DEANERY OF EXETER. (Hansard, 23 April 1839)

§ Viscount Melbourne
moved, that the House go into a Committee on the Deanery of Exeter appointment Bill.

The Bishop of Exeter
said, when on the tion of any persons studying the question, but it is not thought necessary to reprint it in these debates. 463 preceding evening the Deanery of Exeter Bill was under consideration, it would be in the recollection of the House, that the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government was pleased to say on that occasion, that the Chapter of Exeter, as he understood, did not claim the free election of the dean, but that they were recommended to claim free election by their Bishop. As to any recommendation which he had given, he was perfectly ready to explain and justify it. But he had to remind the noble Viscount, that he had appealed to him at the time to which he alluded, as filling a higher character than that even of a Member of their Lordships' House—as a man of veracity and honour—whether he had not perceived in the correspondence that had taken place on this subject, that a claim to free election was put forth by the Chapter? That appeal not having been answered, he then gave notice that he should this day move that certain papers illustrative of the claim of the Chapter of Exeter to free election should be laid before their Lordships. An objection was made to the production of these documents which certainly carried some weight with it—namely, that great inconvenience would arise from laying before the House matters connected with private and confidential opinions, and the correspondence between the noble Viscount and the Chapter of Exeter was, it appeared, considered in that light. That being the case, he did not mean to persist in the motion of which he had given notice; but he should address himself to that part of the speech of the noble Viscount in which the noble Viscount said, that the Chapter of Exeter, as he understood, had not claimed the right of free election, but that the Bishop was desirous to recommend that course. Now, he held in his hand the letter from the Bishop of Exeter to the Chapter, dated the 10th of April, 1839. It was a long letter, but he should read from it all that related to this particular point. The noble Viscount knew that he had no objection to this recommendation of his coming to the hands of the noble Viscount. When he was written to by the noble Viscount for the purpose of inducing him to aid in placing in this situation the person nominated by the Crown, he had answered that he would give no assistance, but that he would state to the Chapter what were his views and feelings on the subject. He 464 should now, with the permission of the House, read the recommendation which he had given on the subject of the right of free election in the Chapter of Exeter. He there said— In the outset I must entreat the Chapter to bear in mind the peculiar position in which I may be placed in the further progress of this affair. If, indeed, my own personal feelings only were concerned, I should not think of troubling the Chapter on the subject, but I address them as their Bishop, as, in that character, having not only the right and the duty of judicially confirming their election, but also the solemn obligation of an oath, taken at my enthronization, 'to defend the rights and liberties of this Church.' That oath, with God's blessing, I will faithfully observe and keep; and in keeping it, I cannot doubt that I shall have the full and fair co-operation of the body, whose cause I am bound to maintain. Now, of 'all the rights and liberties of this Church,' the right of free election of its head, the Dean, if it legally belong to the Chapter, must be considered one of the most important. This is not the time when it would become me, even if I were fully informed and resolved (which I am not), to pronounce a decisive judgment. But enough has passed, and is notorious, to justify me in entreating the Chapter to give their close attention to the question respecting the right, to satisfy themselves fully upon this point, and if they shall be satisfied that the right is theirs, to assert and act upon it. This appears to me to be not too much to expect of them, in co-operation with their Bishop, who, I repeat, is bound by his oath to defend that right, if it exist, and is resolved to observe the oath by which he is bound. Having thus stated what I think to be the duty of the Chapter, if they shall, on due consideration, be satisfied that they have the right of free election, let me now as explicitly state what I think ought to be their course, if they shall be satisfied that they have not the right. In that case, I hope that they would not only not resist the claim of the Crown, but that they would afford every due facility in giving effect to it, by suggesting and forwarding any expedient which their knowledge of the statutes and usages of the Church may enable them to propose. But a third case may be put, as one very likely to arise—that, without being fully satisfied, they may have a strong inclination of their judgment. Now, if this should happen, I must not scruple to avow, that in my opinion the Chapter, having undeniably a primá facie right of free election, ought not to surrender it to any less authority than the decision of a court of law, or at least the plainly and distinctly expressed opinion of some great lawyer, as Sir W. Follett eminently is, consulted by themselves, on their own behalf, and thus made responsible for the opinion that they have not by law a right of free election. Without such an 465 authority, if they surrender, they will, I fear, lay themselves open to the just reproach of sacrificing the rights and liberties of the body, which it is their and my common duty to defend, and, as far as in us lies, to perpetuate. Such (continued the right rev. Prelate) was the advice which he had tendered to the Chapter. The noble Viscount had now heard what he had written to the Chapter. He, acting in the performance of his sworn duty as Bishop, required of the Chapter to assert their rights, if such rights they had; but if the right of free election was not in the Chapter, then he counselled them not to resist the claim of the Crown, but to afford every facility for carrying it into effect. He had thus guarded himself