BX 
 5165 
 S659je 
 1837 
 
 A 
 A 
 
 i 
 01 
 
 ! 
 
 7 I 
 6 i 
 5 i 
 9 1 
 3 I 
 2 1 
 
 SMITH 
 
 LETTER TO ARCHDEACON 
 SINGLETON ON THE 
 ECCLESIASTICAL 
 COMMISSION
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 A LETTER 
 
 ARCHDEACON SINGLETON, 
 
 mtUfiUiftitia eommimon. 
 
 THE REV. SYDNEY SMITH, 
 
 THIRD EDITION. 
 
 LONDON: 
 LONGMAN AND CO., PATERNOSTER ROW, 
 
 1837,
 
 W. IMAnnlOTT, EAST STREET, TAUNTON.
 
 A LETTER f,^^ 
 
 ARCHDEACON SINGLETON, ^^ /< 
 
 <)\ THE I U '^ I 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL C0x\IMISS10N. 
 
 M Y DEAR Sir, 
 
 As yon do me tlie honour to ask my opinion 
 respecting- the constitution* and proceedings of tiie 
 Ecclesiastical Commission, and of their conduct to 
 the Dig-nitaries of the Church, I shall write to you 
 without any reserve upon this subject. 
 
 The first thing which excited my surprize, was the 
 Constitution of the Commission. As the reform was 
 to comprehend every branch of Churchmen, Bishops, 
 Dignitaries, and Parochial Clergymen, I cannot 
 but think it would have been much more advisable 
 to have added to the Commission some members 
 of the two lower orders of the Church — they 
 would have supplied that partial knowledge which 
 appears in so many of the proceedings of the 
 Commissioners to have been wanting — they would 
 have attended to those interests (not episcopal) 
 which appear to have been so completely over- 
 looked — and they would have screened the Com- 
 
 * The original Commission (excluding the Ministers of State 
 and the Archbishops) was the Bishop of London, diluted with 
 some watery additions, unless the Earl of Harrowby would allow 
 me to consider him as that admirable plant of the Monandria 
 Monogynia class, the Radix Zhigiberis of the Pharmacopoeia ; 
 the Zungebel of the Persians, administered to the failing stomachs 
 of the senile nobility by the most polished of human physicians, 
 the Machaon of Majesty, and the Podaliriiis of power. 
 
 5012874
 
 mission from those cluirg-es of injustice^ and par- 
 tiality which are now so generally brought against 
 them. There can be no charm in the name of 
 Bishop — the man who was a Curate yesterday is a 
 Bishop to-day. There are many Prebendaries, 
 many Rectors, and many Vicars, who would have 
 come to the Reform of the Church with as much 
 integrity, wisdom, and vigour, as any Bishop on the 
 Bench ; and I believe, with a much stronger recol- 
 lection that all the orders of the Church were not 
 to be sacrificed to the highest; and that to make 
 their work respectable, and lasting, it should in 
 all, (even its minutest provisions), be founded upon 
 justice. 
 
 All the interests of the Church in the Commuta- 
 tion of Tithes are entrusted to one parochial 
 Clergyman * ; and 1 have no doubt, from what I 
 hear of him, that they will be well protected. 
 Why could not one or two such men have been 
 added to the Commission, and a general impression 
 been created, that Government in this momentous 
 change had a parental feeling for all orders of 
 men whose interests might be aflfected by it ? A 
 Ministry may laugh at this, and think if they culti- 
 vate Bishops, that they may treat the other orders 
 of the Church with contempt, and neglect ; but I 
 say, that to create a general impression of justice, 
 if it be not what common honesty requires from 
 any Ministry, is what common sense points out to 
 
 * The Rev. Mr. Jones is the Commissioner appointed by the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury to watch over the interests of the 
 Church.
 
 them. It is strengtlij and duration ^ — it is the only 
 power wliich is worth having — in the struggle ot" 
 parties it gives victory, and is remembered, and 
 goes down to other times. 
 
 A mixture of diflerent orders of Clergy in the 
 Commission, would at least have secured a decent 
 attention to the representations of all ; for of seven 
 communications made to tiie Commission by Cathe- 
 drals, and involving very serious representations 
 respecting higli interests, six were totally disre- 
 garded, and the receipt of the papers not even ac- 
 knowledged. 
 
 I cannot help thinking that the Commissioners 
 have done a great deal too much. Reform 
 of the Church was absolutely necessary — it 
 cannot be avoided, and ought not to be post- 
 poned ; but I would have found out what really 
 gave offence, have applied a remedy, removed 
 the nuisance, and done no more. I would not iiave 
 operated so largely on an old, and (I fear) a decay- 
 ing building. I would not, in days of such strong 
 political excitement, and amidst such a disposition 
 to universal change, have done one thing more than 
 was absolutely necessary to remove the odium 
 which was excited against the Establishment, which 
 was, in fact, the only sensible reason for issuing 
 any Commission at all, and the means which I took 
 to effect this, should have agreed as much as pos- 
 sible with institutions already established. For 
 instance, the public were disgusted with the spec- 
 tacle of rich Prebendaries enjoying large incomes, 
 and doing little, or nothing for them. The real
 
 remedy for this would have been (according to the 
 plan so properly recommended by the Church of 
 Canterbury), to have combined wealth, and labour 
 and as each of the present Prebendaries fell off, 
 to have annexed the stall to some large, and po- 
 pulous parish. A Prebendary of Canterbury, or of 
 St. Paul's, in his present state, may make the 
 Church unpopular ; but place him as Rector of 
 a Parish, with 8000 or 9000 people, and in a Bene- 
 fice of little, or no value, he works for his wealth, 
 and the odium is removed. In like manner the 
 Prebends, which are not the property of Resi- 
 dentiaries, might have been annexed to the smallest 
 livings of the neighbourhood, where the Prebendal 
 estate was situated. The interval which has elapsed 
 since the first furious demand for reform, would 
 have enabled the Commissioners to adopt a scheme 
 of much greater moderation than might perhaps 
 have been possible at the first outbreak of popular 
 indiofuation ag-ainst the Church : and this sort of 
 distribution would have given much more general 
 satisfaction than the plan adopted by the Commis- 
 sioners ; for though money, in the estimation of 
 philosophers, has no ear mark, it has a very deep 
 one in the opinion of the multitude. The riches of the 
 Church of Durham were most hated in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Durham ; and there such changes as I 
 have pointed out would have been most gladly 
 received, and would have conciliated the greatest 
 favour to the Church. The people of Kent cannot 
 see why their Kentish Estates, given to the Cathedral 
 of Canterbury, are to augment livings in Cornwall.
 
 The Citizens of London see some of their xMinis- 
 ters starving^ in the city, and the profits of the 
 extins'uished Prebends sent into Northumberland. 
 These feehngs may be very miphilosophical, but 
 they are the feelings of the mass ; and to the feel- 
 ings of the mass of the people the Reforms of the 
 Church ought to be directed. In this way the evil 
 would have been corrected where it was most seen 
 and noticed. All patronage would have been left 
 as it was. One order of the Church would not 
 have plundered the other. Nor would all the Cathe- 
 drals in England have been subjected to the uncon- 
 ciliating empire, and unwearied energy of one man. 
 
 Instead of this quiet, and cautious mode of pro- 
 ceeding, all is change, fusion, and confusion. 
 New Bishops, new Dioceses, confiscated Prebends, 
 — Clergymen changing Bishops, and Bishops Cler- 
 gymen — mitres in Manchester, Gloucester turned 
 into Bristol. Such a scene of revolution, and com- 
 mutation as has not been seen since the days of 
 Ireton, and Cromwell ! and the singularity is, that all 
 this has been effected by men selected from their 
 age, their dignity, and their known principles, and 
 from whom the considerate part of tlie community 
 expected all the caution, and calmness which these 
 high requisites seemed to promise, and ought to 
 have secured. 
 
