The BISHOP of ST. DAVID'Ssaid, he was sure their Lordships would not be indisposed to listen to the few words he was about to address to them, which had at least as much to say to the question before the House, as the remarks they had just heard, when they knew that what he had to say tended to correct a mistake affecting the personal character of a Member of their Lordships' House. He had not been present at the time the speech was delivered by the noble Lord (Lord Stanley), and he deeply regretted the fact; but he understood that the noble Lord had done him the honour to advert to one or two points of his speech, in which he had been misinformed as to the facts as far as regarded himself (the Bishop of St. David's). 446 He understood that the noble Lord had been pleased to refer their Lordships to the distinction existing between the sources from which certain of the right rev. Prelates on the benches of that House drew their incomes, and those from whence the incomes of the parochial Clergy were derived. He was aware that his noble Friend had not intended, and most probably had disclaimed the design, to make any invidious construction on the effect of that distinction; but as he believed the noble Lord had also stated that it was a fact likely to make a great impression on the country, he thought their Lordships would admit that he (the Bishop of St. David's) was entitled to say, that the fact on which the noble Lord relied was erroneous. Speaking for himself, he wished to inform their Lordships, as well as the public, that of his own public income very little more than one-third was derived from fixed payments, and that very little less than two-thirds was subject to reduction for depreciation of agricultural produce or for other causes, exactly in the same proportion as the incomes of the parochial Clergy. He did not mean to extend his assertion on this point beyond his own case; but their Lordships would, he was sure, give him some credit for being sufficiently well informed as to his own affairs.
LORD STANLEYwould have been glad, had the right rev. Prelate, before he had thought proper to advert to what had fallen from him on a previous night, informed him beforehand of his intention. He (Lord Stanley) had not the least idea that he would have been called upon for an explanation of what he had really stated; but it was in their Lordships' recollection and he recollected it, that he expressly said, he would state nothing personally offensive to the right rev. Prelate, and that he would say nothing of him in his absence which he would not say in his presence. But their Lordships would recollect that the right reverend Prelate had addressed them on the subject of motives, and that he had used those extraordinary words, as nearly as he (Lord Stanley) could remember, "That their Lordships might be fully conscious of the purity of their own intentions; but they must recollect that a very different view of this great question would be entertained throughout the country, and that a very different construction would be put on their conduct." In commenting on that observation of the right reverend Prelate, not supposing it possible 447 that he could have intended anything offensive to their Lordships, he had made use of words to the effect, that he was confident the right rev. Prelate was as little influenced by any motive of private consideration as he had given their Lordships credit for being, but that the public were free to draw the same inference with respect to him and his motives, as he had thought fit to draw with respect to the personal motives of their Lordships. If there were anything personally offensive in what had passed, it had fallen from the right rev. Prelate, and not from him; because his (Lord Stanley's) assertions, with respect to the operation of motives, went as far as the right rev. Prelate's conviction of their Lordships' purity of intentions. The statement he made, which might not have been correctly repeated to the right rev. Prelate, had been this—and he hoped he would forgive him for repeating it—that there was a wide distinction between the sources from which the right reverend Bench and the parochial Clergy derived their incomes; that the latter were wholly and exclusively dependent on corn for their income; that as the value of that article feel, so their income would be depreciated, and they would inevitably be losers by the measure, unless all other commodities fell in proportion; and he had proved that would not be case. By the confession—no, not confession—he would not apply that word to the speech of the right rev. Prelate—but by his own statement, their Lordships were informed that two-thirds of his income depended on the price of corn; but as regarded one-third of it, he was not only protected from reduction, but received a fixed money payment for it. He then took the liberty of showing that all who received a fixed money payment were gainers by this measure, and that was all he had said. He hoped this explanation would be satisfactory to the right rev. Prelate. He had not thought he should have been called upon to make it, and should have gladly explained what he did say, if the right rev. Prelate had asked him to do so in private. He disclaimed all motives, or the imputation of them, and had only pointed out the distinction between the sources of the revenues of the parochial Clergy, and the right reverend Bench, which was admitted by the right rev. Prelate to exist.