against the supposition, that he meant to recommend resistance; though some persons had declared, and most erroneously considered, that he had recommended that course. The last person who ought to have made such a suggestion as the noble Viscount had last night made was the noble Viscount himself, and if the noble Viscount recollected what he had written on the subject, he would feel that this was the fact. He alluded to a letter addressed by the noble Viscount to another noble Viscount, a Roman Catholic Peer, connected with Ireland, who, however, had not been chosen a Representative Peer for that part of the United Kingdom. That letter was written in reply to an application made to the head of the Government, recommending a clergyman whom that Roman Catholic Peer thought to be a fit and proper person to receive the appointment to the Deanery of Exeter. The noble Viscount, the first Minister of the Crown, couched his reply in those terms of courtesy which he always used whenever he took pen in hand, for then he was deliberate and calm. The letter contained expressions of regret at being unable to comply with the request preferred to him, adding that the Deanery of Exeter was not in the gift of the Crown. If the noble Viscount never had written any such letter, he begged that he might be then interrupted, and if wrong, set right. [Lord Melbourne said, it was very likely that he had written some such letter.] The occurrence was not only likely, but had actually taken place. He was ready to mention names and dates. The clergyman who had been so recommended lived in the capital town of the county in which the noble Viscount from whom the application proceeded resided, and so delighted was that rev. person with being made the subject of correspondence 466 between the first Minister of the Crown and the noble Lord in his neighbourhood, that he went about the streets of the town, showing the letter of the noble Viscount on the Treasury Bench, in which there was an excuse offered for refusal on the ground that the appointment was not in the Crown. An account of this correspondence reached him (the Bishop of Exeter) a day or two before the meeting of the Chapter, and he lost no time in making them acquainted with the facts. His communication on this subject reached the Chapter at the same time with the letters patent from her Majesty, recommending the appointment of Lord Wriothesley Russell. Was it after that to be supposed, that the Chapter would take it as a matter of course, that they were bound to appoint the individual whom the Crown recommended? The correspondence which ensued, clearly showed that the Chapter had never given up its right of free election. He would now, with the permission of the House, read an extract from a statement made on this subject by the precentor; it was dated March 27, 1839:— The law officers of the Crown and Sir William Follet have given their joint opinion, that 'according to the usage and the charter, the Dean must necessarily be elected from the body of prebendaries.' We consider this opinion communicated to us by Sir William Follett, to be decisive, both in its letter and spirit, that the Deanery of Exeter is not in the appointment of the Crown, but in the election of the Chapter. My letter of the 23d informed your Lordship of the intention of the Chapter to elect. On the 4th of April the Chapter had a meeting, at which they agreed to this minute,— That the Chapter are advised, that under the charter of erection, and the usage that has prevailed, the appointment to the Deanery of Exeter is not, and never was, legally vested in the Crown; that it is an elective office to which the Chapter must elect one of their own body; that for nearly 300 years the usage has been to elect one of the prebendaries who had previously been elected a canon residentiary; that the Chapter has been in the habit, in the election of their Deans, of receiving the letters patent as conveying no more than the recommendation of the Crown, but whilst they do not admit that they are bound by that recommendation, the present body have no wish to depart from that usage, provided the person recommended be duly qualified according to the custom of their Church. On the Saturday following, one of the prebendaries was sent to London under the authority of the great Chapter, a body 467 which, when full, consisted of twenty-four members. Dr. Bull, who came to London on this mission, addressed on the 20th of this month a letter to the noble Viscount at the head of the Government, which he would then, with their Lordships' permission, read to the House:— On the 10th of April, the great Chapter met on a special summons to take the whole case of the vacant Deanery, with the opinions of the law officers of the Crown and Sir William Follett, into their consideration. It was then found, that the prebendaries present were adverse to any legislative interferences. They desired to abide by the law as it stood, thinking it unfair that the restrictions which the Ecclesiastical Appointments Suspension Act imposed on all parties should be partially removed. In fact, my Lord, all parties were influenced by one motive, and one only—to pay as much respect as possible to the wishes of the Crown consistently with the due maintenance of those rights which they believed to belong to the several members of their cathedral in their respective stations—the greater Chapter, the lesser Chapter, and the visitor—rights which they had all and each most solemnly sworn to defend. I have now only to add, that sinless the great Chapter should recede from the opinion contained in the enclosed minute, and give up their objection to any partial legislative interference, the lesser Chapter of residentiaries would, I apprehend, feel very considerable difficulty in proceeding to elect Mr. Grylls into their body in the face of that minute, and without the certainty that he would finally become Dean. It was plain from this, that the great Chapter claimed the right of free election. Having thus put the House in possession of the facts connected with these proceedings, and laid before them the views of the parties concerned from the documents to which he had referred, he should not trouble their Lordships further, and should not oppose the motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee.