 The plea of making a fund is utterly untenable 
 — the great object was not to make a fund ; and 
 there is the mistake into which the Commission 
 have fallen : the object was not to add £10 or £20 
 per annum to a thousand small livings, and to
 
 8 
 
 diminish inequalities in a ratio so trifling that the 
 public will hardly notice it; a very proper thing 
 to do if higher interests were not sacrificed to it, 
 but the great object was to remove the causes of 
 hatred from the Church, by lessening such incomes 
 as those of Canterbury, Durham, and London, exor- 
 bitantly, and absurdly great— by makingidleness work 
 — and by these means to lessen the envy of laymen. 
 It is impossible to make a fund which will raise 
 the smaller livings of the Church into any thing like 
 a decent support for those who possess them. The 
 whole income of the Church, episcopal, prebendal, 
 and parochial, divided among the Clergy, would 
 not give to each Clergyman an income equal to 
 that which is enjoyed by the upper domestic of a 
 great nobleman. The method in which the Church 
 has been paid, and must continue to be paid, is by 
 unequal divisions. All the enormous changes 
 which the Commission is making will produce a 
 very trifling difference in the inequality, while it will 
 accustom more and more those enemies of the 
 Church, who are studying under their Right Rev. 
 Masters, to the boldest revolutions in Ecclesiastical 
 aflTairs. Out of 10,478 Benefices there are 297 
 of about ^40 per annum value ; 1,629 at about ^75, 
 and 1,602 at about £125; to raise all these bene- 
 fices to c£200 per annum, would require an annual 
 sum of £371,293 ; and upon 2,878 of those Bene- 
 fices there are no houses ; and upon 1,728 no houses 
 fit for residence. What diff'erence in the apparent 
 inequality of the Church would this sum of 
 ^371,293 produce, if it could be raised, or in
 
 9 
 
 what degree would it lessen tlie odium which that 
 inequality creates ? the case is utterly hopeless; and 
 yet with all their confiscations the Commissioners 
 are so far from being- able to raise the annual sum 
 of £371,000, that the utmost they expect to gain 
 is £130,000 per annum. 
 
 It seems a paradoxical statement, but the fact 
 is, that the respectability of the Church as well as of 
 the Bar, is almost entirely preserved by the unequal 
 division of their revenues. A Bar of one hundred 
 lawyers travel the Northern Circuit, enlightening 
 provincial ignorance, curing local partialities, dif- 
 fusing knowledge, and dispensing justice in their 
 route ; it is quite certain, that all they gain is not 
 equal to all that they spend ; if the profits were 
 equally divided there would not be six and eight- 
 pence for each person, and there would be no Bar 
 at all. At present, the success of the leader 
 animates them all — each man hopes to be a Scar- 
 lett or a Brougham — and takes out his ticket in a 
 lottery by which the mass must infallibly lose, trust- 
 ing (as mankind are so apt to do) to his good for- 
 tune, and believing that the prize is reserved for 
 him, disappointment, and defeat for others. So it is 
 with the Clergy ; the whole income of the Church, 
 if equally divided, would be about £250 for each 
 minister. Who would go into the Church and 
 spend £1,200 or £1,500 upon his education, if 
 such were the highest remuneration he could ever 
 look to ? At present, men are tempted into the 
 Church by the prizes of the Church, and bring into
 
 10 
 
 that Church a great deal of capital which enables 
 them to live in decency, supporting themselves, 
 not with the money of the public, but with their 
 own money, which, but for this temptation, would 
 have been carried into some retail trade. The 
 offices of the Church would then fall down to men 
 little less coarse, and ignorant than agricultural 
 labourers — the clergyman of the parish would soon 
 be seen in the squire's kitchen ; and all this 
 would take place in a country where poverty is 
 infamous ! 
 
 In fact, nothing can be more unjust, and idle than 
 the reasoning of many laymen upon Church mat- 
 ters. You choose to have an Establishment — God 
 forbid you should choose otherwise ! and you wish 
 to have men of decent manners, and good educa- 
 tion as the Ministers of that Establishment : all 
 this is very right; but are you willing to pay them 
 as such men ought to be paid ? Are you willing to 
 pay to each Clergyman, confining himself to one 
 spot, and giving up all his time to the care of one 
 parish, a salary of £500 per annum? To do this 
 would require three millions to be added to the 
 present Reveiuies of the Church ; and such an 
 expenditure is impossible ! What then remains if 
 you will have a Clergy and will not pay them 
 equitably, and separately, than to pay them un- 
 equally and by lottery ? and yet this very in- 
 equality, which secures to you a respectable Clergy 
 upon the most economical terms, is considered by 
 laymen as a gross abuse. It is an abuse, however,
 
 11 
 
 which tliey have not the spirit to extinguish by in- 
 creased munificence to tlieir Clergy, nor justice to 
 consider as the only other method by which all the 
 advantages of a respectable Establishment can be 
 procured ; but they use it at the same time as a 
 topic for sarcasm, and a source of economy. 
 
 This it will be said is a Mammonish view of the 
 subject ; it is so, but those who make this objection, 
 forget the immense effect which Mammon pro- 
 duces upon religion itself. Shall the gospel be 
 preached by men paid by the state ? shall these 
 men be taken from the lower orders and be meanly 
 paid? shall they be men of learning and educa- 
 tion? and shall there be some magnificent endow- 
 ments to allure such men into the Church ? Which 
 of these methods is the best for diffusing the 
 rational doctrines of Christianity ? not in the age of 
 the apostles, not in the abstract, timeless, nameless 
 placeless land of the philosophers, but in the yea^ 
 1837, in the porter-brewing, cotton-spinning, tallow 
 melting kingdom of Great Britain, bursting with 
 opulence, and flying from poverty as the greatest 
 of human evils. Many different answers may be 
 given to these questions, but they are questions 
 which do not end in Mammon, but have a powerful 
 bearing on real religion, and deserve the deepest 
 consideration from its disciples, and friends. Let the 
 comfortsof the Clergy go for nothing. Consider their 
 state only as religion is affected by it. If upon this 
 principle I am forced to allot to some, an opulence 
 which my clever friend the Examiner would pro-
 
 12 
 
 nounce to be uiiapostolical, I cannot help it ; I 
 must take this people with all their follies, and 
 prejudices^ and circumstances, and carve out an 
 establishment best suited for them, however unfit 
 for early Christianity in barren, and conquered 
 Judea. 
 
 Not only will this measure of the Commission 
 bring into the Church a lower, and worse educated 
 set of men, but it will have a tendency to make 
 the Clergy fanatical. You will have a set of rant- 
 ing, raving. Pastors, who will wage war against all 
 the innocent pleasures of life, vie with each other 
 in extravagance of zeal, and plague your heart out 
 with their nonsense, and absurdity ; cribbage must 
 be played in caverns, and sixpenny whist take 
 refuge in the howling wilderness. In this way low 
 men doomed to hopeless poverty, and galled by 
 contempt, will endeavour to force themselves into 
 station, and significance. 
 
 There is an awkward passage in the memorial 
 of the Church of Canterbury, which deserves some 
 consideration from him to whom it is directed. 
 The Archbishop of Canterbury, at his consecration, 
 takes a solemn oath that he will maintain the rights 
 and liberties of the Church of Canterbury ; as Chair- 
 man, however of the New Commission, he seizes the 
 patronage of that Church, takes two-thirds of its 
 Revenues, and abolishes two-thirds of its Members. 
 That there is an answer to this I am very willing to 
 believe, but I cannot at present find out what it is ; 
 and this attack upon the Revenues, and iM embers of
 
 13 
 
 Canterbury is not obedience to an Act of Parlia- 
 ment, but the very Act of Parliament which takes 
 away is recommended, drawn up, and signed by the 
 person who has sworn he will never take away ; and 
 this little apparent inconsistency is not confined to 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, but is shared 
 equally by all the Bishop Commissioners, who have 
 all (unless 1 am grievously mistaken,) taken similar 
 oaths for the preservation of their respective Chap- 
 ters. It would be more easy to see our way out of 
 this little erabarrassment,if someof the embarrassed 
 had not unfortunately, in the parliamentary debates 
 on the Catholic Question, laid the greatest stress 
 upon the King's oath, applauded the sanctity of the 
 monarch to the skies, rejected all comments, called 
 for the oath in its plain meaning, and attributed the 
 safety of the English Church to the solemn vow 
 made by the King at the altar to the Archbishops 
 of Canterbury and York, and the other Bishops. 
 I should be very sorry if this were not placed on 
 a clear footing, as fools will be imputing to our 
 Church the pia et religiosa CaUiditas, which is so 
 commonly brought against the Cathohcs. 
 
