BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER.

HL Deb 10 June 1847 vol 93 cc281-94

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE

said, that in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, he should trouble their Lordships with a few observations, for the purpose of explaining its nature. The propriety of carrying into effect the consolidation of the two bishoprics of St. Asaph and Bangor had occasioned considerable diversity of opinion in that House; and for several years the question had been the subject of discussion both there and elsewhere; but there was but one opinion with respect to the propriety of the object which was intended to be obtained from the consolidation, namely, the creation of a bishopric of Manchester. All their Lordships who had the interests of the Church and of religion at heart could have but one feeling upon the desirableness of creating a new bishopric in a part of the kingdom remarkable for the growth of its population, its central position, and its connexion with a great variety of bodies and professions. It had been subsequently thought right to leave the Welch bishoprics, with some slight alterations, in the same situation as heretofore; hut it also appeared indispensable to couple with that continuation the creation of a new bishopric in the quarter to which he had alluded. Happily the means existed of supporting this new episcopal dignity out of funds consecrated to objects of episcopal maintenance. Under the management of the Ecclesiastical Commission, which had now sat many years, such a surplus revenue had accumulated as afforded the means of creating the new bishopric of Manchester without expense to the public. It had been considered inexpedient to add to the number of Prelates in that House; and no addition to the num- ber of their Lordships' House would be made in consequence of the creation of the new bishopric. The first Bishop of Manchester would succeed to a seat in their Lordships' House when, by death or otherwise, a vacancy occurred in one of the other bishoprics; thus, a bishop, when appointed, would not have a seat in their Lordships' House until a vacancy took place. This would be the general rule, but it was not without exception; because it was thought desirable that certain bishoprics, from their importance, their historical character, and the position they occupied in the country, should always be represented in that House. These were the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, and the bishoprics of London, Durham, and Winchester. When a vacancy occurred in any of these sees, the bishops appointed to them would he immediately admitted to seats in their Lordships' House. With respect to the see of Manchester, the limits of which were accurately stated in the Bill, it would contain a population of 1,123,000 souls; and it comprised an area of 1,220 square miles. The effect of creating the new bishopric would be greatly to relieve a bishopric already much overburdened—the see of Chester. But, although that would be reduced, it would still remain a bishopric of great dimensions in respect of population and extent. The Bill also created a new archdeaconry of Liverpool, which would be annexed to the see of Chester. The sum of 3,000l. per annum was already available for the maintenance of the new bishopric, and this would shortly be augmented by a further sum of 1,200l., which would make the income of the see of Manchester 4,200l. per annum, the amount which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners recommended as the proper income of the new see. Some of the provisions of the Bill related to the endowment of new deaneries and archdeaconries; but the main object of the Bill was to provide for the creation of the new bishopric. He should not have moved the second reading of the Bill in the absence of the most reverend Prelates and the Bishop of London, if they had any objection to it; but, as that was not the case, he would move that the Bill be now read a second time.

LORD MONTEAGLE

would not have opposed the Bill if it had been simply confined to the establishment of a new bishopric of Manchester; but there were other matters, both introduced into the Bill and omitted from it, upon which he very mate- rially differed with the promoters of the measure. For instance, it was not accompanied by any provision for the augmentation of the incomes of the parochial clergy in North Wales. The Commission which sat on the Ecclesiastical Revenues in 1835, and which was composed of the heads of the Church and some of the chief Members of Sir R. Peel's Government, recommended such augmentation. On the change of Government the Commission was renewed, and the new Commission made the same recommendation. But it was considered that the funds at the disposal of the Commission were not sufficient, and therefore they were devoted to endowing the proposed see of Manchester. He had much regretted at the time that that resolution had been come to; and he wished he could now have seen the object originally intended carried out. He wished that such a provision had formed a part of the present Bill. But he did not merely complain of this omission; he also objected that the Bill contained a new and a most important provision. Not only were four now sees to be created which were not recommended by the Ecclesiastical Commission, but they were also to be excluded from seats in Parliament. It was true, if he rightly understood his noble Friend, that the bishops were afterwards to pass from this species of episcopal noviciate to the full completion of their episcopal character by their having seats in Parliament. He did not see, however, how the sort of arrangement proposed by the noble Marquess could be carried into effect. As to the proposal to erect Manchester into a bishopric, he thought there could be no objection to it. When the enormous mass of population growing up in and around Manchester was considered, the necessity of such a measure must be seen at once. But in North Wales there was a great want of clerical aid. The Dissenters vastly predominated there in consequence of there not being clergy enough, and also in consequence of their deficient incomes. Whilst by this Bill they were about to cure one of these evils, they were going to perpetuate the other. He regretted also that such a subject should have been brought forward in the shape of a Bill at such a time, just at the close of a Session, and almost at the close of a Parliament.

