Lords Sitting of 17 February 1888

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Mortmain and Charitable Uses* (16).
Second Reading—Truro Cathedral Fabric and Services* (3).

AGRARIAN OUTRAGES (IRELAND)— THE RETURNS.

  QUESTION.
  EARL SPENCERasked the Lord Privy Seal, Whether he could answer the Questions which his noble and learned Friend (Lord Herschell) put to him last Monday as to certain Returns bearing upon the present state of Ireland?
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN), in reply, said, that all the Returns which had been asked for on Monday would be supplied with two exceptions. The noble and learned Lord

  691
  opposite had asked for a Return showing the number of persons proceeded against under the Criminal Law and Procedure Act, the number of those acquitted and convicted respectively, the nature of the charges, and the result of appeals. Directions had been given for the preparation of these Returns. The noble and learned Lord had also asked whether the names of the acting magistrates could be given in the Returns? With this request the Government could not comply. A Return was also asked for of the number of cases which had been brought to the notice of the Government, including the cases which had not been followed by prosecution. That was rather a vague request, and the Government could not consent to prepare such a Return. The noble Earl (Earl Spencer) had asked for information as to the number of derelict farms. Now, such information had never yet been collected with the object of publication in statistical form, and the Government were at present inclined to agree with their Predecessors that it would not be convenient to publish the figures as a Return; it would be most difficult to present such a Return in a complete and accurate shape. The Return which the noble Earl desired of the number of people under protection would be prepared and produced as soon as possible.
  LORD HERSCHELLasked, whether there would be any objection to publish the names of the magistrates who had heard cases if they were not connected with any particular trial? Further, their Lordships were aware that the Land Act of the Government had rendered evictions unnecessary, and had substituted a notice which had the effect of turning a tenant into a caretaker. He did not know whether the Government possessed a record; but if they had, he hoped they would consent to a Return showing the number of cases in which this substituted proceeding had been taken advantage of.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, he would confer with the Chief Secretary for Ireland upon the point.
  EARL SPENCERsaid, that the other day he spoke entirely from memory on the subject of derelict farms. He had not had an opportunity of inquiring at the Irish Office as to what the practice had been; but he certainly was under the impression that an attempt was formerly
  692
  made to collect some information of that sort, though not in a form intended for publication. He thought, however, information might be prepared for publication in a shape similar to that taken in the Returns relating to Boycotting. These Returns showed the number of people wholly Boycotted and the number olny partially Boycotted. As to the Return of persons under police protection, he wished to know whether the noble Earl proposed to give a table comparing one period of six months with another period of six months?
  EARL CADOGAN, in reply, said, that it was intended to renew the Return presented in July last, and put it side by side with the Return of the 31st January. As to derelict farms, he might add that it would be very difficult to obtain any Return which could be considered complete. At all events, the information could only be obtained through the police, who might not be the best judges as to whether a farm was derelict or not. The Return would therefore be incomplete, and, perhaps, hardly trustworthy.

THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYasked the Prime Minister, When he would be in a position to lay on the Table the text of the Treaty which had just been concluded at Washington and the Protocols of the Conference?
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): I hope the noble Earl will not consider me disrespectful if I answer laconically when I can get them.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: But they will be laid on the Table?
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Oh, yes.

THE LONDON THEATRES—CAPTAIN SHAW'S REPORT.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF STRAFFORD, in rising to put a Question to the Government, remarked that he believed he was correct in saying that in 1882 Captain Shaw inspected and reported on all the London theatres. This work was thoroughly done; the results of the investigation in each case were noted, and changes and improvements in the