 Urbem quam dicunt Romam, Meliboee, putavi 
 Stultus ego huic nostree similcm. 
 
 The words of Henry VIII , in endowing the Cathe- 
 dral of Canterbury, are thus given in the translation. 
 " We therefore, dedicating the aforesaid close, site, 
 circle, and precinct to the honour and glory of 
 the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son, and
 
 14 
 
 Holy Spirit, have decreed that a certain Cathedral 
 and Metropolitan Church, with one Dean, Pres- 
 byter, and twelve Prebendaries Presbyters ; these 
 verily and for ever to serve Almighty God shall be 
 created, set up, settled, and established ; and the 
 same aforesaid Cathedral, and Metropolitan Church 
 with one Dean, Presbyter, and twelve Prebenda- 
 ries Presbyters, with other Ministers necessary for 
 divine worship, by the tenor of these presents in 
 reality, and plenitude of force, we do create, set 
 up, settle, and establish, and do command to be 
 established and to be in perpetuity, and inviolably 
 maintained and upheld by these presents." And 
 this is the Church, the rights and liberties of 
 which the Archbishop at his consecration swears 
 to maintain. Nothing can be more ill-natured 
 among politicians, than to look back into Han- 
 sard's debates, to see what has been said by par- 
 ticular men upon particular occasions, and to 
 contrast such speeches with present opinions — and 
 therefore I forbear to introduce some inviting pas- 
 sages upon taking oaths in their plain and obvious 
 sense, both in debates on the Catholic Question 
 and upon that fatal 2ii\d Jllezentian oath which binds 
 the Irish to the English Church. 
 
 It is quite absurd to see how all the Cathedrals are 
 to be trimmed to an exact Procrustes pattern — 
 quieta movere is the motto of the Commission : there 
 is to be every where a Dean, and four Residentiaries ; 
 but St. Paul's, and Lincoln have at present only three 
 Residentiaries, and a Dean, who officiates in his turn
 
 15 
 
 as a Canon ; — a fourth must be added to each. 
 Why? nobody wants more Prebendaries ; St. Paul's 
 and Lincoln fro on very well as they are. It is not 
 for the lack of Prebendaries that the Church of Eng-- 
 land is unpopular, but for their idleness ; but in the 
 lust of refoi'ming", the Commission cut, and patch 
 property as they would cut figures in pasteboard. 
 This little piece of wanton change, however^ gives 
 to two of the Bishops, who are Commissioners as 
 well as Bishops, patronage of a thousand a year 
 each ; and though I am willing not to consider this 
 as the cause of the recommendation, yet I must 
 observe it is not very common that the same persons 
 should bring in the verdict and receive the profits 
 of the suit. No other Archdeacons are paid in 
 such a manner, and no other Bishops out of the 
 Commission have received such a bonus.* 
 
 I must express my surprize that nothing in this 
 Commission of Bishops, either in the Bill which 
 has passed, or in the Report which preceded it, is 
 said of the duties of Bishops. A Bishop is not 
 now forced by law to be in his diocese, or to attend 
 his duty in Parliament — he may be entirely absent 
 from both ; nor are there wanting instances within 
 these six years where such has been the case. It 
 would have been very easy to have placed the 
 repairs of Episcopal Palaces (as the concurrent 
 leases of Bishops are placed) under the superin- 
 tendence of Deans, and Chapters ; but though 
 
 * This extravagant pay of Archdeacons is taken, remember, from 
 that fund for the augmentation of small Livings, for the establish- 
 ment of which all the divisions and confiscations have been made.
 
 the Bishops' bill was accompanied by another bill, 
 containing- the strictest enactments for the residence 
 of the Clergy, and some very arbitrary, and unjust 
 rules for the repair of their houses, it did not 
 appear upon the face of the law that the Bishops 
 had any such duties to perform ; and yet I remem- 
 ber the case of a Bishop, dead not six years ago, 
 who was scarcely ever seen in the House of Lords, 
 or in his diocese ; and I remember well also 
 the indignation with which the inhabitants of a 
 great Cathedral Town spoke of the conduct of 
 another Bishop (now also deceased) who not only 
 never entered his palace, but turned his horses into 
 the garden. When I mention these instances, I 
 am not setting myself up as the satirist of Bishops. 
 I think upon the whole, they do their duty in a very 
 exemplary manner ; but they are not as the late bills 
 would have us to suppose, impeccable. The Church 
 Commissioners should not have suffered their reports 
 and recommendations to paint the other branches 
 of the Church as such slippery transgredient mor- 
 tals, and to leave the world to imagine that Bishops 
 may be safely trusted to their own goodness with- 
 out enactment or controul. 
 
 This squabble about patronage is said to be 
 disgraceful. Those who mean to be idle, and in- 
 solent, because they are at peace, may look out of 
 the window and say, " This is a disgraceful squab- 
 ble between Bishops and Chapters ;" but those 
 who mean to be just, should ask, Who begins f 
 the real disgrace of the squabble is in the attack, 
 and not in the defence. If any man puts his banrl
 
 17 
 
 jnto my pocket to take my property, am I dis- 
 graced if 1 prevent liim? Churchmen are ready 
 enough to be submissive to their superiors ; but 
 were they to submit to a spoliation so gross, 
 accompanied with ignominy, and degradation, and 
 to bear all this in submissive silence? to be ac- 
 cused of Nepotism by Nepotists, who were praising 
 themselves indirectly by the accusation, and be- 
 nefiting themselves directly by the confiscation 
 founded on it ? — the real disgrace would have been 
 to have submitted to this : and men are to be ho- 
 noured, not disgraced, who come forth, contrary to 
 their usual habits, to oppose those masters, whom, 
 in common seasons, they would willingly obey ; but 
 who, in this matter, have tarnished their dignity, 
 and forgotten what they owe to themselves and to us. 
 
 It is a very singular thing that the Law always 
 suspects Judges, and never suspects Bishops. If 
 there is any way in which the partialities of the 
 Judge may injure laymen, the subject is fenced 
 round with all sorts of jealousies, and enactments, and 
 prohibitions — all partialities are guarded against, 
 and all propensities watched. Where Bishops are 
 concerned. Acts of Parliament are drawn up for 
 beings who can never possibly be polluted by pride, 
 prejudice, passion, or interest. Not otherwise 
 would be the case with Judges, if they, like the 
 heads of the Church, legislated for themselves. 
 
 Then comes the question of patronage : can any 
 thing be more flagrantly unjust, than that the patron- 
 ageof Cathedrals shouldbe taken away and conferred 
 
 c
 
 18 
 
 upon the Bishops ? I do not want to go into a long; 
 and tiresome history of Episcopal Nepotism, but it 
 is notorious to all, that Bishops confer their patron- 
 age upon their sons, and sons-in-law, and all their 
 relations ; and it is really quite monstrous in the 
 face of the world, who see this every day, and every 
 hour, to turn round upon Deans, and Chapters and 
 to say to them, " We are credibly informed that 
 there are instances in your Chapters where prefer- 
 ment has not been given to the most learned men 
 you can find, but to the sons and brothers of some 
 of the Prebendaries. These things must not be — 
 we must take these Benefices into our own keep- 
 ing;" and this is the language of men swarming 
 themselves with sons, and daughters, and who, in 
 enumerating the advantages of their stations, have 
 always spoken of the opportunities of providing for 
 their families as the greatest and most important. 
 It is, I admit, the duty of every man, and of every 
 body, to present the best man that can be found to 
 any living of which he is the Patron ; but if this 
 duty has been neglected, it has been neglected by 
 Bishops quite as much as by Chapters ; and no man 
 can open the " Clerical Guide" and read two pages 
 of it, without seeing that the Bench of Bishops are 
 the last persons from whom any remedy of this evil 
 is to be expected. 
 
