BISHOPRIC OF SOUTHWARK BILL [H.L.], [SECOND READING.] (Hansard, 4 March 1902)

* THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
My Lords, this is the same Bill as that which passed through all its stages in your Lordships' House last year, and which was crowded out, for want of time, when it reached the House of Commons. Its purpose is to relieve the diocese of Rochester, which has grown to an overwhelming size, and is now rather more than ought to be assigned to one Bishop to manage. It divides the present diocese of Rochester into two parts—one to be called the diocese of Southwark, and the other the diocese of Rochester—the former to include the district of South London. To the diminished area of the diocese of Rochester will be added certain portions of the diocese of Canterbury. These, at one time, belonged to the diocese of Rochester, and are, therefore, only being restored to it. The boundaries have been very carefully considered, and I do not believe there will be any objection to them. I beg to move the Second Reading.

* VISCOUNT MIDDLETON
My Lords, I make no apology for rising to support this measure, because, with the exception of two or three right reverend Prelates. I believe I know more of the locality with which it is intended to deal than any Member of your Lordships' House. I do not think that anyone who has not studied the question carefully can be aware of the enormous increase of population which 311 has taken place in the districts affected by this Bill. It is now at least three times what it was forty or fifty years ago, and it is further increasing daily. It is, however, not only the quantity of the population, but the quality, that makes the problem of dealing with it so difficult. I believe that there exists, within the area of a mile around Lambeth Palace, more crime, vice, and immorality than can be found in any similar area throughout the length and breadth of London. There are streets there which are almost entirely given up to the criminal classes. I remember the chairman of Surrey Quarter Sessions being warned by the police never to venture down any of the side streets leading off Waterloo Road, because it was believed that there was not a single inhabitant there who did not know him by sight from the dock of the Sessions House. It is of extreme importance to strengthen the hands of the Church in this quarter, and I hope that your Lordships will read the Bill a second time without opposition, and that it will not be materially modified in its passage through the House.

* THE LORD BISHOP OF ROCHESTER
My Lords, I cannot refrain, as Bishop of the diocese referred to, from expressing my satisfaction that the Bill now presented to your Lordships has the support of my noble friend the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Surrey. The noble Viscount has laid before the House one of the enormous difficulties which beset the Church in South London. But we have not only to deal with the slums of that portion of the diocese of Rochester which lies within the interior of London, but with the enormously rapid extension in the exterior portion, and, of the two problems, I am inclined to think that the latter is almost the more overtasking. I feel that the Bishop who is responsible for South London ought to have his hands, time, and thoughts as free as possible for dealing with both of these problems, and ought not to be encumbered with the charge of the great national centre at Chatham, and of the many problems which beset it, I trust that the Bill will become law this session.