  693
  structure and accommodation of the various buildings were suggested. If this document had seen the light it would have served as a valuable reference both to London and country theatrical managers and to the public. In London it was stated that there were 50 theatres with a holding capacity of 70,000 persons, while there were upwards of 475 music-halls, 31 concert-halls and so-called "palaces," with a holding capacity of 445,000 persons. It was said that upwards of £4,000,000 capital were invested in these places of amusement, and that they afforded direct employment to about 150,000 people. At no time probably were theatrical entertainments more popular than they were now; managers and performers were reaping rich harvests from the support of the public; and the public had a right to expect that, so far as human foresight and appliances could avail, they should be protected from the dangers of overcrowding and the still more hideous dangers of fire. Within the last few years there had been some terrible calamaties from the burning of theatres; the Ring Theatre at Vienna, the Opéra Comique at Paris, the principal theatre at Exeter, the Grand Theatre at Islington, and the theatre at Bolton had all suffered in this respect; and it was clear that better precautions ought to be adopted for the security of the audiences. It was true that from time to time officials from the Lord Chamberlain's Department and from, the Metropolitan Board of Works visited the theatres and were presumed to make suggestions for the better comfort and security of the audiences; but these recommendations had not the same weight as those emanating from so distinguished and competent an authority as Captain Shaw. If it were true that the Government intended to deal with the subject of the safety of theatres, he thought that it was desirable before they did so that the public should know the opinions of Captain Shaw. Believing also that his Report would be of much use for the future guidance of theatrical managers, he ventured to hope that it might be presented to Parliament. He would conclude by asking Her Majesty's Government, in the terms of the Notice, Whether there would be any objection to produce the Report made by Captain Shaw, head of the Metropolitan Fire
  694
  Brigade, in the year 1882, upon the condition of the London Theatres, and their probable safety from fire, the said Report having been sent to the Home Secretary and printed by the Metropolitan Board of Works "for the consideration of Members of the Board only?"
  LORD MAGHERAMORNEsaid, that as Chairman of the Metropolitan Board he desired to state that since this Report every theatre in London had been thoroughly and efficiently inspected, and successive Home Secretaries, including Sir William Harcourt, Viscount Cross, and the present Home Secretary, considered that it would not in any way conduce to the public interest to make this Report public. In his opinion the publication of it would produce unnecessary alarm, because it had been considered and acted upon, and many of the defects which it pointed out had been remedied. Some theatres had been shut up because they were not in a proper condition as to safety, and every new theatre had been thoroughly inspected. Many music-halls had been dealt with, and others were still under the consideration of the Board. Many and many a weary day had been spent in going over theatres from top to bottom for the purpose of testing their safety. He did not say that everything had been done that ought to be done, because the powers of the Board were circumscribed. When he was in the House of Commons he introduced a Bill for the purpose of increasing the powers of the Board; but, unfortunately, it met with obstruction. Another Bill was now before the House in charge of his hon. Friend and Colleague the Member for Knutsford (Mr. Tatton Egerton), whose success, he hoped, would be greater than his own had been.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): In the absence of my noble Friend the Lord Chamberlain (the Earl of Lathom), I have been requested to say, in answer to the Question of the noble Earl, that the Secretary of State for the Home Department has consulted the Metropolitan Board of Works, and he has received from them an opinion very much of the character which my noble Friend behind me has just given. The Report of Captain Shaw is dated as far

  695
  back as 1882, and since that time a great deal has been done, and many alterations have been made, while some theatres have been shut up by the action of the Metropolitan Board, and of the Lord Chamberlain's Office. We are of opinion that it would produce a false impression upon a subject on which a false impression would be eminently undesirable if the Report of Captain Shaw, so much out of date, were now laid upon the Table.