 The legislature has not always taken the same 
 view of the comparative trust-worthiness of Bishops 
 and Chapters as is taken by the Commission. 
 Bishops' leases for years are for twenty-one 
 years, renewable every seven. M hen seven years
 
 19 
 
 are expired, if the present tenant will not renew, 
 the Bishop may grant a concurrent lease. How 
 does his lordship act on such occasions? He 
 generally asks two years income for the renewal, 
 when Chapters, not having the privilege of grant- 
 ing such concurring leases, ask only a year and 
 a half; and if the Bishop's price is not given, 
 he puts a son or a daughter, or a trustee, into 
 the estate, and the price of the lease deferred 
 is money saved for his family. But unfair, and ex- 
 orbitant terms may be asked by his lordship, and 
 the tenant may be unfairly dispossessed — therefore, 
 the leo'islature enacts that all those concurrent 
 leases must be countersigned by the Dean, and 
 Chapter of the diocese — making them the safe- 
 guards against Episcopal rapacity ; and, as 1 hear 
 from others, not making them so in vain. These 
 sort of laws do not exactly correspond with the 
 relative views taken of both parties by the Eccle- 
 siastical Commission. This view of Chapters is of 
 course overlooked by a Commission of Bishops, 
 just as all mention of bridles would be omitted in 
 a meeting of horses ; but in this view Chapters 
 might be made eminently useful. In what pro- 
 fession, too, is there no gradations ? Why is the 
 Church of England to be nothing but a collection 
 of Beggars and Bishops — the right reverend Dives 
 in the palace, and Lazarus in orders at the gate, 
 doctored by dogs, and comforted w ith crumbs ? 
 
 But to take away the patronage of existing Preben- 
 daries is objectionable for another class of reasons. 
 
 c 2
 
 20 
 
 If it is right to take away the patronage of my Cathe- 
 dral and to give it to the Bishop, it is at least unjust 
 to do so with my share of it during my life. Society 
 have a right to improve, or to do what they think an 
 improvement, but then they have no right to do so 
 suddenly, and hastily to my prejudice ! After secur- 
 ing to me certain possessions by one hundred statutes 
 past in six hundred years — after having clothed me 
 in fine garments, and conferred upon me pompous 
 names, they have no right to turn round upon me 
 all of a sudden and to say, you are not a Dean nor 
 a Canon-Residentiary, but a vagabond and an out- 
 cast, and a morbid excrescence upon society. This 
 would not be a reform, but the grossest tyranny 
 and oppression. If a man cannot live under the 
 canopy of ancient law, where is he safe ? how can 
 he see his way, or lay out his plan of life ? 
 
 " Diibitant homines serere atque impendere curas." 
 
 You tolerated for a century the wicked traffic in 
 slaves, legislated for that species of property, en- 
 couraged it by premiums, defended it in your 
 Courts of Justice — West Indians bought, and sold, 
 trusting (as Englishmen always ought to trust) in 
 Parliaments. Women went to the altar, promised 
 that they should be supported by that property; 
 and children were born to it, and young men were 
 educated with it : but (^od touched the hearts of 
 the English people, and they would have no slaves. 
 The scales fell from their eyes, and they saw the 
 monstrous wickedness of the traffic ; but then they 
 said, and said magnificently, to the West Indians,
 
 21 
 
 " We mean to become wiser and better, but not 
 at your expense ; the loss shall be ours, and we 
 will not involve you in ruin, because we are ashamed 
 of our former cruelties, and have learnt a better 
 lesson of humanity, and wisdom." And this is the 
 way in which improving- nations ought to act, and this 
 is the distinction between reform, and revolution. 
 
 Justice is not changed by the magnitude, or 
 minuteness of the subject. The old Cathedrals 
 have enjoyed their patronage for seven hundred 
 years, and the new ones since the time of Henry 
 the Eighth ; which latter period even gives a much 
 longer possession than ninety-nine out of a hun- 
 dred of the legislators, who are called upon to plun- 
 der us, can boast of for their own estates. And 
 these rights, thus sanctioned, and hallowed by 
 time, are torn from their present possessors with- 
 out the least warning, or preparation, in the midst 
 of all that fever of change which has seized upon 
 the people, and which frightens men to the core of 
 their hearts; and this spoliation is made, not by 
 low men rushing into the plunder of the Church 
 and State, but by men of admirable, and unim- 
 peached character in all the relations of life — not 
 by rash men of new politics, but by the ancient 
 conservators of ancient law — by the Archbishops 
 and Bishops of the land, high official meii, invented 
 and created, and put in palaces to curb the lawless 
 changes, and the mutations, and the madness of 
 mankind ; and to crown the whole, the ludicrous is 
 added to the unjust, and what they take from the
 
 22 
 
 other branches of the Church they confer upon 
 themselves. 
 
 Never dreaming of such sudden revolutions as 
 these, a Prebendary brings up his son to the Church, 
 and spends a large sum of money in his education, 
 which perhaps he can ill afford. His hope is (wicked 
 wretch!) that according to the established custom 
 of the body to which he, (immoral man !) belongs, 
 the Chapter will (when his turn arrives), if his 
 son be of fair attainments and good character, 
 attend to his nefarious recommendation, and 
 confer the living upon the young man ; and in 
 an instant all his hopes are destroyed, and he 
 finds his preferment seized upon, under the plea of 
 public good, by a stronger Churchman than himself. 
 I can call this by no other name than that of 
 tyranny, and oppression. I know very well that 
 this is not the theory of patronage ; but who does 
 better? — do individual patrons? — do Colleges 
 who give in succession ? — and as for Bishops, lives 
 there the man so weak, and foolish, so little observant 
 of the past, as to believe (when this tempest of 
 purity and perfection has blown over) that the 
 name of Blomfield will not figure in those benefices 
 from which the names of Coplestou, Blomberg,Tate, 
 and Smith, have been so virtuously excluded ? I 
 have no desire to make odious comparisons between 
 the purity of one set of patrons and another, but 
 they are forced upon me by the injustice of the 
 Commissioners, 1 must either make such com-
 
 23 
 
 parisons, or yield up, without remonstrance, those 
 rights to which I am fairly entitled. 
 
 It may be said that the Bishops will do better in 
 future ; that now the public eye is upon them, they 
 will be shamed into a more lofty and antinepotic 
 spirit; but, if the argument of past superiority is 
 given up,and the hope of future amendment resorted 
 to, why may we not improve as well as our masters ? 
 but the Commission say, '* These excellent men 
 (meaning themselves) have promised to do better, 
 and we have an implicit confidence in their word: 
 we must have your patronage." In the mean- 
 time we are ready to promise as well as the Bishops. 
 
 With regard to that common newspaper phrase 
 the public eije— there's nothing (as the Bench well 
 know) more wandering and slippery than the 
 public ei/e. In five years hence the public eye 
 will no more see what description of men are 
 promoted by Bishops, than it will see what Doctors 
 of Law are promoted by the Turkish Uhlema ; and 
 at the end of this period (such is the example set 
 by the Commission), the public eye turned in every 
 direction may not be able to see any Bishops at all. 
 
 In many instances, Chapters are better patrons 
 than Bishops, because their preferment is not given 
 exclusively to one species of Incumbents. I have a 
 diocese now in my private eye which has undergone 
 the following changes. The first of three Bishops 
 whom I remember \vas a man of careless easy 
 temper, and how patronage went in those early 
 days may be conjectured by the following letters, 
 which are not his, but serve to illustrate a systen)
 
 24 
 
 THE BISHOP TO LORD A 
 
 My Dear Lord, 
 
 1 have noticed with great pleasure the behaviour 
 of your Lordship's second son, and am most happy to have it in my 
 power to offer to him the Uving of * * * He will find it of 
 considerable value ; and there is, I understand, a very good house 
 upon it, &c. &c. 
 
