w 
 
 w 
 
 '-"^ 
 
 ,v 
 
 '^^^ 
 
 ^' 
 
 i^-f.\
 
 L I B RARY 
 
 OF THL 
 U N I VER.5ITY 
 or 1 LLl NOIS
 
 SEQUEL 
 
 REMARKS UPON CHURCH REFORM, 
 
 * Sfc. Sfc.
 
 SEQUEL 
 
 REMARKS UPON CHURCH REFORM, 
 
 OBSERVATIONS 
 
 UPON 
 
 THE PLAN PROPOSED BY LORD HENLEY. 
 
 REV. EDWARD BURTON, D. D. 
 
 REGivs rrtoFESson of divinity in the univeusity of oxford, canon of 
 ciiiusTcnuacii, and rector of ewelme. 
 
 LONDON: 
 ROAKE AND VARTY, 31, STRAND, 
 
 AND 
 
 J. PARKER, OXI-'OlllX 
 1832.
 
 '1 UIUC °
 
 SEQUEL 
 
 REMARKS UPON CHURCH REFORM, 
 
 Having been induced, in the course of last year, 
 to publish some Remarks upon Church Reform, I 
 have read with much interest some of the nume- 
 rous works which have appeared upon the same 
 subject : and it has been a cause of mortification, 
 as well as of surprise, to find that the question 
 has made so little progress, and that no practical 
 plan has yet been attempted. I am bound to 
 add, that the scheme recommended by myself 
 does not appear to have gained many advocates ; 
 though I have good reason to think, that the 
 objections have been advanced by persons who 
 have not taken pains to investigate it : and it 
 still appears to me not only practicable, but likely 
 to be more beneficial than any other which has 
 been proposed- 
 
 Among the persons, who have expressed them- 
 selves decidedly opposed to my suggestions, the 
 first place ought to be given to Lord Henley, 
 
 B
 
 ( V! ) 
 
 who has lately put forward " A Plan of Church 
 Reform," of which the thu'd edition is now lying be- 
 fore me. This rapidity of sale is a sufficient proof of 
 the popularity of the work : and though many per- 
 sons have denounced the plan as "mischievous," I 
 could never suffer myself to apply the term to a 
 work which is written in such a Christian spirit, 
 and with such a sincere regard to the best inte- 
 rests of religion. If all persons would approach 
 the subject of Church Reform with the same feel- 
 ings as Lord Henley, there would be nothing to 
 apprehend from discussion and disagreement. We 
 might differ as to the best mode of accomplishing 
 the object; but we should be agreed in endeavour- 
 ing to reform the Church, so as to make it produce 
 the most good, and to render the greatest service 
 to the souls and bodies of men. This is the defi- 
 nition which was given of Church Reform in my 
 former publication; and I feel convinced that there 
 is no difference between Lord Henley and myself 
 upon this point. I also ventured to say, that the 
 first object to be accomplished is the augmentation 
 of small livings : and though Lord Henley has 
 dwelt upon many other points as being of primary 
 importance, he is fully impressed with the neces- 
 sity of increasing small livings; and this is in fact 
 the principal part of the scheme which he has 
 given in detail. It will be my object, in the pre- 
 sent remarks, to point out the impracticability of 
 his Lordship's plan : after which I shall explain at
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 greater length the scheme recommended l)y my- 
 self; and endeavour to shew, upon principles ac- 
 knowledged by Lord Henley, that it is not only 
 free from the objections which he brings against 
 it, but that it would be much more effective than 
 his own plan in preventing the abuses which he 
 deplores. 
 
 To those who have not read Lord Henley's 
 pamphlet, I would state in a few words, that he 
 proposes to invest all the property, now belonging 
 to Bishops and Chapters, in the hands of Commis- 
 sioners. All the present sees are to be retained ; and 
 two new Bishops, not being Lords of Parliament, 
 are to be appointed. The Chapters of all the Ca- 
 thedrals are to be entirely remodelled. A Dean and 
 two Chaplains are to perform the daily service in 
 each cathedral, and the stalls are either to be an- 
 nexed to livings situated within the city, or (where 
 this cannot be effected) to be suppressed alto- 
 gether. The sum of money, which will remain, 
 after paying these several functionaries, is to be 
 applied to the augmentation and improvement of 
 the smaller benefices. 
 
 Lord Henley assumes the aggregate of the epis- 
 copal revenues to be 163,000/. per annum: and 
 since his own scheme, though altering the incomes 
 of individuals, would make the whole payment to 
 the Bishops amount to precisely the same sum, I 
 need not at present take any notice of this part of 
 the plan. The augmentation of small livings.
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 which I have stated to be my leading object, would 
 not be effected by this new distribution of the 
 revenues of the Bishops. 
 
 Lord Henley gives two calculations concerning 
 the property of Deans and Chapters, and of Col- 
 legfiate Churches. Dr. Cove estimated it some 
 years ago at 275,000Z. per annum. Mr. Rose has 
 more recently stated it to be 300,000/. Lord 
 Henley has adopted the latter sum as the basis 
 of his own calculations ; and for the present we 
 will assume it to be correct. Out of this sum 
 he proposes to apply 52,600Z. to the stipends of 
 the Deans and their Chaplains; and 100,0001. j)er 
 annum to the maintenance of those stalls which are 
 still to be retained. The remainder, which may be 
 called in round numbers 150,000/., is to be de- 
 voted to the augmentation of small livings. 
 
 The plan, as thus stated, is extremely attractive. 
 It seems likely to accomplish, and with great 
 rapidity, the removal of that blot in our establish- 
 ment, the great inequality of benefices : and if 
 Lord Henley could really produce the sum of 
 150,000/. which would annually be available for 
 such a purpose, I would say nothing of his pur- 
 chasing the benefit by the sacrifice of so many 
 ancient establishments. It is true, that Lord 
 Henley does not actually reckon upon having so 
 large a sum at his disposal : and his own pamphlet 
 furnishes materials for making most alarming de- 
 ductions : but still he has not given the amount of
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 these deductions : and in one place (p. 40.), he 
 distinctly states that the residue " will amount to 
 about the annual sum of 150,000/." Unfortunately 
 for the augmentation of small benefices, it will ap- 
 pear upon investigation, that this ample residue 
 will be reduced almost to nothing, as may be seen 
 by the following considerations. 
 
 The fifteenth section in Lord Henley's plan pro- 
 vides, " that the following payments be made by 
 the corporation out of the funds so vested in them : 
 viz. the stipends of the several ecclesiastical per- 
 sons as fixed by the Act ; the salaries of the Com- 
 missioners and other officers, and the expenses of 
 carrying the Act into execution, as specially di- 
 rected by it; the repair of Cathedrals, and of those 
 Churches, of which the property is hereby vested 
 in the corporation ; the expenses of Choirs and 
 other charges attendant on Divine Service ; and 
 also the repairs of the Palaces and Residences of 
 such ecclesiastical persons." 
 
 I will take each of these clauses in their order, 
 omitting the first, which has no reference to the 
 sum now under consideration. With respect to the 
 salaries of Commissioners and other officers, it is 
 provided in Section IV. that there shall be eight 
 Commissioners who receive pay ; and in Section VI. 
 that there shall be an Accountant-General with a cer- 
 tain number of clerks : and it would not, perhaps, be 
 extravagant to fix the expense of these salaries at 
 5,0001. per annum. This sum shall be taken to include 
 the whole expense of the machinery of the l)oard,
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 tliougli many other items might be named : and 
 thus the sum of 5,000/. is to be deducted from 
 the 150,000/. I shall say nothing of "the expenses 
 of carrying the Act into execution," which though 
 extremely heavy would occur only once. 
 
 The next item is " the repair of Cathedrals, and 
 of those Churches, of which the property is hereby 
 vested in the corporation." I have procured re- 
 turns of the sums actually laid out upon the repair 
 of eleven cathedrals; and they give an average of 
 of 1,04:21. jJer annum. This average is below the 
 sum which is laid out annually upon some of our 
 largest and most venerable Cathedrals : but it is 
 too high as a general calculation. I cannot, how- 
 ever, venture to reduce it, when I consider the 
 contingency of such events as the fires at West- 
 minster Abbey and York Minster, or the falling of 
 the west-end of Hereford Cathedral. These cala- 
 mities are now met by a large temporary sacrifice 
 on the part of the Chapter. For several years the 
 sum devoted to repairs greatly exceeds the usual 
 average : and such cases must be expected not unfre- 
 quently, out of a number of thirty-two Cathedrals. 
 The board of Commissioners would then be obliged 
 to defray the whole expense. The incomes of the 
 Deans and the few remaining prebendaries being 
 reduced to a settled stipend, it could not be ex- 
 pected that they \yould come forward as before, 
 and take the burthen upon themselves. Even if 
 they had the wish, they would not have the means.
 
 ( y ) 
 
 The Commissioners would frequently be called 
 upon for a sudden and extraordinary repair, to the 
 amount of several thousand pounds : and I cannot, 
 therefore, venture to put this item of expense at 
 less than what appears to be the average of ordi- 
 nary repairs. It would probably greatly exceed 
 it: but I will put it at the sum of 1,000/. which 
 will bring the repair of thirty-two Cathedrals to 
 32,000Z. per annum. 
 
 Lord Henley also provides for the repair of 
 *' those Churches, of which the property is hereby 
 vested in the corporation :" and though he does 
 not calculate the number of these Churches, we may 
 form some estimate of them by the provisions in 
 Section XXXI. which orders " that the corporation 
 shall take an account of all the livings in the gift 
 of the several Chapters aforesaid, situated within 
 the cities where such Chapters are." These livings 
 are in future to be in the gift of the corporation : 
 and according to the provisions in Section XV. the 
 Churches are to be kept in repair by the funds at 
 the disposal of the corporation. I have taken 
 some pains in ascertaining the number of these 
 Churches ; and I find that there are rather more 
 than one hundred livings in cathedral towns, which 
 are in the gift of the respective Deans and Chap- 
 ters. Lord Henley would increase the number of 
 them : for the same Section XXXI. gives a power 
 '' to annex other livings within such cities to such 
 stalls :" but I will estimate them only at one hun- 
 dred: and the repedr of one hundred Churches,
 
 ( « ) 
 
 when we reckon for extraordinary contingencies, 
 can hardly be put at less than 25/. a piece, or in 
 all 2,500Z. per annum: which sum, when added to 
 the 32,000/. which would be required for the repair 
 of thirty-two Cathedrals, will amount to 34,500/. 
 per annum: and this must be deducted from the 
 residue of 150,000/. 
 
 The next item contains " the expenses of Choirs 
 and other charges attendant on Divine Service :" and 
 since it is distinctly stated in Section XXXIII. that 
 the cathedral service is to be continued "in like man- 
 ner as has heretofore been done," we must calcu- 
 late the expense of an organist, singing men, cho- 
 risters, vergers, &c. &c. in all the cathedrals. There 
 are now twenty-five Cathedrals, in which there is 
 daily choral service. Lord Henley's establishment 
 contains thirty-two Cathedrals : and whoever is 
 acquainted with these matters, will know that the 
 choirs of thirty-two Cathedrals would be very 
 cheaply served for 10,000/. per annum : and this 
 sum is also to include the " other charges atten- 
 dant on divine service." 
 
 The last item in this section refers to "the re- 
 pairs of the palaces and residences of such eccle- 
 siastical persons." Here I am obliged to take the 
 Bishops into my calculations ; for though the sum of 
 163,000/., as it is now divided among the Bishops, 
 is able also to keep their houses in repair, the same 
 sum, when distributed according to the equalizing 
 system, is found to be insufficient for that purpose. 
 Lord Henley accordingly proposes, that the expense
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 of repairing the episcopal houses shoukl be paid by 
 the board of Commissioners, i. e. out of his residue 
 of 150,000/. His scheme comprehends twenty-eight 
 Bishops : and when we consider the size and antiquity 
 of some of their residences, their annual repair will 
 not be rated highly at 5000/. But Lord Henley also 
 provides for repairing the houses of all the ecclesi- 
 astical persons mentioned in the Act. These per- 
 sons consist of thirty-two Deans, sixty-four Chap- 
 lains, and a certain number of Canons or Preben- 
 daries, who, according to the provisions already 
 cited from Section XXXI, will be at least one hun- 
 dred ; so that we have one hundred and ninety-six 
 houses to be kept in repair by the board of Commis- 
 sioners in addition to the residences of the Bishops. 
 The sum of 7000/. is not too large to be devoted to 
 this purpose : and we must thus deduct 12,000/. 
 from the residue of 150,000/. 
 