§ Viscount Melbourne
said, that he was glad that the right rev. Prelate had given up his intention of moving for documents, the production of which would unquestionably be liable to objection. He conceived that the statement made by the right rev. Prelate very little altered or varied the case. What he had stated was, that the Chapter of Exeter had never claimed the right to free election. He did not mean to say, that they had not 468 reserved any right which they might have, but that they had given up the claim to free election, for, admitting that for three hundred years the appointment had always been made on the recommendation of the Crown, throughout the whole course of the correspondence the Chapter represented to him over and over again that it was not their intention to depart from the usual course and practice. Though they reserved the right they had, yet there was not, in any part, an assertion in fact or reality of the power of free election. He thought that the right rev. Prelate had strongly recommended the Chapter to insist upon the right to free election. He had taken that upon the representations of those to whom the right rev. Prelate wrote the letter. He thought that the right rev. Prelate had instigated them; but he did not wish to press upon that point. The right rev. Prelate said, "Respect your oaths. You are bound to maintain the rights of the Church—recollect you are bound to support what you have and possess against any encroachments; and if the right be yours you are bound to assert it." The right rev. Prelate had taunted him (Viscount Melbourne) with want of faith, and he said that when he took pen in hand he was a little more calm. The same observation might apply to the right rev. Prelate himelf. With respect to the letter which the right rev. Prelate had referred to, he (Viscount Melbourne) had some recollection of having written it. He, however, had no precise recollection as to whom it was addressed. The right rev. Prelate had praised his (Viscount Melbourne's) courtesy. That only showed him the folly of too great courtesy in replying to the letters he received. He seized upon it, perhaps, too eagerly, and he undoubtedly had written the letter without ground or foundation. It was the mistake of the persons who had given him the information. From all the communication he had had with the Chapter of Exeter, he believed that they were anxious to carry into effect the recommendation of the Crown, and to act in unison with the House; and he had no doubt, if their Lordships would permit them to remove the obstacle by passing this bill, the matter would be settled to the satisfaction of all parties.

§ The Duke of Wellington
said, that in his opinion the object of this Amendment Act was, that the Crown on the one side, and 469 the Chapter of Exeter on the other, should be placed precisely in the same situation with relation to each other in which they stood previous to the pasing of the 7th Wm. 4th., the Act of last session, and that was the principle on which he had voted last night for the second reading, and now for going into Committee; but he thought that this bill went further than was necessary for that object. The bill which was now presented to their Lordships, as amended by the noble Lord opposite, went further than the clause sent up by the House of Commons; and he now wished that it might be brought back to the state in which it had been sent up by the House of Commons.

The Bishop of Exeter
said that, in conformity with the noble Duke's suggestion, he would move the omission of the clause in question, and the substitution of words to the effect, that "nothing in the recited Acts shall prevent the collation or appointment of a canon residentiary to any canonry or prebend which shall have become vacant by any of the causes which shall have caused or may hereafter cause the vacancy of a deanery, when it has been the practice that the dean should be elected or appointed from the canons residentiary or prebends." He had great gratification in thinking that he was proposing a measure which must receive unanimous consent. The noble Duke opposite had just approved of it. The noble Viscount must consent to it, because it was a clause which he must have assented to in the Cabinet, and it was one which had been adopted by the unanimously-declared opinion of the other House, who, without a division, had sent up the amendment alluded to by the noble Duke.

Lord Brougham
thought that the object of all parties might be simply attained by omitting the four words "nominated by the Crown," which gave rise to the objection of the rev. Prelate. That course would leave the question of right, which he understood to be sub judice, entirely open; and the whole matter would be left as the noble Duke had suggested.

The Bishop of Exeter
said, that there were other objectionable words, viz., these—"for the purpose of qualifying to be appointed by the Crown."

Lord Brougham
thought they might be left out too.

The Bishop of Exeter
would be satisfied if both passages were left out.

§ The Lord Chancellor
said that the omis- 470 sion of the latter words would entirely alter the character of the bill.

§ Lord Lyndhurst
thought that if the four former words were left out the object of the right rev. Prelate would be answered.

The Bishop of Exeter
—No; he could assure the noble and learned Lord it would not. He acknowledged his object was to have the amendment of the House of Commons.

§ Viscount Melbourne
said he would consent to the proposition of the noble and learned Lord (Brougham), but not to the omission of both passages.

§ The Duke of Wellington
said, he had thought that the clause of the House of Commons provided sufficiently for the object in view; but if the noble and learned Lords thought the omission of the four words mentioned would equally accomplish it, and the noble Viscount would consent to that, he thought the right rev. Prelate had better withdraw his amendment.