Bruce 
 
 An Account 
 
 of the 
 
 Present Deplorable State 
 
 of the 
 
 Ecclesiastical Courts 
 
 of Record
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 A3<P 
 
 AN ACCOUiN'T 
 
 PRESENT DEPLORABLE STATE OF THE 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL 
 COURTS OF RECORD; 
 
 WITH PROPOSALS FOR 
 
 THEIE COMPLETE EEFOEMATTON. 
 
 WILLIAM DOWNING iBRUCE, ESQ., 
 
 OF LIN(OLn"s IN'N, BARRLSTBR-AT-I.AW ; FELI.OU" of THE SO( IKTV n 
 A.VTUiUARIES, ETC., ETC. 
 
 "Your Committee, in conclusion, invite the consideration of the House to the evi- 
 dence taken betore them, which is a proof that tlie attentiun (if ftirliiimetit sliuuld be 
 (tirerted without delinj to the application of the neccssarj' remedies." — h'ecommi'n- 
 datiim nf the (-'onimittee on the Ecflesiitxtitul Courts. Second Heport, Wth Ausvst, 1850. 
 
 '• For a sm.all fee, and in a few minutes, the public may obtain a certificate of any 
 marriage, birth, or death that has occurred since the establishment of this oflice. 
 •••••* Such is the good fortune meted out to the three great events ot the 
 Knglish human family at Somerset House, in registering them. \\ hat a contrast it 
 presents to the doom of English Wills." — Household Words, No. 36, Nov. 30th, 1850. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 HENRY ADAMS, 9, PARLIAIMENT STREET, WESTMINSTER. 
 W. ARPTHORP, 22, BISHOPSGATE STREET WITHOUT. 
 
 1854. 
 Price One Shilling.
 
 LONDON : 
 W'OODFALL AND KINDER, PRINTERS, 
 
 ANGEL COURT, SKINNER STRKKT.
 
 
 O^ 
 
 TO THE CONSIDERATION OF 
 
 THE RIGHT HONOURABLE 
 
 HENRY JOHN VISCOUNT PALMERSTON 
 
 G.O.B., 
 
 SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT, 
 
 THESE PAGES ARE SUBMITTED, 
 BY HIS OBEDIENT HUMBLE SERVANT, 
 
 WILLIAM DOWNING BRUCE. 
 
 1104603
 
 The following pages form a coiitribiitio.i to tlie discLLssiou 
 of one of tlie most important questions of the day. The 
 present position and deplorable state of the Ecclesiastical 
 Com'ts, and the manner iji which the tixist reposed in them 
 is being discharged, have already awakened }(ublic atten- 
 tion. The wiiter of the present pamplilet has had the 
 o[>portunity of personally inspecting and examining the 
 ancient Record Offices connected with the prinei])al dioceses, 
 and founded for the important purpose of j^reserving 
 I'ecords of great jniljlic and private value ; and in a series of 
 articles in Postulates and Data, he recoi'ded some time 
 since the result of his inquiries. He now reprints the 
 articles, with the additions and alterations suggested by 
 new cii'cumstances and a more enlarged experience, to- 
 gether with the suggestion of a practical remedy. 
 
 1, Old Sijuare, Lincoln's Jiiit, 
 .hinuitni l'J//<, 1.S.J4.
 
 PRESENT STATE 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS OF RECORD. 
 
 It is a national characteristic of the English people to love 
 what is old. Prescription is entrenched in our common law ; 
 but finds a stronger hold in the natural disposition of society. 
 The word " venerable" is one of the most effective adjectives 
 in a speech spoken to an English audience ; and when any- 
 thing really respectable is linked, however artificially, with 
 an ancient institution, its chances of popularity and perma- 
 nence stand very high. It is much to be regretted that this 
 disposition of the people has been largely abused, and that 
 inveterate abuses have grown up into enormous wrongs, 
 altogether intolerable. 
 
 There is one class of these standing in the midst of our 
 institutions, like an old ruin in a country place, and owing 
 immunity from interference to superstitious awe. None 
 but the most hardy venture to approach lest the mass 
 should fall upon the rash intruder. After this, need we 
 name the Ecclesiastical Courts ; having a jurisdiction " ex- 
 tending to all persons and things belongiug to the Roman 
 Church, to the guardianship of orphans, the wills of de- 
 fimcts, and matters of marriage and divorce."* These 
 Courts possess the same powers at the present day, and with 
 revenues far exceeding those of the bishops, they exercise 
 jurisdiction over that important class of documents called 
 
 * Lord Stair's Inst, of Law of Scotland, lib. i. tit. 1, p. 7.
 
 wills, wliicli are in fact, as regaixls a large pi'oportioii of 
 property, the title-deeds of the country. Very early in their 
 history they assumed the form of a constituted abuse, gross 
 enough to be recognised as such even in those days of Popish 
 authority over persons and property ; ^for so long ago as the 
 year 1357, "the Parliament openly charged and com- 
 manded the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Bi- 
 shops, that amendment should be made." By the statute 
 made at Leicester, 2 Hen. V. 1414', cap. iii., they were 
 pronounced a grievance. In 1418, 3 Hen. V., we find 
 " the Commons complain of the unlawful exactions made 
 for probates ;" and an Act passed, restricting the amount, 
 " but it did not endure but to the next Parliament follow- 
 ing, by reason that the ordinaries did then promise to re- 
 form the said exactions and oppressions."' They were, how- 
 ever, " nothing reformed nor amended, but greatly aug- 
 mented and increased, against right and justice, and to the 
 great impoverishment of the King's subjects." These are 
 the complaints made at the period of the Reformation 
 when there was an attempt made to reform these Courts. 
 In the reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth — fi'om the time 
 of James I. down to tliat of Queen Anne, it was unsuc- 
 cessfully endeavoured to remedy their defects. In 1812, 
 one who was no incompetent judge, a man indeed of the 
 highest authoiity, Lord Stowell, brovight in a bill for the 
 abolition of the Com-ts in question ; but the bill was lost 
 by a dissolution of Parliament. The next bill passed in 
 the House of Commons, but, as might be expected from 
 the episcopal element which prevailed there, did not pass 
 the Lords. In 1829, the Duke of Wellington issued a 
 Commission of Inquiry. In 1832, during the administra- 
 tion of Lord Grey, a bill was introduced by Lord Brougham 
 to carry out the recommendations of the Commissioners ; 
 but it did not advance any further. In 1833, a Committee 
 of the House of Commons, of which Sir Robert Peel was 
 chairman, investigated the subject. In 1834, a bill was 
 prepared ; another followed in 1835, and lejive was ob-
 
 taiued by tlie Attorney -Genei'al for its introduction. In fact, 
 bill after bill has been introduced. Speeches from the throne 
 have recommended the abolition of these Courts as public 
 nuisances ; but so many persons are interested, either as 
 jjossessors or expectants, in the continuance of tlie system, 
 that all these attempts, it would appear, have hitherto failed, 
 and the subject still remains in statu quo. 
 
 In former times, when the property of the country con- 
 sisted chieiiy in land, the importance of the jm'isdiction of 
 tliese Courts was not so gi-eat as it is at the present time, 
 when so large a proportion of that property consists of 
 money and other personalty. Now, therefore, it becomes 
 a most momentous consideration, how far the existing law 
 is consistent, not only with the due administration of justice, 
 but also with the security of property. 
 
 The jurisdiction conceded to these Courts extends properly 
 over wills ; matrimonial disputes of all kinds, even to limited 
 divorces ; questions of church-rates and chui'chwardens ; 
 brawling in churches ; defamation ; maritime causes ; cer- 
 tain immoi'al often ces ; and the dereliction of clergymen 
 from church discipline. The decision upon questions arising 
 out of these multifarious subjects is governed, not by the 
 English law, but by the Popish canon law and the civil law, 
 wliich the Norman barons of old unanimously rejected. The 
 conduct of the business is entrusted to Judges ; to Advocates 
 licensed to practise by the Archbishops and Bishops ; and 
 to Proctors, who become such by virtue of seven years' ser- 
 vice under articles to one of the senior proctors. One result 
 of this arraugement is, that none can practise but the rela- 
 tions of a little family party at Doctors' Commons and the 
 sons of a few deceased bishops, who thus ^drtually form a 
 close corporation. An individual having business in any 
 of these Courts, (though he may have his own private sohci- 
 tor for all other Courts,) must nevertheless employ a proctor. 
 The procedure is not exceeded in intricacy by that of 
 Cli.mcery ; and both remind us of the secret proceeduigs of 
 the Italian Courts. The [)roceedings must he in writing :
 
 10 
 
 the examination of witnesses is taken in writing, divided 
 into " articles" by au examiner of the Court ; a copy of 
 which is given to tlie opposite party, who can only cross- 
 examine by written interrogatories delivered to tlie ex- 
 aminer's answers, and kept secret during certain stages of 
 the suit from both parties. Either may except to the credit 
 of a witness, but must confine his objections to matters con- 
 tained in that witness's depositions. The actual effect of 
 these regulations may be easily surmised. Proceedings, thus 
 siiortly described, last for years. When completed, copies 
 must be prepared for the judges and advocates. At this 
 point the expense will bear comparison only with similar 
 proceedings in Chancery, frequently leaving even the suc- 
 cessful suitor a ruined man. 
 
 When a person dies, his property is distributed under the 
 terms of his will, or if he die intestate, it is distributable 
 under certain rules of law ; it either belongs to the person 
 indicated by the testator, or to those whom the law marks 
 out. Though it belongs to such persons, it is usually held 
 as a stake to be wrestled for. The law invites members of 
 families to contend for the stake ; it calls in strangers to 
 partake in the dispute ; it offers dishonest attorneys certain 
 rewards if they will interfere, and more especially if they 
 will give dishonest advice ; it summons creditors to join in 
 the contest, and scourges them for being present ; and, 
 among relatives, to the affliction of mourning, dismay and 
 ruin, adds grievous and unjust privation. 
 
 As regards the enormous incomes derived from the public 
 by the sinecurists, who hold the appointments of Regis- 
 trars, with names generally corresponding to those of de- 
 ceased bishops, there is little dependence to be placed on 
 the returns made by many of these officers to Parliament ; 
 the only check upon them being the amount paid annually 
 to the Comptroller of Legacy Duty. In his evidence before 
 a Committee of the House of Commons, that gentleman states 
 his experience : — " Thirty or forty cases have come to my 
 knowledge in the Ecclesiastical Courts in the country, where
 
 11 
 
 great instances of fraud have been committed upon tha 
 revenue by the I'egistrar or deputy registrars, who have 
 received from executors and administrators the amount of 
 stamp duty on probates and administrations, and wilfully 
 omitted to use any stamp, by which the revenue is consider- 
 ably defrauded, and executors and administrators ai-e de- 
 prived of the security which the stamped probate of the will 
 or letters of administration can alone afibrd. On the dis- 
 covery of the frauds, I have found it difficult to deal with 
 them. One or two of the registrars I consider to be incor- 
 rigible ; they have repeated the offence six or twelve months 
 after I have exposed their conduct. Mr. G. B. White, deputy 
 registrar of the Archdeacon's Court at Ely, received 601. for 
 stamp duty, together with other fees for the probate of the 
 will of Sarah Dickenson, who died 1829; repeated appli- 
 cations have been made for the probate, but it is not delivered 
 to this day. Mr. White has since left the country — the 
 consequence is, that executors cannot receive a dividend 
 of 200L under a bankruptcy, because they do not produce 
 the probate to show their authority to receive it." 
 