 The next clause which we have to notice, is one 
 of great liberality on the part of Lord Henley, but 
 which is very fatal to his residue of 150,000/. In 
 Section XXIV. it is provided, " That every Bishop 
 shall, once in every year, hold a Visitation in his 
 Diocese, and that every Archdeacon shall, once in 
 every year, visit every parish in his Archdeaconry : 
 and that the expenses of such Visitations be paid 
 by the Corporation to Bishops and Archdeacons, 
 according to a rate of per mile for travelling 
 
 expenses, and per day for other disburse- 
 
 ments." I am not versed in settling the travelling 
 expenses of Bishops and Archdeacons : but the
 
 ( 10 ) 
 
 Barristers, who are to visit their political dioceses 
 under the Reform Bill, are to be paid " at the rate 
 of five guineas for every day they shall be so em- 
 ployed, over and above their travelling and other 
 expenses." This may, perhaps, furnish a prece- 
 dent for Archbishops and Bishops : and we may 
 reasonably allow them at the rate of four shillings 
 a mile for travelling. If we take one diocese with 
 another, each Bishop must perform his visitations 
 rapidly to finish them in four days, and we may 
 suppose them to travel fifty miles a day : this will 
 require a sum of 1708/. without allowing anything 
 for " other expenses." With respect to the Arch- 
 deacons, I will not institute a comparison between 
 the importance of their labours and those of the re- 
 gistering Barristers ; but as Lawyers charge much 
 more for their time than the Clergy, instead of giv- 
 ing the Archdeacons five guineas a day, we will 
 only give them half that sum, and two shillings a 
 mile for travelling expenses. The Archdeacons 
 must consume many more days in their visitations 
 than the Bishops, since they are to visit every 
 parish in their Archdeaconry once in every year. 
 There are now sixty Archdeacons: and since there 
 are 10,000 parishes, each Archdeacon must visit on 
 the average, one hundred and sixtyrsix churches. It 
 is scarcely possible to visit more than four churches 
 in one day, so that each Archdeacon will employ at 
 least forty-one days in his visitation. The distance 
 travelled by him each day will be less than that 
 travelled by the Bishops : i)erhaps he will not exceed
 
 ( 11 ) 
 
 twenty miles a day ; and the expenses of the sixty 
 Archdeacons will be found, upon this very moderate 
 scale, to amount to 11,377/.; and this must be 
 deducted from the residue of 150,000/. 
 
 The next article also furnishes a very heavy de- 
 duction : but it is so heavy, that I scarcely know 
 how to proceed in my calculations, lest I should ap- 
 pear to wish to reduce this unfortunate residue im- 
 properly. Lord Henley shall speak for himself. 
 He says, in Section XXV. — " That where any 
 Archbishop, Bishop, or the Incumbent of any Be- 
 nefice, having a population of 1500 souls, shall 
 become permanently incapacitated, by age or in- 
 firmities, from discharging the duties of his office ; 
 or shall, after fifteen years' service therein, have 
 attained the age of seventy years, such person shall 
 be entitled, upon resigning such preferment, to re- 
 ceive a pension equal to one half of the stipend 
 thereof, provided such pension shall not exceed 
 3000/. j^er annum, except the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, who shall be entitled to a retiring pension 
 of 4000/. per annum.'' It will, perhaps, be con- 
 ceded, that this clause will be worse than nugatory, 
 unless it be made imperative, that each of the per- 
 sons mentioned in it, shall resign his preferment 
 upon attaining the age of seventy. To make the re- 
 signation optional, or dependent on the judgment of 
 the Commissioners, would be such an inconvenient 
 and invidious proceeding, that the rule must either 
 be invariable, or not exist at all. I believe that
 
 ( 1^ ) 
 
 there arc now at least seven persons on the Episco- 
 pal Bench, who have reached the age of 70 ; and 
 when the number of Bishops is raised to twenty- 
 eight, this must always be expected. The retiring 
 pensions of these seven persons would amount at 
 least to 21,000/. 
 
 With respect to the Incumbents of Benefices 
 having a population of 1500 souls, it is difficult to 
 calculate their number accurately ; but the livings 
 in the patronage of the University of Oxford will, 
 perhaps, enable us to form a tolerable estimate. 
 The number of these livings is 426, of which there 
 are 68 with a population of 1500 souls :* so that out 
 of the 10,000 livings in England and Wales, we 
 may suppose that there are 1596 with a population 
 of 1500 souls. Some of these 426 livings being 
 chapelries, or small perpetual curacies, there are 
 only 400 incumbents : and I find that 19 of these 
 incumbents were presented to their livings before 
 the year 1790 : and we may fairly assume, that 
 they are now 70 years old.f If we follow this pro- 
 portion, there will be 75 of the 1596 incumbents 
 entitled to the retiring pension, which is to equal 
 one half of the stipend of the preferment : and when 
 we consider the plan which is proposed for raising 
 
 * This is according to the census of 1821 : so that now there 
 are probably more than 68 livings with 1500 souls. 
 
 t If we take the average length of a clergyman's life, it is pro- 
 bable that there will be more than 19 clergymen out of 400, who 
 have reached the age of 70.
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 the value of all benefices, we ought not to place 
 this retiring pension at less than 300/. per annum. 
 The whole sum, therefore, which will be paid in 
 pensions to superannuated incumbents, will be 
 22,500/. ; which, added to the pensions of the 
 Bishops, will amount to 43,500/. ; and this must be 
 deducted from the residue of 150,000/. 
 
 The next item is one of small amount, when com- 
 pared with the two last. It is in Section XXXII. 
 where it is provided, — "That, in those cases where 
 Chapter preferment is now attached to Professor- 
 ships, or Heads of Houses, upon the death or re- 
 moval of the present possessor, the future holder 
 shall receive an annual payment from the Corpo- 
 ration, equal to the average of the last three years." 
 If we may judge from the University of Oxford, 
 this payment will amount to about 3000/. per 
 annum, which is to be deducted from the residue 
 of 150,000/. 
 
 I have now gone through all the items of expense 
 which are to be defrayed by the Board of Com- 
 missioners. If I had been anxious to swell the 
 aggregate of these expenses, I might have named 
 many other sums. For instance. Lord Henley 
 proposes in Section VII. "that a commission be 
 appointed to inquire into the best means of giving 
 efficiency to the Convocation :" and since it would 
 be absolutely impossible for the Bishops and 
 Clergy to defray the expenses attendant upon a 
 session of convocation, the money must be paid
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 by the Board of Commissioners or ])y the country. 
 The expense to which the country is put by Mr. 
 Hume alone for printed returns, would ruin the 
 Board of Commissioners in one year, and I shall 
 therefore say nothing more about it. It will be 
 remembered, that the whole sum which Lord 
 Henley has to deal with is 300,000/. Out of this 
 sum, the Deans and other Clergymen are to receive 
 150,000/., or to speak more correctly, 152,600/. 
 The remainder is 147,400/., and this is the fund 
 intended for the augmentation of small livings. 
 
 But we have seen, that Lord Henley has himself 
 specified several other payments, which are to be 
 made out of this fund, before any part of it is ap- 
 plied to the augmentation of small livings. These 
 payments are as follow : 
 
 Salaries of Commissioners . . £5000 
 Repairs of Cathedrals .... 32,000 
 
 Churches : . . . 2,500 
 
 Choirs, &c 10,000 
 
 Repairs of Bishops' Palaces . , 5,000 
 — Clergymen's Houses 
 
 Bishops' Visitations 
 
 Archdeacons' Visitations . 
 
 Bishops' Pensions .... 
 
 Clergymen's Pensions 
 
 Professors and Heads of Houses 3,000 
 
 7,000 
 
 1,708 
 
 11,377 
 
 21,000 
 
 22,500 
 
 £121,085 
 It appears, therefore, that instead of a residue of
 
 ( 15 ) 
 
 150,000/. as Lord Henley has assumed, the Com- 
 missioners will only have 26,315/. for the augmen- 
 tation of small livings. If any person will take the 
 trouble to examine the calculations I have made, he 
 will find that they are taken on a very moderate 
 scale ; and I feel convinced, that if Lord Henley's 
 scheme was actually to be tried with all its provi- 
 sions, the Commissioners would scarcely have any 
 surplus at all for the augmentation of small livings. 
 If it should turn out, that Mr. Rose has exaggerated 
 the amount of cathedral property, and that Dr. 
 Cove was right in estimating it only at 275,000/. 
 per annum, the residue would amount to little more 
 than 1000/. The Commissioners would probably be 
 bankrupts in the first year of their managing the 
 concern : or even if they were not, the sum would 
 not be as great as that which now arises from the 
 fund called Queen Anne's Bounty. With respect 
 to the two calculations of Dr. Cove and Mr. Rose, 
 it is difficult to decide as to their relative correct- 
 ness. Lord Henley, when speaking of the Chapters, 
 says, " The number of dignitaries is usually stated 
 at 600, with stipends varying from mere nominal 
 sums to incomes of very large amount;" and this 
 statement might make it appear not improbable, 
 that the total revenues of the whole body amount 
 to 300,000/. per annum. But the accuracy of the 
 passage just quoted may perhaps be doubted. If the 
 term '' dignitary" be limited, as it generally is, to 
 Deans and Residentiaries, the whole number of
 
 ( n^ ) 
 
 (Jignitaries, instead of ])eing 600, cannot be raised 
 to 230. I have taken some pains to ascertain the 
 annual incomes of these persons, and I am confi- 
 dent that in several instances the calculation ex- 
 ceeds the truth. It may be said to amount to some- 
 thing less than 200,000/. : so that if the income of 
 the whole body is equal to 300,000/., as Mr. Rose 
 has stated,* we must suppose a sum exceeding 
 100,000/, to be divided annually between other per- 
 sons belonging to the cathedral, or to be made up 
 from the property of other collegiate churches : a 
 supposition which appears rather improbable. Mr. 
 Rose has perhaps calculated the gross receipts of the 
 different chapters ; in which case, his statement 
 may probably be not far from the truth. But Lord 
 Henley has reckoned upon the sum of 300,000/. as 
 being clear without any deductions besides those 
 specified by himself. He is perhaps not aware of 
 the expenses attending every renewal of a lease. 
 Large sums are paid every seven or fourteen years for 
 surveys of estates. Chapters, like other landlords, 
 have many drawbacks in settling with their tenants : 
 and if the Commissioners of Lord Henley's board 
 had a nominal rental of 300,000/. they would find 
 it grievously reduced, before they began to appro- 
 priate the money. The drawbacks would amount 
 to at least the surplus of 26,315/. and there would 
 in fact be no surplus at all. 
 
 * Mr. Rose's expression is " under 300,000Z. ;" which is altered 
 by Lord Henley to " about 300,000^."
 
 ( 17 ) 
 
 The question now presents itself, wliethev it 
 is worth while to make this o-reat chanoe in 
 our ecclesiastical establishment, for the chance of 
 having 26,315/. per annum for the augmentation of 
 small livings. Without dwelling on the smallness 
 of this sum, and the uncertainty of its existence, 
 there are objections to the scheme itself, wliicl) 
 would incline me to look out for some better mode 
 of eftecting the same objects. In the first place, I 
 cannot think that the Deans will be made more effi- 
 cient, either as members of society, or as ministers 
 of religion, by being confined for nine months in the 
 year to perform the daily service in their cathe- 
 drals. But this is a point, upon which I shall say 
 more hereafter. Another objection arises out of a 
 circumstance, which is likely to have escaped the 
 knowledge of Lord Henley, but which a member of 
 a Chapter cannot well pass over. I may say with 
 truth, that scarcely a month elapses, in which the 
 Chapter, to which I belong, does not receive an ap- 
 plication from some place in which it happens to 
 have property. The parish church is to be rebuilt 
 or repaired, a churchyard is to be enlarged, an or- 
 gan is to be erected, a school is to be established, 
 or some other good work of this kind is contem- 
 plated ; and the Chapter, as receiving the great 
 tithes, or as having property in. the parish, is ap- 
 plied to for its subscription. I am quite sure, that 
 Lord Henley would not wish these sources of cha- 
 rity to l)e dried up : Init such would inevitably be
 
 ( 18 ) 
 
 the case, if all the cathedral property was vested in 
 the hands of Commissioners. There is now a natu- 
 ral connexion between the two parties. The ap- 
 plication is perhaps not always attended to : but 
 still a considerable sum of money is expended in this 
 way : and if all the cathedral property in England 
 was managed by one board, it is quite certain that 
 claims of charity on such an extended scale could 
 not be listened to. The objection which is now 
 made to tithes being paid to persons who are not re- 
 sident in the parish, would still be felt, but with 
 increased force. At present there is some portion, 
 however small, which returns now and then in the 
 shape of a charitable subscription : but Lord Hen- 
 ley's scheme would put an end to all such benefac- 
 tions : and I feel confident that he is not aware of 
 the injury which would be caused in this way by the 
 new arrangement. 
 
 These and other objections might perhaps appear 
 of minor importance, if they were the necessary 
 result of an extensive plan for augmenting the 
 smaller livings : but when we bear in mind, that 
 all these changes would be made, and that little or 
 no benefit would accrue to the smaller livings, we 
 ought perhaps to pause, before we try an experi- 
 ment, which has so little practical good to recom- 
 mend it. 
 