LORD STANLEY

would be very sorry if any words that might fall from him on the subject should interfere with the progress of a measure which he considered to be of the highest importance to the best interests of that part of the country with which he was connected. He hoped, however, his near connexion with the district in which the new diocese was to be erected, would be considered a sufficient justification for him if he trespassed for a few moments on their Lordships' attention. He had agreed on a former occasion with the noble Lord who had just sat down in regretting the resolution that had been come to, by which the resolution of the Commission with respect to the union of the two sees was reversed; and he still continued of the same opinion. He was satisfied that those who in that instance yielded to what he had no doubt was the prevailing opinion out of doors, would find that still greater evils would ensue from the concession than would have accrued from a refusal of it. The two sees in question would stand forth in invidious comparison both with regard to emoluments and duties with almost every other see in the kingdom. But he did not deny the force of opinion both in and out of that House, among some of the warmest friends of the Church, in favour of the retention of those two sees; and, although he regretted the decision of the Government, he did not feel warranted in opposing this measure on any ground connected with that question. The object the Bill was intended to effect, was one of deep and vital importance. Such a measure was absolutely necessary. he was sure it would be universally admitted that there was no Prelate on the Bench who laboured more studiously, diligently, or successfully in promoting the cause of religion, and extending its influence, than the right rev. Prelate who presided over the see of Chester—that see so overwhelmingly extensive, and in some parts of which episcopal supervision was so especially necessary. But he believed that right rev. Prelate would himself be the first to admit that the duties of his diocese were so extensive and laborious as to be more than could be performed by any one Prelate, however fit or able. And the new bishopric of Manchester, embracing as it would a population of considerably above a million, and extending over a vast area, would, even when separated from the see of Chester, be quite sufficient to justify its being erected into a separate see. Before proceeding to notice the objections he entertained, on principle, to parts of the Bill, he begged to say, that but for a circumstance which he would state to their Lordships, he should have felt it his duty to propose a clause in the Bill with a view to imposing on the dean and chapter a more strict performance of their duties, according to their charter. But he had the high satisfaction of stating to their Lordships, that after the discussion that took place on the petition which he had had the honour to present, complaining of the non-observance by the dean and chapter of the duties which were morally if not legally imposed on them, an arrangement had been entered into between that body and a considerable portion of the petitioners, which certainly appeared to him to reflect great credit on the disposition of the former to meet the wishes of the latter; while, at the same time, it seemed to a great extent to remedy the grievances complained of. The principal complaint was of non-residence. An arrangement had been made, the result of which was an offer on the part of the chapter so to remodel their existing statutes as to make the obligation of residence as binding in law as it was intended to be by the chapter; and, further that each individual member of the chapter should take charge, in future, of one of those now ill-provided townships in the parish of Manchester, and that thus, in addition to his character of a member of the chapter, each person should take the duty of a parochial minister. He had further the satisfaction to state that arrangements had been made by which the surplus revenue of the chapter would be rendered available for improving the parochial condition of the great parish of Manchester; and likewise it was material the House should know, that