 It is indeed difficult under these circumstances to discover 
 the full amount received by each of the registrars through- 
 out the country. We will, however, take Chester, in the 
 prerogative of York. The Registrar of this place, Mr Henry 
 Raikes, called to the bar in 1837, returns his income to 
 Parliament in the year 1842, at 7 04*1?.! and the total 
 annual amount of fees at 11,530/. : now Sir John Jervis, 
 the member for Chester, stated in his place in Parliament 
 that the fees at Chester were 20 per cent, less than in 
 London ; there can therefore be little doubt that owing to 
 the great increase of personal property arising from the 
 public funds, and the extension of the commercial capital of 
 the country during the last ten years, the Registrars of the 
 Prerogative Court of Canterbury receive a far greater income 
 than is stated in any of the Parliamentary Returns. 
 
 Tlie number of Courts tlu'oughout the ct>untr3' to which 
 the pubHc may resort for the purpo.se of proving wills and
 
 12 
 
 pbtaiuing adniinistratiuu, is uo less than 372. Under 
 the present system, it is almost impossible to know where 
 a will should be looked for unless it is a \ery recent one. 
 Younger sons, daughters, and infants of bygone bishops, 
 clei'gynien, general officers, and attorneys, have filled, and 
 continue to fill, in different dioceses, the office of Registrar ; 
 and consequently ai'e obliged to act by deputy. If a per- 
 son die possessing more than 51., in any other jurisdiction 
 than that in which he died, prerogative probate is required. 
 Again, if the property is in two provinces, double probate 
 is required ; entailing, of course, double expense, delay, and 
 trouble. Since the establishment of railway stock, a will 
 is sometimes obliged to be proved in three or four Courts. 
 In fact, it has been shown that the personal property of 
 this country, on changing hands at the death of the pos- 
 sessor, pays -iL 7s. per cent, into these Courts before the 
 deceased's children can receive their lawful portion of the 
 hard earnings of a provident parent. 
 
 Besides the Courts there are the Record Offices which are 
 attached to the old Cathedrals throughout Great Britain, 
 subject to the care of the Diocesan Registrar. In these Courts 
 are placed the original wills, the duplicate parish registers, 
 the administrations, the copies of marriage hcences, origi- 
 nal charters of great historical interest, and other like do- 
 cuments, such documents forming deeds affecting thousands 
 of landed proprietors .; but to the great mass of the middle 
 and all the lower class, they form the only records, the 
 only title-deeds, to which they can appeal, and on the 
 accuracy of which they can rely. The author has paid a 
 visit to the chief Ecclesiastical Courts of Record, for the 
 purpose of giving a report of the state of each ; and he is 
 convinced from his personal knowledge that the historical 
 and biogTaphical matter contained in their records, are at 
 once the most valuable and the most inaccessible in this or 
 in any other country. The i-apacious and exoi'bitant system 
 of exacting large fees amounts to nothing less than a de- 
 nial of justice, and is only exceeded by the insolence and
 
 13 
 
 vulgarity with which those wlio desire to search the records 
 are treated by the officials. Lord Monson wrote a letter 
 to the late Mr. E. Davis Protheroe, a Commissioner of 
 Public Records and M.P., in which he states the incivility 
 he had met with, and the utter impossibility of making 
 any literary investigation. Sir Harris Nicolas emphati- 
 cally describes this kind of treatment in the Preface to his 
 " Testamenta Vetusta," p. 1 3, where he says that " the tone 
 was still more insolent than the terms." Messrs. Charles 
 Dickens, Falconer, Walbran, &c., besides a host of writers in 
 newspapers, have attacked and exposed the conduct of 
 these Registrars, who are paid out of the rich plunder of 
 the public. 
 
 First in importance is the Registrar's Court at Doctors' 
 Commons, in which are deposited all the wills proved in 
 that large, rich, and populous district included within the 
 archiepiscopal jurisdiction of Canterbury. It is a job so 
 enormous as to be almost incredible. The revenues are de- 
 rived from sources which are oppressive, many useless, not 
 a few absurd, and the greater part demanding abolition. 
 These old licentiates of an antiipiated ecclesiastical system 
 are fattening on the garbage and corruption of the most arbi- 
 trary system that the darkest ages of our history ever saw 
 enacted under the name of justice. Abominable as all this 
 is, the enormity might hav^e been much diminished if a 
 portion of their revenue had been applied to the preserva- 
 tion and safe custody of the records. Tlie Rev. Robert 
 Moore is the Registrar of this Court. He was appointed 
 by his father, a certain Archbishop Moore, on the 6th of 
 December, 17 J) 9. He wjis then described as of Christ's 
 Church, Oxford, and was a minor ; he was nominated in 
 conjunction with his two brothers, one of whom was a 
 Prebendary of Canterbury, and died leaving 300,000/. be- 
 hind him ; and the other was M.P. for Woodstock, These 
 lucky gentlemen — ^and we believe that their mother had 
 more, who are of coiirse also snugly provided for — have 
 divers nephews and relatives in the office ; one of whom.
 
 1-t 
 
 the Rev. G. B. Moore, was appointed a " Clerk of a seat," 
 for which he receives upwards of 2000^. per annum. 
 There are four other seats as they are called, in the office, 
 held by various members of the famil3\ From a Parlia- 
 mentary Paper moved for by Sir Benjamin Hall, printed 
 14th August, 1850,* it will be seen how great is the sine- 
 cure patronage of Mr. Moore, who is stated to have re- 
 ceived a gross revenue arising from fees in this Court, 
 amounting, for the year ending 31st March, 1848, to no 
 less a Slim than 30,832?. ! ! besides a further sum of 6760?. 
 received in the same year as discount on stamps. The same 
 report informs us, " that the Registrar performs none of 
 the duties of his office," but " that they are executed by 
 the subordinates." Mr. Moore is termed " The Great Sine- 
 curist." On referring to this report the public will see 
 how they are robbed to make up his enormous income ; 
 how they pay eightpence and the Stamp Office sixpence per 
 folio, for work that is actually done for one penny ; how all 
 the fees are at the Tnaximwrn, and how the judge was peti- 
 tioned to allow of higher fees being taken, because " the 
 great sinecurist " would not give up any of his emoluments 
 to pay the working officer. The curious public may also 
 see the appointment of " this great sinecurist," beginning 
 with these words, — " To all the faithful in Christ unto 
 whom these presents shall come ;" and may learn how, not- 
 withstanding an Act of Parliament, which declares that the 
 clerks of seats shall be proctors, and do their duty in per- 
 son, this Act is totally set at nauglit. These, and many 
 other wonders of this sublime Court, they will see, if they 
 will read the report of the Committee of which Mr. Bou- 
 verie was chairman, and of which the present and the late 
 Attorney-General, Mr. Walpole, Mr. Henley, Mr. Rouu- 
 dell Palmer, Sir W. Page Wood, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. 
 Hume, Sir James Graham, and others, were members. In 
 the report, the " long known and uncorrected abuses " 
 of this Court are justly and severely animadverted upon, 
 
 * Second Report Fees (Courts of Law and Equity), No. 711, p. iv.
 
 15 
 
 and the whole is summed up in tliese words : — " Your 
 Committee, in conclusion, invite the consideration of tlie 
 House to the evidence taken before them, which is a proof 
 that the attention of Parliament should be directed, loithout 
 delay, to the application of the necessary remedies." 
 
 In the Report of 1830,* Mr. Thomas Hamilton, a soli- 
 citor of considerable experience, stated on oath that the 
 clerks at Doctors' Commons " ai'e very much afraid of 
 seeing a bit of paper or a pencil, even if you want to 
 put down three or four words only." In support of Mr. 
 Hamilton's statement there is the evidence of the late Sir 
 Harris Nicolas. He had applied for a copy of an early 
 will of gi'eat historical importance, which the officers of 
 the Court w^ere unable to transcribe : subsequently he 
 tried to make an extract with his own hand ; and while 
 he was thus engaged, one of the clerks snatched the paper 
 out of his hand, tore it to pieces, and shut the will book 
 before his face. In another case, the opinion of counsel 
 was taken as to the expedienc}' of filing a criminal infor- 
 mation against a certain clerk for a wilful and deliberate 
 libel on a gentleman wdio had made himself obnoxious by 
 repeated complaints to tlie Deputy Registrar of the rude- 
 ness he had experienced from the menials in the office. Mr. 
 Hamilton further observes — " From the experience I have 
 had, they are not very accurate, I am sorry to say, in their 
 office copies. I have one very important instance of in- 
 accuracy, which, if it had not been for the single word 
 ' said' introduced afterwards, would have been of very great 
 consequence. It was an office copy which the parties took 
 of an old will, under which they fancied they had a claim 
 to an estate in Yorkshire. I read it over and over again, 
 but I could find no mention of the ancestor under whom 
 they claimed, until I happened to see, at the end of it, ' and 
 he the said' so and so. Upon this I went to Doctors' 
 Commons to consult the original, and I found then the 
 whole devise to him was omitted, to the extent of about 
 * Ecclesiastical Commission Report, p. 3.
 
 16 
 
 three lines. Tlie original will was plainly written, of aLout 
 a century old." Another case, very similar to the one 
 quoted by Mr. Hamilton, is to be found in the will of 
 Colonel William Cleland, dated 24th August, 1718, and 
 proved 22nd October, 1718. The Colonel is described in 
 an office copy, dated 20tli August, 1847, " of Buckridge, 
 the Mannor House of my good friend John ireZlen, Esq. ;" 
 the words ^^len is substituted for Alexd., Buckridge for 
 Busbridge ; and the name was John Tfafter* and not 
 Wellen, in the original will. Sir William Betham, Ulster 
 King at Arras, in his evidence ■]- stated — " I think there is 
 an unnecessary degree of severity at the Prerogative Court 
 of Canterbury ; it struck me so : suppose a person wanted 
 to go and search for the purpose of genealogy ; they will 
 not allow one to make any memorandum or list of the 
 wills from the index to assist you in calling for any par- 
 ticular will." 
 
 It appears from the evidence taken before Parliament, 
 that there exists a great necessity for enlarging the present 
 Registry and making various alterations for the purpose of 
 securing the very valuable papers contained therein. The 
 yard adjoining the Record Room is in the possession of a wheel- 
 wright, and there is a quantity of timber deposited in that 
 yard under a shed, which shed is built against the room 
 itself " The room in which the original wills are kept 
 is warmed by flues from underneath.":]: And Mr. Prothe- 
 roe, M.P.,§ in the same report, states that the records are 
 not deposited in a proper building ; that they are on shelves 
 in an out-office ; " a building," he says, " which does not 
 seem to me to be fire-proof." He continues — " There is no 
 one who has occasion to consult wills in that office but must 
 experience great discomfort from the narrowness of the room." 
 