 It may be said, in answer to this, that the bene- 
 fit would be immense, if pluralities, sinecures, tlie 
 inequality of l)enefices, and all such e\nls, are re-
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 moved from our Church Establishment. I would 
 be the first to assent to this proposition : and it is 
 with some unwillingness that I venture to assert, 
 that Lord Henley's scheme, properly so called, 
 does not provide for the removal of any one of 
 these evils. Lord Henley would wish to see them 
 removed, and so would every sincere friend to 
 religion and the Church. But Lord Henley 
 knows as well as I do, that there is one prelimi- 
 nary step, which must precede his reform : a step, 
 over which he has no control : but without which 
 he cannot put the smallest particle of his scheme 
 into practice. I allude to the patronage of Church 
 Preferment, and particularly to that which belongs 
 to the Crown. I am aware of the difficulty under 
 which Lord Henley writes, and can fully under- 
 stand his feelings, when he said at page 56, 
 " There is one remaining point, which, though 
 not made the subject of any specific proposal in 
 the following plan, is yet so deeply connected with 
 the purity of the Church, that it w^ould be im- 
 proper to omit all notice of it, though the time is 
 not yet arrived when we can hope for any legisla- 
 tive enactment respecting it. It relates to the 
 mode of disposing of the Crown Patronage." 
 This declaration is sufficiently discouraging. Lord 
 Henley had said at page 34, " It is clear from 
 what has been already premised, that the augmen- 
 tation of small Livings, and the endowment of 
 Churches in poor and populous places, can onlj'^
 
 ( 20 ) 
 
 be effected by tbe application of some portion of 
 cathedral property." This is, in fact, the founda- 
 tion of his Lordship's whole scheme. Unless the 
 Crown will give up its patronage of preferment in 
 cathedrals, he cannot execute any one of the 
 thirty-four provisions contained in his plan : and 
 yet he says, in the passage quoted above, "that 
 the time is not yet arrived, when we can hope for 
 any legislative enactment respecting it !" 
 
 This, then, is the real state of the question : not 
 whether Lord Henley's is a good scheme for abo- 
 lishing pluralities, sinecures, and all such evils ; 
 but whether, supposing them to be abolished by 
 an alteration of patronage, it would then be 
 advisable to apply his Lordship's scheme. This 
 view of the case will materially assist us in coming 
 to an agreement upon the question of Church 
 Reform. I perfectly agree with Lord Henley in 
 condemning pluralities, non-residence, sinecures, 
 &c. «&c. I should rejoice to see some legislative 
 enactment, by which such evils would be rendered 
 impossible. We are both agreed in thinking the 
 augmentation of small livings an indispensable 
 preliminary to real reform : so that, in fact, there 
 is scarcely any difference between us, except as to 
 the best mode of raising a fund for this purpose. 
 I have endeavoured to shew that Lord Henley 
 would not raise the sum which he has calculated. 
 The scheme which I am about to develope, will 
 produce a much larger sum ; and though I am
 
 ( 21 ) 
 
 equally anxious with Lord Henley to see an altera- 
 tion in the Crown Patronage, it will be observed 
 that my plan might exist without it, whereas that 
 of Lord Henley cannot be applied, till the pre- 
 ferment in the gift of the Crown is placed at his 
 disposal. 
 
 In my former pamphlet I mentioned the outline 
 of the plan which I would propose. It is, that all 
 benefices of a certain amount should pay an annual 
 tax, which should form a fund for the improvement 
 of the smaller livings. I perhaps expressed myself 
 incautiously on the subject of tenths ; and many 
 persons have taken fright, as if it was intended 
 that every living should pay a tenth of its actual 
 annual income. Nothing was farther from my 
 thoughts than such a proposal. Though I ex- 
 pressed myself favourable to the plan of making 
 the payment of tenths " more real than it is at 
 present," I added, " there is, perhaps, no virtue 
 or charm in the number ten. A graduated scale 
 might be agreed upon ; and every living above 
 a certain value, as well as preferment in cathe- 
 drals, might be taxed according to its income." 
 This passage occurred in the first edition of my 
 pamphlet : and having found that many persons 
 misunderstood my meaning, I added a postscript 
 to the second edition, in which I disclaimed tJie 
 notion of wishing to enforce a payment of actual 
 tenths. 
 
 Still, however, I find that many persons de-
 
 ( 22 ) 
 
 nounce any sclieine of this sort as impracticable 
 and unjust: and it is with great regret that I 
 extract the following passage from Lord Henley's 
 pamphlet: — "When this subject was considered 
 so long ago as the year 1810, Lord Harrowby, in 
 a very valuable pamphlet on the Augmentation of 
 Poor Livings, adduced reasons in opposition to this 
 scheme, which ought to have set the agitation of it 
 at rest for ever. Besides the important consi- 
 deration of the hardship of it, he shewed clearly 
 that it would be an act of gross injustice. When 
 nearly three centuries have elapsed, during which 
 this tax has been considered as invariable, when 
 so large a number of livings have become private 
 property, and have passed for a valuable considera- 
 tion from one purchaser to another on the faith of 
 the invariability of this tax, a fresh valuation, for 
 the purpose of increasing the tax, would be an 
 arbitrary seizure of vested estates, in order to throw 
 upon a particular class of proprietors that burthen 
 which ought to be borne in common." I have 
 not been able to meet with Lord Harrowby 's pam- 
 phlet : but from the account given of it by Lord 
 Henley, I suspect that this part of it must have 
 been directed against a scheme essentially different 
 from mine. I am at a loss to conceive, that Lord 
 Harrowby could have seen any injustice in taking 
 a small sum from the large livings, even when 
 they belonged to private jiatrons. When the 
 preferment is in the gift of the Crown, or of
 
 ( 23 ) 
 
 Chapters, or other Corporations, there is not 
 even a shadow of ground for the argument of 
 injustice : no " valuable consideration" has been 
 paid for such benefices : and with respect to stalls 
 in Cathedrals, Lord Henley, so far from feeling 
 any scruple in taxing them, would not hesitate to 
 remodel or extinguish them. The argument is, 
 therefore, entirely confined to the large livings in 
 the hands of private patrons : and I am surprised 
 to find that Lord Harrowby would think it unjust 
 to diminish, in a small degree, the value of this 
 kind of patronage. We are indebted for what is 
 commonly called the Curates' Bill to the exertions 
 of Lord Harrowby. I am aware that the bill was 
 opposed at first by many excellent persons : but I 
 believe that the opposition has given way to 
 almost general approval ; and my own opinion 
 was always decidedly in favour of it. Still, how- 
 ever, it is a bill which interfered very materially 
 with the rights, or rather with the customs, of 
 private patronage, and with what are called 
 "vested interests." The sale of small livings 
 has been greatly affected by that bill. Tlie argu- 
 ment used by Lord Henley might equally serve 
 to prove not only " the hardship," but " the 
 gross injustice" of the Curates' Bill : and though I 
 am quite certain that he would not argue in such 
 a manner, I merely wish to remind him, that a 
 scheme is not necessarily unjust because it inter-
 
 ( 24 ) 
 
 feres in some degree with private patrons. To 
 which it may be added, that the patrons of small 
 livings will have the value of their patronage 
 increased by the plan now proposed : and, since 
 the small livings are more numerous than the 
 large ones, the Church will, in fact, give back a 
 larger sum to the lay patrons than what she takes 
 from them. The livings which are taxed will con- 
 tinue to fetch the same price in the market ; while 
 the value of those which are augmented will be 
 greatly increased. 
 
 But the real answer to this argument is, that 
 Lord Henley does not understand the nature and 
 extent of the scheme, or has not considered it in 
 detail. Thus, after speaking of the benefit de- 
 rived by the country from the incomes of a resi- 
 dent Clergy, he adds, " And any scheme tending 
 to diminish such an income by a ninth, or a tenth, 
 would, in no inconsiderable degree, diminish that 
 influence both upon the temporal and spiritual 
 interests of a numerous population, which it is 
 highly desirable should be possessed by its minis- 
 ter." I perfectly agree with Lord Henley in this 
 SL'ntiment : but the force of it applies only to those 
 persons who wish to take a ninth or a tenth from 
 such incomes : and perhaps the simplest way to 
 remove all misconception is to give at once a 
 graduated scale, according to which 1 would pro- 
 pose that parochial benefices should be taxed.
 
 ( 25 ) 
 
 A living of £200 joer annum should pay £1 
 
 250 15 
 
 300 1 15 
 
 350 2 10 
 
 400 3 10 
 
 450 4 15 
 
 500 6 5 
 
 550 8 
 
 600 10 
 
 650 12 5 
 
 700 14 15 
 
 750 17 10 
 
 800 20 10 
 
 850 23 15 
 
 900 27 5 
 
 950 31 
 
 1000 35 
 
 1050 ....... 39 5 
 
 1100 43 15 
 
 1150 48 10 
 
 1200 53 10 
 
 1250 58 15 
 
 1300 64 5 
 
 1350 70 
 
 1400 76 
 
 1450 82 5 
 
 1500 88 15 
 
 1550 ....... 95 10 
 
 1600 102 10 
 
 1650 109 15
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 A living oi £1700 per a?muni should pay £1 17 5 
 
 1750 125 
 
 1800 133 
 
 1850 141 5 
 
 1900 149 15 
 
 1950 158 10 
 
 2000 167 10 
 
 It will perhaps be suggested, that the scale 
 ought not to have begun w^ith livings of so low a 
 value as 200/. and that all livings under 300/. pe?- 
 annum should be exempt from payment. I have 
 no objection to such an arrangement : but there 
 appeared to be more than one reason for beginning 
 with livings of 200/. In the first place, the sum 
 of 1/. or 1/. 5s. would hardly be felt. In the 
 second place, I found, upon investigating a certain 
 number of livings in a poor diocese, that the pre- 
 sent payment of tenths is exactly on this average, 
 i. c. that every 100/. of annual value pays IO5. 
 Thirdly, if the plan proposed for augmenting 
 small livings should be carried into effect, there 
 will soon be no living of so low a value as 200/. 
 per annum, so that the question now before us will 
 become of no importance : and in the mean time 
 it does not appear unjust, that a living of 300/. 
 should pay 1/. 155. joer annum. I should not, how- 
 ever, object to beginning the scale with livings of 
 300/. which might pay an annual tax of 2/. 
 
 The little hardship, which would be felt by a 
 taxation of this kind, will be seen by the following
 
 ( 27 ) 
 
 table. It contains a list of all the livings in one 
 particular Deanery, in which the livings are gene- 
 rally small. The names of the livings are not 
 mentioned : but the first column exhibits their 
 present annual income. The second shews the 
 sum which they now pay for tenths : and the third 
 specifies the sum which it is proposed for them 
 to pay. 
 Annual Income. Present Tenths. 
 
 £. £. s. d. 
 
 140 discharged 
 
 500 .... 1 17 71 
 
 400 .... 13 11 
 
 280 .... 1 6i 
 
 690 .... 2 12 Oi 
 
 180 .... 14 111 
 
 400 .... 19 Oi 
 
 160 .... 1 2 Oi 
 
 590 .... 2 3 0| 
 
 150 discharged 
 
 250 .... 1 14 lU 
 
 230 .... 18 3 
 
 230 .... 1 5 8i 
 
 210 discharged — 
 
 300 .... 19 1 
 
 250 discharged 
 
 150 discharged 
 
 Proposed Payment. 
 £. s. d. 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 12 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 3 10 
 
 8 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 16 1 2 42 
 
 The first remark, which I have to make upon 
 this list, is, that the livings contained in it, pay at
 
 ( 28 ) 
 
 present 16/. Is. 2d. for tenths, whereas the pro- 
 posed plan of taxation would raise a sum of 42/. , 
 and this in a very poor deanery. But I should 
 now wish any person to examine the list, and to see 
 whether there is anything in it approaching to 
 ' hardship,' or to ' gross injustice.' Five of the 
 livings were discharged altogether from the pay- 
 ment of tenths. Three of them would still continue 
 discharged : but two, which have been raised to 
 the incomes of 210/. and 250/., would pay respec- 
 tively 1/. and 1/. 5s. Two livings, which now pay 
 tenths, but which have not increased in value, 
 would be discharged altogether. The largest living 
 upon the list has an income of 690/. per annum. It 
 is proposed that this living should pay 12/. 5s. an- 
 nually, which would reduce the living to 677/, 155. : 
 and I merely wish to ask, whether the value of the 
 advowson, or the next presentation, would be in- 
 jured by this deduction? 
 
 I would also remark in this place, that if a pro- 
 per scale of taxation could be agreed upon, I would 
 propose that the payment of first-fruits should be 
 abolished altogether. Lord Harrowby, as quoted 
 by Lord Henley, at page 24, has stated, in forcible 
 terms, the hardship of this tax. Few persons would, 
 perhaps, defend the continuance of it : and those 
 incumbents, who have hitherto been opposed to 
 my scheme, may become more reconciled to it, 
 when they not only see the smallness of the sum 
 which is proposed to be paid, but when they find
 
 ( 29 ) 
 
 themselves relieved from the burthen of first-fruits. 
 I have calculated, in the case of my own living, 
 that, according to the scale proposed at page 25, 
 the next incumbent would have paid, at the end 
 of four years, 321. : and, at the end of the same 
 period, if he had paid the first-fruits and yearly 
 tenths, he would have paid 30/. 25. 7d. : so that it 
 would not have been till the fourth year of his in- 
 cumbency, that he would have found any difference 
 at all : and the whole difference in every suc- 
 ceeding year, would only amount to 51. \6s. ll^d. 
 This, it will be observed, is upon a living of nearly 
 600/. per annum : and I can hardly think, that the 
 incumbent would complain, if his payment was 
 double that sum. 
 
