§ SIR BENJAMIN HALLwished to put a question to the noble Lord at the head of the Government with reference to an appointment which had lately taken place to a canonry in the Cathedral church of Durham. In 1836 Dr. Maltby was appointed Bishop of Durham, and he (Sir B. Hall) found from the Parliamentary papers that 8,000l. a year was assigned to the see of Durham, and that Dr. Maltby, being a 496 Bishop upon a new foundation, was entitled to that sum. He found, however, from a paper presented last year, that Dr. Maltby had received 79,658l. more than that income. In 1843 there was a vacancy in the rectory of Eaglescliffe, and the Bishop appointed his son to that valuable preferment, which was worth 1,200l. a year. Three weeks ago a canonry, which he believed was known as a "golden canonry," became vacant in the Cathedral church of Durham, and the Bishop appointed this same son, the rector of Eaglescliffe, to that canonry. He (Sir B. Hall) wished to ask whether any remonstrances had been made by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, or whether any correspondence had taken place between them and the Bishop with reference to this appointment; and, if so, whether the noble Lord would have any objection to the production of such correspondence?
§ LORD JOHN RUSSELLunderstood that a correspondence had taken place with regard, he believed, to the emoluments the canon was to receive, and there would be no objection to lay it on the table. His hon. Friend seemed to be under some misapprehension as to the value of the "golden canonry." The Ecclesiastical Commissioners had been taking measures to reduce all the canonries to 1,000l. a year; and by an Order in Council the value of the canonry to which the hon. Baronet alluded would be reduced to that amount.