§ Order for Third Reading read.
§ MR. MALINSsaid, that on the part of the lay impropriator of the tithes of Great St. Helens, he wished to correct a misstatement which had been made by the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite), in reference to the amount of the tithes. It had been stated that the tithes had been purchased for the sum of £3,000—that the income was £1,700 a year, and that some of the tithes had been raised from 15s. to as much as £10 10s. Now he held in his hand a statement of the gentleman to whom reference had been made, from which it appeared that he had held the property for thirty-five years; and the income, instead of being between £1,600 and £1,700, was only £350. He was entitled to charge 2s. 9d. in the pound for tithes, but he had never charged more than Is,; and although he was a member of the legal profession, he never had a lawsuit with any one in reference to his rights. He was quite sure the hon. Member for Bath had made the statement under a misappre- 1756 hension as to the facts, and would be glad to remove the erroneous impression which had been created.
§ MR. TITEsaid, he had spoken of two parishes, and it was in the other parish where the litigation existed, and wheer the income was as stated. It was not denied that the gentleman had purchased the rectory for a very small sum.
§ MR. MALINSAt a public auction, for, in reality, the sum of £6,500.
§ MR. TITEsaid, the rector was paid only £20 per annum by the lay Impropriator, and he had himself, when churchwarden, gone round the parish to raise a sum for him for additional remuneration, lie had merely stated the income of £1,000 per annum, and the facts as they were believed in the parish, but he begged it to be distinctly understood that he had also spoken of the forbearance of the gentleman to whom reference had been made by the hon. and learned Member. He was, however, glad to hear the correction now made, and would take care that the matter was explained where it was more important than in that House.
§ Bill read 3° and passed.