HOUSE OF LORDS—HOUR OF MEETING.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether it would not tend to general convenience if the Public Business of the House before Easter was ordered to begin at 5.30 instead of 4.30? The noble Earl said, that until a few years ago Public Business began at a quarter past 5 o'clock, the House assembling at 5; but on the Motion of a noble Earl opposite the House began to meet at 4.15, Public Business commencing at 4.30. The idea was that then debates would be usefully lengthened by affording opportunities to speak to younger Peers who, under the former arrangement, were said to have been deterred by the fear of infringing upon the dinner hour. But he did not think the expectation as to the encouragement of younger Peers and the development of latent abilities had been realized, while in the earlier part of the Session the present arrangement led to the rising of the House at a time which left a considerable interval before dinner, and that interval could not be used for exercise in the open air, because it was too dark until Easter; and noble Lords who were engaged in Judicial Business or on Committees were deprived of the opportunity for such exercise between 4 and 5 by the present arrangement for Public Business. If the change that was made some years ago had produced the results that were anticipated, he would not think of raising the question; but in the absence of such results he thought the matter worthy of reconsideration.
  VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid, that this subject came before their Lordships' House some 10 years ago, and was referred to a Select Committee presided over by the Earl of Carnarvon, and was afterwards repeatedly and fully dis-
  696
  cussed, and the House decided without any Division to meet at an earlier hour. In spite of what had been said by the noble Earl (Earl Beauchamp), he believed the results of the change made had been perfectly satisfactory, and debates of importance would probably have been cut short if the House had met at a later hour. Of course, there were occasions when there was only a little Business before their Lordships' House, and when the House in consequence rose at an early hour; but he did not think that those occasions could be set against the numerous instances in which more time was required than could be given between half-past 5 o'clock and 8 o'clock. The present arrangement enabled noble Lords who were on Committees to come straight to the House. So far as Ministers were concerned, he could quite conceive that it would be convenient to them if their Lordships met at a later hour; but, upon the whole, there were very strong grounds for supporting the existing arrangements.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)said, that, so far as he could gather the opinion of the House, he was bound to say that it was decidedly Conservative in this as in other matters. He did not think that, from the point of view of the Government, it made much difference; and the only Member of the Government to whom a later hour would be attractive was the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who was now frequently obliged to leave an Ambassador in the middle of an interview. He was very much surprised to find that the noble Earl who held that position when the change was made was one of the strongest advocates for meeting at an earlier hour. Now that the change had been made, and their Lordships had fixed all their arrangements accordingly, it was very undesirable that they should make a further alteration. He quite agreed that no great change should be made in Constitutional principles until a necessity had been shown for it. He was sorry to see that there was a spirit of alteration in the air, and he noticed that the House of Commons was proposing to meet at 3 o'clock. He did not know how far the noble Earl would insist on following that proposal.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that he was pleased to be able to concur with the Conservative view of the case. He quite agreed with the noble Marquess that the Foreign Secretary was the Minister most affected by this change, and if he did not object nobody else was likely to do so. The noble Marquess said that owing to the early hour at which the House met he sometimes had to break off an important conversation with an Ambassador. He was not perfectly clear whether that was not on some occasions rather convenient. He was under the impression that the Rule had worked well, and that in consequence they had had a great many debates in the last two years which had gone on till 8 o'clock, and which would otherwise have been cut short, while if there was no Business more time was obtained for other Business, or for recreation, or for catching a train. He noticed that the disposition to go away at 8 o'clock was not confined to their Lordships, but that in the House of Commons it was actually proposed to suspend the Sitting at that hour. He agreed with the noble Marquess that it would be much better that they should remain as they were.

COLONIZATION—ANSWERS TO CIRCULAR.
LORD SANDHURSTasked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether replies have been received to the Circular addressed to the Colonial Governments last year on the subject of colonization; and, whether the Circular and the replies will be laid on the Table of the House?
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (The Earl of ONSLOW), in reply, said, that a Circular was issued by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to all the Colonies with the request that they should send their replies before the opening of the Imperial Parliament. But the Government had received replies from only five Colonies —namely, the Cape, South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia, and Fiji. He was sorry to say that the subject did not seem to have been taken up with any great warmth; indeed, the replies were all more or less unfavourable to the proposals set forth. He thought it was desirable that they should have the views of all the Colonies on
698
this subject, and the Colonies would be requested to furnish a reply as speedily as possible. As soon as all the replies had been received they would be laid on the Table of the House.

FRANCE (PRICE OF BREAD).

  QUESTION.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he would lay on the Table any recent Consular Reports showing the price of bread in France?
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): They will be laid at once on the Table of the House; but it will take some considerable time before they are circulated.

TRURO CATHEDRAL FABRIC AND SERVICES BILL.—(No. 3.)
(The Lord Steward.)
TRURO CATHEDRAL FABRIC AND SERVICES BILL.—(No. 3.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE LORD STEWARD (The Earl of MOUNT-EDGCUMBE), in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to provide, annually, a fund for the repair and services of the Cathedral Church of Truro by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners out of the income of certain estates in their hands. The sum which the Bill asked for was £3,000, and it was to be applied for the maintenance of the fabric of the Cathedral, and the defraying the stipends and expenses of the minor canons, Missioners, preachers, organists, choir, sexton, officers, and servants of or belonging to the cathedral, and all other expenses incident to the performance of Divine Service therein, and such sum should be vested in and administered by the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral. The money, he might say, was sorely needed, and might fairly be claimed. The Commissioners had more than once recommended such a proposition, and the application was justified by the past action of Parliament. Comparing the resources available for the Cathedral with those which the Legislature had sanctioned for the use of Exeter Cathedral, he would state that Exeter received from the Common Fund £15,000, which