 The next list is constructed upon similar prin- 
 ciples with the last, and contains all the livings of 
 a deanery in a different part of England, in which 
 there is a greater mixture of large and small livings. 
 
 Annual Income. Present Tenths. 
 
 £. £. s. d. 
 
 Proposed Paj 
 £. s.' 
 
 ^ment 
 d. 
 
 300 , . . . 
 
 1 3 0| . 
 
 . 1 15 
 
 
 
 200 discharged 
 600 ... . 
 
 19 4 
 
 . 1 
 . 10 
 
 
 
 
 400 ... . 
 
 16 . 
 
 . 3 10 
 
 
 
 500 ... . 
 
 17 4 
 
 . 6 5 
 
 
 
 260 ... . 
 
 1 6 
 
 ..15 
 
 
 
 200 discharged 
 
 — — — 
 
 ..10 
 
 
 
 300 discharged 
 
 
 . 1 15 
 

 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 Annual Income. Present Tenths. 
 
 Proposed Payment 
 
 £. 
 
 £. s. d. 
 
 £. 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 80 discharged 
 
 
 
 
 
 1000 .... 
 
 2 17 7 
 
 . . 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 50 discharged 
 
 
 
 
 
 200 discharged 
 
 
 . . 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 300 ... . 
 
 11 75 
 
 . . 1 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 200 discharged 
 
 
 . . 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1200 .... 
 
 2 13 3^ 
 
 . . 53 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 60 discharged 
 
 
 
 
 
 250 ... . 
 
 1 6 Ui 
 
 . . 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 140 ... . 
 
 2 15 11 
 
 . — 
 
 
 
 400 ... . 
 
 1 15 2 
 
 . . 3 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 180 discharged 
 
 
 
 
 
 60 discharged 
 
 
 
 
 
 300 ... . 
 
 14 5 
 
 . . 1 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 250 discharged 
 
 — — — 
 
 . . 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 800 ... . 
 
 2 2 
 
 . . 20 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 19 18 8i 
 
 147 
 
 
 
 
 
 One more list, from a deanery in another part 
 of England, widely distant from the other two, in 
 which the livings are larger, will be sufficient to 
 shew, in detail, whether the plan, when carried 
 into practice, would be onerous or unjust. 
 
 Annual Income. 
 
 Present Tenths. 
 
 Proposed Payment 
 
 £. 
 
 £. s. d. 
 
 £. 5. d. 
 
 350 . . 
 
 ..168 
 
 . . 2 10 
 
 275 . . 
 
 . . 1 3 2i 
 
 ..150
 
 ( 31 ) 
 
 nniial Income. 
 
 
 ] 
 
 'resent Tenths. 
 
 Proposed Payment 
 
 £. 
 
 
 £. 
 
 5. 
 
 d. 
 
 £. 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 475 
 
 
 . 1 
 
 8 
 
 91 . 
 
 . 4 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 1750 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 19 
 
 3^ 
 
 125 
 
 
 
 
 
 675 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 3 . 
 
 . 12 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 C50 
 
 
 
 
 . 2 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 . 12 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 700 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 19 
 
 2i 
 
 . 14 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 050 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 11 
 
 . 12 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 350 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 . 2 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 250 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 19 
 
 01 
 
 . 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 450 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 3 . 
 
 . 4 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 650 
 
 
 
 
 . 1 
 
 11 
 
 ^01 
 
 . 12 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 dischai 
 
 ged — 
 
 
 
 . . 1 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 125 
 
 cliscliai 
 
 gee 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 4 
 
 6i 
 
 207 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 I should now wish to calculate, what would be 
 the sum raised from tlie whole of England and 
 Wales, if all livings were taxed upon this scale. I 
 have an account of the annual value of 509 livings, 
 situated in the dioceses of Winchester, Hereford, 
 Peterborough, Oxford, and Lichfield. The result 
 may be seen by the following table : 
 
 Livings under 200/. per annum . 
 
 from 200/. to 300/. . . 
 
 — 300/. to 500/. . . 
 
 above 500/. 
 
 224 
 
 109 
 
 111 
 
 G^ 
 
 509 
 The number of all the livings in England and 
 Wales is estimated at ten thousand : and if we sup-
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 pose th^ir incomes to be in the same proportion as 
 those of the 509 livings mentioned above, the result 
 will be as follows. 
 
 Livings under 200Z. per minum .4 ")1 
 
 from 200Z. to 300/. . . 2.c 
 
 • — - 300/. to 500/. . . 2, _ 
 
 above 500/. .... 1,277 
 
 10,000 
 If we adopt the scale of taxation proposed in 
 page 25, there will be 4,401 livings exempt from 
 payment, as being under 200/. per an7iwn. The liv- 
 ings from 200/. to 300/. and from 300/. to 500/. 
 per annum, have been taken at a mean average as 
 to payment : and with respect to the livings ex- 
 ceeding 500/., I have taken them at an average of 
 800/. The whole sum to be raised by this mode of 
 taxation would be as follows : 
 Livings from 200/. to 300/. j^er ann. to pay £2,409 
 
 300/. to 500/ 6,812 
 
 above 500/ 26,178 
 
 £35,399 
 It appears, therefore, that upon this very mode- 
 rate scale of taxation, a sum of 35,399/. might be 
 raised from the parochial benefices. I am aware, 
 tliat many persons have proposed a higher scale, 
 and I tliink my own decidedly too low. Thus the 
 1,277 livings, which exceed 500/. per annum, might 
 pay much more than an average of 20/. \0s. each : 
 but mv object was to sliew, that a large sum miglit
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 be raised without even an approximation to hard- 
 ship or injustice : and whoever objects to my scale 
 of taxation, as not taking enough from the larger 
 benefices, is in fact strengthening my argument. It 
 is to be mentioned also in recommendation of this 
 scheme, that the sum raised by a taxation of bene- 
 fices will be a constantly increasing sum. The liv- 
 ings now under 200/. will gradually be raised so as 
 to pay their small assessment ; and other livings 
 from various causes will be constantly increasing in 
 value, and will be placed accordingly higher in the 
 scale of taxation. 
 
 The next point for our calculation is the sum 
 which would be raised by a taxation of Cathedral 
 property ; and here I venture to hope, that even 
 Lord Henley would not complain of hardship or in- 
 justice. He assumes it as a settled point, that all 
 this property may be subjected to any arrangements 
 and modifications for the benefit of the Church: and 
 if he has no scrapie in taking the whole income of 
 stalls for the augmentation of small livings, he can- 
 not object to each stall being taxed for the same 
 purpose. The difficulty which I feel is in fixing the 
 scale, according to which the taxation shall be 
 made. My object, however, is merely to shew, 
 that a large sum may be raised in this way. I 
 shall therefore make my calculations upon a scale 
 which is lower than that which would probably be 
 adopted : and if other persons would fix it higher, 
 my argument, as before, is strengthened by a larger 
 
 D
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 sum being produced. It seems fair that a stall, 
 which is worth 1000/. per annum, should be taxed 
 at a higher rate than one which is only worth 500/. , 
 and so on in proportion. I have followed this principle 
 in the calculation for parochial benefices : but in 
 the present instance I have considered cathedral 
 preferment, which is under 500/. per annum, to be 
 taxed at 5 per cent. : preferment between 500/. and 
 1000/. per annum, to be taxed at 30 per cent. : and 
 all higher preferment, at 20 per cent. There are 
 deaneries and stalls which ought to pay more than 
 20 per cent, : but I am anxious, as before, to make 
 a calculation, which may be considerably increas- 
 ed : and if we confine ourselves to the twenty-six 
 Episcopal Chapters, and the two churches of West- 
 minster and Windsor, it will be found that this mo- 
 derate tax upon the incomes divided by the Deans 
 and Prebendaries, would amount to the sum of 
 23,955/. per annum. If we add this to the sum of 
 35,399/., which would arise from the taxation of 
 livings, we shall have an aggregate of 59,354/. per 
 annum for the augmentation of the small benefices. 
 
 Nor is this the only use which I would make of 
 Cathedral property. It may perhaps be convenient 
 to divide this species of property into three parts. 
 One part is shared among the Deans and Canons, 
 another among the vicars choral or chaplains, 
 singing-men, choristers, &:c. &c. ; in short, among 
 those persons who perform that part of Divine Ser- 
 vice, which does not fall upon the dignitaries : and
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 in some Cathedrals there is still a tliird portion, 
 which is divided among persons, generally called 
 Prebendaries, who have stalls in the Cathedral, but 
 not seats in the Chapter, and whose incomes are 
 extremely small. Of these three portions of Cathe- 
 dral property, I would retain the two former on 
 their present footing. The first would be taxed ac- 
 cording to a graduated scale : the second is not at 
 all too high in consideration of the services per- 
 formed, and ought perhaps to be increased rather 
 than diminished. But the third portion, which 
 includes the minor stalls, might be devoted at once 
 to the augmentation of small livings. I do not mean, 
 according to Lord Henley's plan, that so much pro- 
 perty shoidd be taken out of the hands of the Chap- 
 ters, and that the income of it should be paid to the 
 small livings by a board of Commissioners. I 
 would retain this species of preferment exactly on 
 its present footing, as far as concerns its connexion 
 with Cathedrals : but it should be given in every 
 instance to the incumbents of small livings Avitliin 
 the diocese. The addition of actual income in these 
 cases would often be small : but the preferment, 
 such as it is, would be properly bestowed : and 
 without attributing feelings of worldly pride to the 
 parochial minister, he would be pleased with his 
 little accession of dignit}^ and his love for the 
 village church would not be lessened by its being 
 brought into closer proximity to the stately Ca- 
 thedral.
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 There are also other collegiate bodies, besides 
 those which we have now been considering, such as 
 the Churches of Southwell, Ripon, Wolverhamp- 
 ton, &c. There would perhaps be no objection to 
 devoting the whole of the property belonging to 
 these bodies to the augmentation of small livings. 
 In some cases they have livings in their own patron- 
 age : these might be immediately augmented by a 
 different division of the income : and where they 
 have no such patronage, the income might be given 
 to the smallest livings in the neighbourhood of the 
 places in which the property is situated. Lord Hen- 
 ley will perhaps find, that this would be a more 
 effectual way of abolishing sinecures, than by put- 
 ting Wolverhampton, Southwell, and Ripon, as he 
 has proposed, upon a level with other Cathedrals, 
 and calling the Deans into residence. 
 
 Having thus given my own arguments in support 
 of a plan of taxation, I have pleasure in quoting 
 the Quarterly Review as not unfavourable to it : 
 though with an ingenuity common to his tribe, the 
 writer contrives to disparage the plan as advanced by 
 myself, and then to bring it forward as an invention 
 of his own. After mentioning the scheme for "pay- 
 ing over the actual instead of the nominal first-fruits 
 or tenths, or both, to Queen Anne's Bounty, and so 
 to make that fund effectual to the more rapid im- 
 provement of the poorest livings," he goes on to say,* 
 '* Of this class of Reformers is the Regius Professor 
 * NutnberXCIV. p. 391.
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 of Divinity at Oxford.' Upon which I have to ob- 
 serve, that if " this class of Reformers" means those 
 persons who would enforce a payment of actual 
 tenths, I have distinctly disclaimed belonging to 
 such a class. The Reviewer then adds, ' ' That such 
 a plan presents difficulties, there can be no doubt : 
 still it deserves consideration, whether, if not the 
 scheme itself, some modification of it might not be 
 adopted :" and this is precisely what I have said in 
 the pamphlet referred to by the Reviewer. 
 
 He then proceeds to notice objections, in which 
 he says that there is " much reason :" and if these 
 can be answered satisfactorily, I venture to hope 
 that he will lend his powerful support to the plan of 
 taxation. " Two-thirds of the livings in England 
 and Wales are in the gift of laymen — they, no 
 doubt, would be often found unwilling to relinquish 
 a portion of property at the disposal of them and of 
 their heirs for ever. Some persons have bought 
 advowsons, and it may be said to be hard upon them 
 to load them with a payment which was not consi- 
 dered in the purchase money." I have already ob- 
 served, that this objection is founded upon the no- 
 tion of a large sum being taken from every living ; 
 whereas the tables in page 25 will shew that this is 
 by no means intended. Very few patrons, if any, 
 will be required " to relinquish a portion of their 
 property:" and the expression of "loading them 
 with a payment" is altogether inapplicable to the 
 small sum which it is proposed to take from them.
 
