Lords Sitting of 24 November 1813

MILITIA SERVICE.
The royal assent was given by commission to the Militia Service Bill. Commissioners, the Lord Chancellor and lords Buckinghamshire and Walsingham.

CLERGY PENALTIES SUSPENSION BILL.
The Archbishop of Canterburymoved the second reading of the Bill. The persons to whom this Bill related were, 1st. Those who, having two livings, had omitted to notify to the bishop their non-residence on one of them. 2d. Those who had neglected to renew their licences in terms of the act of parliament. In regard to the first description of clergymen, the bishop had better means of information than any that could come from the party interested. If the two livings were in one diocese, he had obviously better means; if they were in separate dioceses, each of the bishops must know the fact, by communicating with each other. As to the other description of clergymen, in many cases, no doubt, the neglect had arisen from inadvertence, rather than from any culpable negligence. It could not be expected, that all clergyman should be accurately acquainted with all the modern laws by which they were affected; and many of them might think that they were protected by their former licences, without renewal. He should hope it would appear, that all of them, were of a nature which would free them from the imputation of culpable negligence. They were at times considerably embarrassed by the provisions of the several Acts. The Act of the 53d of his Majesty required, that before a licence was given, the incumbent must have nominated a curate to supply the living: six months was allowed by the Act for that purpose; and yet, from the nature of these laws, taken together, a clergyman might be obliged, in order to entitle himself to a licence, to nominate a curate instanter. Clergymen, however, who really wished to procure those for whose conduct they would be willing to become responsible, required some time to look about them, and examine into the character of those who applied for the situation. A remarkable instance of this had come under his own ob-
194
servation, where the liability to penalty would be a peculiar hardship: if was that of an incumbent who was rendered unable to do the duty of his cure by severe illness, and who notwithstanding could not have a licence for non-residence until he had appointed a curate; for which he very properly required time to inquire into the character and qualifications of the person to be appointed, Yet this incumbent would be liable under the Act to penalties for non-residence. Of the informer in these cases he wished to say noting; this person had been secretary to the late bishop of London, and the present bishops of Norwich and Ely; and in that situation had ample means of fixing upon his objects, and rendering his success in suing for penalties certain. If it were possible to suppose, that any individual in such a situation were profligate enough, how easily might he, by his own conduct, nourish the offence, until it was brought to that height which would answer the purpose he had in view. He trusted their lordships, under all these circumstances, would consent to give time, as proposed by the Bill; and to suspend for a period the actions which had been thus commenced.
The Bishop of Chesterexpressed his high sense of the very favourable indulgence granted to the clergy on this occasion, by both Houses of the legislature. It was shewn, however, to a body of men who were not undeserving of it. The community was indebted to the exertions and example of the parochial clergy for not a few of those advantages which, in a temporal as well as religious point of view, it enjoyed.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed for Friday.
Lord Hollandpresented a short petition from Mr. Wright, praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill. The petition was laid on the table, and it was ordered that he be heard by is counsel on Friday.