§ Considered in Committee.
§ [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER, CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS, in the Chair.]
§
Clause 2,—
Section two of the schedule to the Bishopric of Bristol Act, 1884, is hereby repealed, and there shall by virtue of this Act be substituted for it the following section, that is to say:—
The diocese to consist of—
and all other provisions of the said Act as amended by the Bishopric of Bristol Amendment Act, 1894, and all other enactments having reference in any manner to the section aforesaid shall be read and have effect accordingly.
* MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS (Notts, Mansfield)said that while he had no intention of opposing the Measure, he wished to offer one or two observations upon it, as no Debate had taken place on the Second Reading. This subject had been brought before the notice of Parliament on several occasions. Fourteen years ago an Act was passed authorising the formation of a separate See for Bristol, but the bishopric was not yet in existence. Then, two years ago an amending Act was passed, and now Parliament was asked to pass another Measure on the subject. The necessary funds for the formation of the See had been obtained, with the exception of £5,000, which was required for the purpose of making alterations in the Bishop's house and erecting a private chapel. Bearing in mind the time that had elapsed since this project was first started, it was not unreasonable to suppose that yet more time would elapse before the contributions to the fund reached the additional sum that was wanted. By that time the promoters of this legislation might have changed their minds once more upon the subject of the boundaries of the proposed diocese, and in that case application would have to be made to Parliament for the fourth time. Other religious denominations did not trouble Parliament in that way; the reason being that they were not established by 1328 law. The money necessary for the See had obviously been obtained with great difficulty; but, when everything would be ready for the appointment of the Bishop the subscribers to the fund would have no share in the selection made, but would have to accept the nominee of the Prime Minister of the day.
* THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSOrder, order! The remarks of the hon. Member are not pertinent to this clause, which deals simply with the limits of the See.
* MR. CARVELL WILLIAMSconcluded by saying that, when the See should have been created and a Bishop appointed, many of the subscribers to the fund would in all probability disapprove of the selection.
§ MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH (Anglesey)asked what was the amount of income proposed to be transferred under this Bill, and at whose instigation the Bill was brought forward. A significant memorandum on the back of the Bill said that it was introduced in order to meet the wishes of some of the principal owners of property in certain parishes. But owners of property were not the people chiefly interested in subjects of this kind, and he wished to ask whether the parishioners concerned had been consulted in the matter?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid he was responsible for this Bill. There was nothing whatever in the Bill about any transfer of money. It merely dealt with an alteration of the boundaries laid down for the Bishopric of Bristol under a former Act. The phrase to which the hon. Member referred was certainly rather an unfortunate one, but he was not responsible for it. He knew that the parishioners had been consulted, and that it was their unanimous desire that the change should be made.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment; Bill read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.