 * John Walter, Esq., M.P., formerly of Barbadoes, purchased Bu.s- 
 bridge Manor House, Surrey, 1710. See Manning's Surrey, vol. i. 
 p. 6181. 
 
 t Ecclesiastical Commission Report, 1830, p. 203. 
 
 It: Ditto, 1830, p. 17. E\adence of Mr. John Batson, Surveyor. 
 
 § Ditto, p. 175.
 
 In a letter from the Lords Commissioners of the Trea- 
 sury to the Secretary of State, dated 23rd April, 1829,* 
 the Lords state — " they consider that it is the duty of 
 the Registrars to provide a building adequate to the safe 
 custody of the wills and other documents committed to 
 their charge ; and as the profits of the Registrars have 
 been greatly increased by that accumulation of wills whicli 
 has rendered necessary an enlargement and improvement of 
 the buildings, it appears peculiarly proper that the charge 
 of providing such additional building should fall upon the 
 Registrars, and upon them alone." What ! would the 
 Lords Commissioners rob these poor Registrars of one 
 shilling of their hard earnings just to save landed and 
 other property of some millions value from litigation and 
 fraud ? Would they diminish their 40,000?. a-year by even a 
 fraction per cent. ? Mr. Moore*f- admits that the records 
 " ought certainly to be secured from every possible danger." 
 The room in which these important documents are con- 
 tained, was built by his late father against the walls of a 
 large shed in the occupation of a wheelwright, and filled 
 with timber. " Now," he continues, " if this place should 
 ever be on fire, the conflagration oi so large a quantity of 
 dry materials must inevitably make the walls of this room 
 red hot, and in that case, although the walls themselves, 
 from the nature of their construction, might not be de- 
 stroyed, I know of nothing that can prevent the wills 
 from being burnt." It was impossible that the Registrar, 
 out of his small and hard-earned income, could carry into 
 execution, " by his oiun unassisted efforts," the erection of 
 a proper building that might cost 2000L He had en- 
 gaged to do nothing, and appeals to the Government to 
 act. It would be a flagrant breach of liis engagement 
 with the public if he were in any way to assist from his 
 vast and unearned wealth in the restoration of the build- 
 
 * Ecclesiastical Commission Report, 1830. p. 533. 
 t Letter to Sir John NichoUs, 18th June, 1829, printed in the Eccle- 
 siastical Commission Report, 1830, p. ."jSj.
 
 18 
 
 ing. The public may go to Jericho, Bath, Stepney, or 
 any of those places which are selected by common consent 
 for the sojourn of disagreeable or intrusive people. He 
 disclaims all responsibility but one — the- responsibility of 
 receiving the money. 
 
 In the minutes of evidence taken before a Select Com- 
 mittee of the House of Commons in 1830,* Mr. Dyneley, 
 one of Mr. Moore's deputies, stated "that the wills of the 
 province of Canterbury would, if the principal Registrar 
 were to die, come into the possession of his executors and 
 assigns." What ! are the public title-deeds of thousands to 
 become the property of one single individual ! ! From Mr. 
 Dyneley 's evidence we may expect ere long to see an adver- 
 tisement in the " Times," announcing that Messrs. Put- 
 tock and Simpson have been instructed by the executors to 
 Mr. Moore to offer to public competition this unique and 
 interestins collection. In 1830+ the Commission re- 
 ported as their opinion, that these " most important title- 
 deeds, both as to real and personal property, ought to belong- 
 to the Government, instead of being, as at present, the pri- 
 vate property of the Registrars." In many other instances 
 the buildings are the private property of individuals ; in 
 others they belong to different ecclesiastical corporations ; 
 but in no case are they Public Property. 
 
 All the Wills of England, then, are the pri- 
 vate PROPERTY OF THE REGISTRARS ! What discovery of 
 the nineteenth century is to be compared with this, either 
 in magnitude or in importance ? All the wills of England 
 the private property of the Registrars. Here, with a ven- 
 geance, is " the potentiality of growing rich beyond the 
 dreams of avarice." More than half the property of the 
 nation is in the power of these Registrars. Only imagine 
 them inclined to exercise that power " for a consideration." 
 Half of the property of the nation jeopardised by destroy- 
 ing or withholding the titles to the possession of it ! The 
 
 * Ecclesiastical Commission Report, p. 1. 
 t Ditto, p. :i.
 
 19 
 
 very threat would suffice. It is dangerous to provoke Mr. 
 Moore and his fi-ateriiity ; they are very ill-used men. Eng- 
 land, instead of complaining of their profligate rapacity and 
 shameless ig-norance of moral obligation, is bound respect- 
 fully to tender her thanks that they have hitherto been 
 satisfied, no, not satisfied with, but condescended to de- 
 mand only their fees, and she must trust to their for- 
 bearance. 
 
 Lord Canterbury was appointed by his grandfather. Arch- 
 bishop Sutton (in reversion after Mr. Moore), and has, it 
 appears, anticipated his portion of the costly gift, and mort- 
 gaged the reversion to the Globe Insurance Office. " We 
 must all die ;" and there mil some day be an end of Lord 
 Canterbury. The appointment to these reversions rests 
 with the Archbishops for the time being. Dr. Howley, the 
 late Archbishop, declined makhig any nomination, but the 
 present Archbishop has appointed liis son to this magnificent 
 reversion. 
 
 The next office in importance is that of York. The 
 Registry Office here is supposed to be worth upwards of 
 lOjOOOL per annum. Egerton Yei'non Harcourt, Esq., 
 was appointed by his father, the late Archbishop to the 
 office, in conjimction with his nephew, Granville Edward 
 Venables Vernon Harcourt, Esq., in 1825 ; the latter was 
 at that time a minor. However, to do full justice to their 
 Ai'chiepiscopal father, it must be admitted he evinced much 
 vigilance and forethought in securing for his own sons so 
 many good things : Granville Vernon Harcoui't, another 
 son, was appointed by his father the Ai'chbishop, in 1818, 
 Chancellor of the Diocese, Commissary and Keeper of the 
 Exchequer and Prerogative Courts, Official of the Consis- 
 tory and Vicar General and Official Principal of the Chan- 
 cery of York : another son, the Rev. C. G. V. Harcourt, 
 M.A., was presented by his kind father, in 182-i, to the 
 rectory of Rothbury, Northumberland, worth 1200/. per 
 annum ; he also holds a canonry in the Cathedral of Car- 
 lisle, worth about 1 200/. a-year more : another brother,
 
 20 
 
 the Rev. L. V. Harcourt, received the appointment of Chan- 
 cellor of the Cathedral of York, worth about 2000L per 
 annum, and also a Prebendal Stall, which from fines and 
 other emoluments is worth about 12007. per annum : the 
 Rev. W. V. V. Harcourt, another son, was presented by his 
 liberal father the Archbishop, in 1837, to the rectory of 
 Bolton Percy, worth 1540?. per annum. Surely it is not 
 harsh to say, that while no emoluments seem too inordi- 
 nately large for the capacity of retention by this familj^, 
 none are too minutely small to elude the grasp of their 
 selfishness, or too paltry to be scorned. by their self-respect, 
 for it will be found that this last-named reverend gentle- 
 man also holds the "sinecure (so called in the Clergy List), 
 rectory of Kirkby, in Cleveland," to which he was presented 
 by his father, in 1828, and which is worth only 3591. per 
 annum. He is also Canon Residentiary of York, for which 
 he receives about 1000/.. per annum more — an appointment 
 he also obtained from his father. The Rev. Evelyn H. 
 Vernon, a grandson of the Archbishop, is Rector of Grove, 
 and Sinecure Rector of Hendon. On reference to the 
 Clergy List, it will be found that no less than nine other 
 persons of this name are all snugly provided for. Wh}^ did 
 the Archbishop, the visitor of the cathedral, who swore to 
 ensure the observance of the statutes, — why did he show 
 so much vigilance and forethought in securing for his 
 own sons all these good things, and yet exhibit so much 
 wilful indifference or culpable neglect in securing to the 
 children of others those rights which he swore to main- 
 tain inviolate, when he was inducted into his high and holy 
 office? 
 
 The jurisdiction of this Court extends over the large 
 and populous counties of York, Chester, Lancashire, West- 
 moreland, Cumberland, Durham, Northumberland, and 
 Flintshire, and the national records relating to this district 
 contain a great quantity of valuable information relating to 
 our wonderful Ecclesiastical history, a history never to be 
 written until these and such records are thoroughly ex-
 
 21 
 
 amiued and digested. Aud what chance have we of this 
 under existing management ? 
 
 It has been stated that the Registrars of this cathedral 
 receive no less annually than 10,000^. for doing nothing, 
 and in this they are assisted by a worthy deputy, for which 
 he receives at least 4000?. ; he is a person of considerable 
 power in the city, a magistrate, an alderman, and a proctor 
 withal, in boundless practice. He lives in great state, he 
 keeps horses and carriages, and he is — could he be any- 
 thing else ? — ^a staunch conservative. 
 
 On arriving at this Registrar's Office, fortified with a letter 
 bearing the mitred seal of tlie Archbishop, I was treated 
 with eveiy insult and annoyance. Whether from natural 
 infirmity of temper or dislike to the direction of the Arch- 
 bishop, the deputy received me more in the style of an 
 infuriated pedagogue, than of a man claiming the slightest 
 acquaintance with good manners, or even ordinary decency. 
 He denied an audience apart from his clerks, to whom 
 I was unwilling to expose his futile rage ; he next denied 
 the right of the Archbishop, who he stated had no juris- 
 diction whatever over him, to give the access required. 
 Finding at length the only thing required was a definite 
 answer wliich could be communicated to the Archbishop, 
 and failing also to resist these demands through the more 
 specious interrogatories of a surrogate of the name of Salvin, 
 whom he had intentionally placed in the office, he proposed 
 to allow me to consult the records previous to 1400 — just 
 one book out of some hundreds. Subsequently, on scorn- 
 ing such a proposition, his generosity proposed the year 
 1 500 instead. It was quite impossible to discover what 
 class of records there were in the evidence rooms, as access 
 to them was not allowed. 
 