 This is to confer a living upon a man of real 
 merit out of the family ; into which family, ap- 
 parently sacrificed to the public good, the living 
 is brought back by the second letter. — 
 
 THE SAME TO THE SAME A YEAR AFTER. 
 
 My Dear Lord, 
 
 Will you excuse the liberty I take in soliciting 
 promotion for my grandson ? He is an officer of great skill and 
 gallantry, and can bring the most ample testimonials from some 
 of the best men in the profession : the Arethusa frigate is, I un- 
 derstand, about to be commissioned ; and if, &c. &c. 
 
 Now I am not saying that hundreds of Preben- 
 daries have not committed such enormous, and 
 stupendous crimes as this (a declaration which 
 will fill the Whig Cabinet with horror) ; all that I 
 mean to contend for is, that such is the practice 
 of Bishops quite as much as it is of inferior 
 Patrons. 
 
 The second Bishop was a decided enemy of Cal- 
 vinistical doctrines, and no Clergyman so tainted 
 had the slightest chance of preferment in his 
 diocese. 
 
 The third Bishop could endure no man whose
 
 25 
 
 principles were not strictly Calvinistic, and who 
 did not give to the Articles that kind of interpreta- 
 tion. Now here were a great mass of Clergy na- 
 turally alive to the emoluments of their profession, 
 and not knowing which way to look or stir, because 
 they depended so entirely upon the will of one 
 person. Not otherwise is it with a very Whig 
 Bishop, or a very Tory Bishop ; but the worst case 
 is that of a superannuated Bishop ; here the prefer- 
 ment is given away, and must be given away, by 
 wives and daughters, or by sons, or by butlers, 
 perhaps, and valets, and the poor dying Patron's 
 paralytic hand is guided to the signature of 
 papers, the contents of which he is utterly unable 
 to comprehend. In all such cases as these, the 
 superiority of Bishops as Patrons will not assist 
 that violence which the Commissioners have com- 
 mitted upon the patronage of Cathedrals. 
 
 I never heard that Cathedrals had sold the 
 patronage of their preferment ; such a practice, 
 however, is not quite unknown among the higher 
 orders of the Church. When the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury consecrates an inferior Bishop, 
 he marks some piece of preferment in the gift of 
 the Bishop as his own. This is denominated an 
 option; and when the preferment falls, it is 
 not only in the gift of the Archbishop, if he is 
 alive, but in the gift of his representatives if he is 
 not. It is an absolute chattel, which, like any 
 other chattel, is part of the Archbishop's assets; 
 and if he died in debt, might be taken, and sold,
 
 26 
 
 for the benefit of his creditors — and within the 
 memory of man such options have been publicly 
 sold by auction — and if the present Archbishop of 
 Canterbury were to die in debt to-morrow, such 
 might be the fate of his options. What Arch- 
 bishop Moore did with his options I do not know, 
 but the late Archbishop Sutton very handsomely 
 and properly left them to the present — a bequest, 
 however, which would not have prevented such 
 options from coming- to the hammer, if Arch- 
 bishop Sutton had not cleared off, before his 
 death, those incumbrances which at one period of 
 his life sat so heavily upon him. 
 
 What the present Archbishop means to do with 
 them, I am not informed. They are not alluded to 
 in the Church Returns, though they must be worth 
 some thousand pounds. The Commissioners do 
 not seem to know of their existence — at least they 
 are profoundly silent on the subject ; and the Bill 
 which passed through Parliament in the summer 
 for the regulation of the Emoluments of Bishops, 
 does not make the most distant allusion to them. 
 When a parallel was drawn between two species of 
 patrons — which ended in the confiscation of the 
 patronage of Cathedrals — when two Archbishops 
 helped to draw the parallel, and profited by 
 the parallel, I have a perfect right to state 
 this corrupt anrl unabolished practice of their 
 own sees — a practice which I never heard 
 charged against Deans, and Chapters. 
 
 I do not mean to imply, in the most remote de-
 
 27 
 
 gree, that either of the present Archbishops have 
 sold their options, or ever thought of it. Purer 
 and more high-minded gentlemen do not exist, nor 
 men more utterly incapable of doing any thing un- 
 worthy of their high station ; and I am convinced 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury* will imitate or 
 exceed the munificence of his predecessor : but 
 when twenty-four public bodies are to be despoiled 
 of their patronage, we must look not only to 
 present men, but historically, to see how it has 
 been administered in times of old, and in times 
 also recently past; and to remember, that at this 
 moment, when Bishops are set up as the most 
 admirable dispensers of patronage — as the only 
 persons fit to be intrusted with it — as Marvels, for 
 whom law and justice, and ancient possessions, 
 ought to be set aside, that tiiis patronage (very 
 valuable because selected from the whole diocese) 
 of the two heads of the Church is liable to all the 
 accidents of succession — that it may fall into the 
 hands of a superannuated wife, of a profligate son, 
 of a weak daughter, or a rapacious creditor — that 
 it may be brought to the hammer, and publicly bid 
 for at an auction, like all the other chattels of the 
 palace; and that such have been the indignities to 
 
 * The options of the Archbishop of York are comparatively 
 trifling. I never heard, at any period, that they had been sold ; 
 but they remain, like those of Canterbury, in the absolute pos- 
 session of the Archbishop's representatives after his death. I will 
 answer for it that the present Archbishop will do every thing 
 with them which becomes his high station and high character. 
 They ought to be abolished by Act of Parliament.
 
 28 
 
 which this optional patronage has been exposed, 
 from the earliest days of the Chnrch to this 
 moment. Truly, men who live in houses of glass 
 (especially where the panes are so large) ought 
 not to fling stones ; or if they do, they should be 
 specially careful at whose head they are flung. 
 
 And then the patronage which is not seized — 
 the patronage which the Chapter is allowed to 
 present to its own body — may be divided without 
 their consent. Can any thing be more thoroughly 
 lawless, or unjust than this — that my patronage 
 during my life shall be divided without my con- 
 sent? How do my rights during my life differ 
 from those of a lay patron, who is tenant for life? 
 and upon what principle of justice, or common 
 sense is his patronage protected from the Com- 
 missioners' dividing power to which mine is sub- 
 jected ? That one can sell, and the other cannot 
 sell, the next presentation, would be bad reason- 
 ing if it were good law; but it is not law for 
 an Ecclesiastical Corporation, aggregate or sole, 
 can sell a next presentation as legally as a lay 
 life-tenant can do. They have the same power of 
 selling as laymen, but they never do so ; that is, 
 they dispense their patronage with greater pro- 
 priety, and delicacy, which, in the estimate of the 
 Commissioners, seems to make their right weaker, 
 and the reasons for taking it away more powerful. 
 
 Not only are Laymen guarded by the same act 
 which gives the power of dividing livings to the 
 Commissioners, but Bishops are also guarded. The
 
 29 
 
 Commissioners may divide the livings of Chapters 
 without their consent ; but before they can touch 
 the living of a Bishop, his consent must be ob- 
 tained. It seems after a few of those examples, 
 to become a little clearer, and more intelligible 
 why the appointment of any other Ecclesias- 
 tics than Bishops was so disagreeable to the 
 Bench. 
 
 The reasoning then is this : if a good living is 
 vacant in the patronage of a Chapter, they will only 
 think of conferring it on one of their body or their 
 friends. If such a living falls to the gift of a Bishop, 
 he will totally overlook the interests of his sons, and 
 daughters, and divide the living into small portions 
 for the good of the public ; and with these sort of 
 anilities. Whig leaders, whose interest it is to lull 
 the Bisliops into a reform, pretend to be satisfied ; 
 and upon this intolerable nonsense they are not 
 ashamed to justify spoliation. 
 
