QUESTION—OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 24 July 1890)

§ LORD BRABOURNE,
in rising to ask the Prime Minister whether, before the re-introduction of any Bill upon the subject of tithes, he will cause to be laid before Parliament statistics as to the varying incidence of the tithe rent-charge in English counties, the proportion in which the same is now paid by owners and by occupiers not being owners, and the number of distraints for tithe rent-charge which have been levied in English counties during the last three years, said: My Lords, the question I have put upon the Paper will only require a few sentences on my part to explain it, but it can hardly be denied that the matter is an important one. During the existence of the present Government several measures have been introduced upon the subject of tithes, all of which have from the force of circumstances been withdrawn; but, as far as I am aware, no statistics whatever have been placed on the Table of either House with regard to the important question with which those Bills have dealt. I think it has very often been said with regard to these measures by supporters of the Government that they really do not reopen the settlement of 1875; but how that can be said when proposals are made to alter the conditions in the country with regard to it it is rather difficult to 707 imagine. When it is said that that will be the effect that will be produced by legislation, it is desirable we should know the facts not only with regard to the difficulty which tithe owners will have in collecting their tithes, but also the present number of tithe rent-charges in the different English counties. I have seen it stated that four or five English counties pay more than half the entire rent-charge. This, I think, is a matter on which we should obtain information before we legislate on the matter. But there are other points which I think press even more severely upon us; that is to say, it is more necessary they should be elucidated, because various Governments have dealt with them. It is believed in this country that what the Government have intended to do, and will, no doubt, wish to do, is to make the owners pay some impost: and it is desirable to ascertain whether there are any owners who do not pay the charge, and whose occupiers pay the rate instead. Again, it is desirable we should know whether there is a large number of owners who do pay, what the position of the tithe-payers has been, and how the whole question will be affected. Then there is another question, and that is the number of distraints for tithe rent-charge which have been levied in the English counties during the last three years. I think it is desirable, before any legislation is proposed, that we should know something upon these points, and for this reason. We are told in many quarters that the whole legislation proposed has been in consequence of the opposition made in parts of Wales to the collection of tithes, but as far as I can understand this has not been at all in connection with the collection of tithes, but in consequence of the incidence of the tithes themselves. Of course, if the Welsh people choose to disobey the law, as long as it is the law, it is the duty of the Government to put the law in force; and why there should be legislation unless you show that there is some necessity for it upon the basis of statistical information rather passes my comprehension. The importance of this question can, I think, hardly be denied. I do not know whether the Government are aware of the gathering feeling, especially in the southern counties, with respect to the 708 legislation that has been already proposed upon this question, but that it is gaining strength I cannot doubt. I have recently seen a letter written by a very near relative of the noble Marquess the Prime Minister, of which I will only say it shows that sons do not always take the same view as their fathers take; and, therefore, I do not wish to suggest for a moment that the noble Marquess is bound by the opinion of his relative, but the writer of the letter presses for this kind of legislation, because he considers that we are upon the eve of a struggle for the endowments of the Established Church. Without passing any opinion upon this judgment, I am quite satisfied that if we are upon the eve of such a struggle, the sooner there is full inquiry made as to the endowments likely to be attacked, and they are placed on a sound footing, the better will it be for those who have to defend them. Therefore, I merely put the matter before your Lordships, that as we are threatened with a re-introduction of a Bill on this important subject, it is most desirable that statistics should be laid before Parliament which will enable Parliament to come to a just conclusion in regard to the actual position of the question.

§ * THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I will follow the good example of my noble Friend by avoiding all contestable matter in reference to this subject, and will simply address myself to answering the question he has addressed to me. I am afraid, in the first place, I cannot make the re-introduction of the Bill of the Government subject to the completion of the statistics for which the noble Lord asks, because, even if the statistics were to be easily obtained between this and November, considering that that period includes the habitual holidays of all sorts of persons employed in public offices, I do not think there would bo sufficient time to enable the statistics to be collected with the care and accuracy necessary to give them such value chat they could be used with confidence and certainty. But, even with that deduction, I am afraid I can hardly give an unqualified affirmative to the question of my noble Friend. He asks me to lay before Parliament statistics as to "the varying incidents of the tithe rent-charge in English counties," 709 and I should have been very glad if my noble Friend had appended a gloss which would have indicated the precise meaning which that phrase would bear when submitted to the officer who would have to make up the Return. What is "the varying incidence of the tithe rent-charge?" The tithe rent charge was imposed by the provision and machinery of the Act of 1836, and I do not think there is any general incidence for any particular county or locality. There is simply laid down by agreement what is thought to be a fair rent-charge under the provisions of the Act of 1836, and that is returned to the Tithe Commissioners. I do not believe there is any such general principle either over large or small areas as the question of my noble Friend assumes. As to "the proportion in which the same is now paid by owners and by occupiers not being owners," there is no authority that has the slightest cognisance of the facts.

§ LORD BRABOURNE
There is the incumbent.

§ * THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
There is no public office which has cognisance of the state of facts. It would involve the question in each case whether the man who paid the rent-charge was of a particular bit of land the occupier or the owner. Very often a man is the occupier of a certain number of fields, and the owner of a certain number of adjoining fields; he might pay the tithe for the whole of this land, and the incumbent would have no power of distinguishing between that which was owned and that which was occupied. A Return, the value of which would depend upon its accuracy, and which must contain many very complicated figures to be obtained from 20,000 clergymen all over England—well, I will not say more of it than that it would not be completed by next November. I am not sufficiently acquainted with legal practice to know whether it is possible to obtain a Return of "the number of distraints for tithe rent-charge which have been levied in English counties during the last three years," or whether materials for that Return exist. Of course, where there have been distraints ordered by any Court they would not be difficult to 710 ascertain; but those restraints are not ordered by the Court, and, therefore, I am at a loss to know where to obtain the necessary materials; but if it is possible there will not be any objection to the Return being produced.

§ LORD BRABOURNE
What I mean by "varying incidence" is the amount of the tithe in relation to the letting or rateable value of the land; in some counties the proportion is very high, and in others it is very low.

§ * THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
That, I think, is quite impossible as regards entire counties, for I know by my own experience that of two fields lying next each other the amount of the tithe in relation to the value of the land or the rent it bears will vary as much as possible, and to get at these variations you would have almost to take each particular field from one end of the country to the other.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
I suppose there would be no difficulty in giving the total amount of tithe paid in each county? It varies, no doubt, in a most remarkable manner; but I think it might be obtained.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
It is already before the House.

§ VISCOUNT CRANBROOK
Lord Beau-champ moved for the Return two years ago.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
I believe that showed that the tithe rent varied very greatly in different parts of England. I am not moving now for the Return.

§ LORD BRABOURNE
My noble Friend will see that Lord Beauchamp's Return gives it for each county, the total amount in each parish, and the amount of appropriation between the lay impropriators, the ecclesiastical establishments, and the schools.