the chapter had set apart a considerable sum for building purposes; and the effect of this was, or soon would be, to relieve the district churches of double fees. In making this statement he begged it, however to be distinctly understood that this neither went to support or interfere with the necessity of providing an episcopal jurisdiction for the district of which Manchester was the centre. It was true that the circumstance to which he referred had no immediate connexion with the Bill before their Lordships, but he thought it right to mention the matter—it was due to the chapter to do so, and he hoped that the example which they had set would not be lost on other ecclesiastical bodies. The objection taken by his noble Friend to the principle of the present measure was, that it would have the effect of introducing a novelty to which he was opposed, that of appointing bishops in England, without giving them seats in that House. In that objection he, to a considerable extent, concurred. He had formerly said, and he now thought it right to repeat the opinion, that the whole plan of the Government ought to be propounded to the House before any special case was brought under their consideration. Instead of proposing to deal with Manchester by itself, they ought to bring forward their entire plan, and at once put the House in possession of how far and in what directions they proposed to extend the episcopal system of England. According to the Bill then before their Lordships, a new bishopric would be created, and the bishop to whom it was to be given was not to have a seat in that House. But then, eventually, four new bishoprics were to be created, and not any of these bishops were, in the first instance, to have seats in that House. The Government, however, had not informed Parliament how much further they thought it would be necessary to carry the measure—they had not stated precisely what was to be the extent of their plan, or how many were eventually to hold scats in that House. If the Government would state that no more than four bishops were to be created, there would then, perhaps, be no objection to confer upon those four prelates seats in their Lordships' House; but there would be a great objection to conferring seats in Parliament upon as many as twenty-six. It would never do to appoint one bishop now with a seat in Parliament, and in a few years hence another also with a similar privilege, and then soon afterwards another and another. he understood the proposed arrangement to ho, that four bishops were to be appointed; that for the present none of those prelates were to have seats in the House; but that, considering them as an integral portion of the whole bench of bishops, the four junior prelates, to whatever see they might belong, should always in future be without seats in Parliament, leaving the whole number of spiritual Lords unchanged, but giving the holders of the four new bishoprics the right of sitting in rotation with the other prelates, according to seniority. If, as some thought, there would be inconvenience in adding one, two, or three bishops to the House of Lords, there would obviously be a much greater inconvenience if the augmentation of bishops were to be considerable. There were some who thought that not four, but four-and-twenty bishops, ought to be created; at the same time, no one thought that such an addition as that ought to be made to the numbers of their Lordships' House. Suppose it was thought necessary that there should be forty-eight bishops, and that half that number should have seats in the House of Lords, then might not the half of those bishops he suffragans to the original sees, they being without seats in that House, and each bishop in chief having, as before, a seat in Parliament? If they adopted a different plan—that was to say, if they allowed some bishops to possess seats in Parliament, and excluded the junior bishops, then one effect would be that they would lose the assistance of prelates in the prime of life, and none except the elder bishops would enjoy seats in that House, although every one admitted that important duties belonged to bishops as Lords of Parliament. He passed by the contrast that even persons friendly to the