The BISHOP of SALISBURYsaid, that the distinction had certainly been stated in a manner which would appear 448 somewhat invidious, and that effect had been augmented by repetition in other places in a manner still more invidious. He was almost ashamed to trouble their Lordships with a defence against imputations—not intended, it was said—but certainly calculated to exercise an injurious effect, as regarded Members of their Lordships' body, on the public mind. He would, therefore, without troubling their Lordships at any length, state how the case really stood. Out of the twenty-six Members of the right reverend Bench in their Lordships' House, fourteen were altogether free from being placed, in the least degree, in the circumstances which had been stated by the right rev. Prelate, and received no portion of their incomes in payment from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. Those Members of the right rev. Bench derived their incomes in the same way as the landed proprietary did, the only difference being, that they derived a larger proportion from the impropriate tithes, which were more likely to be affected by this Bill, than in any other way. It certainly seemed severe that the Clergy should suffer by the Bill; and its bearing on their case presented an obstacle to him in the way of the vote he had given on behalf of the Bill. The liability of the parochial Clergy to be affected by it certainly did appear to him an argument against the Bill. He did not, however, regret the appeal which had been made to the right rev. Bench, for he believed they were justly looked upon as the guardians of the Clergy in that House. Nevertheless, he thought the injustice which had been done to that body was not so much attributable to that Bill as to the Tithe Commutation Act. Differing, as he did, in opinion on that subject from many of his Friends, he had always held, and repeatedly expressed it, and he believed, that by it parochial Clergy were deprived of the prospect of any increase of value to be derived from improvement in agriculture. Of the other Members of the right reverend Bench four were in the position of paying fixed charges to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners out of uncertain incomes—the gross amount of their revenue being liable to fluctuation from the operation of this Bill, or of any other measure affecting the price of corn. Of those four right rev. Prelates, three had recorded their votes in favour of the Bill. Thus two-thirds of the right reverend Bench were altogether removed from the possibility of their being under 449 any imputation as regarded the motives for their votes. One-third of his right rev. Brethren were under the suspicion of receiving fixed payments. But had none of their Lordships any fixed incomes? Had none of their Lordships funded property not liable to be affected by the operations of this Bill? He claimed no exception for his right rev. Brethren from any charges which could with truth be brought against them; but from their position and character, no persons should be more exempt from charges without proper foundation. He thought he had demonstrated that this charge, which it had been intended to apply to them, though it had been brought forward in somewhat an invidious manner elsewhere, was totally without foundation.
§ The EARL of MALMESBURYsaid, it must be admitted that above all men the right rev. Prelates ought to be most feelingly susceptible as to any charge which might touch their character and high position; and feeling that he might have excited in some degree the great susceptibility they had shown in this measure, he would beg leave to say a few words on the subject. He must say that the susceptible feeling the right rev. Prelates showed had been somewhat slow in its approach. He had spoken on the second night of the second reading, humbly delivering his opinions as he had a right to do. He seldom troubled their Lordships, that having been, he believed, the second or third time he had troubled them; but it was a long time ago, and he had been in the House several nights since, when no notice was taken of it. Not one word had been said of his remarks until last Friday, when they had been commented on by the right rev. Prelate. He thought it needless to assure their Lordships there was not a Peer in that House who would more unwillingly offer a word to them which could possibly look like an imputation on the right rev. Prelate. He stated that they stood in that position with regard to the parochial Clergy, that it was a part of some difficulty for the right rev. Bench to interfere on the present occasion, and that the people might possibly misconceive their motives in doing so; nor had he alluded to the right rev. Prelates in any other sense. He utterly denied that any other wish had entered into his heart than to do them justice; and he acquitted them entirely of being actuated by any unworthy motives. But he had been called to task by the 450 right rev. Prelate, who had made a most able and eloquent speech, for having taken the liberty of addressing himself to that right rev. Bench. He was not accustomed to take liberties, nor did he think he had taken any liberty in expressing himself as he had done. If out of that House the right rev. Prelate should ever condescend to give him (the Earl of Malmesbury) his spiritual advice, he would gladly admit and follow it; but in that House, in all temporal and in all political subjects, he should, in everything but ability and eloquence, consider himself and act as the Peer of the right rev. Prelate.
The BISHOP of ST. DAVID'Srose to explain. The only object he had in any observation he had addressed to their Lordships, was to remove the impression which might have been made within that House, and in the country at large.
§ The EARL of HARDWICKEwished to remind their Lordships that there had not been anything like personalities introduced into the debates, until certain right rev. Prelates had addressed the House for the first time. Those right rev. Prelates to whom he referred had not been ascustomed to take part in such proceedings, nor had they possessed any opportunity of seeing the manner in which many of their right rev. Brethren conducted themselves. Those right rev. Prelates never had ventured to impute motives to any of their Lordships in the discharge of their duties, and had set the House a bright example of dignified and becoming conduct. And he now gave the right rev. Prelates to whom he alluded his advice that they would take this example and warning, that it would not be very wise, as regarded themselves, for them in future to impute motives to any of their Lordships in reference to anything which might arise in their Lordships' House.