 A division is set up between public, and private 
 patronage, and it is pretended that one is holden in 
 trust for the public, the other is private property. 
 This is mere theory — a slight (ilm thrown over 
 convenient injustice. Henry VIII. gave to the 
 Duke of Bedford much of his patronage. Roger 
 de Hoveden gave to the Church of St. Paul's 
 much of their patronage before the Russells were in 
 existence. The duke has the legal power to o-ive 
 his preferment to whom he pleases — so have we. 
 We are both under the same moral, and relis-ious 
 restraint to administer that patronage properly —
 
 30 
 
 the trust is precisely the same to both ; and if the 
 public good requires it, the power of dividing 
 livings without the consent of patrons should be 
 given in all instances, and not confined as a mark 
 of infamy to Cathedrals alone. This is not the 
 real reason of the difference; Bishops are the 
 active Members of the Commission — they do not 
 choose that their own patronage should be 
 meddled with, and they know that the Laity would 
 not allow for a moment that their livings should 
 be pulled to pieces by Bishops ; and that if such 
 a proposal were made, there would be more 
 danger of the Bishop being pulled to pieces 
 than the living. The real distinction is between 
 the weak, and the strong — between those who 
 have power to resist encroachment, and those 
 who have not. This is the reason why we are 
 selected for experiment, and so it is with all the 
 bill from beginning to end. There is purple 
 and fine linen in every line of it. 
 
 Another strong objection to the dividing power 
 of the Commission is this. According to the printed 
 bill brought forward last session, if the living is 
 not taken by some members of the body, it lapses 
 to the Bishop. Suppose then the same person to 
 be Bishop, and Commissioner, he breaks the living 
 into little pieces as a Commissioner, and after it is 
 rejected in its impoverished state by the Chapter, 
 he gives it away as Bishop of the diocese. The 
 only answer that is given to such objections is, 
 the impeccability of Bishops ; and upon this prin-
 
 31 
 
 ciple the whole bill has been constructed, and here 
 is the great mistake about Bishops. They are 
 upon the whole very good, and worthy men ; but 
 they are not (as many ancient ladies suppose) 
 wholly exempt from human infirmities; they have 
 their malice, hatred, uncharitableness, persecution, 
 and interests like other men ; and an administration 
 who did not think it more magnificent to laugh at 
 the lower Clergy, than to protect them, should 
 suffer no Ecclesiastical Bill to pass through Parlia- 
 ment without seriously considering how its provi- 
 sions may affect the happiness of poor Clergymen 
 pushed into living-tombs, and pining in solitude — 
 
 Vates procul atque in sola relevant 
 Pascua, post montem oppositum, et trans flumina lata. 
 
 There is a practice among some Bishops, which 
 may as well be mentioned here as any where else, 
 but which I think cannot be too severely repro- 
 bated. They send for a Clergyman, and insist 
 upon his giving evidence respecting the character, 
 and conduct of his neighbour. Does he hunt? 
 Does he shoot ? Is lie in debt ? Is he temperate ? 
 Does he attend to his parish ? &c. &c. Now 
 what is this, but to destroy for all Clergymen 
 the very elements of social life — to put an end to 
 all confidence between man, and man — and to dis- 
 seminate among gentlemen, who are bound to live 
 in concord, every feeling of resentment, hatred, 
 and suspicion ? but the very essence of tyranny is 
 to act, as if the finer feelings, like the finer dishes.
 
 32 
 
 were delicacies only lor the rich and great, and 
 that little people have no taste for them and no 
 right to them. A good and honest Bishop (I 
 thank God there are many who deserve that 
 character !) ought to suspect himself, and carefully 
 to watch his own heart. He is all of a sudden 
 elevated from being a tutor, dining at an early 
 hour with his pupil, (and occasionally, it is be- 
 lieved, on cold meat) to be a spiritual Lord ; he is 
 dressed in a magnificent dress, decorated with a 
 title, flattered by Chaplains, and surrounded by 
 little people looking up for the things which he 
 has to give away ; and this often happens to a 
 man who has had no opportunities of seeing the 
 world, whose parents were in very humble life, and 
 who has given up all his thoughts to the Frogs of 
 Aristophanes and the Targum of Onkelos. How 
 is it possible that such a man should not lose his 
 head ? that he should not swell ? that he should 
 not be guilty of a thousand follies, and worry and 
 teaze to death (before he recovers his common 
 sense) an hundred men as good, and as wise, and 
 as able as himself? 
 
 The history of the division of Edmonton has, I 
 understand, been repeatedly stated in the Com- 
 mission — and told as it has been by a decided 
 advocate, and with no sort of evidence called for 
 on the other side of the question, has produced 
 an unfair impression against Chapters. The his- 
 tory is shortly this : — Besides the Mother Church 
 of Edmonton, there are two Chapels— Southgate,
 
 33 
 
 and Wiiicliinore Hill Chapel. Winchniore Hill 
 Chapel was built by the Society for building 
 Churches upon the same plan as the portions of 
 Maryleboue are arranged ; the Clergyman was to 
 be remunerated by the lease of the pews_, and if 
 curates with talents for preaching had been placed 
 there, they might have gained £200 per annum. 
 Though men of perfectly respectable, and honour- 
 able character, they were not endowed with this 
 sort of talent, and they gained no more than from 
 £dO to £100 per annum. The Bishop of London 
 applied to the Cathedral of St. Paul's, to consent 
 that £250 per annum, in addition to the proceeds 
 from the letting of the pews, or that proportion of 
 the whole of the value of the living, should be allotted 
 to the chapel of Winchmore : and at the same time 
 we received an application from the chapel at South- 
 gate, that another considerable portion, 1 forget 
 what, but believe it to have been rather less (per- 
 haps £200) should be allotted to them, and the 
 whole living severed into three parishes. Now the 
 living of Edmonton is about* £1350 per annum, 
 besides surplice fees, but this £1350 depends 
 upon a Corn Rent of 10^. 3d. per bushel, present 
 valuation, which at the next valuation would, in the 
 opinion of eminent land surveyors whom we con- 
 sulted, be reduced to about 6s. per bushel, so that 
 the living, considering the reduction also of all vo- 
 luntary offerings to the Church, would be reduced 
 one-half, and this half was to be divided into three, 
 
 * I have not the documents with luc, and write from recol- 
 lection. 
 
 D
 
 34 
 
 and one or two Curates (two Curates by the pre- 
 sent Bill) to be kept by the Vicar of the old 
 Church ; and thus three clerical beggars were, by 
 the activity of the Bishop of London, to be esta- 
 blished in a district where the extreme dearness of 
 all provisions is the plea for making the See of 
 London double in value to that of any Bishopric 
 in the country. To this we declined to agree ; and 
 this, heard only on one side, has most probably been 
 the parent of the clause in question. The right 
 cure for this and all similar cases would be, to give 
 the Bishop a power of allotting to such Chapels, 
 as high a salary as to any other Curate in the 
 diocese, taking, as part of that salary, whatever 
 was received from the lease of the pews, and to 
 this no reasonable man could or would object : but 
 this is not enough — all must bow to one man — 
 '•' Chapters must be taught submission. No pam- 
 phlets, no meeting of independent Prebendaries, 
 to remonstrate against the proceedings of their 
 superiors — no opulence and ease but mine." 
 
 Some effect was produced also upon the Com- 
 mission, by the evidence of a prelate who is both 
 Dean and Bishop,* and who gave it as his opinion, 
 that the patronage of Bishops was given upon 
 better principles than that of Chapters, which, 
 translated into fair English, is no more than this — 
 that the said witness, not meaning to mislead, but 
 himself deceived, has his own way entirely in his 
 
 * This Prelate stated it as his opinion, to the Commission, 
 ihat in future all Prelates ought to declare that they held their 
 atronage intrust for the public.
 
 35 
 
 diocese^ and can only liave it partially in his 
 chapter. 
 
