HL Deb 28 July 1853 vol 129 cc873-9
The BISHOP of SALISBURY

moved for returns respecting the gross and net income of the See of Salisbury, the amount of fines for renewal of leases for lives, and other matters connected with the property of the see. He could assure their Lordships that he should occupy their attention for a very few moments, while he stated to them his reasons for moving for these returns, It was peculiarly painful to him to feel himself obliged by circumstances to intrude himself upon their Lordships' attention a second time upon a subject of almost personal concern; but he would confine his observations to a mere statement of the reasons which induced him to do so, and what were the objects which he had in view. He hoped when he had on a previous occasion stated to their Lordships that he had accepted a fixed income from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in the place of the revenue derived from his see in the ordinary way, that he had said all that was necessary on the subject. The amount derived from his see had averaged about 6,700l. a year, and he had accepted from the Commissioners the sum of 5,000l. But it appeared that a great deal of misapprehension had gone abroad on the subject, and had been most industriously promulgated, and statements injurious in their consequences had been made. It had been stated that he, in accepting a fixed income of 5,000l. a year from the Commissioners, had, so far from having made any sacrifice, in reality made what was commonly called a good bargain; that he had retained the full income of his see during those years when the receipts were usually large, and had ultimately resigned that income when he became aware that those receipts would, in all probability, fall off. In moving for the returns which he asked for, it was his object to show, in a manner which could not be contested, that any such supposition as that to which he had referred, not only was not founded upon fact, but was, in point of truth, diametrically contrary to fact. Before making the proposal to accept an income of 5,000l. a year from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and transfer to them the income derived from his see, he had not spoken to any one on the subject, except to his right rev. Friend below him (the Bishop of Oxford). That right rev. Prelate had on that occasion differed from him in the views which he entertained on the subject; but he would recollect that he had been firmly convinced at that time that the revenue derived from the ordinary means would not be decreased. If there were sources of revenue which appeared to be uncertain, but which an experience of fourteen years had proved to yield a large income, and if, according to the best judgment, they were likely always to continue to yield as large an income, the person changing them for other sources would not be content to rest under the imputation that he had made the exchange at a time when those sources of revenue were diminishing in value. In the position which he had the honour of occupying, he felt that to rest under such an imputation would be not only to render himself liable to fresh attacks, but also would expose the Church to imputation. It might be said that when he entered into the arrangement with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners he had no sufficient ground for entertaining the supposition that what might be called the uncertain sources of revenue in his see would not produce a smaller amount than they had up to that time produced. He might be misinformed himself upon the subject; but what he said was liable to correction, for he had the advantage of seeing present the noble Earl who was the First Estates Commissioner (the Earl of Chichester); and also the Gentleman who sat at the table of their Lordships' House (Mr. Lefevre) had, as an unpaid Commissioner, afforded the advantage of his great experience, of his acquaintance with all matters of finance, and of a candid and impartial judgment. He had gone carefully through the details of the matter with those persons, and he trusted that he should not say anything which they would not be prepared to confirm, or, at all events, he hoped that if he fell into error, they would correct him. It would be more satisfactory than entering into details, and he hoped their Lordships would permit him to read a letter which he held in his hand from the noble Earl who was the First Estates Commissioner. That letter, which was dated "Whitehall-place, July 26, 1853," said— You may probably wish me to state in writing what I said to you in a recent conversation on the subject of your agreement with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in 1851. That arrangement was at the time considered by us to be an advantageous one for the Common Fund, and consequently could scarcely be, as has been stated, a pecuniary gain to yourself. An inspection of the septennial returns and of the state of existing leases upon lives clearly shows that there was reasonable ground for expecting that the seven years, commencing with 1851, would yield an aggregate income at the least equal to that of the preceding period. Indeed, I have no hesitation in saying that you were quite justified in the expectation entertained by you in 1851, that the period then commencing would be more productive than the former one. It was with these expectations, and on the earliest opportunity which the law afforded, that you proposed to put yourself under the new Act, and to receive a fixed income of 5,000l. a year, and no more. He trusted that their Lordships would deem that letter sufficient to show the falsity of the imputations which had been cast upon him; and he himself, after reading that letter, felt that it would be unnecessary to trouble their Lordships with the figures upon which such statements had been founded. He would merely generally state that the income of his see, and of the sees of his right rev. Brethren, was derived from three sources—from permanent sources or receipts, which were certain to fall in every year—from other sources, in one sense fixed, in another sense fluctuating, such as accrued and were almost certain to fall in every year, as fines upon renewal of leases for twenty-one years, renewable every seven years; and it was on account of the income derived from that source that seven years was the period fixed upon for returns to be made. The other source of revenue was considered uncertain; it was derived from the fines accruing on the renewal of leases for lives. He would assert that there was no reason to suppose that the income derived from the latter source would not, when he made his offer to the Commissioners, approach to that derived from it during the preceding period, and he would go further, and say, that there were some reasons to expect a not inconsiderable increase. In discussing this subject, he had thought it desirable to look upon the revenue derived from the renewal of fines upon leases for life now as the same as that derived in the preceding period, and only to touch upon the revenue derived from that source. It had been argued that because before making the arrangement with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, he had derived a large income from the renewal of fines upon leases for life; that, therefore, it was not likely that any considerable sum would accrue for a long time. In moving for the returns he now pressed for, his great object was to show that such was not the case, but that the exact contrary was the fact. From a return which he held in his hand, it appeared that during the first fourteen years of his incumbency the average receipts from fines on leases for years amounted to a suns of 1,973l. per annum; while the annual average for the seven years preceding the arrangement in the year 1851, had been only 820l.; so that it appeared that at the very time when he entered into the arrangement the receipts from that source were unusually small, and the probability was that the receipts to be expected for the future would be greater; although, indeed, such matters were so uncertain that he himself expressed no opinion on the subject. He would at once state to their Lordships that it was perfectly true that it had so happened that during the first two years after he had entered into the arrangement, the receipts had been extremely small. But, although such was the case—and he was most willing to admit that it was so—he would also beg their Lordships to observe what was the state of the case in the third year. It was the case that what had at one time only been a matter of probability had since become a matter of absolute certainty; that the receipts from the fines upon renewal of leases for lives, which it had been expected would increase, had actually increased, and at the present moment there was a larger amount due from that source than had been due at any period since he first entered upon the incumbency. Besides two other small cases, there were four lives at the present moment vacant. He would not enter into detail on the subject, for he did not think that such a course would be desirable, nor had he as yet received all the reports; but he felt that he had a right to say that, speaking upon the best information he could obtain, it was estimated that at the present moment there was due on account of leases in which lives were vacant, the sum of 10,196l., a sum considerably greater than the largest which had fallen due during the whole time he had held the incumbency. The effect of that would be, that if during the remaining three and a half years of the period of seven years no other leases at all were to fall vacant, the sum now due, combined with the income derived from other sources, would give an annual income of 6,236l., while, if other leases should fall vacant, that income would, of course, be proportionately increased. The average of the receipts of the see during the first three years of the present septennial period, if the leases now vacant were renewed in the ordinary manner, would be not less than 5,843l. 19s. These were all the facts to which he wished to call their Lordships' attention, and which he was desirous of confirming from the returns for which he moved. He did not wish to detain their Lordships longer: he felt bound, however, before be resumed his seat, to express the gratitude he felt for the kind attention which he had received. There was another thing which he wished to state, and which he considered it due to their Lordships that he should state. It was not on account of their Lordships that he had felt bound to make the statement which he had made that evening, for he felt that they were just and honourable men, and would not be ready to believe that other persons acted from unworthy motives. They would not, he was well persuaded, lightly attribute base conduct to any one, and least of all to one placed in the situation which he had been called upon to fill, he should have felt it degrading to enter into details concerning such a subject if he had only himself personally to defend. But that was not all. Such charges brought against one in his position, were calculated, if substantiated, to bring scandal upon the Church itself. And he had felt himself constrained to adopt the course which he at present pursued, to prevent that Church suffering by any imputations which had been cast upon him.

