SECOND READING. (Hansard, 22 June 1899)

THE LORD BISHOP OF MANCHESTER

My Lords, the object of this Bill is to deal with funds derived from the sale of the houses of residence of the Dean and Canons of Manchester, which now amount to £1,941 a year. By Section 20 of the Parish of Manchester Division Act, 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c. 41), the net proceeds of sale of the houses of residence of the Dean and Canons are required to be applied by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in or towards procuring a fit house of residence for the dean, canon, minister, or incumbent who, in case such sale had not taken place, would have been entitled to the premises so sold, or otherwise for the increase of the income of such dean, canon, minister, or incumbent, or for both such purposes, as to the said Commissioners shall seem best. Your Lordships will therefore see that this money with which we are proposing to deal belongs by law to the Canons of Manchester, and cannot be taken from them in order that it may be applied to any other object, or given to any other person, without fresh legislation. With the unanimous consent, however, of the Dean and Canons of Manchester it is now proposed that a fresh disposition shall be made of this sum of money. At present the incomes of the Canons are of equal value—nominally they are £600 a year and a house, but all the houses have been sold, and they were sold for very different sums. Consequently, at the present time, the senior Canon's income is £1,900; the second Canon £900; the third Canon, £900; and the fourth Canon, £641 a year. As the duties of the Canons are exactly the same, the state of things to which I have called attention is not desirable. Nor was it contemplated, for the Act under which the Manchester diocese was formed originally intended to make the incomes of all the Canons the same, and to give to each Canon £1,000 a year. It is now proposed, instead of having this unequal disposition of the fund, that in future all the 236 incomes of the Canons shall be £850 a year each. That, I must say, is not the whole of the income which the Canons will possess, because, by the Manchester Division Act, when a man is made a canon of Manchester he becomes incumbent or rector of a certain designated parish in Manchester, for which he receives £150 a year from the Ecclesiastical Commismissioners. The total income of a Canon, therefore, will amount to £1,000. Possibly to some persons that may seem rather a large sum, in the present state of circumstances, to assign to a canon for his income; but I must ask your Lordships to remember that the parishes of which these Canons are made Rectors by law are amongst the largest and poorest in the City of Manchester, and involve a considerable amount of labour, being thereby a burden and not an advantage. Again, a canon of Manchester cannot possibly hope, as is the case with the canons of other cathedrals, to hold a rich or desirable living. He is obliged to hold that which is assigned to him. If your Lordships are of opinion that these considerations are sufficient to justify the appropriation of £1,000 a year of the sum, to which I have referred towards the income of a canon, there will remain a sum of £941 a year to be further appropriated, and of this sum the Canons now desire to divest themselves; the money belongs to them by law, but they propose to divest themselves of it in order that it may be applied to the more efficient performance of Divine worship in the Manchester Cathedral. By the decision of Chancellor Long, the Canons have been prohibited from employing any part of the sum of money which belongs to their general fund to assist the choir, except so far as would maintain four singing men and four singing boys. That is an exceedingly inefficient choir, as the church and the congregation are both large. The choir frequently fails to make itself heard, and experiences considerable difficulty in leading the worship of so large a congregation. I hardly suppose that any of your Lordships will think that Archbishop Tait was a Ritualist, and yet this is what he said about the function of a cathedral: It is, perhaps, the greatest function of a cathedral church that it should exhibit to the diocese an example of the highest form of worship, with all the appliances which sacred art, moderated by sound judgment, can contribute. 237 What example, I ask your Lordships, of the highest form of worship is to be obtained from a choir consisting of four singing men and four singing boys? If it is necessary, and I think everybody will admit that it is, that the choir should be improved, I do not think any objection can he taken to the source from which it is proposed that the support should be obtained, as it is to come from the present ncomes of the Canons of Manchester. We have certain Cathedral reformers in the City of Manchester—Canon Nunn and Mr. Freston—who put forward a statement in 1888 respecting one that had been made by the late Bishop of Carlisle. The Bishop had referred to that absurd choir of four singing men and four singing boys. Upon that the following criticism was made by our Cathedral reformers: This is the original parochial choir; there is no reason why it should not be augmented by subscription or otherwise. A rearrangement of the sums spent on the Cathedral would, it is thought, provide that is necessary without trenching on the fund required for the poor parishes. It is precisely what these hostile critics suggested that is now provided in the Bill before your Lordships. We desire to provide a choir from the existing incomes of the Canons of Manchester, who are willing that it should be so provided. Not a penny is taken from the fund which is applicable to the poor parishes, and seeing that the Bill is a very moderate and reasonable one, I have great pleasure in moving its Second Reading.