The BISHOP of OXFORDrose to address the House amid some confusion. He appealed to their Lordships' sense of justice to hear him for a few moments. It would be impossible for him to suffer the lecture which had been delivered to him—and he would add no epithet to that word, for he considered it would quite suffice to express his meaning—it would be impossible for him to suffer the lecture which the noble Lord had thought it proper and seeming to address to two right rev. Members of that body, who sat with him in that House as his Peers, without saying a few words in reply. He was in the recollection of the 451 House, when he appealed to all he had said; and he fearlessly challenged contradiction, when he asserted that he had imputed no motive to any noble Lord in the beginning of his speech, and had guarded against doing so. In the heat of argument, and in discussing what he believed to be a great national question, upon which, after the best and most earnest consideration he could bestow, he had come to a clear and decided opinion, he might have been led into a warmth of expression which he had not intended. If that had been the case, and if he had said anything offensive to any noble Lord, he was at once ready to admit it, and to apologize for having done so. But as to submitting to the imputation which had been so wantonly and improperly brought forward, that instead of confining himself to argument, he had imputed motives to their Lordships, he would not do so, and he rejected the charge altogether. It was a very easy thing for noble Lords to stand up in their places and make such charges as these, and to make charges of youth and inexperience; but was a man who for forty years had studied, and that not carelessly, books, men, and manners, to be declared incompetent to deliver his opinions, or to be taunted by the noble Lord with being a young man? Surely it were a greater shame for any reasonable being to be on the wrong side the question as an old man, than as a young man. But he was not very anxious to throw aside the censure of the noble Lord, by any desire to escape by the plea of great senility. He had confined himself to argument, which was, he believed, found to be troublesome; and it was far easier to give lectures on imputed arrogance, than to take the edge off argument which had been listened to and received. It had been said, too, that he had set the example of introducing acrimony and personal altercation into the debate; but he could appeal to the noble Duke, whether, when he had drawn his (the Bishop of Oxford's) attention to a slight slip, a wholly unpremeditated allusion which had risen to his lips in the moment of speaking, and with which he concluded the sentence, he had not at once retracted it. Now he did complain publicly of that pseudo lecture which had been delivered to him with such extraordinary gravity by that noble Lord, with whom he was in private on terms of friendship. He could not, however, suffer that noble Lord on the common ground of that House to assume the 452 privilege of imputing to him assertions and motives which he could not prove.
The EARL of WINCHILSEAsaid, that having had the honour of a seat in their Lordships' House for many years, he could most confidently state, that if ever he had heard a lecture in his life, it certainly was contained in the speech of the right rev. Prelate in the last night of the debate. So strong a lecture he had never heard. Not only had he designated the speech and arguments of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley), which, in point of eloquence and effect, had never been exceeded in that House, as a mere declamation—as "actual rottenness;" but he had the presumption to say that those of their Lordships who had stated, and stated honestly, that they were the friends of the labouring classes, had other motives for their conduct. He had hoped to have heard the right rev. Prelate prove that this was a landlord's question. Had he done so, he (Earl Winchilsea) would have doubted the motive by which he thought himself actuated. He would not occupy their Lordships' time any further than by saying that the right rev. Prelate knew but little of the agriculture of the country when he talked of improving it by introducing the competition of the foreign labourer, the labour of the serfs of Poland. He could conscientiously say that he deeply regretted the speech of the right rev. Prelate; and he thought that the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) who had spoken from the other side of the House, had given as perfect a description of that speech as could be imagined.
§ The EARL of GALLOWAYhad heard the speech of the right rev. Prelate, and the animadversions which had been made upon it, and must express his deep sense of the injustice of the latter. During his speech the right rev. Prelate had been frequently subjected to the most unseeming interruptions; and it was a marvel to him that the right rev. Prelate should have been enabled with so much good temper to bear with those interruptions. There was sometimes something very sharp in the retorts of the right rev. Prelate; but there was nothing unparliamentary in the speech. He believed that the attacks launched to-night against the right rev. Prelate showed how deeply those who made them felt the truth of the remarks which had called them forth.