 There is a rumour that these reasonings, with which 
 they were assailed from so many quarters in the 
 last .Session of Parliament,, have not been without 
 their effect, and that it is the intention of the 
 Commissioners only to take away the patronage 
 from the Cathedrals exactly in proportion as the 
 numbers of their Members are reduced. Such may 
 be the intention of the Commissioners ; but as that 
 intention has not been publicly notified^ it depends 
 only upon report ; and the Commissioners have 
 changed their minds so often^ that they may alter 
 their intentions twenty times again before the 
 meeting of Parliament. The whole of my observa- 
 tions in this letter are grounded upon their hills of 
 last year — which Lord John Russell stated his in- 
 tention of re-introducing at the beginning of this 
 Session. If they have any new plans^, they ought to 
 have published them three months ago — andtohave 
 given to the Clergy an ample opportunity of con- 
 sidering them : but this they take the greatest care 
 never to do. ^J he policy of the Government 
 and of the Commissioners is, to hurry their Bills 
 through with such rapidity, that very little time 
 is given to those who suffer by them for con- 
 sideration and remonstrance, and we must be pre- 
 pared for the worst beforehand. You are cashiered 
 and confiscated before you can look about you — 
 if you leave home for six weeks, in these times, 
 
 D 2
 
 36 
 
 you find a Commissioner in possession of your 
 house and office. 
 
 A report has reached my ears^ that though all 
 other Cathedrals are to retain patronage exactly 
 equal to their reduced uumbers, a separate mea- 
 sure of justice is to be used for St. PauFs ; that 
 our numbers are to be augmented by a fifth ; and 
 our patronage reduced by a third ; and this im- 
 mediately on the passing of the Bill. That the 
 Bishop of Exeter, for instance, is to receive his 
 augmentation of patronage only in proportion as 
 the Prebendaries die off, and the Prebendaries 
 themselves will, as long as they live, remain in the 
 same proportional state as to patronage ; and that 
 when they are reduced to four (their stationary 
 number), they will retain one-third of all the pa- 
 tronage the twelve now possess. Whether this is 
 wise or not, is a separate question, but at least it 
 is just ; the four who remain cannot with any colour 
 of justice complain that they do not retain all the 
 patronage which was divided among twelve ; but 
 at St. Paul's, not only are our numbers to be aug- 
 mented by a fifth, but the patronage of fifteen of 
 our best livings is to be instantly conferred upon the 
 Bishop of London. This little episode of plunder 
 involves three separate acts of gross injustice ; in 
 the first place, if only our numbers had been 
 augmented by a fifth (in itself a mere bonus to 
 Commissioners), our patronage would have been 
 reduced one-fifth in value. Secondly, one-third of
 
 37 
 
 the preferment is to be taken away immediately ; 
 and these two added together make eight-fifteenths, 
 or more than one-half of our whole patronage. 
 So that when all the Cathedrals are reduced to 
 their reformed numbers, each Cathedral will enjoy 
 precisely the same proportion of patronage as it 
 now does, and each member of every other Cathe- 
 dral will have precisely the same means of pro- 
 moting men of inerit or men of his own family, as is 
 now possessed; while less than half of these ad- 
 vantages will remain to St. Paul's. Thirdly, if the 
 Bishop of London were to wait (as all the other 
 Bishops by this arrangement must wait) till the 
 present Patrons die off, the injustice would be to 
 the future body ; but by this scheme, every present 
 Incumbent of St. Paul's is instantly deprived of 
 eight-fifteenths of his patronage ; while every other 
 member of every other Cathedral (as far as patron- 
 age is concerned) remains precisely in the same 
 state in which he was before. Why this blow is 
 levelled ao^ainst St. Paul's I cannot conceive ; 
 still less can I imagine why the Bishop of London 
 is not to wait, as all other Bishops are forced to 
 wait, for the death of the present Patrons. There 
 is a reason, indeed, for not waiting, by which (had 
 I to do with a person of less elevated character 
 than the Bishop of London) 1 would endeavour to 
 explain this precipitate seizure of patronage — and 
 that is, that the livings assigned to him in this re- 
 markable scheme are all very valuable, and the
 
 38 
 
 incumbents all very old. But I shall pass over this 
 scheme as a mere supposition^ invented to bring 
 the Commission into disrepute, a scheme to which 
 it is utterly impossible the Commissioners should 
 ever affix their names. 
 
 I should have thought, if the love of what is 
 just had not excited the Commissioner Bishops, 
 that the ridicule of men voting such comfortable 
 things to themselves as the Prebendal patronage 
 would have alarmed them ; but they want to 
 sacrifice with other men's hecatombs, and to 
 enjoy, at the same time, the character of great dis- 
 interestedness, and the luxury of unjust spolia- 
 tion. It was thought necessary to make a fund; 
 and the prebends in the gift of the Bishops* were 
 appropriated to that purpose. The Bishops who 
 consented to this have then made a great sacrifice — 
 true, but they have taken more out of our pockets 
 than they have disbursed from their own ; where 
 then is the sacrifice ? they must either give back 
 the patronage or the martyrdom ; if they choose 
 to be martyrs — which I hope they will do — ^let 
 them give us back our patronage : if they prefer 
 the patronage, they must not talk of being martyrs 
 
 * The Bishops have, however, secured for themselves all the 
 Livings vehich were in the separate gifts of Prebendaries and 
 Deans, and they have received from the Crown a very large 
 contribution of valuable patronage ; why or wherefore, is known 
 only to the unfathomable wisdom of ministers. The glory of 
 martyrdom can be confined only at best to the Bishops of the 
 old Cathedrals, for there are scarcely any separate Prebends in 
 the new Cathedrals.
 
 39 
 
 — they cannot eflect this double seiisuahty and 
 combine the sweet flavour of rapine with the 
 aromatic odour of sanctity. 
 
 We are told, if you agitate these questions 
 among- yourselves, you will have the democratic 
 Philistines come down upon you, and sweep you all 
 away together. Be it so ; I am quite ready to be 
 swept away wlien the time comes. Every body has 
 their favourite deatli : some delight in apoplexy, and 
 others prefer marasmus. I would infinitely rather 
 be crushed by democrats, than, under tiie plea of 
 the public good, be mildly, and blandly absorbed by 
 Bishops. 
 
 I met the other day in an old Dutch Chronicle, 
 with a passage so apposite to this subject, that 
 though it is somewhat too light for the occasion I 
 cannot abstain from quoting it. There was a great 
 meeting of all the Clergy at Dordrecht, and the 
 Chronicler thus describes it, which I give in the 
 lanofuag-e of the translation : — '^ And there was 
 great store of Bishops in the town, in their robes 
 goodly to behold, and all the great men of the 
 State were there, and folks poured in in boats on 
 the Meuse, the Merve, the Rhine, and the Linge, 
 comincr from the Isle of Beverlandt and Isselmond, 
 and from all quarters in the Bailiwick of Dort ; 
 Arminians and Gomarists, with the friends of John 
 Barneveldt and of Hugh Grote. And before my 
 Lords the Bishops, Simon of Gloucester, who was 
 a Bishop in those parts, disputed with Vor- 
 stius, and Leoline .the Monk, and many texts of 
 scripture were bandied to and fio ; and when this
 
 40 
 
 was done, and many propositions made, and it 
 waxed towards twelve of the clock, my Lords 
 the Bishops prepared to set them down to a fair 
 repast, in whicli was great store of g-ood things — 
 and among the rest a roasted peacock, having in lieu 
 of a tail, the arms, and banners of the Archbishop, 
 which was a goodly sight to all who favoured the 
 Church — and then the Archbishop would say a 
 grace, as was seemly to do, he being a very holy 
 man ; but ere he had finished, a great mob of 
 townspeople and folks from the country, who were 
 gathered under the window, cried out bread! 
 bread! for there was a great famine, and wheat 
 had risen to three times the ordinary price of the 
 sleich ;* and when they had done crying bread ! 
 bread! they called out no Bishops — and began 
 to cast up stones at the whidows. Whereat my 
 Lords the Bishops were in a great fright, and cast 
 their dinner out of the window to appease the mob, 
 and so the men of that town were well pleased, 
 and did devour the meats with a great appetite ; 
 and then you might have seen my Lords standing 
 with empty plates, and looking wistfully at each 
 other, till Simon of Gloucester, he who disputed 
 with Leoline the monk, stood up among them and 
 said,*^ Good, my Lords, is it your pleasure to stand 
 here fasting, and that those ivho count lower in 
 the Church than you do^ should feast and flus- 
 ter ? Let us order to us the dinner of the Deans 
 and Canons, which is making ready for them in 
 
 * A measure in the Bailiwick of Dort, containing two gallons 
 one pint English dry measure.
 