  699
  sum did not include all the revenues of the Cathedral, while Truro received only £1,800 from the same source. Of the sum received by Truro £800 went to the Bishop to make up the voluntary endowment, and the remaining £1,000 was distributed between the Archdeacon of Cornwall, the Precentor, and the Chancellor. There was absolutely not one penny available for the expenses of heating, lighting, maintaining the fabric and the services, preachers, missioners, repairs, or even for sweeping out the building. With the exception of the rectory there were no buildings for the clergy, and the Bishop of Truro himself had to pay a considerable sum annually for the house in which he resided. He felt justified in pressing the claim for the Cathedral of Truro on the principle that those had the best right to assistance who had shown their willingness to help themselves. Cornwall had raised for that Cathedral £113,000, besides £70,000 contributed for the endowment of the bishopric, making together £183,000 from voluntary sources. He thought that principle of granting funds in response to benefactions was one which was universally adopted in regard to church grants; and it was only fair to consider that the large sum of £183,000 derived from voluntary sources as giving the county of Cornwall some claim to such aid. As far back as 1855 the Cathedral Commissioners reported that a diocese of Cornwall was urgently needed. In 1883 they recommended that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners be empowered and instructed to provide such allowances out of the late capitular estates of Exeter, which were situated in Cornwall, as might secure the usual performance of Divine Service. In 1885 they said that the intention of the Legislature was obvious in the Act of 1866; they gave a list of claims of Cornwall founded upon it, and concluded by earnestly pressing the importance of cathedral organization and influence in these days. The action of Parliament in sanctioning the formation of the Diocese of Truro also gave them a strong claim. One-third of the population—and that the poorest portion—of the former Diocese of Exeter had, by the action of Parliament, been cut off from a share which it had enjoyed for centuries in the benefits of Diocesan organization
  700
  without any provision for re-establishing that organization. They now asked for less than one-third of what was now enjoyed for those purposes in the other portions of the old Diocese of Exeter, and far less than would be required. He was aware of the depression of agriculture, the distress of the clergy, and the many claims on the funds of the Commissioners; and if he did not think that the Cathedral of Truro had already become, and would become still more, a centre of spiritual life, and that agencies were there at work by which the highest interests of the clergy, the laity, and the Church at large would be promoted, he would not have introduced that Bill. No one who had taken part in the work of the last seven years, while the Cathedral was building, or had been present at the services connected with its consecration, could fail to see that the influence of that work and those services was real and widespread; and it did seem hard that just at the time when the energies of the Bishop and of his very small staff were specially needed to take advantage of that influence, they should have to remain ecclesiastical beggars for the rest of their lives because they had not the means of carrying out the organization that was necessary for their work. It was not intended to call on the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to pay over the full amount of £3,000 a-year to the cathedral of Truro at once, but only from time to time, as circumstances might permit. The words originally contained in the 1st clause said that they should appropriate such sums "forthwith;" but that had been altered, and he was ready to modify the clause in any way which would make the intention clear. He was prepared also to postpone the further stages of the Bill, including the second reading itself, if necessary, so as not to commit the House to the principle, if the whole question should be referred to a Select Committee. If his noble Friend who was connected with the Commission would approve that course, he should be glad to allow the Order to remain as a dropped Order, without, if possible, withdrawing or negativing the Bill; and he would propose that a Committee should be appointed to consider the best means of making provision for the maintenance and the services of the Cathedral of Truro. If it was consistent,