 'For the public, however, evidence is hardly necessary 
 to make them acquainted with the manner in which the 
 trust imposed on the Registrar and his deputy is performed. 
 At page 170 of the " Ecclesiastical Commission Report," 
 made to Parliament 27th February, 1832, there is recorded
 
 22 
 
 the CAddence on oatli of a gentleman, Mr. Edward Protlieroe, 
 M.P,, who had himself visited this office. He declared that 
 the documents were in " a scandalous state." " I found 
 them/' he continues, " perfectly to accord with the descrip- 
 tion I had received from various literary and "antiquarian 
 gentlemen who had occasion to make searches in the office ; 
 and I beg leave to remark, that the place must have been 
 always totally inadequate as a place of deposit for the re- 
 cords, both as to space and security." Some of the writings 
 he found in two small cells, " in a state of most disgraceful 
 filth ;" otRers in " two apertures in the tliick walls, scarcely 
 to be called windows, and the only accommodation for these 
 records are loose wooden shelves, upon which the wills are 
 arranged in bundles, tied up with common string, and with- 
 out any covering to them ; exposed to the efiect of the 
 damp and the weather, and the necessary accumulation of 
 dirt." To these unprotected wills the Deputy Registrar, 
 perhaps wise in his generation, denies access ; for Mr. Pro- 
 theroe says, in addition, that "if it was the object of any 
 person to purloin a will, such a thing might be accom- 
 plished." Yes, Mr. Protheroe, the following statement 
 shows how a clerk in this office employed his leisure, which 
 was considerable, and his brains (which were not so great), 
 in fabricating a will to prove himself heir to the House 
 of Percy. But when he found that his industry was 
 establishing for him a nearer propinquity to the House of 
 Correction, he prudently suppressed the nefarious document. 
 On 19th February, 1850, the author^ accompanied by a 
 friend, had occasion to visit the Will-office at York, for the 
 purpose of making some researches among the early records. 
 In searching the Index No. 76, for the years 1721 and 
 1722, they discovered, written in a modern hand, the name 
 of John Paver. It appeared that a clerk in the office 'of 
 that name, claimed to be the representative of the house of 
 Percy, and heir to all the ancient baronies of that illustrious 
 family ; this modern insertion caused a doubt in their minds, 
 and the doubt was considerably strengthened by the pro-
 
 23 
 
 duction of the preteuded will itself, dated loth January, 
 1721. It actually recited that the testator, John Paver, 
 had married Millian, only daughter and heiress of Maxi- 
 niillian Woodroofe, son and heii' of Maximillian Woodroofe, 
 who was the eldest son and heir of Richard Woodroofe, by 
 Lady Elizabeth Percy, daughter of the Earl of Northumber- 
 land, and that the said John Paver, eldest son and heu-, was 
 then dead, and that William Paver, his grandson, was his 
 eldest son and heir, and that his (Wm. P/s) eldest child 
 John was then living. The Earl of Northumberland was 
 beheaded in 1572, and the last-mentioned John Paver died 
 in 1760, so that this will extended over no less than 188 
 years, and proved eight generations. It is fortunate for 
 those persons having estates or titles depending on the re- 
 cords at York, that about this period the wills were all 
 copied into volumes, which Mr. Protheroe describes as of 
 " prodigious bulk, and requiring a man of herculean strength 
 to move them \' for, on a most careful search made by both 
 gentlemen, from 1719 to 1731, no such will could be dis- 
 covered in those books, which clearly proved that the will 
 had been placed in the office long since that period. Shortly 
 after, several articles entitled " The Doom of English 
 Wills'" appeared in Mr. Charles Dickens's Household 
 Words, on the subject. These had the effect of the removal 
 or destruction of the pretended will, and the erasure from 
 the parchment Index Book, No. 76, of the name of John 
 Paver ; for, on a visit to this office by the same gentleman, 
 on the 19th and 24-th July, I80I, for the pm'pose of show- 
 ing the document to a Barrister of high standing in his 
 profession, no traces could be discovered, save the erasure 
 
 from the Index under the letter P . 
 
 But will the reader believe that there had been a real 
 will of John Paver which had been destroyed, and that 
 the page* of the Register which should contain the tran- 
 script of the will had been abstracted ? The reference to this 
 real will in the Index was also erased, except the figures 460. 
 * Pp. 459 and 460.
 
 24 
 
 There is, however, now a third forged will of John Paver, 
 1722, inserted to make up for the genealogical one here 
 described ; a substitute, it would appear, which was placed 
 in the oiiice after our re-visit to York. This had doubtless 
 been done to induce Messrs. Harcourt and Buckle to believe 
 that what was stated about the first will was incon^ect, and 
 that the story had been got up to make a bad case against 
 tlie Ecclesiastical Courts system and this office in particular ; 
 but Mr. Clarke, solicitor at Sherborne, obtained an office 
 copy of the first will several years before when engaged in 
 the case of Hungate v. Gascoigne, which was forwarded to 
 the Registrar at York, and is now in the possession of 
 his solicitor Mr. Gray. 
 
 A sort of mock investigation took place, the matter was 
 not thoroughly sifted, and after Mr. Harcourt's solicitor 
 found " a case made out of a most serious nature," and 
 was desirous of prosecuting the delinquent at the assizes, 
 no further proceedings were taken by the Registrar except 
 to dismiss the individual fi*om the office. Tliis case alone 
 ought to be sufficient to prove the necessity of the imme- 
 diate abolition of these iniquitous Courts. 
 
 At page 339 of the Report of 1832, Mr. Buckle, the 
 Deputy Registrar himself, is recorded to have owned that 
 the place of custody for wills is a room not fire-proof. 
 Everybody knew as much ; but he asserts that the place 
 was free from damp, which was not in accordance with Mr. 
 Prothei-oe's evidence. Many of the records have been lost 
 or stolen. Some were made away with by a former Deputy 
 Registrar to revenge the meanness of the Legislature in not 
 providing the well-paid Registrars with remuneration for 
 some additional duties ; for Dr. Thelwall of Newcastle 
 wrote in the "Gentleman's Magazine" for 1819, page 490, 
 — " The most shameful neoiig-ence is attributed to the 
 pei'son [the Deputy Registrar at York] in whose keeping 
 they [the records] have been placed. Indeed I have some 
 reason to .suppose this, as I lately saw in the possession of 
 a friend a great number of extracts from tlie Registrar of a
 
 20 
 
 certain parish in this neighbourhood, and on questioning 
 him as to the way in which he became possessed of them, I 
 was informed they were given to him by his cheesemonger, 
 and that copies were forwarded by the clergyman of the 
 parish to the proper officer in a bordering diocese, and had 
 been allowed, through the negligence of their keeper, to 
 obtain the distinguished honour of wrapping up cheese and 
 bacon." This mode of " 'preserving" such duplicates de- 
 posited at York is alluded to in a letter addressed by " a 
 Country Parson," * to the Editor of the " Yorkshire Ga- 
 zette," October, 1850, who draws attention " to the sad 
 state of the copies of the Registers at York." He says that 
 " when on coming to my present living, I inquired for how 
 long a period I should have to send in copies ; they would 
 give me no information whatever on the subject, but re- 
 ferred me to the arcliives themselves, which appeared in a 
 state of almost hopeless confusion ; and I have now to add 
 that, having since written to the officials on the same sub- 
 ject, I have not even received any answer to my letter." 
 No wonder, indeed ; nor have they troubled themselves 
 about the matter for upwards of a centuiy ; for on con- 
 sulting the dilapidated parisli Register of Kirkby Malzeard, 
 in Yorkshire, -f- this entry will be foimd in the Baptismal 
 Register — " So far given in at the Archbishop's Primary 
 Visitation at Ripon, October 13th, 1743, But Mr. Juhb 
 said they were not required, so returned the copy to me." 
 This Jubb was the Deputy Registrar of the Office, and 
 sucked thereout, lustily and long, no small advantage. 
 
 In the evidence of Sir William Betham, Ulster King at 
 
 * The Kev. F. O. Morris, M.A., Vicar of Nafferton, and a Magistrate 
 for the County. 
 
 t In this parish the Register of 165.3 was reported by the Curate, 
 Mr. Wilson, as lost or stolen, but was found by the author of this 
 pamphlet, tattered and torn, behind some old drawers in the curate's 
 back kitchen. See a letter to R. Monckton Milues, Esq., M.P., on the 
 condition and unsafe state of Ancient Parocliial Registers in England 
 and the Colonies ; by W. Downing Bruce, Esq., p. 2 : and Postulates and 
 Data, vol. i. p. 196.
 
 26 
 
 Anns, before tlie Committee in 1832, we find that he had 
 occasion to search at this cathedral, and went for the ex- 
 press purpose of searching duplicates of parish Registers. 
 He found them " lying unarranged and unconsultable " in 
 the office. He asked the reason, and was answered that the 
 Act of Parliament which ordered this chiss of records to be 
 sent to tlie Bishop's Registry, gave no directions about fees. 
 From these facts may be inferred the degree of care with 
 which the wills are kept at Yoi'k. Previous knowledge had 
 prepared me for all this ; but I was not prepared to find 
 that the tvhole of another and most important class of re- 
 cords up to a comparatively late date were not forthcoming, 
 namel}^, the Marriage Allegation Papers or affidavits. On 
 inquiry elsewhere it was discovered that these documents, 
 or at least the greater part of them, were the private pro- 
 perty of one of the clerks, a genealogist by profession, who 
 kept them in his own house. His own account varied : that 
 he purchased them from the late Mr. Radcliffe, the herald, he 
 states to one person ; and to another he averred that he 
 procured them "from the widow of a Dissenting minister," 
 without name and residence. Of course he could not have 
 had them fi'om both places ; but the fact of his shifting his 
 ground strongly supports the ojnnion that he had them fi:"om 
 neither. " A County Magistrate," in a Letter* in the "York 
 Herald," dated 23rd October, 1850, in answer to a state- 
 ment made by Mr. E. V. Harcourt, the Registrar, respect- 
 ing these documents, states : " I have in my possession a 
 number of papers containing notifications of marriages, ex- 
 tracted, as I understand, from the private documents of the 
 gentleman who I presume is alluded to, which were fur- 
 nished by him about six months ago ; and each of these 
 notes of marriage has a regular ])rinted forumla attached to 
 it, specifying a graduated scale of charges for the information 
 so furnished, amounting altogether to a large sum of money. 
 I will minutely describe them. Each paper, after giving the 
 
 * Geo. P. Dawson, Esq., of Osgodby Hall, Magistrate for the East 
 and West Ridings of Yorkshire, and for the County of Berks.
 
 27 
 
 infonnation required in MS., has 'printed at the foot of it these 
 words : — ' The above is a correct copy of an entry in viy 
 ■manuscript, entitled Notes of Weddings by Licence/ Then 
 comes the written signature of a gentleman, who is, it is pre- 
 sumed, the clerk in question, and the date, York, February, 
 1850. Then comes under a line the following notification 
 in 'print: — 'The manuscript above-mentioned, which relates 
 principally, but not wholly, to the seventeenth century, and 
 contains many important particulars as to residence, age, 
 rank, and not to he found in any other collections, has been 
 compiled probably from original marriage licences, as it con- 
 tains facts which in several instances are not recorded in the 
 licence affidavits preserved in the Registry at York. Fees 
 for a general search for any one surname, including a list of 
 all, either male or female, with year, according to the follow- 
 ing plan: — "Dawson, Gent., and Lister," \l. Os. Of?.; a copy 
 of each note of marriage, where the party is described as 
 merchant, gentleman, or of higher rank, 1 1. Os. Od. ; a copy 
 of each note of marriage, where the party is not described as 
 above, or is undescribed in the list, 01. 5s. Od. l^° Per- 
 sonal applications cannot be attended to.' 
 
 The signature to this document is " William Paver." 
 The English of all this is, that the present custodian of 
 those papers, Mr. William Paver, purchased of a dead 
 herald what did not belong to him ; no one could have 
 known better than the purchaser that they were public 
 property, and that their proper place was not in his private 
 house, but in the Registry Office. The produce of this 
 abstraction is an illegal income, probably double that of 
 some of our best dramatists or poets. 
 