interests of the Church would, in some cases, he disposed to perceive between the manner in which the episcopal functions were discharged by bishops who had seats in the Upper House, and those who had not; but every one must see that those whom the present Bill excluded from Parliament would he men at the most active period of life. He knew that to the suggestion which he was inclined to make, there existed some strong objections; and he was conscious that his offering it to their Lordships savoured somewhat of presumption; but the question before them was one of great importance, which he thought would fully plead his excuse. In this case there were two conflicting difficulties. It was necessary that there should be a large increase of the number of bishops; and there would be an obvious inconvenience in excluding from the House of Lords the junior bishops. To him it appeared that this evil might be got over by recurring to the practice of old times; and, acting under the sanction of an unrepealed law, they might have a certain number of suffragan bishops, equal as amongst themselves, but without seats in Parliament, the chief prelate of each see remaining, as before, one of the Lords spiritual. The several bishops would then have, as in ancient times, the aid of a suffragan; and, during the attendance of the bishop in Parliament, the interests of the see would not suffer by the want of his presence, for his suffragan would of course be authorized to exercise all the episcopal functions. To the adoption of such a system, he knew there were some objections; but to its extension there were certainly no limits, except the difficulty of procuring the means of endowment. He would not say that no endowment was required; but he might be allowed to observe that those who thought the suffragan bishops ought to be selected from amongst the most wealthy of the beneficed clergy of the dioceses to which they belonged seemed to overlook this, that restricting the choice to that class would very inconveniently circumscribe the power of selection, and might have the effect of excluding many persons from the office of suffragan, who might be much better qualified for its duties than those who happened for the time being to hold the richest benefices in the diocese. In his opinion, they need not at present be over-solicitous on the subject of endowments. If they laid down a good plan for the extension and improvement of the Church, they might confidently reckon on the support of the friends of the Church, and funds would not be wanting. A large, broad, and extensive scheme ought to be laid down; and there should be no legislation by little and little. Every one knew that there existed in this country so strong a feeling in favour of the Church, that hardly any amount of aid would be wanting. If an appeal were made to the Churchmen of England, he entertained not the least doubt that they would respond to it in such a manner as to put an end to all solicitude on the subject of endowments. It appeared to him infinitely more satisfactory and advantageous in every respect, if they were to have only two descriptions of bishops: one having an absolute superintendence and control of the dioceses, each bishop having equal rights and privileges with the other, and entitled to a seat in that House; and the other class suffragans, with equal rights amongst themselves, but without seats in that House. He thought it was most important that they should now consider the principle upon which they proposed permanently to act. It was not his wish to offer any opposition to the second reading of this Bill. He concurred in the main principle. He, however, earnestly begged the Government to consider what might be hereafter the possible requisitions of the Church, and not lead the public to believe that a mere addition of four bishops would meet the spiritual exigencies of the Church of England. They must contemplate at some future period a large increase in the num- ber of bishops. This, therefore, was the time when they should make up their mind under what circumstances and to what extent the increase must he made, and also to take into consideration the question respecting the occupation of seats in the House.