The EARL of CHICHESTER

said, that as a member of the Ecclesiastical Commission he not only had no objection to the production of these returns, but he should rejoice at their production, being persuaded that when they were laid before their Lord-ships, it would be clearly proved how un-founded were the insinuations to which the right rev. Prelate had referred. At the time the arrangement was entered into, In (the Earl of Chichester) was fully satisfied that it would be for the benefit not of the Bishop, but of the Board; and as the right rev. Prelate had read to their Lordships letter which he had addressed to him, he would only add to the statement container in that letter, that, from a closer examination of the state of the existing leases, he had every reason to feel convinced that the right rev. Prelate, at the time of his entering into the arrangement with the Commissioners, must have anticipated that a large income would he derived from that source during the succeeding septennial period than had accrued in the preceding. He would only repeat his conviction that the returns moved for would entirely prove that such was the case.

The LORD CHANCELLOR

said, he felt it his duty to declare, in justice to the right rev. Prelate, that the law on the subject had been very much misunderstood and misrepresented. There was a great misconception as to the state of the law regarding the arrangements between the Bishops of the various sees and the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. In the year 1835, or 1836, when he held the office of Solicitor General, a proposition was made with the view of making an approach towards an equalisation of the resources of the different sees. The Ecclesiastical Commission took the subject into its consideration. Two modes of proceeding were suggested for carrying that object into effect. One was the fixing, first of all, what ought to be about the nominal income of each see. It was proposed that the revenues should be received by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and paid by way of salary to the Bishops. The Commissioners were to look back to see what had been the average income for seven or fourteen years, and the see was to be accepted under an obligation to pay to the Commissioners such a sum as they should fix upon at the time of his coming into it, as that which would probably leave him in possession of the right amount. For instance, supposing it to have been ascertained that the right amount for the see of Salisbury was 5,000l. a year, and that for the preceding seven years the average income had been 6,000l. a year, then the Bishop was to pay 1,000l. a year. That arrangement was to operate during the whole incumbency; and, whether it was beneficial or not to the Bishop, there was no power of making any alteration. He recollected entertaining a strong opinion when the matter was first discussed in the House of Commons that the system was being based on a wrong foundation, and that it would be much better if an annual sum were paid. This conviction was strengthened by the fact which he discovered that the income of the see of Ely was, by the payment of 5,000l. a year, reduced for the first and second years almost to nothing. In that case, when the Bishop remonstrated, the answer of the Commissioners was, that it could not be helped, that he had accepted the see charged with a fixed payment, and that if he were a loser one year, he might be a gainer the next. That appeared to him a most unsatisfactory footing on which to place the resources of the hierarchy; but, on the other hand, it was but justice to the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Salisbury) and to the other Prelates concerned, to say that they had no choice in the matter; that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners fixed the sum to be paid by them with reference to the probable amount of their receipts; and that the Bishop had nothing to do but receive his income. That very unsatisfactory state of things was altered two years ago, and now the Bishops received fixed payments from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who received the whole revenues of the sees. If anything were wanted to show the necessity for the alteration, it would be found in the fact stated by the right rev. Prelate that evening, that in the present year he would, under the old arrangement, have received, besides his annual income, upwards of 10,000l.

Returns ordered.