 It is impossible to state the exact amount of income 
 derived by the fortunate possessors of the Registrarship at 
 York; but from the fact that the income of the Registrar 
 of the Diocese of Chester, in this province, is worth 1 1,530?. 
 per annum, we give this of York at least as 1 0,000?. Chester 
 is a sort of suffragan bishopric under the jurisdiction of 
 York; and many of the wills proved there are also obliged
 
 28 
 
 to be proved at York ; also the fees demanded at York are 
 five times as much. Again, Mr. G. V. Harcourt, in the 
 Report of 1832, page 115, informs us that he does not 
 think tliat he could possibly state tlie average amount of 
 his income ; and, at page 182, " It is the case in ahnost all 
 dioceses, that the Deputy Registrars receive emoluments 
 which they do not account for to their principals." 
 
 Next in magnitude to the two Ai'chiepiscopal Courts of 
 Canterbury and York is Chester, in the province of York, 
 extending over the whole counties of Chester and Lancaster, 
 with parts of York, Westmoreland, Cumberland, and Flint. 
 The population of this jurisdiction is perhaps one of the 
 largest in the kingdom : it includes the busiest of our 
 manuffxcturing towns, Manchester, Liverpool, Bury, Bol- 
 ton, &;c. 
 
 The records of Chester appear to have been kept in a 
 most disgraceful state by the former Registrar, Benjamin 
 Keene ; who was appointed by his father, the Bishop of 
 Chester, 4th December, 1769; and held it till his death in 
 1837, upwards of sixtj^-eight years. The total amount of 
 fees according to the Report, 1842, amounted to 11,530^. 
 per annum; but it must be admitted that this far exceeded 
 the annual amount Mr. Keene received. Taking therefore 
 the average at half for sixty-eight years, it amounts to no 
 less a sum than 374,720^. 
 
 The late Archbishop Markham, who, when Bishop of 
 Chester, so well provided for his family by exchanging 
 church lands of great value for moors, fearful lest so lucra- 
 tive an office might be lost to his family, granted the prin- 
 cipal Registrarship to two of his sons in reversion after the 
 death of the then Rev. Mr. Keene. The two sons, however, 
 died before 1832, and never enjoyed the emoluments. 
 Mr. Henry Raikes, the present Registrar, who had been 
 appointed Deputy on the death of Mr. Vfard, in 1837, a 
 few months afterwards succeeded to the office of Principal 
 Registrar, vacant by the decease of Mr. Keene. 
 
 From the Report of 1832, it a[)pears that the acting
 
 29 
 
 Judge of the Ecclesiastical Court of Chester was son-in-law 
 of the Deputy Registrar, that the Courts were ouly held 
 once a fortnight for the convenience of the Judge, and that 
 the cases frequently lasted a year — sometimes three years. 
 
 From the same Report (p. 189) it appears that there 
 were then eighty-seven Surrogates,* and that sometimes the 
 balance they each had to render at the end of half a year 
 was lOOOL, and sometimes as much as 1500L 
 
 To show the careless way in which business is, or rather 
 was, conducted at Chester, a speech of Mr. Elphinstone on 
 the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill in 1843,t maybe quoted. 
 "A gentleman," he says, "of the name of Leigh, died 
 lately, leaving 100,000L in Chester, and 60,000?. in the 
 jurisdiction of the province of Canterbury. The executors 
 took the will and seven codicils to the Chester Registry, 
 where probate was granted of all the documents. When 
 the executors brought the same documents to the Preroga- 
 tive Court of Canterbury, it was at once discovered that the 
 last codicil revoked five others, so that probate ought only 
 to have been gTanted at Chester of the will and two 
 codicils. If this mistake had not been detected at the 
 Prerogative Office in Doctors' Commons, the executors 
 might have paid large legacies to persons in no way 
 entitled to them." 
 
 Mr. Thomas Falconer, in a letter to the " Times," in 
 January, 1850, illustrates the difficulties of making a search 
 for ancient wills in this Court. He states that he applied 
 to Mr. Parry, the Deputy, to know if he would search for 
 the will of a lady of the name of Rachael Dahiiahoy, 
 whose husband died about 1663, and for whose will he had 
 a legitimate title to search. Mr. Raikes, the Registrar, 
 himself replied that there was no will of about that date 
 of Rachael Cholmondeley. Mr. Falconer pointed out the 
 mistake Mr. Raikes had made, and requested to be informed 
 of the usual fee for a search. His answer was as fol- 
 
 * Tlie number now amounts to 115. 
 t Hansarcl, vol. Ixviii. p. 10.58.
 
 30 
 
 lows : " Sir, — A search has been made in the name 
 of Dalmahoy, but without success. The charge for searches 
 Chohnondeley and Dahnahoy is 7s. 9d., by P. O. Order. 
 Youi's, &c., Henry Raikes." The substance of Mr. Fal- 
 coner's reply was, that he ought not to be charged for two 
 searches, and that he thought the charge to be enormous, 
 even if the calendar was not in proper order, Mr. Raikes 
 then sent the following, his tliird letter, in reply : " Sir, — 
 You were only charged for 07ie search, the other being my 
 mistake of the name, nor would this have been charged to 
 you unless you had particularly requested it. As you now 
 consider it is too much for the search and the three letters 
 you have had, I only hope you -svill not tax yourself to 
 send it, as I shall consider myself fully repaid by the 
 cessation of such a correspondence, which is at best an 
 interruption, as unwelcome as unprofitable to my ordinary 
 duties. Yours, &c., H. Raikes." This is the answer of a 
 gentleman, a young barrister, holding one of the most 
 magnificently-paid lay appointments in the kingdom. 
 His errors, his blunders, and his discourtesy concern the 
 public, but it is not necessary to discuss these charges 
 here. 
 
 The ancient wills here contain a wonderful mass of 
 information, illustrative of biography and history: one of 
 particular interest was required, dated 1625; but in reply 
 to inquiries for this will, the Deputy Registrar said: — - 
 " I am sorry to say that it is not found on the file for 
 1625, which has been completely searched, as have also 
 those for a few years before and afterwards, every will 
 having been in part looked at for the one in question ; 
 having been misplaced about that period, however, the wills 
 in our Registry are imperfect, and I regret that your 
 searches were not some years later after the Commonwealth." 
 Two other wills, one in 1553 and the other 1579, could 
 not be found. 
 
 The present Registry Office was first used in February, 
 1847 : it is open from 9 till dusk. It is a large stone build-
 
 31 
 
 ing, and is divided into various rooms; the first on tlie right 
 is for searching the index for wills and grants of letters of 
 administration, the fee for ^yhich is now altered from two 
 shillings and sixpence to one shilling ; the room is very dif- 
 ferently fitted up to that at York or Doctors' Commons, 
 and is of ample size. All modern wills are now copied at 
 length into large well-bound books : they are not engrossed 
 as at Doctors' Commons in court text, but written in round 
 band, so distinct and plain that the illiterate might read 
 them. The originals can be examined on giving a satis- 
 factory reason to the Registrar, or, in his absence, to the 
 principal Clerk, Wills which are received from Manches- 
 ter and other places are indexed the same day; a practice 
 very different from that at York, where wills are sometimes 
 not indexed for six or eight months, and consequently often 
 not at all. 
 
 The Parish Register returns are substantially bound in 
 separate parishes and kept in one large room ; they have 
 been much referred to since their arrangement about four 
 years ago ; the room is however not fire-proof. A fee of 
 three shillings and eightpence is demanded for a search : — 
 at York for the production of a similar quantity of records 
 at least 1 51. without clerks' fees are required, and at Lin- 
 coln it would be impossible to produce them at all, so many 
 having been destroj^ed. 
 
 The first index of wills commences about 1553 : the 
 diocese was not founded till the reign of Henry VIII., and 
 the testamentary records before that period are to be found 
 at York and Lichfield, The first volume of indexes is only 
 a volume in name : it has no back ; all the leaves are loose, 
 and some lost. Like most of the early indexes, the alpha- 
 betical arrangement is not of surnames but of christian 
 names, so that the searcher has to run the gauntlet down 
 interminable columns of the Richards, Roberts, Thomases, 
 Johns, " that bristle upon each page like the iron railings 
 along a London street," This lump of almost useless leaves 
 has never been copied into a legible form by smy Registrar
 
 since it became unfit for use. There is no index from 1601 
 to 1605, and the index from 1605 is imperfect, only com- 
 mencing with the letter M. 
 
 The Marriage allegation books from 1606 have a few 
 chasms. The first book commences in 1606 and ends 
 1616: there is no back to this volume, and it is in a 
 bad state of preservation, with no index, but the names are 
 written in large legible letters on the margin. The mar- 
 riage afiidavits and bonds are very imperfect prior to the 
 year 1700, and there is no index to them. 
 
 In this case it has been shown that the principal Regis- 
 trar acts with his Deputy ; and although his income is very 
 large, even after the great expense it has been his duty to 
 incur for suitable public accommodation, and the loss he has 
 voluntarily sustained by reducing the fees, yet it must not 
 be wholly grudged to a gentleman who fulfils his ofiice with 
 some degree of assiduity. The early wills should be pre- 
 served with greater care, and the indexes arranged in a more 
 perfect state. No man, ecclesiastical or civil, can be grudged 
 his full and fair remuneration for every labour he is called 
 upon to perform ; noi* is there any wish to interfere with 
 vested rights, but we must have the labour performed for 
 which the pay is given ; and if they who now receive the 
 one are unfit to perform the other, it is but wise and 
 economical to compensate them for any vested right they 
 have, and secure the treasures at the cost of a temporary 
 outlay. 
 
 The diocese of Lincoln extends over seven counties, Lin- 
 coln, Leicester, Bedford, Huntingdon, Buckingham, and 
 parts of Hereford, and Derbyshire. The Registrar, Mr. 
 Robert Swan, was appointed in 1829, in conjunction with 
 a relative of the then Bishop, and the fees received by him 
 in 1849 amounted to upwards of 4000^. per annum. He 
 is also a solicitor in boundless practice, a proctor, chapter 
 clerk, town clerk, clerk to the magistrates, &c. 
 
 The nation pays but twelve hundred a-year in pensions 
 to its benefactors in literature, science, and art, and it pays
 
 33 
 
 four thousand a-year to one of its officers for allowing its 
 records to rot. 
 
 Within the Gate House at Lincoln are deposited, or 
 rather gradually decay, documents, the loss of which would 
 be the ruin of many families by needless Htigation. Here 
 are to be seen rows of shelves and boxes containing wills, 
 &:c., not protected in any way from dirt or the rain that 
 filters through down among the solemn injunctions of the 
 dead. The roof is broken, and the ceiling unplastered ; 
 and the efifects of time, rain, and mildew, are so omnipotent 
 in this damp depository, that the shelves have in some 
 places rotted away. 
 