LORD BROUGHAM

reserved to himself the right of proposing an alteration in the clause by which the new bishop was excluded from the House, as he thought the addition of only one to their Lordships' House was not a matter of so much importance as to require his exclusion. He must say, however, that if they made the Bishop of Manchester because the Bishop of Chester was overworked, they ought on the same grounds to divide the diocese of London.

The BISHOP of SALISBURY

said, he was not a member of the Commission on whose report this Bill was founded, and as he had seen the Bill for the first time that morning, he had had only very little time to consider its provisions. He regretted that a Bill on a subject of so much importance, and involving questions of much nicety, had not been submitted to the careful consideration of the whole of his Brethren on that bench. But, nevertheless, he believed that the principle of this Bill was assented to by almost every one of the right rev. Prelates; and he would not refuse to the Government his acknowledgments, and which he had no doubt they would receive from the great body of the most attached members of the Church, for having had the courage to enter upon the consideration of this question, and to introduce this Bill. The noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) had expressed very strongly his sense of the great necessity for an increase in the number of bishops; and his belief that if that increase was not to go beyond the number contemplated in that Bill, there need not have been any difficulty in giving the new bishops seats in that House. He regretted very much that the noble Lord had entertained so different a view on this subject when he was himself a prominent Member of Her Majesty's Government; and when, therefore, had he held the opinions he had now expressed, he was in a position to bring forward with advantage a measure to carry them into effect. But the noble Lord had at that time used very different language, as must be very clearly in the recollection of many Members of that House. He did not for a moment deny that the question was encompassed with many and great difficulties; but he questioned the efficiency of the mode proposed by the noble Lord who had just spoken, for providing for the admitted necessity of increased episcopal superintendence. His own opinion upon the matter was, that the appointment of suffragan bishops would not be found, in its operation, satisfactory for the purpose for which they would be required. The evil which was most generally felt, under existing circumstances, was, that there was too little opportunity of intercourse between the bishop of a diocese, and the members of the Church, both clergy and laity, under his jurisdiction. The creation of suffragan bishops would be only to increase the evil which was now so much complained of. They could only exercise that power which was committed to them by the bishops under whose commission they would act. So far as they exercised episcopal functions at all, they would replace the diocesan bishops in that respect; and the bishops would be thereby still further removed than they were now from personal contact with those over whom they would still exercise jurisdiction in all matters which came under their episcopal superintendence. Such a system would be found to be pregnant with objections and difficulties greater than those which could attach to this measure. It could not be denied, that to augment the number of bishops without giving them seats in that House, was objectionable; but under the pressure of the existing evils, from a deep sense of the extreme wants of the Church in that respect, and under the conviction that the choice placed before them was, either to rest contented with the existing number of bishops, or to assent to the proposition for increasing that number without augmenting the number of those who had seats in that House, he believed that it was their duty to the Church of which they were the spiritual superintendents—to those whose spiritual edification they were bound by the most sacred obligations to attend to—to make the latter choice, as the best for the welfare of the country, and for the Church of which they were the ministers. He was by no means insensible to the difficulties attending this subject; but he should, nevertheless, give his cordial assent to the Bill then before their Lordships.

EARL FITZWILLIAM

agreed in many of the opinions expressed by his noble Friend, and especially in the observations he had made upon one bishop only being excluded from a seat in their Lordships' House. He did not quite understand upon what ground it was assumed—and yet assumed it must be—that twenty-six were precisely the number of spiritual Lords who should have seats in that House. Considering the great increase in the number of temporal Peers, it might have been supposed to he just possible that a small increase of two, three, or four spiritual Peers would not be productive of any great evil. In the diocese now about to be created, there was a population of upwards of 1,000,000; and he was certain that the next diocese they would he called upon to divide, unless it was the metropolitan, would be the new diocese of Manchester. If it had been stated that there would be only an addition of one, or oven four bishops, he very much doubted whether there would have been any great apprehension entertained; but it must have been felt by the Government, as it was by his noble Friend opposite, that that number was a very inadequate reinforcement of the episcopal establishment of the Church. He doubted, however, whether the appointment of suffragan bishops would answer the purpose. His own inclination was to see a very large addition to the number of bishops, for he was satisfied, that unless a very considerable subdivision was made of the more populous dioceses, the superintendence of the clergy by the bishops must still remain very inadequate; hut he should be inclined to deal with that addition in a very different manner from that proposed by his noble Friend. If a large number of bishops was added to the present number, there might be some objection to giving them all seats in that House; and his notion would be that they should sit by rotation, the result of which would be, that all who had sees would, at no distant period, have seats within those walls. He was the more inclined to that Motion from having observed that the most active of the bishops were amongst the junior members of the right rev. Bench; who therefore would, by that plan, be not so long excluded from sitting in that House as if they were only to succeed to vacancies as they occurred.