  701
  he would now move the second reading, as he would like to hear what his noble Friend might have to say on the subject.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Lord Steward.)
  THE BISHOP OF TRUROsaid, that if he had consulted his own feelings he would rather have been silent. He was aware that in many minds the idea still lingered that there was very little vitality connected with a cathedral. He remembered a lecturer many years ago describing a man who, as he said, had nothing particular to do, and whom Nature had admirably fitted for that position; and then, looking up to the gallery, certain that he would bring down cheers, the lecturer added that the man was of that sort whom they generally found in a cathedral close. Now nobody, at any rate at his time of life, liked to stand up as the representative of what was regarded as the abode of indolence and incapacity; but he felt that it would not be respectful to their Lordships if he remained entirely silent as a Bishop of the National Church when a Bill was being discussed in that House in which, to a large extent—and he used the words with a deep sense of responsibility—to a very large extent the national as well as the ecclesiastical life of Cornwall in the future, and the very near future, depended. Therefore, in the briefest possible manner he would ask their Lordships to bear with him while he endorsed some of the points which had just been so clearly brought before them by the noble Earl. He endorsed what the noble Earl had said with reference to the 1st clause. The draftsman proposed to insert the word "forthwith," but he refused to allow it to be inserted. He was a Member of the Ecclesiastical Commission, and he knew the difficulties by which that body was at present surrounded on every side to provide for the many pressing claims made upon their funds. He took care, with the concurrence of the noble Earl, to fix the modest sum of £3,000, which was not at all adequate to the needs of the diocese. In addition to his being an Ecclesiastical Commissioner, he was also a clergyman, and he knew the distress of his brethren at the present time. Many a parsonage in England silently and without a word of complaint had
  702
  endured hardships of which probably few in that House had any idea. A clergyman and his wife had sometimes to rear and educate a family on £100, £ 120, and £ 150 a-year, having even to deprive themselves of meat for some days in the week. He would never have allowed the Bill to be presented to their Lordships had he not been satisfied that, with the help of the noble Earl and that body of laymen who had rallied to the Church in the days of his Predecessor in Cornwall, there would soon be developed such an amount of activity and spiritual life as would in a very short time tend to the augmentation of the poor livings, and relief of the many forms of distress by which the Church was afflicted in his diocese. He had merely been the instrument of carrying out the plans of a far greater mind than his own. It was the Archbishop of Canterbury who planned and developed the work. Everywhere the enthusiasm felt for the Cathedral was simply wonderful, not by Church people alone, but by Nonconformists as well, who were as proud of the edifice as Church people. This enthusiasm was not of that kind which consisted in singing hymns and coming to the services. The Cornish people were a practical people. Ten years of toil had resulted in the collection of £113,000. The helpless and the poor had contributed what sums they could spare; and it was gratifying to know that the enthusiasm was real. It was a recognized principle, he believed, in every Department of the Public Service, certainly in the Ecclesiastical Department, to help those who help themselves. He asked, therefore, whether a county which had so helped itself had not some claim upon the funds of that great Church which he represented? They had no fear, if only a nucleus were given, of gathering all that was required.
  EARL STANHOPEsaid, that while entirely sympathizing with the object contemplated by the Bill, he trusted that the noble Earl in charge of it might be induced to discharge the Order for the second reading, and that a Select Committee, strongly constituted, would be appointed to inquire into the whole question, and see what could be done. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners felt bound to oppose this measure on the sole ground of want of funds for carry-

  703
  ing it into effect. In 1884 the Commissioners had been able to expend £25,000 per annum, or a capital sum of £750,000 each year in augmenting small livings and in meeting the spiritual needs of populous places; but, owing to the agricultural and commercial depression of recent years, the amount at their disposal for such purposes had been reduced by one-half, with a still further reduction of their income being in prospect. This last year the Commissioners were only able to vote £12,500 per annum in perpetuity; in the present year they had been obliged to reduce this amount to £6,000 in perpetuity; next year it would probably fall to £3.000. In these circumstances, if this measure were to pass, the amount they devoted to such grants would be swallowed up for a whole year, and they would be compelled to suspend all their ordinary grants from their Common Fund for a whole year. He fully admitted the claims of the diocese in question to consideration, inasmuch as it had subscribed the sum of £180,000 towards the cost of founding the new cathedral. But some of the old Chapters were seriously effected, and were unable to pay the statutable incomes to their Deans and Chapters, and they might fairly insist on their right to be considered before the newly-created dioceses. He was willing to move that the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Bill be read and discharged, with the view to the whole subject being referred to a Select Committee.
  LORD GRIMTHORPEsaid, he thought that the noble Earl who had just sat down, and who represented the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, had scarcely done justice to his own case. It was perfectly true that the Diocese of Truro had subscribed a large sum of money to build its cathedral; but others of the new dioceses had subscribed quite as much during the last 20 years, and one a great deal more, for the far more necessary purpose of saving old ones from ruin and adapting them for service. Not only that, but Truro had already got, through the management of Bishop Philpotts, an endowment of £1,000 a-year from a fifth Canonry of Exeter reserved for this purpose, which no other of the new cathedrals did. So its only exceptional position was that it alone had got a capitular endowment,
  704
  and now wanted to make it four times as much. If the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were to subscribe the sum asked for to the support of the Truro Diocese, they would be bound to subscribe equal sums towards the maintenance of the other new cathedrals; to which they would truly reply that they could not, because Truro had got their last farthing. And yet it had very much the smallest population of all the new dioceses, and not half as many benefices as either Southwell or St. Albans; and the Commissioners certainly had estates in both those dioceses, as well as in Cornwall. The Bill proposed to devote £3,000 a-year to the maintenance of choral services in Truro Cathedral, and to founding what were called in the Bill missioners, functionaries unknown to the law of England, and mere intruders, whom the Bishop could not legally authorize to preach in any pulpit or even in any street without the leave of the incumbent. He knew that they had been foisted into the two Acts of last year, but without any attempt to endow them. That Act and this Bill together would enable the Bishop to complete the Chapter by calling two of the honorary Canons missioners and endowing them out of this fund. He was in favour of choral services, but not when the money had, as in this case, to be taken away from the parochial clergy. If people wanted choral services—fancy services—they ought to pay for them. It was originally provided by Act of Parliament that there should be no Dean and Chapter of Truro until there was an endowment fund of £1,000 a-year for the Dean and £300 a-year for each of the four Canons. Somehow or other they had shot past this, and, without any express repeal of that Act, there was now a Dean and Chapter, the Bishop being the Dean. He did not know what was the use of new Deans and Chapters. They got on very well without them at St. Albans. The frequent Cathedral Commissions and Cathedral Statute Bills proved that they were puzzled to know what to do with Deans and Chapters; their chief function was now said to be to quarrel with the Bishop. Every Act that had been passed, and all of them by the political Predecessors of the present Government, contained an express prohibition against diverting any of the common or parochial fund