 Here the Registrar had been so besotted in ignorance 
 and selfislmess as actually to deny access for the Archaeo- 
 logical Institution on their meeting at Lincoln in 1849. 
 The duplicate Parish Registers are tied up in the parcels 
 in which they were sent bundled into boxes, and those 
 which had been written on parchment were regularly cut 
 up for binding modern wills, so as not to encroach upon 
 the Registrar's hard earnings ; Bishop's Registers without 
 indexes, and unconsultable : in short, everything that could 
 not be turned into money, neglected, dispersed, and aban- 
 doned. A once celebrated Record Book of its class, and 
 mentioned by Gough in his " British Topography," wi'itten 
 about the period of the Conqueror's " Doomsday Book," 
 and known as a singular and unique MS. relating to lands 
 throughout the diocese in 1070, could not be found. The 
 clerks had neither seen nor heard of such a thing. The 
 author and a friend observed swept into a corner of the 
 Record Room, a number of loose papers, apparently ready 
 to be burnt or destroyed, some having already been placed 
 in baskets for removal. Led by curiosity to examine the 
 nature of these records, they found amongst them a few 
 leaves of this very book ; also the original Charter of King 
 William the Conqueror, — the identical instrument by which 
 the See of Dorchester was transferred to Lincoln, with the 
 Great Seal of the great Norman. This they handed to tlie 
 
 C
 
 84 
 
 clerk, who considered it nothing of any consequence, but 
 placed it in his office desk. Many other treasures of almost 
 equal historical interest were saved from being carried off 
 by bricklayers' labovirers. A charter of agreement between 
 King John and the Barons after the contest, a cotemporary 
 Poem on Bosworth Field, a Confession of the Protestant 
 Faith, made by Archbishop Toby Matthews when on his 
 death-bed, part of an original Saxon Chronicle, with char- 
 ters and wills, were heaped and huddled together, and, as 
 may be supposed, in the most dilapidated condition. In an 
 upper room was found a curious book containing an inven- 
 tory of all the plate, ornaments, vestments, &c., in every 
 church throughout this extensive diocese at the Reforma- 
 tion. Indeed the great quantity of valuable information 
 which must speedily perish with these decaying records is 
 distressing to mention. When these offices are regulated, 
 and their holders grow clamorous for compensation, it is to 
 be hoped that no small deduction will be made for this scan- 
 dalous neglect of duty, which ought justly to deprive them 
 of any compensation they claim as keepers, not destroyers. 
 
 The public, no doubt, will be glad to know what has 
 been done towards the better preservation of the docu- 
 ments at Lincoln. For their comfort it will be shown 
 that the labours of the press in the good cause have not 
 been altogether ineffectual. In a letter from the Reve- 
 rend Richard Pretyman, addressed to the late Edward 
 Davis Protheroe, Esq., M.P., it is stated that "the Re- 
 cords in the Lincoln Registry will soon be arranged in 
 a very satisfactory manner." It is true that the Reve- 
 rend Gentleman mentions this " very satisfactory arrange- 
 ment " only in conjunction with a bilious regret that the 
 Author of the articles in Household Words, " The Doom of 
 English Wills," and to whom the arrangement was owing, 
 " should have been permitted to set foot in the office," and 
 pronounces " attacks " which appeared on the authority and 
 under the editorship of Charles Dickens * " false and ca- 
 * Household Words.
 
 35 
 
 lumuious." But, on the other hand, as the said false and 
 calumnious statements were to the effect that the arrange- 
 ments were unsatistactory, and as the injured innocence, 
 which indignantly deplores that any " civility " possible 
 was shown to the calumniator, only asserts that they soon 
 will be arranged, it may be readily conceived that " at- 
 tacks," however disagreeable, are sometimes useful, and that 
 in this instance the public have been sufficiently benefited 
 to justify Mr. Pretyman being interfered with. But the 
 reader will no doubt ask impatiently, Who is this Mr. 
 Pretyman, whose civility only extends to persons who will 
 not report faithfully as to his neglect of duty, and who v.iil 
 not have the courtesy to be p.olitely fictitious as to the 
 state of documents involving the titles of personal and real 
 property of seven English counties, or of the dilapidated 
 Gate House at which he and his B^egistrar, Mr. Swan/ 
 take toll to the amount of at least some four or five thou- 
 sand per annum ? Mr. Pretyman is chaplain warden of 
 the Mere Hospital, to which he was appointed by his fathei-, 
 the Bishop, in 1817. This hospital was founded in 1244, 
 for the perpetual support of thirteen poor persons in bed 
 and food, and clothing, and of the chaplain therein minis- 
 tering, and it was further directed by the founder, tliat 
 the chaplain should give an account once a-year to the 
 Bishop of Lincoln. 
 
 Such was the trust to be carried out by Mr. Pretyman. 
 Two years after he was appointed he granted a lease of the 
 hospital lands, reserving the old rent of 32^., but taking a 
 fine of more than 9000^.* In 1826 and 1835 he again 
 renewed the lease for fines of 2000Z. and 1740?. 1 Os., all 
 of which he kept himself, besides 750?. for timber. Out 
 of the 32?. he kept 8?. himself, and applied the rest to the 
 use of six poor persons. The buildings of the hospital 
 have ceased to exist, and no duties are performed by the 
 chaplain, and the annual value of the lands is more than 
 
 * See case of the Attorney-General v. Pretyman, Law Report, Bc\'an 
 4, p. 462. 
 
 O 2
 
 36 
 
 1200^. In 1817, Mr. Pretyman, who was to minister in 
 the hospital at Mere, was, through his father's kindness, 
 appointed to a canonry in Lincoln Cathedral, officially 
 valued at 16651., and also to the precentorship, returned 
 at 184^., but having attached to it the rectory of Kilsby, 
 over the Tunnel, with tithes upon 2100 acres, commuted 
 for land, and therefore not worth less than 835Z. In the 
 same year his father bestowed upon him the rectory of 
 Walgrave-cum-Haddington, endowed with 660 acres of 
 land, and money payments, and a house besides, and 
 therefore worth not less than 1000?. The produce, then, 
 of the three offices in thirty-five years must have been 
 105,000?. ; but in 1819, the year of his 9000?. fine, his 
 father presented him with the rectory of Honey Mid- 
 dleton, commuted at 436?. 10s., and in 1825 he obtained 
 from the Bishop of Winchester the sinecure rectory of 
 Wroughton, commuted at 570?. The annual value then 
 of liis church preferment is not less than 4000?., and the 
 proceeds during the tenure of it amounted to not less than 
 134,794?., besides the 13,700?. obtained by anticipating 
 the revenues of the Mere Hospital ; raising the total to 
 more than 148,500?. The Reverend George Pretyman, 
 another lucky son of the Bishop, was by his kind father 
 appointed to a canonry at Lincoln, valued at 1665?.; to 
 the chancellorship too, retm^ned at 284?. a-year ; but pro- 
 bably worth 535?., as it has attached to it the prebend of 
 Stoke ; also to the perpetvial curacy of Nettleham, a parish 
 of 3284 acres, with tithes commuted for land and a money 
 payment. In the same year he became rector of Wheat- 
 hampstead-cum-Harpenden, with tithes commuted for 1591?., 
 and therefore worth, at least, 1600?. ; making, with the 
 canonry, and precentorship, 3800?. a-year, and producing 
 in thirty -eight years at least 144,000?. In 1817, when 
 Richard Pretyman became canon, chaplain, precentor, and 
 his brother George was pi-esented by his father with the 
 rectory of Chalfont Saint Giles, commuted for 804?., and 
 in 1825, when Richard got the sinecure rectory in Wilts,
 
 37 
 
 George stepped into a stall at Winchester, a sinecure of 64)21. 
 a-year. These two additions raise the annual income of 
 his preferment to 5246^., and the proceeds during the 
 tenure of it to about 190,000^., which, with his brother's 
 148,500^., makes 338,500^. for the pair. They are patrons 
 of six or seven small benefices as Precentor and Chan- 
 cellor ; as Canons of Lincoln they have a share in patronage 
 of great value. Thus, as Canon of Lincoln, George pre- 
 sented his son to Great Carlton, value 571^., upon whose 
 death it fell to another son in 1850. 
 
 For whose good, except for their own, do these Prety- 
 mans enjoy all these wardships, rectorships, canonries, and 
 precentorsliips, to the amount of so many thousands a-year, 
 unburdened by any corresponding duty ? Such things are 
 alike repudiated by the state of society out of which they 
 sprang, and that into which they have intruded themselves. 
 The past knows them not, and the present rejects them. 
 Yet, wliile we are in the habit of exacting from men of talent 
 and experience the most laborious duties for paltry and in- 
 adequate salaries — while we peril the efiiciency of the 
 public service in order to carry out throughout its depart- 
 ments a system of rigid and scrupulous economy — we suifer 
 hundreds of thousands of the public money to be swallowed 
 annually by drones, who cannot even give a specious account 
 when called upon to explain the services which they render. 
 We starve those who work, in order to gorge those who 
 are idle. The accident of birth commands what merit 
 cannot hope to attain ; and what makes malversation of 
 sacred funds the more shocking is, that they are diverted 
 from the service of the Chm-ch, to swell the hoards or to 
 supply the extravagances of their useless possessors. 
 
 The jurisdiction of the Court of Lichfield and Coventry 
 extends over the whole coimties of Stafibrd and Derby, 
 and the greater part of Warwick and Salop. The Rev. 
 W. H. Mason and the Rev. H. Mann are or were the 
 Registrars, when the last report was made to Parliament. 
 They received the appointment from their uncle, the 
 Bishop of the Diocese, in 1814. The office of Deputy is
 
 38 
 
 performed by a pei'son who rejoices iu the name of Mott, 
 who is described as the holder of no fewer than thirty- 
 seven offices, being " Registrar, Sealer, and Auditor" to as 
 many different courts. Properly to perform the duties of 
 registrar and sealer to so many courts, he would need 
 almost as many hands as Briareus. But one hand only is 
 sufficient to receive and appropriate the proceeds ; the 
 aggregate amount of which nobody has yet had the cou- 
 rage to calculate. 
 
 Mr. Mott's father was forty-five years Deputy Registrar, 
 twenty-seven years Registrai- to the Dean and Chapter, and 
 Secretary to two or three Bishops. 
 
 The house in which the Deputy resides is a very dif- 
 ferent sort of place to that in which the Public Wills 
 and Records are "preserved." It is a splendid red brick 
 edifice in the Cathedral Close; has extensive grounds, de- 
 tached stables, and a tasteful boat-house at the edge of 
 wliat is called the Minster Pool. 
 
 Tlie office for Searcher is inconveniently small ; only one 
 window. The charge, however, is not so, for 6s. Sd. 
 is demanded per year for Parish Register Returns, and 
 2s, 6cZ. for each will ; and, as in some other offices, we were 
 not allowed to make a single extract. 
 
 The Record Office is situated at the corner of the 
 Pleasure Grounds ; it overlooks the Minster Pool and Dam 
 Street. The outside (I was unable to obtain access to 
 the interior) resembles an old bai'n. It has no window 
 on the grouud floor. On the first floor are six ; two in 
 the front of the building, and four at the end; much of 
 the glass is broken, and the wiUs and other records are 
 seen fi-om the street in the windows exposed to the rain. 
 To mend these windows upon five or six thousand a-year 
 would never do, especially when old parchment is lying 
 about in heaps. Why pay glaziers' bills, when ancient 
 wills and other great historical documents keep out wind 
 and weather, as well as glass ? for light is a thing rather to 
 be shunned than admitted into such places. 
 