The BISHOP of OXFORD

must inform the noble Earl, that five or six of his right rev. Brethren had taken their seats on the episcopal bench earlier than he had himself; and, moreover, that he was much nearer to the mystic age which the noble Earl seemed to think a clergyman should have attained before he could be a bishop, than the noble Earl supposed. He was anxious, before their Lordships closed the consideration of this great subject, to tender his hearty acknowledgments to the Government for having introduced this Bill, without at all pledging himself to all its details. There was, indeed, something approaching the principle of it to which he could not entirely assent; hut he thought that the whole nation owed great thanks to the Government for not having thrown cold obstruction in the way of what was proposed—for not having advised Her Majesty to adhere to past recommendations, which the recommenders themselves had withdrawn—and for having giving their hearty consideration to the great necessity for increased episcopal superintendence, and the manner in which that necessity could be met—and for having proposed a substantial and practical measure upon the subject. A deep debt of gratitude was due to the Government for the course they had taken; but he was bound to say, that he thought there were some great objections to the plan that was now proposed. He felt very strongly some of the objections stated by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley); but, when they spoke of the difficulty of this subject being confined to the question of seats in that House, he was anxious that that should not go forth to the public without one or two things being attended to. The first objection to additional bishops having seats in that House was, the necessity it created of those bishops having a large income. Now, he begged to state to their Lordships, that it was not having a seat in that House that entailed upon the bishops the necessity of a large income. It was the hospitality which the bishop was bound to exercise in his own diocese, and which was essential to his maintaining that degree of personal intercourse with those who were in communication with him, which was so desirable, seeing them day by day in that kind of intercourse in which men's characters were to be moulded. It was in that respect, that, taking the extent of the dioceses as they were at present, a large income was required; and he thought that Parliament had acted wisely in assenting to the amount of the revenues of the bishops for the sustentation of the episcopal office. They could not, therefore, get rid of the difficulty of providing revenues for the support of additional bishops by the exclusion of them from seats in that House. Then, another point of apprehension was, that to give the bishops a seat in that House, was to invest them with more power. He believed that, on the contrary, their seats were a great qualification and drawback upon their power. Touching, as the English bishop did, so largo a class of the community—being brought into contact with them upon the most deeply important spiritual concerns—he believed that instead of the powers they now possessed being restricted by the liability to which they were subject of being questioned and treated in that House like other public men, they would have greater powers of a more dangerous kind if they had not such scats. He might mention an instance of a tyrannous use of the power of a bishop, in refusing to ordain a person who would not subscribe to certain articles. A question respecting it was put to the bishop in his place in Parliament, and that tyrannous exercise of power was prevented. But there was another great advantage from their having seats in that House. It brought them naturally into intercourse and intimacy with those, who, from their condition of life, took the widest views of the condition of the people; and he thought the advantage resulting to the Church and the nation more than made up for any loss they might sustain from the want of immediate spiritual authority. he thought one of the great fundamental difficulties in assenting to this Bill was, that they were practically providing that there should be no increase beyond four in the number of bishops. This was the great and pressing practical difficulty; and he admitted that his own desire would be to pass this Bill with the greatest unanimity, after certain amendments on those points which made it restrictive of the further extension of the episcopacy. He thought that the Bill should form a bishopric of Manchester, he should say, with a seat in that House, and leave for future consideration the question of the extension of the episcopacy; for in a Church where the episcopacy was a distinguishing feature, the system could not work where the episcopacy was neglected.

The BISHOP of BANGOR

offered his best thanks to Her Majesty's Government for the measure they had brought forward; although, when it went into Committee, be would state a few objections to its details.

EARL POWIS

was understood, as a Churchman, to thank the Government for this boon.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE

, in reply, said he was not aware that it was necessary for him to offer any observations, as there was no intention of opposing the second reading. He would only remark that the objections of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley), and of the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Oxford), were of an entirely opposite character; but he agreed that it was impossible to stop with this Bill. To promote the efficiency of the Episcopal Establishment, reform must be carried further; and it was with this view that the Government had thought it necessary to express distinctly in this enactment that three more bishoprics besides that of Manchester, should be looked forward to at no distant period, as the funds were rapidly accumulating out of which they could be sustained. And when the right rev. Prelate said, that by assenting to this Bill they were barring their power of carrying a further increase of the episcopal bench, he thought it would be impolitic now to contemplate the creation of a largo number of new bishops. With respect to this Bill, he was desirous of naming an early day for a Committee on the Bill; and he was also desirous of the attendance of the most rev. Prelate at the head of the Church; and he would name that day se'nnight, subject to the convenience of the right rev. Prelates.

Bill read 2^a.

House adjourned.