  705
  of the Commission to capitular purposes; and that prohibition had been repeated twice over in the variety of Acts which Truro alone had been continually getting by the pertinacity of its Bishops, and now with the significant assistance of the Cornish Member of Her Majesty's Government. That clause of the General Act of 1866 which was recited in the Bill, and relied on by its advocates, told exactly the other way; for everyone who was capable of reading Acts of Parliament must see that the words "the Cathedral or Collegiate Church" at the end of it, meant the old cathedral or church, such as Southwell, for instance, which had been robbed of every bit of its old capitular endowment, besides being torn away from its old Province of York; and now £3,000 a-year of that endowment was simply to be translated to Truro, besides the previous £1,000. And yet all the Bishops were either absent or sat still and left the defence of the parochial funds of the Ecclesiastical Commission to the noble Earl who spoke just now, and to the chance of any stranger such as himself. If the subject was referred to a Select Committee, the whole question of the new cathedrals ought to be referred, and not merely this attempt of one of them to steal a march upon the others.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Viscount CRANBROOK)said, that it was somewhat singular that the noble and learned Lord who had so munificently restored the Cathedral of St. Albans should have provided the splendid casket with so much indifference as to the jewels which it might contain. The peculiarity of the case of Truro seemed to be that it differed from the other cathedrals spoken of by him, inasmuch as within the limits of the diocese there were large estates given for cathedral purposes which came within the spirit and meaning of the Act passed by the Archbishop of York, which provided that where any estates existed belonging to a dean and chapter the Ecclesiastical Commissioners might use the money produced by them for purposes enumerated. With regard to Truro that provision did not apply, the estates having belonged to the Dean and Chapter of Exeter, and it required legislation to bring Truro within the clause. Various matters to which allusion had been made were fit questions to be discussed
  706
  in Committee. Since the institution of the new Bishopric of Newcastle not less than £243,000 had been collected for Church purposes in that diocese. That was quite a new fund, as it were, coming into the Church. They all sympathized very much with what had been said with regard to the distress of the clergy, and the necessity of extending assistance to them; but he believed that the clergy were much more likely to gain by the new agencies than by any small increases in their stipends that were continually added by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. He thought his noble Friend (Lord Stanhope) would much rather have a contest with regard to one particular diocese, in the first instance, instead of having the circumstances of all the new dioceses brought under the consideration of the Select Committee. These were great questions, which had arisen in consequence of the changed state of things in the Church of England. Distress had fallen upon many cathedrals. It was notorious that not only the canons of some cathedrals, but the minor officers also, were, in consequence of the hard pressure of the times, deprived of the income which they expected, and he thought it might be only just that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be called upon to review what they had done for certain cathedrals. In point of fact, those cathedrals which received money instead of land were in a perfectly good condition, while those which received lands instead of money found those lands so depreciated in value that they were deprived of the incomes which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners intended to assign. For his own part, he fully believed that the course which had been taken with regard to Truro and the other dioceses was beneficial to the Church at large, and that these funds which were devoted to cathedral purposes in the diocese of Truro ought to receive some consideration from that House. Under the circumstances, he would support the Motion of his noble Friend (the Earl of Mount Edgcumbe). Their Lordships could do no harm in allowing the Bill to go to a second reading, and, ultimately, to a Select Committee.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

  MORTMAIN AND CHARITABLE USES BILL [H.L.]
  A. Bill to consolidate the law relating to mortmain, and to the disposition of land for charitable uses—Was presented by The Lord Chancellor; read 1a (No. 16.)
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.