 Mr. Mott, in his return to Parliament in IS 30, page 312,
 
 39 
 
 states that the first Index Book only extends to the year 
 1532, "and that a search may be made with certainty for 
 any wUl granted fi'ora that time to the present." On 
 referring to the originals at Lichfield, it will be found that 
 the fii'st volume was from 1526 to 1561, which does not 
 accord with Mr. Mott's description : it had no back, the first 
 thi'ee leaves were lost, several others loose, the alphabetical 
 arrangement of Christian and not Surnames. These almost 
 useless leaves had never been copied into a legible form by 
 any Registrar, although the income of the ofiice of even 
 Deputy sometimes admits of the maintenance of a dozen 
 race-horses. 
 
 The Clerks owned that any wills required before 1526 
 would take at least eight or ten months to find ; and 
 that the Registrar charged his clients for the time of his 
 clerks at one or two guineas per day. 
 
 On a former occasion when visiting Lichfield, and 
 content to pay 2s. 6d. for merely consulting an imperfect 
 Index, and 6s. 8d. for each year of a Parish Register, and 
 2 s. 6d. for each Will, documents were furnished, some 
 seven in every ten ; but on a second visit, finding t-o 
 investigation had become so protracted, that to comply with 
 their demands was impossible, a letter was procured fi'om 
 the Bishop of the Diocese addressed to Mr. Mott, of which 
 the following is a copy : — 
 
 " Mr. Bruce has my full permission to examine the 
 Records in the Registry of the Diocese of Lichfield. 
 
 "J. Lichfield. 
 
 " Palace, Lichfield, 23 May." 
 
 On producing this letter, avarice was soon changed for 
 cunning, and as the only means for defeating my object, 
 and evading the Bishop's injunctions, it was professed tliat 
 not more than one wW\ in ninety of those mentioned 
 in the Index could be found or produced. The clerks 
 stated that many wilLs had been destroyed at the siege of 
 Lichfield in 1643, but the followmg list of a few modern
 
 40 
 
 wills which were not found could not surely have been 
 destroyed at the siege of Lichfield, which took place one 
 hundred years before they existed : — Martha Stockley, 
 1746; EHzabeth Dickin, 1750; George Wooley, 1753; 
 John Blackham, 1757. 
 
 The Reverend James Thomas Law, son of the Right 
 Reverend Dr. Law, Bishop of Cliester, appointed, as Chan- 
 cellor and Judge of Lichfield, four additional Proctors. 
 This Mr. Mott opposed, for he and his son-in-law had all 
 the business between them. Mott was taxing-master of his 
 own costs, and of those of his son-in-law. The case came 
 on in April or May, 1848, before Sir Herbert Jenner Fust, 
 who of course decided in favour of the little family party. 
 
 In concluding these remarks on the Registrars of the 
 various Courts, the names of some of the Chancellors and 
 Registrars of those in England and Wales may be enume- 
 rated, incidentally from recollection, and at the same time 
 show, as far as possible, by whom they were appointed. 
 
 In the Diocese of St. Asaph, the Rev. Charles Scott 
 Luxmore, Dean of St. Asaph, was appointed Chancellor 
 hy his father. Dr. G. J. Luxmore, when Bishop, in 1826. 
 
 The Rev. J. F. Cleaver, Rector of Coxwell, was appointed 
 to the office of Registrar by his father, when Bishop, in 
 1809. 
 
 Dr. John Warren, the Bishop of Bangor, appointed his 
 son, the Rev. J. Warren, to the office of Chancellor. 
 
 At Bath and Wells, Dr. Law was Bishop of the diocese ; 
 his nephew, Hon. W. Towry Law, was an officer in the 
 Grenadier Guards. After Dr. Law was appointed Bishop, 
 Mr. Law sold his commission, and entered the church. He 
 was made Chancellor of the diocese, and Judge of the 
 Court, and had good preferment given him. He was ap- 
 pointed by his uncle prebendary of Wells, and was made 
 vicar of Harborne, in Staffordshire. He did his duty by 
 Deputy, paying that Deputy 20^. annually, and pocketing 
 the fees. The Deputy was the Rev. Peter Parfitt. The 
 Registrar is Mr. Beadon, now a police magistrate in London,
 
 4T 
 
 son of a former judge, and grandson of a former Bisho}>. 
 He was appointed when five years of age, and farms out 
 the Court for 400^. a-year, to Edward Parfitt, who is 
 Deputy Registrar, and charges extra fees to suitors. He is 
 also a proctor, and appears in Court before his own father, 
 the Deputy Judge, and taxes his own costs as Deputy Regis- 
 trar, Mr. Law has lately turned Roman Catholic, and the 
 present Bishop of Bath and Wells has, in accordance with 
 ancient usage, appointed one of his sons to the vacancy. 
 In the Diocesan Court of Wells, Mrs. Berry, daughter of 
 the late Dean Lukin, is the Registrar. She was appointed 
 when eight years of age, and does duty by the same De- 
 puty, Edward Parfitt ! ! ! 
 
 Joseph Phillimore (who also holds the appointments of 
 Chancellor of Oxford and Worcester) was, by Dr. Lewis 
 Bagot, his uncle, and when Bishop of Bristol, appointed to the 
 Chancellorship of that Cathedral ; and Chi'istopher Wilson 
 was appointed Registrar, by his father, Dr. Wilson, when 
 Bishop, in 1790, conjointly with the Bishop's grandson, 
 Thomas Becket, Esq., now Sir Thomas Becket, Bart., who 
 also holds the same appointment at Gloucester. 
 
 R. J. Phillimore, the Liberal Member for Tavistock, the 
 son of the Chancellor of Gloucester, Oxford, Worcester, and 
 Bristol, is Chancellor of Chichester, and also Chancellor of 
 
 Sarttm ; and the Rev. Bucknor, now deceased, was 
 
 lately Registrar, an ofiice he received from his father. Dr. 
 John Bucknor, the Bishop, in 1812. 
 
 At Durham, the Hon. Russell Barrington, and the 
 Hon. and Rev. L. J. Barrington, received the appointments 
 of Registrars from their unxle, the Hon. Shute Barrington, 
 when Bishop. 
 
 John Heniy Sparke was appointed Chancellor of Ely, 
 and the Rev. E. B. Sparke, Registrar, hij their father. Dr. 
 B. E. Sparke, the Bishop, in 1817. 
 
 The Rev. W. A. W. Keppel was appointed Registrar of 
 Exeter, in 1829, hy his (jrand father, Dr. Frederick Keppel, 
 the Bishop.
 
 4,2 
 
 At Gloucester, Sir Thomas Becket succeeded the Rev. 
 R. F. Halifax, who had been appointed hy his father, Dr. 
 Halifax, the Bishop. 
 
 J. H. M. Luxmore, in 1813, received the appointment 
 of Registrar /rom Ms father, the Bishop. 
 
 The Rev. J. T. Law, son of Bishop Law, is Chancellor of 
 Lichfield, and Mr. Mott, the present Registrar, succeeded 
 the Rev. W. H. Mann, and the Rev. H. Mann, who had been 
 appointed to the ofiice of Registrar hy their uncle James, 
 Bishop of Lichfield. 
 
 The Right Hon. Stephen Lushington, Chancellor of Ro- 
 chester, is also Chancellor of London, an appointment he 
 received from his uncle, Bishop Law. 
 
 Eyre Stewart Bathurst was appointed in 1825, then 
 being a minor. Registrar of Norwich, hy his grandfather. 
 Dr. Henry Bathurst, the Bishop. 
 
 The Rev. J. E. Bagot, the Rev. C. W. Bagot, and F. 
 Bagot, Esq., are jointly Registrars of Oxford, and were 
 appointed, on the death of Thomas Lowth (who had 
 received the office from his father. Dr. Lowth, when 
 Bishop), to that office by their father. Dr. Richard Bagot, 
 the Bishop. 
 
 William Wales succeeded Stephen Madan in the 'office of 
 Chancellor at Peterborough, who had been appointed to 
 that ofiice hy his father, Dr. S. Madan, the Bishop. 
 
 The Rev. Walker King was, in 1819, jointly with his 
 brother, appointed by their father to the office of Registrar 
 of Rochester. 
 
 Fitzhubert Macdonald succeeded William Douglas Cle- 
 land, Esq., in the office of Registrar, at Salisbury; he had 
 received the appointment from Dr. Douglas, his grandfather, 
 who was Bishop in 1795. 
 
 The Rev. Henry Law, son of Bishop Law, is Chancellor 
 of Wells. 
 
 Brownlow North (then a minor) was appointed in 1817 
 Registrar of Winchester, hy his grandfather, the Hon. and 
 Right Rev. Brownlow North, the Bishop.
 
 43 
 
 F. H. Cornwall was, in 1827, appointed Registrar of 
 Worcester, hy his father, Dr. Cornwall, the Bishop. 
 
 Of the Ai-chiepiscopal Courts of Canterbury and York, 
 we have already given a full description. 
 
 Half the iniquities of the Ecclesiastical Courts have not 
 been entered into ; nothing has been said of their tyran- 
 nies, exemplified in the case of David Jones, the Unitarian 
 weaver, of Llanon, in Carmarthenshire,* who was imprisoned 
 for contumacy as churchwarden, because he had no funds 
 out of which, to procure bread and wine for the sacra- 
 ment. Exemplified also in the case of the respectable 
 farmer James, who, opposing a Tory candidate for a seat in 
 Parliament at the contested election, was cited by the Tory 
 Vicar of Llanelly for " absenting himself from church ;" 
 was tried before the Rural Dean, who was Judge of the 
 Ecclesiastical Court, and Editor of the Tory " Carmarthen 
 Journal," and condemned to prison and costs. Nothing has 
 been said of the nonsensical penances which these Courts 
 still have the privilege of inflicting. The mal-treatment of 
 the wiUs should alone sufiice to insure the abolition of public 
 incorporations which so gi'ossly misbehave themselves. 
 " Here goes the testator and a pedigree," cries a humorous 
 fLinctionary, when he lighted his pipe with a will at Durham. 
 " Here goes the testator and the legatees," might the Kilkenny 
 Registrar cry, when the records of that ofiice were " the 
 regular resource of the cook when she wanted to singe a 
 turkey, and the housemaid when she wanted to light a fii'e."-f- 
 " Here goes the testator and the baronies," might some gentle- 
 man at York exclaim, inserting the will on the record. 
 " Here goes the testator and the baronies," might some one 
 else ejaculate, while abolishing the will, and erasing the 
 index with a stroke of his pen. 
 
 How long, then, will these iniquities be permitted to 
 exist undisturbed ? How long will a much enduring 
 
 * See Speech of Mr. Hawes. Hansard, vol. xlvii. p. 522, April, 1839. 
 t Information supplied to the writer by the Rev. James Graves, M.A., 
 Kilkenny.
 