 ( 38 ) 
 
 The Reviewer then says, " There are those who 
 have an objection, and a fair objection, to the prin- 
 ciple, wliich certainly is of a levelling tendency, 
 and might be urged farther than was intended." I 
 am utterly at a loss to know how^ this can be consi- 
 dered by the Reviewer a fair objection, except in- 
 deed as to the latter part, that the scheme " might 
 be urged further than was intended." This is un- 
 doubtedly true : and when the Reviewer will pro- 
 duce any scheme of Reform, which is not liable to 
 be carried too far, I will attempt to remove his fears 
 in the present instance : but with respect to the 
 " levelling," or, as he afterwards calls it, "equaliz- 
 ing tendency" of the principle of taxation, the ten- 
 dency appears to me to be exactly the contrary. 
 The Reviewer would seem to have forgotten, that 
 a most levelling principle of taxation has existed 
 ever since the time of Henry the Eighth. All liv- 
 ings were then charged with a payment of actual 
 tenths : and though it is true that the tenths are 
 not paid according to their present value, still " the 
 principle," as it is termed by the Reviewer, is 
 strictly "levelling." On the other hand, the 
 scheme which is now proposed, so far from being of 
 " a levelling tendency," pays a due regard to the 
 different proportions of income. Livings of the same 
 " level" as to annual value, are put upon the same 
 "level" as to taxation: but livino;s of a higher 
 " level" as to income, are to be put upon a higher 
 " level" as to taxation : so that the Reviewer would
 
 ( 39 ) 
 
 have been more correct in saying, that the payment 
 of tenths had been conducted on a levelling princi- 
 ple ever since the Reformation ; but that now a 
 scheme was proposed, which would make the pay- 
 ments vary in proportion to the income. 
 
 The next objection is still more inexplicable. 
 " Some may argue, and justly argue, that the 
 Church Establishment is for the general benefit of 
 the public, not for the exclusive benefit of the in- 
 dividual minister ; and therefore that the public 
 ouffht to take their share in the sacrifice thus de- 
 manded for the public service." This is the very 
 argument which I would use in favour of my 
 scheme of taxation. The Church Establisliment is 
 undoubtedly for the general benefit of the public : 
 and when the Reviewer observes, that " the public 
 ought to take their share in the sacrifice thus 
 demanded for the public service," I should have 
 expected him to draw the conclusion, that patrons 
 of livings ought " to take their share in the 
 sacrifice thus demanded for the public service ;" 
 especially when the sacrifice is proved to be so 
 extremely small. His inference, however, seems 
 to be exactly the contrary : and there is pro- 
 bably some link in his reasoning which I do not 
 comprehend. 
 
 Lastly, he says, " Some again may contend, 
 that though there are many livings so small as to 
 call loudly for augmentation, there are very few 
 livings so large as to l)ear a reduction for such a
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 purpose." Instead of there being very few livings 
 which would bear the small reduction, which it 
 is proposed to make in them, there are really very 
 few which would feel it at all. The next incum- 
 bent of a living which is now worth 1000/. per 
 aniium, will not complain very much at receiving 
 only 965/. : and I have already observed, that the 
 sale of the advowson would scarcely, if at all, be 
 affected. 
 
 I have now gone through all the objections no- 
 ticed by the Reviewer, and I cannot help imagin- 
 ing that they did not appear to himself to carry 
 much weight. He afterwards says, " We observe, 
 indeed, that Dr. Burton confines his proposition to 
 the tenths, and we think he is right ; — whether 
 some portion, as we have already hinted, less than 
 a tenth might not suffice, or whether some gra- 
 duated scale might not be adopted in reference to 
 the value of the benefice, it being obvious that a 
 living of a thousand a year could afford to pay a 
 hundred pounds better than one of half the sum 
 to pay fifty ; but these are all matters which this is 
 not the season for discussing.'"* I wish the reader 
 to compare this sentence with the following pas- 
 sage from my pamphlet, which the Reviewer ap- 
 pears to have had before his eyes, and almost to 
 have copied in the very words. " There is, per- 
 
 * This sentence is copied accurately, even to the punctuation. 
 There seems to be some grammatical defect, though the meaning 
 is obvious.
 
 ( 41 ) 
 
 haps, no virtue or charm in the number ten, A 
 graduated scale might be agreed upon ; and every 
 living above a certain value, as well as preferment 
 in cathedrals, might be taxed according to its in- 
 come. It is ob\dous that an incumbent of a thou- 
 sand pounds a year could much better afford to pay a 
 ninth, than an incumbent of three hundred pounds 
 a year could pay a tenth." The reader will, per- 
 haps, think that the words "as we have hinted," 
 might as well have been changed into "as we have 
 borrowed the hint;" but I am perfectly satisfied 
 with having the concurrence of this able writer, and 
 shall be happy to take from him any hints which 
 he may be able to give upon a subject in which 
 we both feel a common interest. 
 
 It will perhaps be asked, Whether this is all the 
 Reform which I would propose ? and whether I 
 would suffer all the abuses to remain, which are 
 now found in our Cathedrals and parochial bene- 
 fices ? If I knew how to shape my answer, so as 
 to meet the wishes of the most ardent Reformer, 
 or if I could borrow from Lord Henley his most 
 earnest protestations against clerical abuses, I 
 might perhaps hope to make myself understood on 
 this important subject. Lord Henley says, in one 
 sentence, " The most prominent evil in the Church 
 is the non-residence of the beneficed Clergy and 
 the system of pluralities." To this I heartily 
 subscribe, and most thankful should I feel, if I 
 could join his Lordship in any scheme for prevent-
 
 ( 42 ) 
 
 iiig these crying evils. But if I am not mistaken, 
 I mentioned in my former pamphlet the real impe- 
 diment to their removal. In nineteen cases out of 
 twenty the fault is in the patron. The Church is 
 not the cause of non-residence or pluralities, ex- 
 cept where the patronage belongs to an ecclesias- 
 tical body : and I have no wish to say, that 
 Bishops or Chapters are less liable to err in this 
 matter than laymen. I would only observe, 
 that lay-patrons are vastly more numerous, and 
 much more jealous of any interference with their 
 patronage. 
 
 I would extend this remark to almost every 
 topic which is touched upon by Lord Henley. He 
 inveighs most justly against the translation of 
 Bishops : and I have literally not found a Clergy- 
 man who does not take the same view. Why then 
 is this evil inflicted upon the Church ? According 
 to Lord Henley it may be explained on the follow- 
 ing principle. " If any one turns to the list of 
 the Dignitaries of our Cathedrals, he will find that 
 not more than one-twentieth of them have had any 
 claims to preferment, on the ground of theological 
 or even of literary attainments. Parliamentary In- 
 terest, Family Connections, or Party Gratitude, 
 have in general filled up all vacancies as they 
 have arisen, with the Sons, the Brothers, and the 
 Tutors of Ministers, and of their adherents." It 
 will be remembered that these are the words of 
 Lord Henley : and if the fact be so, it would be
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 more reasonable in him to write upon State Reform 
 than upon Church Reform. It now appears, that 
 the Church is the suffering and not the offending 
 party. She has all these evils inflicted upon her by- 
 ambitious or irreligious statesmen ; and yet sh.e is 
 abused, as if she were herself the cause of all the 
 evil. Lord Henley mentions the case of the Earl 
 of Bridgewater, who " drew the magnificent in- 
 come of one of the golden stalls of Durham while 
 living at Paris." I merely ask, who gave him a 
 dispensation from residing at Durham? — The 
 Crown. In the same way we might go through 
 almost every case of abuse, which is mentioned by 
 Lord Henley and other Church Reformers. I have 
 no wish to say, that the Church is free from blame. 
 In a body of fifteen thousand persons, there must 
 be many, I fear, who are forgetful of their clerical 
 character, and traitors to the Master whom they 
 pretend to serve. Most earnestly do I wish, that 
 the Government and the Legislature would make 
 it more and more difficult for a Clergyman to neg- 
 lect his duty. At qids custodiet ipsos Custodes ? 
 The Government may at this moment, without any 
 Act of Parliament, prevent nearly all the abuses, 
 which are mentioned by Lord Henley. And yet 
 these abuses exist. Surely, then. Church Reform 
 means more than is generally intended by that 
 expression. 
 
 In the first place, it is absolutely necessary that 
 the patronage of ecclesiastical preferment should
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 be taken from the Crown, or at least submitted to 
 some control. I shall speak out upon this subject 
 more plainly than Lord Henley. He says, as I 
 have quoted him at page 19, that " the time is 
 not yet arrived, when we can hope for any legis- 
 lative enactment respecting the mode of disposing 
 of the Crown Patronage." I say, in answer to 
 this, that if the time is not yet arrived, we may 
 spare ourselves the trouble of discussing Church 
 Reform. If ''the influence of politics" is to be 
 prevented, which Lord Henley justly describes as 
 " that fertile source of jobbing, ambition, secula- 
 rity, and scandal," ecclesiastical patronage must 
 not be left in the hands of mere politicians. It is 
 more difficult to point out a plan by which this 
 patronage shall be administered : nor do I feel 
 called upon to hazard the arrangement of all these 
 details. A writer, quoted and approved by Lord 
 Henley, has proposed "to vest the Crown Pa- 
 tronage in ten unpaid Commissioners, members 
 of the Church of England, and chosen for their 
 known devotion to it." Commissioners of this 
 kind might, perhaps, be trusted. The Arch- 
 bishop of the Province, the Bishop and Archdea- 
 cons of the Diocese, together with an equal number 
 of laymen, (the latter to be changed every year,) 
 might very well dispose of all the Cathedral and 
 parochial preferment which was in that Diocese 
 and belonging to the Crown. The preferment in 
 the gift of the Bishop and the Chapter, and per-
 
 ( 45 ) 
 
 haps of all corporate bodies, might also be put 
 upon the same footing. I should like to say 
 something as to livings in private patronage. But 
 I am aware that this is tender ground : and I 
 must, perhaps, be satisfied with hoping, that when 
 all other livings are given to deserving persons, 
 private patrons will not suffer their own sons or 
 relations to form the only exception. 
 
 Having thus provided against Cathedral prefer- 
 ment being given to unworthy persons, or as a 
 political job, we may hope, with Lord Henley, 
 that it will be given as a reward to merit of some 
 kind or other, or at least with a regard to spiritual 
 and professional qualifications. With respect to 
 the Cathedral establishments, there is no difference 
 between Lord Henley and myself as to the expe- 
 diency of retaining the daily choral service. We 
 should, perhaps, agree also as to the want of some 
 more effective and uniform regulations for the 
 residence of those persons who are to attend this 
 daily service. Lord Henley would entrust the 
 performance of it exclusively to the Dean and two 
 Chaplains. I cannot assent to this part of the 
 plan. That the Deaneries may be considered 
 " as the reward or the support of those learned 
 men, whom it may be found more proper to ad- 
 vance in this mode, than by either episcopal or 
 parochial preferment," may be a good suggestion, 
 as a general principle ; but I cannot agree with
 
 ( 4G ) 
 
 liOrd Henley, wlien lie would prohibit all Deans 
 from having parochial preferment. I would not re- 
 ward a learned theologian with giving him the care 
 of a large parish : but if the Incumbent of a living 
 was deserving of a Deanery for his professional 
 learning, I would not oblige him to resign his 
 living upon becoming a Dean. Lord Henley 
 himself speaks of '' the coldness and formality 
 of Cathedral service :" and he would lead me 
 to a totally opposite conclusion from his own, 
 when he says, in another place, of the Dignitaries 
 in Cathedrals, " They are connected with no 
 poor, who look up to them as their protectors 
 and guides ; they have no sick and dying to pra}'^ 
 with ; no children to catechize ; no flock towards 
 whom the sympathies and affections of a Pastor can 
 be called forth. The most important offering to 
 God's glory and service is a formal attendance on 
 a cold and pompous ceremonial." Now, instead 
 of consio-nino; the Dean for his whole life to this 
 most uninteresting routine of daily ministrations, 
 I should think that I was doing a great deal of 
 good both to his body and his soul, by allowing 
 him to pass some months of the year in residing 
 at his living. The care of the parish would be 
 entrusted for the remainder of the year to a 
 resident Curate : and if it be said, that the 
 Curate, who does all the work, ought to receive 
 all the income, I answer, in the first place, that
 
 ( 47 ) 
 
 the Dean, according to the plan here proposed, 
 would be an occasional labourer in the vineyard, 
 and would be entitled to part of the hire. 
 
