QUESTION. (Hansard, 8 March 1869)

§ MR. ACLAND

said, that, in reply, he must ask permission of the House to make a short statement, in order that the purport of the answer might be fully understood. Tatenhill was distant from Lichfield about ten miles, its population was 3,000, its income about £ 1,800 a year, of which there had been hitherto paid 834 only £120 to one curate, and £130 to another; one of the curates being removable at the pleasure of the Dean, the rectory having being attached to the deanery for a great many years. The income of the deanery was small, being derived from the Dean's share of the chapter's estates, and did not exceed £500 a year. In the reign of Queen Anne, by statute, the rectory of Tatenhill was appended to the deanery; and by an Ecclesiastical Commission Act of 1850 it was enacted that thereafter no Dean should accept, take, or hold with his deanery any benefice not within the city. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners in 1852 augmented the deanery prospectively up to £1,000 a year. On the death of the late Dean, Canon Champneys was appointed to the deanery, and had taken possession both of the deanery and the rectory. He (Mr. Acland) had obtained a copy of a letter which the Dean had addressed to one of the Commissioners, in which he stated that when he was offered the deanery he was informed that the rectory of Tatenhill was attached to it, and he stated his desire and intention to make adequate provision for the spiritual wants of the whole parish; that no authorized the insertion in the public journals of a statement to that effect on the 7th December, and that having made himself more fully acquainted with the wants of the parish he was fully prepared, in the event of its being decided that the rectory was still annexed to the deanery, to carry out his intention. He would now proceed to answer the Questions. As to the first Question, whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners recognize the appointment of the Dean of Lichfield to the rectory of Tatenhill, that was a legal question, the decision of which did not rest with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. As to the second Question, the Commissioners had taken the opinion of the Law Officers, and the Law Officers were agreed that the Dean of Lichfield could not accept or hold the rectory; but they were not all agreed on the question whether the emoluments passed to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. But the Dean, he was bound to say, had forwarded to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners a case, together with a statement of the opinion of Sir Roundell Palmer and Mr. Mellish, and their opinion was to the effect that Canon Champneys, on becoming Dean of Lichfield, became ipso 835 facto rector of Tatenhill. The hon. gentleman's next Question was whether the patronage of the living of Tatenhill was not restored to the Duchy of Lancaster. It was not possible, in the present uncertain state of the law, for him to say, whether the patronage of the living had been restored to the duchy. The next Question was, whether the Commissioners contemplated any new legislation in that matter? It was not quite certain that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, in the discharge of their duty as trustees of a public fund, had any interest in that matter; but he might express a hope, which was shared by many of them individually, that the Government would think it necessary to introduce fresh legislation on the subject. As to the last Question, with reference to the revenue of the deanery of Lichfield, apart from the living of Tatenhill, now producing about £2,000 per annum, he had already stated that the deanery, exclusive of the rectory, was in 1852 prospectively angmented to £1,000 a year. That augmentation was made under an Order in Council, which was not revocable without legislation.