with one of the archdeacons, that the bishop had prevented himself from holding an archidiaconal visitation. That was the statement I made to the House, and by that statement I will abide. It is for the right rev. Prelate to settle the matter with the archdeacon who gave me the information upon which I founded my statement; but it so happens that this very morning I received a letter from the archdeacon, inclosing a communication from the bishop, in which he desires to know the circumstances of the case. It would certainly have been more convenient, I think, both for the bishop and for my hon. Friend (Mr. M. Milnes) if he had followed my advice, and had first looked at my answer, which I was prepared to place in his hand, and which I would have brought down to the House had I been informed that he was about to introduce the subject. In my answer to the archdeacon, I have recalled to him the conversation which I had with him at my own house, and in which I expressed my regret at the lamentable and disgraceful state of the diocese of St. David's, and also that he, being one of the archdeacons, should not have had a visitation. In reply he told me that he was prepared to make a visitation, and had got ready his charge written in the Welsh language, to read to those who should have come to hear it, but he was prevented by the bishop from making that visitation. That is my statement, and to that statement I will abide. I declare that I never saw any diocese, or any place in the United Kingdom, in so disgraceful a condition as regards the state of the churches, as may be seen by a reference to the report of the Government Commissioners. If any hon. Gentleman will go himself into the diocese, he will find churches without windows and without roofs, and yet an archdeacon is not allowed to make visitations.

§ MR. MORRIS
was a resident in the diocese of St. David's, but he had never heard that the bishop had prevented archdeacons' meetings. On the contrary, he had regularly seen notices of the visitations in the country papers, and therefore he supposed they had been regularly held. He would venture to say that there was not in the whole diocese a clergyman who 572 worked harder than the bishop who presided over the see.