[Lords.] COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 28 July 1868)

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, the effect of the Bill would he to divide the clergy of the Church of England into two classes—rectors and vicars. Under the Church Building Acts a great variety of designations had been bestowed upon different bodies of the clergy, who were styled incumbents, perpetual curates, and so forth. This was found to be a great inconvenience, which the present Bill was intended to remove. There was, however, already in operation a clause of an Act of Parliament under which if a portion of the tithes were given to an incumbent he could, with the consent of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, be declared a rector or a vicar as the case might be. The 2nd clause of the present measure fully provided for the division of the clergy into the two classes of rectors and vicars, and he should therefore move the omission of the 1st clause.

§ MR. MONK
regarded this as a most extraordinary attempt at legislation. His right hon. Friend who had moved the omission of the 1st clause seemed particularly anxious to undo all that had been done by the House of Lords. When the Bill was introduced into that House it consisted of a single clause, which was the second in the Bill as it now stood. The fact was that a compromise was come to. His right hon. Friend had not at all clearly explained the object of the 1st clause. Under the 9th section of the Act of 28 & 29 Vict. a clergyman who purchased even an infinitesimal amount of tithes might, with the assistance of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, become a rector. Indeed, he was credibly informed that a case had arisen in which the Commissioners were required to convert into a rector a perpetual curate who had purchased tithes which returned him an annual income of something under 2d.

§ MR. POWELL
said, he thought the duty of the House clearly was to consider the Bill on its merits with regard to what had been said in "another place." He 1918 should, this being so, support the Motion for the omission of the clause.