LORDS' AMENDMENTS. (Hansard, 27 July 1868)

§ MR. RUSSELL GURNEY
said, that with the view of protecting a vested interest which, in his opinion, ought to be respected by the Legislature, he would beg to move to leave out— As such coadjutor, continue to act in the same manner as at present as Archdeacon of Middlesex," and insert "and exercises episcopal functions therein, continue to receive out of the Consolidated Fund the annual payment of two thousand pounds, which has hitherto been made to him in part by the Bishop of Jamaica out of 1887 the stipend of three thousand pounds paid to the said Bishop from the Consolidated Fund, under the before-recited Acts, and in part out of the stipend appropriated to his Archdeaconry of Middlesex out of the Consolidated Fund, under the said Acts; Provided, That during his receipt of such annual payment no payment shall be made to him out of the Consolidated fund in respect of the Archdeaconry of Middlesex. If the coadjutor Bishop of Kingston bad not technically a vested interest, he had a strong moral claim.

§ MR. CARDWELL
said, he thought the chum rested neither on a technical nor a moral ground, and that the precedent which his right hon. Friend's Amendment would establish might be productive of great inconvenience hereafter. The proposal was really one for appointing a new Bishop of Jamaica after the next avoidance of the see.

§ MR. BOUVERIE
said, he would point out that, as a new charge would be imposed on the Consolidated Fund, the matter could not be taken into consideration except under a Resolution of the House.

§ MR. ADDERLEY
said, the Government would accede to the proposal, on the ground that it was expedient to deal with such a claim in a wide and generous, and not in a niggardly, spirit. The clause was drawn by the late Lord Cranworth. He thought there was a fair moral claim; and that the Bishop of Kingston would be hardly dealt with if the House did not view the matter in a liberal spirit.

§ MR. NEATE
said, he thought there was much to be said in favour of the proposition of the right hon. and learned Recorder.

§ MR. LOWE
said, it appeared that a coadjutor Bishop had been appointed to assist the Bishop. The office of the coadjutor was correlative with that of the Bishop, and could not extend beyond it. When the present Bishop died the office of his coadjutor could not continue to exist. The House were asked to give the coadjutor, not in virtue of an office which he held now, but in virtue of an office which he would hold after the death of the Bishop of Jamaica, a sum of £1,600 out of the Consolidated Fund. He held with his right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie) that this could not now be done.

§ MR. M'LAREN
said, that the Bishop of Kingston had at present a life-interest in the life of the Bishop of Jamaica, and it was now proposed to give him a life-interest in two lives. The difference was just a grant from the Consolidated Fund.

§ MR. ADDERLEY
said, that no new charge on the Consolidated Fund would be created by the adoption of the proposition.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The whole question seems to be whether this is a new charge on the Consolidated Fund, or a reservation from the £20,000 supposed to be given up. The Bill proposes to relieve the Consolidated Fund from the payment of £20,000, while if the Amendment be passed it would only be relieved of £18,000. I think it is a matter which is open to the decision of the House.

§ MR. POWELL
said, that as the subject appeared to be taking wider range, he would move the adjournment of the debate.