- (1) A presentation to any benefice shall not be complete until the bishop has received a statutory declaration in the prescribed form, by the patron, stating the date when and the manner in which he acquired the right of patronage, and that either he is not a trustee for the presentee, or if he is such a trustee, that the right of patronage has not been transferred to him since the passing of this Act, and that the patron has
603 not made the presentation in consideration of any benefit to himself or to any other person, and that no engagement has been made with any person that the presentee shall at any time resign the benefice, except as authorised by law: Provided that this subsection shall not apply when the patron is a public patron. - (2) If a patron presents himself, such necessary modifications as may be prescribed shall be made in the declaration, and there shall be added thereto a declaration that the right of patronage has not been transferred to him since the passing of this Act.
- (3) The presentation shall not be complete until the bishop has received—
- (a) a statutory declaration by the presentee of all benefices, offices, and employments held by him since his Ordination as a deacon; and (unless the bishop shall otherwise direct)
- (b) letters testimonial in the prescribed form signed by three beneficed clergymen having such knowledge of the presentee as is stated in the letters, and countersigned by the bishop of the diocese in which each of the clergymen signing is beneficed, which countersignature it shall be the duty of every such bishop to give with or without qualification.
- (4) The bishop shall not institute any person to a benefice until the expiration of one clear month after notice that the bishop proposes to institute him has been sent by the bishop to the churchwardens of the parish, which notice shall be published by the churchwardens in the prescribed manner; and any parishioner may send to the bishop a representation in writing to the institution on any ground which by virtue of the next succeeding section entitles the bishop to refuse to institute.
§ LORD LINGEN moved to leave out "benefit" and to insert "valuable consideration." The noble Lord observed that the word "benefit" seemed to him too great an extension of the intention of the clause. For instance, if a patron was to present his son, it could hardly be said he did not confer any benefit on him by that process. Clause 14, which gave the form of the declaration which had to be made seemed to contemplate rather such a consideration as was implied by the words "valuable consideration," and on that ground he moved the Amendment.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYreplied, that the word "benefit" had been in every Bill that had passed their Lordships' House on this subject and was first adopted on the highest legal advice. He thought the words "valuable consideration," conveyed a 604 meaning which was altogether too narrow to apply to a clause like this. The ordinarily accepted meaning was in connection with money, but there were many cases of presentations to benefices which would not come under the idea of money or valuable consideration at all. For instance, a patron might desire to present a clergyman to a living for certain personal reasons. He might give the clergyman in possession of that living a more valuable living in order to secure to himself the right of presenting a clergyman to the other, but no one could reason that he had thereby received a valuable consideration. He would say a word or two on the history of the word "benefit." In the original statute of Queen Elizabeth's reign the words ran much as they did here until they came to this: that a patron was not to present himself and not to make a presentation—
in consideration of any sum of money, reward, gift, profit, or benefit, direct or indirect.He had very good legal advice that all those words were covered by the word "benefit;" and as he thought it a much better word for the purposes of the Bill, and of much wider applicability than the words "valuable consideration," he hoped the noble Lord would not press his Amendment.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORthought the words "valuable consideration" would be too narrow for the reasons pointed out by the most rev. Prelate. But he was not quite easy about the word "benefit" standing alone; nor did he think the words quoted by the most rev. Prelate mere verbiage. He would, therefore, suggest to the most rev. Prelate whether it would not be well, on the Third Reading, to revert to the words which would meet with the objection of the noble Lord.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD LINGEN moved, in Clause 7, page 4, line 28, to leave out "if there be no other impediment," and insert "subject, however, to any existing right of a bishop to refuse, independently of this Act, to institute a presentee." He 605 understood the words "if there be no other impediment" to refer to objections taken to doctrine. The Bill did not include "doctrine"—in express terms—at any rate. It was confined to "competency" and "morals," and the words "if there be no other impediment" might cover doctrine. In all cases under the Bill the decision of the Archbishop upon appeal was final; but in the case of doctrine there was, by law which this Bill did not change, an appeal from the Archbishop to the Privy Council; and his Amendment, which he had imported from Clause 13, would cover rights which the Bishop might have beyond the Bill.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, he did not think the noble Lord had grasped exactly the very narrow scope of Sub-section 4 of Clause 7 which he sought to amend. The intention of the sub-section was, that when a bishop or Archbishop failed to institute when told after an inquiry to do so, then the Vicar General should institute the presentee. The question of doctrine had nothing to do with the sub-section. The words "if there be no other impediment" referred to such matters as, for instance, the patron's title. The words which the noble Lord proposed to introduce into the sub-section applied, when used in the 13th Clause or the Savings Clause, to the whole Act; and he thought it would be detrimental to the Act to remove them from their position of wide application, and apply them to this particular clause.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORsuggested the insertion of the word "legal" before "impediment."
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD LINGEN moved to omit from Clause 9, page 5, line 28, the words, "without restricting the existing law." It seemed to him that the words would defeat the object of the clause or else they were superfluous.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, the intention of the words was to make it clear that the communications mentioned in the clause were not only made privileged by the clause, but that 606 any other protection for communications in the existing law also applied to them.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORconsidered that Clause 9 did not give any additional security to such communications beyond which the law already gave; but it was felt that the insertion of the words referred to would remove many apprehensions on the part of the people making those communications. He did not altogether like the words, "without restricting the existing law," and he suggested that some other words, such as "nothing shall diminish any privilege already existing," should be substituted for them on the Third Reading.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD LINGEN moved, in Clause 13, page 6, line 21, to leave out "a right of patronage," and insert "an advowson which being." The Amendment was merely verbal, and was intended to make the clause clearer.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, he had on the Paper an Amendment to substitute the words "an advowson" for "a right of patronage," which would perhaps meet the object of the noble Lord.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ *On the Motion of the ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY the words "an advowson" were inserted in the clause in line 21, instead of "a right of patronage."