 But there is another answer to this remark, 
 which is too apt to be forgotten, or is, perhaps, 
 not even thought of, by many who discuss the 
 question of residence. It is absolutely necessary 
 for the well-being of the Church, that there should 
 always be a large number of Curates actively 
 employed. Whatever steps are taken for forcing* 
 Incumbents to reside, care must be taken that the 
 race of Curates is not extinguished : and if Lord 
 Henley will reconsider his plan with this remark 
 before him, he will, perhaps, see that the tendency 
 of all his regulations is to make the services of a 
 Curate wholly unnecessary. An abolition of plu- 
 ralities, and a general residence of Incumbents, 
 will undoubtedly cause a diminution in the number 
 of Curates. In some respects this may be found 
 to be an inconvenience : but the evil of pluralities 
 is so flagrant, and the duty of residence is so 
 unquestionable, that we must not hesitate in pro- 
 hibiting the one and enforcing the other : but if 
 there was no other argument for retaining the 
 stalls in Cathedrals, and for allowing the possessors 
 of them to hold livings, I would rest the defence 
 of both these measures upon the certainty which 
 they cause of providing employment for Curates. 
 If all the Dignitaries, mentioned at page 15, were 
 also Incumbents of livings, they would find em-
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 ployiiient tor nearly two hiuidred and thirty 
 Curates : and whoever thinks that a Clergyman 
 should learn his profession before he is entrusted 
 with a parish, will feel that these remarks are not 
 without their weight. 
 
 Whatever has been said concerning Deans, will 
 apply with equal force to Canons and Preben- 
 daries. There appears to me a great advantage 
 in having other persons, beside the Dean, to take 
 part in the Cathedral service. I have already 
 proposed that regulations should be made as to 
 the residence of Prebendaries : and if the measure 
 approved by Lord Henley for the proper appoint- 
 ment of these persons should be enforced, we may 
 hope that his object may be accomplished of 
 making the service of the Cathedral " become 
 more parochial, and therefore more devotional and 
 spiritual in its nature." Lord Henley would 
 allow a Prebendary to hold no living, except one 
 which is situated in the cathedral tow^n. I would 
 extend the permission, as in the case of Deans, 
 to a living, not only in the same Diocese, but in 
 any part of England ; but it must be remembered, 
 that the plan suggested for the appointment of 
 Prebendaries will make it very unlikely that they 
 should have any living, except in the Diocese 
 where the Cathedral is situated. It will perhaps 
 be thought that I am not competent to give an 
 opinion upon the subject ; since the stall, w^hich is 
 attached to my Professorship in the University, has
 
 ( 49 ) 
 
 also a livinf^ armexf^d to it by Act of Parliament. 
 My remarks will, therefore, he treated as those of 
 an interested witness : but, at the same time, they 
 proceed from one who has experience upon the 
 su Inject: and I do most earnestly entreat Lord 
 Henley not to reduce Deans and Canons to the 
 useless character of monks in a cloister; and not 
 to take from them that encitement to evangelical 
 holiness, which the active discharge of parochial 
 ministry is alone calculated to supply. Lord 
 Henley is not aware of the relief which is felt at 
 seeing a village cliurch and a village school after 
 residence in a cathedral town. Let me assure 
 him, that the service of a Cathedral does not 
 unfit a man for the parochial ministry : or, if it 
 has this tendency, we cannot confer upon him a 
 greater benefit, than by making the one duty 
 alternate with the other : and if the mind of the 
 Clergj-^man will thus be more directed to spiritual 
 pursuits, his parish is also likely to be benefited, 
 which for several months in the year receives 
 the attention of the Incumbent as well as of the 
 Curate. Nor is this all. A much larger sum 
 will be spent in parochial charities by the system 
 here recommended, than if the Prebendary spends 
 the whole of his income in the cathedral town, 
 and if the living, which he might otherwise have 
 held, is to maintain a separate Incumbent. The 
 reason why the union of a living and a stall is so 
 often reprobated is, that a residence of one or two 
 
 E
 
 ( 50 ) 
 
 months at the Cathedral is taken as an exemption 
 from all residence on a living. But this crying 
 abuse should be prohibited. A Prebendary might 
 be bound to shorter residence on his living than 
 other Incumbents : but a certain number of 
 months should be specified, (perhaps five would 
 be thought sufficient :) and if he did not comply 
 with this, his living should be forfeited. I feel 
 convinced, that a regulation of this kind would 
 prove of great service both to the Incumbent 
 and the parish. The parsonage house on many 
 a small living would be improved : the poor 
 would feel the benefit of a longer purse than 
 that of an ordinary Incumbent : and cathedral 
 property would thus, by the best of all arrange- 
 ments, contribute to the augmentation of smaller 
 benefices. 
 
 While we are thus making regulations for pre- 
 ferment in Cathedrals, we ought to take into 
 consideration the case of Archdeacons. It is 
 grievous to think of the miserable provision whicli 
 is made in almost every Diocese for these per- 
 sons, whose services are so valuable and so 
 laborious. One very obvious mode of paying 
 them presents itself by annexing a stall in the 
 Cathedral to each Archdeaconry. It is true, that 
 the Bishop would thus virtually have the presen- 
 tation to as many stalls as he has Archdeacons 
 in his Diocese : but I cannot think that this 
 patronage would be looked upon with suspicion.
 
 ( 51 ) 
 
 Appointments to responsible stations are generally 
 made properly : and it would be easy, if it should 
 be thought necessary, to guard against abuse in 
 this instance. I am at present only concerned 
 in recommending, that all Archdeacons should 
 have Prebends in the Cathedral. It would also 
 be desirable, that they should have a parochial 
 benefice : and then attendance at the Cathedral, 
 as well as their absence upon visitations, would 
 almost always require them to keep a Curate ; 
 the advantage of which measure to the Church 
 at large has already been pointed out. When 
 this sufficient maintenance was provided for the 
 Archdeacons, they might give up the payments 
 which they now receive from parochial Incum- 
 bents. The sums which are collected for the 
 Archdeacon, under the name of Procurations and 
 Synodals, give rise to troublesome, if not vexa- 
 tious transactions. I would propose, that they 
 should be entirely given up : and the remission 
 of this payment will, in many cases, reduce the 
 taxation proposed at page 25, to a still smaller 
 sum. 
 
 I am not afraid of being looked upon as a de- 
 fender of pluralities, because I have made an ex- 
 ception in favour of Deans and Prebendaries. If a 
 law should be strictly and literally enforced, that 
 no spiritual person should hold two pieces of pre- 
 ferment of any kind together, the race of Curates, 
 as I have already observed, would almost become
 
 ( 52 ) 
 
 extinct. A title for orders would be extremely dif- 
 ficult to be obtained : and some other facilities 
 must be given for admission into the Church. I 
 have also endeavoured to shew, that the income 
 derived from Cathedrals is likely to be more bene- 
 ficially expended, where a living and a stall are 
 held by the same person : and my own opinion 
 would lead me to extend the same privilege to 
 Heads of Colleges in the Universities, and to Pro- 
 fessors who are resident there. In settling this ques- 
 tion, we must not allow ourselves to be led away 
 by the dread of the word plurality. Much evil has 
 undoubtedly come upon the Church, and is still 
 felt by it, from the numerous cases of pluralities : 
 but while we are trying to remove these evils, we 
 must remember that the permanent good of the 
 Church, and not the application of a theory, is the 
 object which we should keep in view. The persons 
 whom I have now mentioned, are never bound to 
 reside more than five or six months in the year at 
 the University. If they had a living, they might 
 be able to reside upon it for a certain number of 
 months, which should be prescribed by law.* Even 
 the name of pluralists would not strictly be appli- 
 cable to them ; for the Headship of a College is not 
 a benefice. They would be hindered from turning 
 
 • I was myself resident for twenty-eight weeks on my living 
 in the course of last year : and I have already (September) re- 
 sided twenty weeks in the present year, though I am necessarily 
 resident in Oxford everv term.
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 their living into a sinecure : and the income of it 
 would almost always be expended in the parish. 
 
 Having made these exceptions, I would join Lord 
 Henley, or the most rigid Reformer, in strictly pro- 
 hibiting all other pluralities. Sinecures of every 
 kind should be immediately abolished. No person 
 should hold preferment, even of the smallest value, 
 in two Cathedrals. No two benefices, of any kind, 
 where there is cure of souls, should be held toge- 
 ther under any circumstances. A full residence of 
 nine months, except in the cases lately men- 
 tioned, should be required of every incumbent. 
 The Bishops should have more power than is now 
 entrusted to them, of correcting abuses : and if 
 patrons of livings could be restrained, by any 
 means, from bestowing them upon unworthy per- 
 sons, I should not despair, when all these regula- 
 tions were in action, of witnessing the blessings of 
 Church Reform in the faith and practice of all 
 Christians. 
 
 I would willingly follow Lord Henley in not con- 
 sidering the subject of tithes to belong properly to 
 the question now before us : but there is a passage 
 in his pamphlet, which deserves much considera- 
 tion, and w^hich strongly confirms the remark which 
 I ventured to make upon tithes in my former publi- 
 cation. It was there laid down as a fundamental 
 principle, that " tithes must be paid to somebody." 
 We have heard much of late concerning the ex- 
 tinction of tithes : and persons have talked, even
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 in the House of Commons, as if the tenth portion 
 of the produce of the earth was itself to be extin- 
 guished. It is hopeless to reason with "such per- 
 sons: and the question appears capable of being 
 summed up in a very few words. The tithes will 
 either remain the property of the Church, or they 
 will not. If they do not, they will either be taken 
 by the Government, or will come into the hands of 
 private individuals : but in either case, the tenth 
 portion of the produce will have a value set upon 
 it, and that value must be paid. When the expe- 
 riment has been tried, it will be seen whether the 
 farmer paid more to the Clergyman than he will 
 to the Government, or the Squire. On the other 
 hand, if tithes remain the property of the Church, 
 either the present system will be continued, which 
 allows the collection of tithes or a composition, or 
 else there will be a general commutation. In the 
 latter case, the clergy and the farmers will be re- 
 lieved from many unpleasant collisions; but who- 
 ever says, that a commutation of tithe will be a 
 pecuniary gain to the farmer, is either lamentably 
 ignorant, or is courting popularity by supporting 
 a delusion. 
 
 Lord Henley is evidently aware, that the Clergy 
 make less by their property than other persons, and 
 writes as follows. " It must be further observed in 
 recommendation of the plan, that the revenues of 
 the Church would be materially augmented by it. 
 The estates, as is well known, are principally let
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 upon leases for lives or for years, renewable on the 
 payment of fines. The lessors are at best only 
 tenants for life, and often considerably advanced in 
 years ; and, in many of the less lucrative stations, 
 their tenure is of a still more transitory nature, as 
 it combines both the chances of life and the chances 
 of promotion. The consequence has been, that the 
 Church, in many cases, receives much less for re- 
 newals, than what, upon a fair calculation, she is 
 entitled to. This will be remedied by the appoint- 
 ment of a Board of a fixed and permanent nature. 
 Not that the leases of Church property can, with 
 justice, be suffered to run out, though its income 
 would thereby be immensely increased. For as the 
 practice of renewal, within certain limits, has ob- 
 tained for so great a length of time ; as so much 
 property has been bought and sold, and so many 
 family arrangements, by wills or settlement, made 
 upon the faith of it; the most ardent friend of the 
 Church could scarcely require an end to be put to 
 this species of property. But it would be easy to 
 arrange such an equitable scale, upon sound prin- 
 ciples, as would greatly improve the patrimony of 
 the Church, without effecting any injustice to those 
 who have for centuries been its tenants." I am 
 glad that this was written by a layman, rather than 
 by a Clergyman. The fact is here plainly avowed, 
 that persons, who hold land or tithes under the 
 Church, would have to pay more, if the Church 
 ceased to be the proprietor. Lord Henley, it is
 
 ( 56 ) 
 
 true, has pointed out the injustice of this alteration : 
 but, at the same time, he undoubtedly recom- 
 mends, that, to a certain degree, it should be ef- 
 fected. The increased value of Church property, 
 which would follow, is urged as an argument in 
 recommendation of his own plan : and when we 
 read, that such an improvement could not take 
 place, unless the estates were managed by a Board, 
 the real meaning is, that the improvement will 
 take place, when the estates are managed by a 
 Board. This then will be one of the effects of 
 Church Reform, as proposed by Lord Henley. 
 The Church is now perfectly contented to receive 
 less than what she knows to be her due, nor has 
 she any intention of exacting a larger sum : but 
 when the Church is reformed on Lord Henley's 
 plan, the persons who now hold under the Church, 
 will have, in some shape or other, to make larger 
 payments. The plan which I have proposed, will 
 not subject these persons to such a burthen. Abuses 
 \vi[\ be removed, but the frame-work and ma- 
 chinery of the Church Establishment will remain 
 unchanged : and the result will be, that a large 
 sum will be applied to the augmentation of small 
 livings, though the sources from which the sum is 
 drawn, will not be increased. 
 
