CARLISLE CANONRIES BILL. (Hansard, 3 May 1854)

§ MR. GOULBURN,
in opposing the Bill, said, that he was surprised that the House had sanctioned the first reading of a measure of this description. If the arguments of the hon. Gentleman were worth anything they were applicable to the system upon which their cathedral establishments generally were conducted and maintained. A Commission had been appointed some time since with the object of reforming these cathedrals, and they recommended that four canonries only should be main 1214 tained in each cathedral to ensure its efficiency, and the hon. Gentleman now proposed that of the four canons attached to the Cathedral of Carlisle one should be abolished. The real question, however, for the House to decide was, whether they would reopen this matter, which had been settled by that Commission twelve years ago. The defence of the law, as it stood, was in the hands of the Government and the House of Commons, and he would leave it to them to say whether they would make an alteration in the law, as it had been settled for the purpose of meeting this particular case. He did not think they would sanction this step, and as no other hon. Gentleman might do so, he would move, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.

§ MR. ROBERT PHILLIMORE
said, he felt satisfied that the right hon. Member who had last spoken had shown the House sufficient reasons for the rejection of the second reading of the Bill. As he, however, approved of the motive of the hon. Member who had introduced the Bill, he desired to state why, having the same premises, he could not arrive at the same conclusion that the hon. Member had done. If they looked back at the way in which the patronage of the canonries had till within a very recent period been exercised, they could but admit it had been such as had very justly called down on it the animadversion of the country; but they must remember that there was now a Commission instituted for the purpose of examining whether the canonries were worthy of being preserved, what were their functions, and whether they could not be made to bear an important part, as was originally intended, in the education of the people of the country, and until they received the Report of this Commission he thought it was inexpedient to proceed with the present Bill.

§ MR. T. CHAMBERS
said, the arguments in favour of the Bill commended themselves to every one who felt an interest in the Church. Carlisle was divided into four parishes; the cathedral body were the impropriators of the great tithes, which were designed for the spiritual instruction of the people; they appropriated those tithes, while the four incumbents 1215 were supported partly by pew rents, and partly by charity. It was possible the Commission now sitting might assign some useful duties to the four canons; but that was a mere speculation; at present they were of little or no use; they received the tithes, while the four clergymen who performed the duties were left in poverty. Nothing could be more practical or better founded than the proposal to apply the income of the canonries as they fell in to the payment of the existing incumbents. For the interest of the population, who would be withdrawn from the Church unless this were done, the House ought to sanction the proposal.

THE MARQUESS OF BLANDFORD
said, he quite agreed in the importance of the subject, but could not approve of the mode proposed for remedying the inadequate incomes of the clergy of Carlisle. He believed that one of the greatest evils and anomalies of the time, which had tended, more than anything else, to alienate the feelings and affections of the people from the Church Establishment, was that the tithes which had been originally given for the maintenance of benefices had been appropriated to different purposes, and the small residue now given was in many instances so wretched as almost to make one blush for the manner in which the clergy were treated. The proper remedy was an appropriation of surplus cathedral revenues; but this might be effected without resorting to such a violent measure as that proposed. He thought the number of canons at Carlisle ought not to be reduced below four. The revenue of the chapter, if properly administered, would be sufficient for the desired end. His Bill for dealing with capitular property generally would meet the case of Carlisle. Upwards of 15,000l. a year was expected to be derived from this property by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who had named 4,800l. as the sum to be devoted to the support of the chapter, so that when the arrangement was complete, by the falling in of the leases, a sum of upwards of 10,000l. a year would be handed over for the general purposes of the Church.

MR. COWPER
said, he would remind the House that the whole question as to the application of these revenues was under consideration by a Commission. Any legislation, therefore, in the case of Carlisle would be an interference with the general arrangement. If a measure of this kind were thought desirable, it ought to be pro- 1216 posed as a Private Bill; and then the inhabitants of Carlisle would have an opportunity of being heard upon it.

MR. HOWARD
said, he thought his hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Ferguson) had brought before the House a great grievance, while the remedy which he proposed was very small and moderate in its nature. He earnestly hoped, therefore, that it would receive the serious consideration of the House.