 44 
 
 public tolerate tliis wanton and wicked destruction of docu- 
 ments, the importance of which it were almost impossible 
 to exaggerate ? How long is the working curate, after his 
 expensive university career, to struggle to notice and to 
 proper social position on his paltry pittance, while Pluralistic 
 drones and Sinecurist sluggards are fattening on the Church's 
 Revenues ? 
 
 Archbishops, Bishops, and Dignitaries of the Church of 
 England, what avail your piety, your zeal, your learning, 
 while this gross injustice exists ; while these foul mal-prac- 
 tices are yet to be found, and this impious mal-appro- 
 priation of funds devoted to "pious uses" is yet endured. 
 Do not they, like these drones the Moores, the Harcourts, 
 and the Pretymans, give the Chartist or the Infidel a just 
 reason for his scepticism, his subversive tendencies, and his 
 violent language ? Are not these the deeds which tend 
 more to unsettle belief than all the philosophic shoutings of 
 Hobbes or Hume, the wit of Bolingbroke, the ridicule of 
 Voltaire, or the beautiftil pantheism of Spinosa ? 
 
 It is now notorious throughout the length and breadth 
 of the land that the Ecclesiastical Courts contain within 
 their wholesome parts a pestilent cancer of jobbery and plu- 
 ralism of the grossest kind. They have now been dragged 
 from their unholy lurking places, several especial bad cases 
 have now been exposed to the scandal of the country. Their 
 courts, it has been showoi, contain some fine specimens of 
 sinecurists in the character of Registrars and Chancellors, 
 nearly all of whom are the sons of deceased Bishops. There 
 they are, and there they will remain. Can we have the 
 cruelty to demand of them that which is in direct contra- 
 diction to the first conditions of their existence, namely, 
 work ? 
 
 Venerable prescription pleaded loudly for our rotten Par- 
 liamentary boroughs, and our equally peccant Municipal 
 Corporations, but in neither case was the argument from 
 prescription allowed to prevail. Junius, our greatest poli- 
 tical essayist, and the matchless historian of the Middle
 
 45 
 
 Ages, pleaded for these time-honoured abuses in vain. 
 They fell like ripe corn under the unrelenting sickle of 
 improvement, and the names of those who opposed their 
 destruction are preserved rather as literary cuiiosities than 
 as authorities against an act which the will of a nation ap- 
 proved, and the voice of a nation sanctioned. Yet, while 
 thus inexorable to these flagrant and vested iniquities, we 
 suffer to grow up and prosper among us monopolies far 
 more grievous and intolerable than that which Old Sarum 
 exercised in returning two Members to Parliament, or 
 Sutton Coldfield when it melted down the monuments of its 
 corporate existence to a purple pulp by the droppings of 
 corporation wine. The noble lord to whom these pages 
 are dedicated says that the love of antiquity is inveterate 
 amongst us — that no sign can beat the Old Hats but the 
 ..Old Old Hats ; but, as far as we are able to see, the Old 
 Old Registrars and Deputy Registrars of Roman Catholic 
 and Monastic times are far better than the old imitations of 
 them which have descended to this the nineteenth century. 
 The earliest condemnation has been echoed with all the 
 experience and authority of the most modern times ; the 
 difficulty seems to have been to hit upon the measure. The 
 House of Lords has condemned these Courts, and Judges 
 in the Court of Chancery condemn the course of proceedings 
 taken before them ; for Lord Justice Knight Bruce, on an 
 application of counsel in an administration suit for the usual 
 order of reference to the Master, replied, " Yes, — let the 
 
 USUAL decree go FOR DESTROYING THE ESTATE IN DUE 
 
 COURSE OF LAW." Legatees are deprived of their bequests, 
 " next of kin " have their shares of the estate needlessly 
 diminished or consumed by expense, and creditors are sub- 
 jected to numerous annoyances, delay, and costs. How 
 much wrong is committed of which the public knows no- 
 thing ! How many persons, all victims to the host of sine- 
 curists, who are allowed year after year to luxuriate in the 
 patrimony of the fatherless and the orphan ! Surely a wise 
 Parliament will not longer delay the day of pvu'ification.
 
 46 
 
 Well might Mr. Labouchere exclaim in the House of Com- 
 mons, " Of all the abuses in our Courts, those in the eccle- 
 siastical jurisdiction are the most flagrant and the most 
 aggravated." * 
 
 The question is not understood by many members of the 
 House of Commons, nor indeed (we suspect) has it been 
 understood by many ministers of the Crown. It is very 
 important that those who wish the reform of those Courts 
 should agree generally on what reform they desire, for on 
 this point there seems to be a great difference of opinion. 
 Let us take as example the debates on the Bill of 1843. In 
 the course of those debates, Sir Robert Peel said, " I scarcely 
 recollect a Bill which has had the misfortune, like the pre- 
 sent Bill, to meet with vehement opposition from gentlemen 
 who maintain such extremely discordant opinions, for Sir 
 Robert Inglis and Mr. Thomas Duncoml)e mean to vote in. 
 opposition to the Bill, not only on different but on precisely 
 contrary grounds." -f* Sir Robert Inglis was opposed to 
 reform of any kind, and wished the present law preserved ; 
 and Mr. Thomas Duncombe would not support a Bill which 
 should not abolish the civil code altogether, though at the 
 same time he declared that tliere were no Courts which gave 
 greater dissatisfaction to the public. Colonel Sibthorp j 
 protested against the bringing forward of a measure of this 
 natiu-e : " It was a measure of what was called ' reform,' 
 a thing which he detested as he detested the devil." The 
 practitioners in the Courts, the Judges, and the Registrars 
 of the Courts, proved too strong. No purity of intention, 
 no candid or fair dealing, no upright or open conduct, could 
 protect the reform against hostile influences ; for we find 
 that Lord Robert Grosvenor, a tried reformer, now mem- 
 ber for Middlesex, opposed the Bill of 1843, but then he 
 was nnenfiher for Chester ; and his family connection with 
 Chester, in which city the Registrar is a man of consider- 
 able influence, and receives no less than 1 1,530Z. per annum, 
 explains this. Sir John Jervis, another reformer, hut mevi- 
 * Hani^ai'd, vol. Ixviii. t Hansard, vol. Ixxiii. + Hansard, vol. Ixviii.
 
 47 
 
 her for Chester, also opposed the Bill ; Mr, Yorke, a radical 
 reformer, and member for the City of York, with his col- 
 league, Mr. Lowther, a conservative, also opposed the Bill. 
 Well might Lord Brougham declare that he never remem- 
 bered so powerful a host of adversaries armed against any- 
 one measure. The opposition the Reform Bill met with 
 out of doors was really a joke compared to the opposition 
 to tliis Bill.* And Lord Denman said, that "he regarded 
 it as a melanchol}'' and mortifjdng circumstance, that a Court 
 whose abolition had been recommended for fourteen years, 
 a Court which was a public nuisance, whose operation was 
 most oppressive towards individuals, which had been con- 
 demned by all autliorities of every description entitled to 
 respect, should baffle the attempts of a Government which 
 had come in with so much power to effect its removal." 
 
 It cannot be contended that the Court in question have 
 any right to retain testamentary jurisdiction. The Eccle- 
 siastical Commissioners' Report, signed by the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, and five other Bishops, with many distin- 
 gTiished lawyers, states, " that in administering testamen- 
 tary law, the Ecclesiastical Court exercises a jurisdiction 
 purely civil, and in name only ecclesiastical." 
 
 If, indeed, the Court ever had the right, they have now 
 totally forfeited it. It has been shown that the present 
 practice of proving wills, granting letters of administra- 
 tion, and " preserving " records, is a disgrace to the age ; 
 and that some sweeping measure for the aboHtion of these 
 mysterious colonies of Rats and Registrars is imperative. 
 The duties of the officers of these Courts must no longer be 
 left to be ill discharged, or entirely neglected. Such abuses 
 were tolerated in early times when England was under the 
 power of the Priesthood. At that time most wills were 
 nuncupative, or by word of mouth ; and as a Priest was 
 generally beside the testator at his death, priestly testi- 
 mony to the will was generally indispensable. But why 
 retain now the sacerdotal interference and control instituted 
 * Hansard, vol. Ixvi.
 
 48 
 
 in dark ages ? Why not give to our wills and records, and 
 to the interests involved in them, the advantages available 
 at the present time, and suitable to an advanced civili- 
 sation ? Why not place the testamentary interests of this 
 great commercial nation under some proper officer to be ap- 
 pointed by the Crown, to be called the Registrar of Her 
 Majesty's Court of Probate. Since the establishment of the 
 Registrar General's Department at Somerset, House the pub- 
 lic can " for a small fee and in a few minutes obtain a cer- 
 tificate of any marriage, birth, or death that has occuri'ed 
 throughout all England since the establishment of the office." 
 There needs be no more difficulty about the custody and 
 registration of wills. That the nation should so long have 
 tolerated the present practice of proving wills is surprising, 
 since an effort rightly directed and resolutely prosecuted by 
 the people through their representatives in Parliament 
 would at once bring about the reform we require. 
 
 The plan I would suggest may be shortly stated. All 
 the original wills throughout England should be deposited 
 with the officer appointed by the Crown ; they should 
 all be printed in the form of the present Chancery pro- 
 ceedings, and an index of the whole should be formed. 
 A copy should be sent to each County Court. In future, 
 all the wills should be printed at the expense of the ex- 
 ecutor,* and a copy sent free to the Stamp Office. This 
 would save the comitry a considerable sum per annum. 
 One copy should be sent to the County Court of the 
 district in wliich the person died. These wills and indexes 
 should be placed under the care of a proper civil officer, 
 and really for such a purpose none appears so proper as the 
 Principal Registrar of marriages, &c., for that county. Each 
 person named in the will should have a printed notice from 
 the Principal Officer of the Court. The County Courts 
 might decide all cases under 501., and in disputes of a 
 larger amount the Superior Courts should have jurisdiction. 
 All proceedings should be exercised in the name of Her 
 * Civil Service Gazette, p. 635, Oct. 1, 1853.
 
 49 
 
 Majesty, and all j»roceeding,s headed 'Her Ma.ikstv's CIonfiT 
 OF Probate/' 
 
 Ministers have ah-eady confessed that tlie Augean stables 
 of Doctors' Commons must be cleansed ; and in tlie grand 
 reform that will, at no very distant date, be applied to the 
 manifold abuses of the Prerogative Court, surely the faci- 
 lity thus shown of opening the knowledge of wills to tlie 
 community at large by such a cheap and simple process will 
 not be overlooked ; the less, since a reform would be so per- 
 fectly easy, and the machinery for supplying that whicli is 
 so ill contrived and so totally worn out exists in fdll work- 
 ino' order. 
 
 THE ]':nd. 
 
 Wooafall and Kinder, Printers, Angel Court, Skinner Street, London.
 
 ) 
 

 
 ^NIVERSTTY OF CALIFORNIA LIL 
 
 eles 
 
 BX 
 B83a 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 III 11 III III iiiiiiH iiiii ii| 1 1 111111 mill 
 
 AA 000 979 598