 1 would also mention, with respect to a commu- 
 tation of tithe, that the plan which I have proposed, 
 is wholly unconnected with the question. A sum 
 is to be raised for the augmentation of small livings
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 from the annual incomes of the beneficed Clergy : 
 but whether these incomes are derived from tithes, 
 or from a sum of money paid in commutation of 
 tithe, makes no difference whatever. There is, 
 however, one point, which I have not seen noticed 
 in any plan of Church Reform, but which appears 
 to me deserving of consideration. It will be said, 
 perhaps, that this or any plan for augmenting be- 
 nefices will in fact be the means of making a great 
 and permanent increase to the property of the 
 Church. It will undoubtedly have that effect: but 
 so far from it being desirable to prevent such an in- 
 crease, it might be easily shewn that the country is 
 interested in allowing it. Lord Henley and all per- 
 sons who really consider Church Reform to be a 
 religious question, will agree with me in wishing, 
 that every living in England was able to maintain 
 a resident incumbent: by which I mean, that the 
 incumbent of every living, though he has no other 
 source of income, should be able to support a family 
 and to contribute to parochial charities. It has 
 been calculated, and Lord Henley appears inclined 
 to admit the calculation, that " if all the revenues 
 of the parochial clergy were equally divided 
 amongst them, there would not be more than 185/. 
 per annum for each." The whole income of the pa- 
 rochial clergy might therefore be increased three or 
 four fold, before the most economical calculator 
 would think that each incumbent was overpaid : 
 and this is the first answer to be made to the remark,
 
 ( ^^ ) 
 
 that a fiiiul for augmenting small livings will make 
 a permanent increase to the property of the Church. 
 It is of vital importance to the interests of religion, 
 that the incomes of the parochial clergy should be 
 thus increased. 
 
 But even at the distant period, when the 10,000 
 livino-s in England shall be raised to the income of 
 600/. each, there will still be ample employment for 
 the sum which is applied to their augmentation. 
 By that time the population of England and Wales 
 will be greatly increased: and even now there are 
 hundreds, if not thousands, of livings, which are 
 much toolarge for the labours of one minister. As the 
 population increases, parishes may be divided and 
 subdivided almost without end ; and incomes will be 
 wanted for the ministers of these newly created pa- 
 rishes. At present there are 4,809 livings, upon 
 which a Clergyman cannot reside for want of a suf- 
 ficient parsonage house. These houses ought to be 
 built : and it is impossible to contemplate the time, 
 when new churches might not be erected with ad- 
 vantage : all which may perhaps diminish the fears 
 of those persons, who think that the property of the 
 Church ought not to receive a permanent increase. 
 There never will be a want of objects, upon which 
 the surplus funds of the Church may be expended : 
 and though I have no wish to enter into a question 
 of political economy, I should be fully prepared to 
 prove, that if a sum is saved from the annual incomes 
 of some of the Clergy, which permanently increases
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 the incomes of other Clergymen, the country is be- 
 nefited by the creation of so mucli capital. 
 
 There is one more point, which Lord Henley has 
 introduced into his plan, which I would rather leave 
 to the discussion of other persons. I allude to his 
 observations upon the Bishops. With respect to 
 their incomes, I have already stated, that Lord Hen- 
 ley would distribute among them exactly the same 
 sum which is distributed now ; so that in a finan- 
 cial point of view the country has no interest in this 
 part of the question : but it must be remembered, 
 that this same sum is now found sufficient for the re- 
 pair of the Bishops' residences, and for the expenses 
 of their visitations : whereas Lord Henley's equaliz- 
 ing scheme would require both these charges to be 
 defrayed out of another fimd. The other reforms, 
 which Lord Henley would recommend with respect 
 to the Bishops, relate to translations, commendams, 
 and their seats in the House of Lords. With res-ard 
 to the two first, I am convinced that his Lordship is 
 speaking the sentiments of the great body of the 
 Clergy, when he wishes to have them prohibited : 
 but again I ask, why do they exist ? Lord Henley 
 states the reason to be, because " the appointment 
 to the highest offices in the Church is in the nomi- 
 nation of the Prime Minister, who is oppressed on 
 every vacancy with the importunate demands of the 
 powerful and influential, urging upon him the 
 claims of kinsmen and dependants." I give no opi- 
 nion as to the truth of this remark; but if things be
 
 ( 60 ) 
 
 indeed so, 1 call upon the public to decide, whether 
 Reform is not wanted for the laity as well as for the 
 Clergy. 
 
 With respect to the question of Bishops sitting 
 in the House of Lords, I have no intention of enter- 
 ing into it, except that in the name of all sound 
 and legitimate interpretation, I must protest against 
 the New Testament being quoted to prove, that our 
 Saxdour and his Apostles discountenance the idea 
 of Bishops taking part in the counsels of the nation. 
 It is with utter astonishment, that I find Lord Henley 
 urging our Saviour's declaration, that his kingdom is 
 not of this icorld. This text, and the others quoted 
 by his Lordship, prove that Christ did not claim, as 
 Head of the Church, to have temporal dominion, 
 nor to give judgment in civil and criminal cases: 
 and they equally shew, that the Apostles and their 
 successors cannot claim such a right in virtue of 
 any office which they hold in Christ's spiritual 
 kingdom: but who ever said, that the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury had a temporal kingdom, or that he 
 has a right, as Archbishop, to give judgment in civil 
 and criminal cases? When the Bishop of Rome 
 laid claim to the sovereignty of the world, and set 
 himself above emperors and kings, then indeed it 
 was a most legitimate argument to quote to him the 
 words of our Saviour, My kingdom is not of this 
 icorld. So also if the Scotch Bishops, or the Bishop 
 of Sodor and Man, should go to the door of the 
 House of Lords and say, We claim to be admitted,
 
 ( 61 ) 
 
 as being Bishops over Christ's flock, — this text 
 would be as effectual in keeping them out, as the 
 wand of the Serjeant at arms. But this text has 
 nothino- whatever to do with the ministers of Christ 
 exercising civil power, when the civil government 
 of the country thinks proper to invest them with it. 
 When Lord Henley was referring to texts of 
 Scripture, he might have noticed 1 Cor. vi. 1 — 6. 
 where St. Paul advises Christians to decide causes 
 among themselves, without going before the hea- 
 then : and no person can imagine that he meant to 
 prohibit the presbyters or deacons of the Corinthian 
 Church from taking part in such matters. Their 
 spiritual office did not give them the right of decid- 
 ing, but it did not take from them the riglits, what- 
 ever they might be, which they shared in common 
 with other Christians. In a word, the text in John 
 xviii. 36. is conclusive against priests usurping 
 civil power as priests ; but it is wholly silent as to 
 the duties which they are to fulfil as citizens. It is 
 for the legislature to decide, whether the Clergy may 
 hold certain offices : and the Church is to decide, 
 whether it is expedient for religion that they should 
 hold them : but the New Testament gives no pre- 
 cepts upon the subject, except that it enjoins all men 
 to obey the legislature, and that it holds up religion 
 as the one thing needful. The fallacy in Lord Hen- 
 ley's reasoning is a very common one. It turns upon 
 an equivocal use of the word Chuixh, which is often 
 taken to mean the Clergy, whereas it properly in-
 
 ( 62 ) 
 
 eludes all Christians. So the kingdom of Ckiist has 
 the same extensive meaning, and can never be taken 
 to mean only the Bishops. Though the Clergy 
 are ovei^seers, or inhiisters, or stewards, or ambassadors 
 in this spiritual kingdom, yet all Christians are 
 members of it : and if Bishops are excluded from all 
 civil jurisdiction, because Christ is their king, all 
 Christians are equally excluded. Will Lord Hen- 
 ley say, that a Christian lawyer is less a member of 
 Christ's kingdom than a Christian Bishop ? They 
 are both subjects of a kingdom which is not of this 
 world: and the relation in which they both stand to 
 Christ has nothino- to do with the relation in which 
 they stand to the civil community. If Christ had 
 said, (as Lord Henley would interpret his words,) 
 that the ministers of his religion should not hold 
 certain offices in the state, he would have been doing 
 the very thing which Lord Henley denies him to 
 have done : he would have been interfering directly 
 in civil matters ; so that instead of quoting this text 
 against the propriety of Bishops sitting in the 
 House of Lords, I should quote it as a positive 
 proof that Christ meant to give no rules concerning 
 such matters. 
 
 If the legislature should decide, that the Bishops 
 are not to retain their seats in the House of Lords, 
 the Church, of course, will acquiesce in the deci- 
 sion : and if Lord Henley, or any person, will prove, 
 that " the parliamentary peerage of the pre- 
 lates is prejudicial to the cause of religion," I
 
 ( 63 ) 
 
 would be the first to pray that the act of exclusion 
 may be past. This, however, is not the place for 
 discussing such a question. The example of the 
 Apostles, " who, content with such things as were 
 provided for them, sought neither personal aggran- 
 dizement nor civil power," can hardly be consi- 
 dered pertinent. The argument would be just as 
 good against a Clergyman having a comfortable 
 freehold house, and a certain income of 400/a-year, 
 as against Bishops sitting in the House of Lords. 
 If we take the Jewish Sanhedrim, or the Roman 
 Senate, it was certainly not very likely, that the 
 Apostles would have seats in either of them : but it 
 would be difficult to suppose that this was made to 
 them a matter of choice, or that they refused the 
 dignity from a regard to their spiritual duties. St. 
 Paul took good care to assert his rights as citizen of 
 Rome, though he was serving a Master whose king- 
 dom is not of this world: and so the Bishops may be 
 extending the interests of that kingdom, while they 
 are acting in the capacity of temporal legislators. 
 If it should be proved, that this is not likely to be 
 the result, no real Christian will be opposed to their 
 exclusion : but the question must be decided by a 
 reference to the interests of religion in the first 
 place, and to the good of the country in the se- 
 cond. 
 
 I have now gone through all the material 
 points in Lord Henley's plan of Church Reform : 
 and at the same time I have endeavoured to
 
 ( G4 ) 
 
 explain my own views upon the subject. I have 
 a satisfaction in repeating my conviction that our 
 opinions are not greatly at variance. We are 
 both agreed in saying, that the end of Church 
 Reform is the spiritual improvement of the com- 
 munity, or, in other words, the extension of 
 Christ's kingdom upon earth. We are agreed 
 in thinking that the augmentation of small livings 
 is of essential and primary importance toward 
 the attainment of this object. Lord Henley has 
 proposed a scheme, which he thinks would pro- 
 duce an annual sum of 150,000/. for the aug- 
 mentation of small livings. I have shewn from 
 his ow^n statements, and from calculations upon 
 a very moderate scale, that this sum would be 
 so reduced as not to leave more than 26,315/. 
 for that purpose : there is good reason to think 
 that the surplus would be nothing at all. My 
 own scheme would produce an annual sum of 
 59,354/. for the augmentation of small livings : 
 and the calculations have been made on so low 
 a scale, that this sum would, in fact, be much 
 greater : in addition to which, I have recom- 
 mended that all the minor stalls in Cathedrals, 
 and the property of other collegiate Churches, 
 should be applied to the same purpose. Lord 
 Henley is strongly opposed to the plan of raising 
 this sum by a taxation of benefices : but I have 
 endeavoured to shew, that he has entirely mis- 
 understood the plan, or not considered it in detail,
 
 ( «5 ) 
 
 and thai his arguments are, in fact, directed against 
 a scheme which is essentially different. Lord Hen- 
 ley's plan would require the whole establishment of 
 our Cathedrals, as it is at present, to be pulled down 
 and re-modelled : and yet he would not raise as 
 large a sum for the augmentation of livings, as the 
 plan which I have proposed, which would leave 
 every thing connected with our Cathedrals on its 
 present footing, with the exception, that all abuses 
 would be corrected, and that Cathedral preferment 
 would be bestowed much more properly than it is 
 at present. 
 
 Lord Henley has spoken even more strongly than 
 myself, as to " the preservation of the perfect in- 
 violability of all life interests :"' so that the calcu- 
 lated sum would not be produced by either of these 
 plans, until the present possessors of preferment 
 had died off. But the nature of Lord Henley's 
 plan would make it much longer in coming into 
 full operation than mine. There are so many sums 
 to be paid out of his nominal fund of 150,000/., 
 before any part of it would be applicable to small 
 livings, that many years would elapse before this 
 benefit would be obtained. Lord Henley has him- 
 self provided, in Section XVH., — " That, in case 
 the revenues and other funds be at first inadequate 
 to the various payments fixed by the Act, the Cor- 
 poration may borrow money upon Bills, in the na- 
 ture of Exchequer Bills, l^earing interest :" and 
 the effect of this provision upon the surplus a})pli-
 
 ( 66 ) 
 
 cable to small livings, is so extremely fatal, that I 
 am almost ashamed of eriving: the calculation. In 
 the first year of the existence of the Board, it would 
 have to pay the Expenses of the Act, the Salaries of 
 the Commissioners, Repairs of Cathedrals, Bishops' 
 and Archdeacons' Visitation Expenses, Retiring 
 Pensions, Sec. &c. which, according to the calcula- 
 tion at page 14, would amount at least to 70,000/. : 
 and, to meet all these payments, it would have the 
 income of as much chapter preferment, as should 
 happen to become vacant in the course of that year. 
 I will suppose the season to be unhealthy, and that 
 four Deans and twenty Canons die within the year; 
 which is an extravagant calculation. There are 
 now twenty-six Deans, (if we except St. Davids, 
 and LlandafF,) whose average income is 1,780/. 
 each ; there are also one hundred and seventy- 
 seven Prebendaries, (if we except St. David's, 
 Llandaff, St. Asaph, and Bangor,) whose average 
 income is 847/. each. The incomes, therefore, of 
 the four Deans and twenty Canons, if we take the 
 largest average, would amount to 24,000/. The 
 Board would then have to appoint four Deans and 
 eight Chaplains, according to the new arrange- 
 ment ; whose stipends, according to Section XXX. 
 would come to 6,932/. The twenty stalls, according 
 to Section XXXI. would be annexed to livings in 
 the cathedral towns, the average income of m Inch 
 is to be 1000/. each : thus, the twenty stalls, which 
 before produced an aggregate income of 16,940/.,
 
 ( 67 ) 
 
 would now be raised to 20,000/. per annum: so that 
 the Board would have to pay to these Deans and 
 Prebendaries the sum of 26,932Z. ; but the fund 
 for making this payment would only amount to 
 24,000/., beside its being charged with the above- 
 mentioned payments of 70,000/. ; so that in the 
 first year the Board would have to borrow 72,932/. 
 I will not trouble the reader with the details of cal- 
 culations for the seccnd year. Suffice it to say, that 
 the whole expenditure (including four per cent, in- 
 terest upon the debt,) would amount to 127,781/.: 
 to meet which, if we suppose a similar mortality, 
 the Board would have an income of 48,000/. .• so 
 that it would have to borrow an additional sum of 
 79,781/. Thus the debt would go on increasing in 
 this alarming ratio, till all the ancient Chapters 
 were cleared off; at which time it would be as- 
 certained, whether the cathedral property really 
 amounted to 300,000/. : but it is much more pro- 
 bable, that before that time arrived, the whole 
 scheme would be given up in despair: and, at all 
 events, I would undertake to prove, that fifty years 
 would pass away, before a single shilling could be 
 applied to the increase of small livings : whereas, 
 according to my plan, the very first benefice of any 
 kind, above the value of 200/., which became va- 
 cant, would add something to the present fund of 
 Queen Anne's Bounty. Even the present possessors 
 of benefices, though they would not be compelled 
 to anv payment, might, perhaps, be induced to
 
 ( 68 ) 
 
 submit voliintaril}^ to the tax which would be laid 
 upon their successors. Such contributions would 
 not be expected from incumbents of moderate liv- 
 ings, with large families : but, I have little doubt, 
 that if the example was once set, it would be fol- 
 lowed, in many instances, cheerfully and liberally. 
 When it was seen, that the Church was really in 
 earnest, and that the Clergy were contributing so 
 large a sum for the improvement of small livings, 
 lay patrons would, perhaps, be induced to join in 
 accelerating the work. The patrons of small liv- 
 mgs would, in fact, receive very good interest for 
 their money, if, by a donation, or a small annual 
 subscription, they could bring their own livings 
 within earlier reach of augmentation. I may men- 
 tion also, that the management of Lord Henley's 
 fund would require the machinery of a Corpora- 
 tion, the expense of which has been stated, upon a 
 low estimate, at 5000/. per annum : whereas, the 
 sum raised by taxation of benefices would still be 
 managed by the Commissioners of Queen Anne's 
 Bounty, and the salary of a few additional clerks 
 would be the w hole increase of expense. 
 
 I have already mentioned, that Lord Henley's 
 plan, as well as my own, requires the Crown pa- 
 tronage to be vested in other hands : and both of 
 us would need the passing of an Act of Parliament : 
 l)ut there is this essential difference between us, 
 that unless the Crown will surrender its patronage 
 of Cathedral preferment, Lord Henley's scheme
 
 ( 69 ) 
 
 will fall entirely to the ground : but if an Act was 
 passed for the taxation of benefices, my plan would 
 come immediately into operation, though the Crown 
 still continued to present to preferment. We both of 
 us wish to see this preferment given to proper persons : 
 but Lord Henley has made this an essential part of 
 his scheme : if I may so express it, the religious 
 and pecuniary parts of his plan must stand or fall 
 together: whereas, I have provided against the 
 contingent possibility of patrons not choosing to do 
 their duty. I wish that they could be compelled to act 
 properly : but if they persist in continuing abuses ; 
 if Church Reform is still hindered, as it has hitherto 
 been, by lay patrons, I have proposed a scheme, 
 which will make even abuses contribute to the 
 cause of religion. In a word, Lord Henley cannot 
 prevent sinecures, though he points out the evil of 
 them : but until I can prevent their existence, I 
 would tax them heavily: and I cannot but think, 
 that this practical view of the question gives a great 
 advantage to my plan over that of his Lordship. 
 
 Lord Henley's plan, as I have already observed, 
 would nearly extinguish Curates altogether. Their 
 number will be lessened by any scheme for pre- 
 venting pluralities and non-residence : but the one 
 recommended in these pages, which allows a liv- 
 ing to be held with a Deanery, or a Prebend, will 
 always ensure a certain number of Curates. 
 
 These are some of the points of comparison, in 
 which I venture to think, that the preference may
 
 ( 70 ) 
 
 be given to a scheme of taxation. The public will 
 decide, whether I have summed up witli sufficient 
 impartiality. The question of Church Reform must 
 and v^^ill be agitated by many persons, who do not 
 understand the first principles of it. They neither 
 know the meaning of the Church, nor of Reform. 
 If we put aside those persons, who do not believe 
 the Gospel, who write for hire, and for any side 
 which will pay them, who court popularity by po- 
 pular delusions, and who wish to transfer the tithes 
 from the Clergy to themselves, — I say, if we ex- 
 cept these persons, the question of Church Reform 
 has hitherto been discussed by very few writers. 
 Lord Henley has set the example of treating it as a 
 religious subject. I trust that he will be followed 
 by others, who wTite in the same spirit as to the 
 principle which he has in view. With respect to 
 his details, 1 am sorry that I cannot agree with him. 
 They Avoidd cause much unnecessary change; and, 
 after all, woidd not accomplish the object at which 
 he aims. My own plan is, at least, free from the 
 first of these charges : and the reader will judge, 
 whether I am not an advocate for change, when it 
 is really likely to be an improvement. I wish to 
 see the Clergy compelled to do their duty : but I 
 wish also to see the laity hindered from throwing 
 impediments in their way. I wish the latter, as 
 well as the former, to remember, that they belong 
 to the Church, and that they stand in need of Re- 
 form. In a word, if I thought that Religion would
 
 ( 71 ) 
 
 be a gainer, 1 ^volll^l pull down our Cathedrals, 
 and use the materials for building Meeting-houses; 
 but when we had paid the masons for their laI)our, 
 and had ornamented the country with these simple 
 edifices, would the Church of Christ be more 
 established in these kingdoms ? — / trow not.
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 I HAVE given at page 25, a graduated scale for the taxa- 
 tion of benefices. A friend, whose opinion is entitled to 
 much more deference than mine, and who has devoted 
 much consideration, as well as judgment to these matters, 
 has furnished me with another calculation, which appears 
 to be constructed upon a most equitable scale, and which 
 few persons would consider too high. He begins with liv- 
 ings of 300Z. per annum, which he would tax at 1 per cent, 
 i. e. a living of 300Z. would pay 3/. per annum : a living of 
 400/. would be taxed at 2 per cent, and would pay 81. : so 
 that a table would be constructed on the following scale. 
 
 Value. Hate. Payment. 
 
 £• £' 
 
 300 ] per cent. 3 
 
 400 2 8 
 
 300 ■ 3 \5 
 
 (iOO 4 24 
 
 700 5 3o 
 
 800 () 48 
 
 900 7 63 
 
 1000 ~ 8 80 
 
 1100 9 99 
 
 1200 10 • 120 
 
 I would make a slight addition to this scheme, by taxing 
 livings of 200/. at ten shillings per cent. i. e. at 1 /. per an- 
 num : and if we take the nundjer of livings according to 
 the calculation in page 32, the tax upon parochial bene- 
 fices, would amount to the following sum. 
 
 £■ 
 Livings from 200/. to 300/. to pay . . 2,142 
 300/. to 500/ 11,990 
 
 above 500/ G 1,296 
 
 75,428
 
 ( 74 ) 
 
 I have averaged the livings above 500/. as before, at 
 S(X)l. : but if this average, as there is good reason to 
 suspect, is too low, the increase in the lax would be much 
 greater upon this scale than upon mine. The whole sum 
 to be paid ))y parochial and cathedral preferment, would 
 amount to nearly 100,000/. 
 
 The whole of this pamphlet was ready for the press, be- 
 fore I was aware, that Lord Henley's Plan of Church Re- 
 form had appeared in a fourth edition, " with additions." 
 A hasty glance over the additional matter has not led me 
 to alter any thing which I had previously written : but 
 there is one sentence in the Letter to the King, which will 
 probably be read by many persons with regret. After al- 
 luding to the reception which the Plan had met with from 
 the public. Lord Henley informs his Majesty — " I can 
 safely assert, that no one whose outward life and conversa- 
 tion evince that pure and peaceable wisdom which comes 
 from above, has ever expressed any disapprobation of the 
 extent to which it is carried. And, I have generally found, 
 that the more spiritual and the more scriptural have been 
 the views of those, who have honoured me with their no- 
 tice and their communications, the more entire has been 
 their approval of it." 
 
 This places persons like myself, who cannot approve of 
 Lord Henley's scheme, in rather an awkward predica- 
 ment : but, in the name of every thing vrhicli is sound in 
 religion and common sense, I must protest against a 
 man's spiritual and scriptural views l)eing decided b}' his 
 attachment to this or that scheme of Cliurch Reform. If 
 a man is religious, he will be a friend of I'eal Reform : 
 hnt liis religion will not hinder him from mistaking the 
 shadow for the substance. The funuei' is a matter of the 
 heart, the latter of the head. Whether Clergymen should
 
 ( 75 ) 
 
 reside amono- their flocks, and whether sinecures should 
 be abolished, are proper questions to be submitted to 
 persons whose views are spiritual and scriptural : but 
 whether the Cathedral property should be vested in a 
 Board of Commissioners ; whether that property amounts 
 to 300,000/. per annum ; and whether a residue of 
 150,000/. will leave much for small livings, when it is 
 saddled with a payment of 121,085/., these surely are 
 questions, not of religion, but of practical exjjerience and 
 simple arithmetic. I repeat, that these are the questions 
 which are really at issue between us : so that Lord Hen- 
 ley's satisfaction at the religious sentiments of his sup- 
 porters may be perfectly just, and yet it need not follow 
 that his Plan is a good one. 
 
 We may infer from the sentence quoted above, 
 that persons, whose views are spiritual and scriptuial, 
 and w^hose lives are pure and peaceable, approve of " the 
 extent" to which this plan is carried. Let us then con- 
 sider what is this extent. It is, that translations, com- 
 mendams, pluralities, non-residence, sinecures, &:c. kc. 
 should be abolished. But whei-e are the Clergymen who 
 are not willing to go to this extent? I believe that they 
 are very few : and Lord Henley has shewn, that it is 
 the policy of statesmen, as much as the cupidity of 
 Clergymen, wdiich keeps up these abuses. His Lordship 
 will perhaps say, that his Plan goes also to the extent of 
 abolishing several stalls in Cathedrals : but here 1 am 
 obliged again to advert to the fallacy in his reasoning. 
 The al)olition of these stalls is not an end, l)ut a means ; 
 and when stalls can l)e made useful. Lord Henley pre- 
 serves them. Others are to be al^olishcd, to furnish a 
 sum for the augmentation of small livings : and my 
 objection to the Plan is, that the abolition of these stalls 
 will not raise a sum for the augmentation of small liv- 
 ing's. ALr;iin, 1 have already oliserved. lh;il Lord Heuh^y's
 
 ( 76 ) 
 
 Plan, properly so called, makes no provision whatever 
 for the abolition of these stalls : it merely appropriates 
 their revenues, as soon as they are abolished : but the 
 al)olition can only be effected by the Crown resigning its 
 j)atronage : and Lord Henley has himself told us, that 
 " the time is not yet arrived, when we can hope for any 
 legislative enactment respecting it." So far, therefore, 
 from expressing " any disapprobation of the extent to 
 which it (Lord Henley's plan) is carried," I object that it 
 is not carried far enough in restraining statesmen from 
 doing those political jobs, from which the Church suffers 
 so severely, and for which she incurs so much odium, as 
 if she were the offending instead of the suffering party. 
 
 I have said thus much, because persons, who have not 
 the religious feeling or the charity of Lord Henley, may 
 be inclined to convert his proposition, and to say of those 
 persons who express disapprobation of his Plan, that their 
 outward life and conversation do not evince that pure and 
 peaceable wisdom which comes from above. My views 
 of the Gospel do not allow me to speak thus of those who 
 differ from me in opinion : if I felt myself inclined to 
 draw such a conclusion, I should repress the thought as 
 uncharitable : and, " I have generally found, that the 
 more spiritual and the more scriptural have been the 
 views of any persons," the less confident are they in their 
 own conclusions, and the less inclined to judge the con- 
 sciences of others. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 HOAki; AND VAItry, PniMFltS, ol, STKANU.
 
 ^ J^'