 41 
 
 the chamber below.' And this speech of Simon of 
 Gloucester pleased the Bishops much ; and so they 
 sent for the host, one William of Ypres, and 
 told him it was for the public good, and he, 
 much fearing- the Bishops, brought them the dinner 
 of the Deans and Canons; and so the Deans and 
 Canons went away without dinner, and were pelted 
 by the men of the town, because they had not put 
 any meat out of the window like the Bishops ; and 
 when the Count came to hear of it, he said it was a 
 pleasant conceit, and Ihat the Bishops ivere ric/ht 
 cunning men, and had ding'd the Canons tveli." 
 
 When I talk of sacrifices, I mean the sacrifices 
 of the Bishop Commissioners, for we are given to 
 understand that the great mass of Bishops were 
 never consulted at all about these proceedings ; 
 that they are contrary to every thing which con- 
 sultations at Lambeth, previous to the Commission, 
 had led them to expect : and that they are totally 
 disapproved of by them. The voluntary sacrifice 
 then (for it is no sacrifice if it is not voluntary) is 
 in the Bishop Commissioners only ; and besides the 
 indemnification which they have voted to them- 
 selves out of the patronage of the Cathedrals, 
 they will have all that never-ending patronage 
 which is to proceed from the working of the Com- 
 mission, and the endowments bestowed upon dif- 
 ferent livings. So much for episcopal sacrifices ! 
 
 And who does not see the end and meaning of 
 all this ? The Lay Commissioners, vvho are 
 members of the Government, cannot and will not 
 attend — the Archbishops of York and Canterbury
 
 42 
 
 are quiet and amiable men, going last down in 
 the vale of life — some of the members of the 
 Commission are expletives — some must be absent 
 in their dioceses— the Bishop of London is pas- 
 sionately fond of labour, has certainly no aversion 
 to power, is of quick temper, great ability, tho- 
 roughly versant in ecclesiastical law, and always in 
 London. He will become the Commission; and 
 when the Church of England is mentioned, it will 
 only mean Charles James, of London, who will 
 enjoy a greater power than has ever been possessed 
 by any Churchman since the days of Laud, and will 
 become the Church of England here upon earth. 
 As for the Commission itself, there is scarcely any 
 power which is not given to it. They may call for 
 every paper in the world, and every human crea- 
 ture who possesses it; and do m' hat they like to 
 one or the other. It is hopeless to contend with such 
 a body ; and most painful to think that it has been 
 established under a Whig Government*. A Com- 
 mission of Tory Churchmen, established for such 
 purposes, should have been framed with the utmost 
 jealousy, and with the most cautious circumscrip- 
 tion of its powers, and with the most earnest wish 
 for its extinction when the purposes of its creation 
 were answered. The Government have done every 
 thing in their power to make it vexatious, omni- 
 l)otent, and everlasting. This immense power, 
 
 * I am speaking here of the permanent Commission esta- 
 blished by Act of Parliament in 1835. The Commission for 
 reporting-, had come to an end six months before this letter was 
 written.
 
 43 
 
 flung into the hands of an nidividual, is one ot" the 
 many foolish consequences which proceed from the 
 centralization of the Bill, and the unwilUngness to 
 employ the local knowledge of the Bishops in the 
 process of annexing dignified to parochial pre- 
 ferment. 
 
 There is a third Bill concocted by the Com- 
 mission-Bishops^ in which the great principle of 
 increasing the power of the Bencli has certainly 
 not been lost sight of. , a brother Cler- 
 gyman^ falls ill suddenly in the country, and he begs 
 his clerical neighbour to do duty for him in the af- 
 ternoon, thinking it better that there should be 
 single service in two Churches, than two services 
 in one, and none in the other. The Clergyman 
 who accedes to this request is liable to a penalty 
 of £5. There is an harshness, and ill natuie in 
 this — a gross ignorance of the state of the poorer 
 Clergy — an hard-heartedness produced by the long 
 enjoyment of wealth and power, which makes it 
 quite intolerable. I speak of it as it stands in the 
 Bill of last year. 
 
 If a Clergyman has a living of £400 per annum, 
 and a population of two thousand persons, the 
 Bishop can compel him to keep a Curate, to whom 
 he can allot any salary which he may allot to any 
 other Curate ; in other words, he may take away 
 half the income of the Clergyman, and instantly 
 ruin him — and this without any complaint from the 
 Vestry ; with every testimonial of the most perfect 
 satisfaction of the Parish in the labours of a Mi- 
 nister, who may perhaps be dedicating his whole
 
 44 
 
 life to their iuiprovement. I tliiiik I remember 
 that the Bishop of London once attempted this 
 before he was a Commissioner, and was defeated. 
 I had no manner of doubt that it would speedily 
 become the Law after the Commission had begun 
 to operate. The Bishop of London is said to have 
 declared, after this trial, that if it was not Law it 
 should soon he Law:^ and Laiv you will see it will 
 become. In fact, he can slip into any Ecclesiastical 
 Act of Parliament anything he pleases. There is 
 nobody to heed, or to contradict him ; provided 
 the power of Bishops is extended by it, no Bishop 
 is so ungenteel as to oppose the Act of his Right 
 Reverend Brother ; and there are not many men 
 who have knowledge, eloquence, or force of cha- 
 racter to stand up against the Bishop of London^ 
 and, above all, of industry to watch him. The 
 Ministry, and the Lay Lords, and the House of 
 Commons, care nothing about the matter ; and the 
 Clergy themselves, in a state of the greatest igno- 
 rance as to what is passing in the world, find their 
 chains heavier, and heavier, without knowing who 
 or what has produced the additional incumbrance- 
 A good honest "Whig minister should have two or 
 tliree stout-hearted parish priests in his train to 
 watch the Bishops' bills, and to see that they were 
 constructed on other principles than that Bishops 
 
 * The Bishop of London denies that he ever said this; but 
 the Bishop of London afFects short sharp sayings, seasoned, I 
 am afraid, sometimes with a little indiscretion ; and these sayings 
 are not necessarily forgotten because he forgets them.
 
 45 
 
 cmi (h) no wrong, and cannot have too much power. 
 The Whigs do nothing of this_, and yet tliey com- 
 plain that they are hated by the clergy, and that 
 in all elections the Clergy are their bitterest ene- 
 mies. Suppose they were to try a little justice, a 
 little notice, and a little protection. It would take 
 moi'e time than quizzing, and contempt, but it might 
 do some g-ood. 
 
 The Bishop puts a great number of questions to his 
 clergy, which they are to be compelled, by this new 
 law of the Commission, to answer, under a penalty, 
 and if they do answer them, they incur, perhaps 
 a still heavier penalty. " Have you had two ser- 
 vices in your Church all the year ?" " I decline 
 to answer." ^* Then I fine you £20." '* I have 
 only had one service." ^' Then I fine you £250." 
 In what other profession are men placed between 
 this double fire of penalties, and compelled to 
 criminate themselves ? It has been disused in 
 England, I believe, ever since the time of Laud 
 and the Star Chamber. 
 
 By the same Bill, as it first emanated from the 
 Commission, a Bishop could compel a clergyman to 
 expend three years' income upon a house in which 
 he had resided perhaps fifty years, and in which 
 he had brought up a large family. With great 
 difficulty, some slight modification of this enormous 
 power was obtained, and it was a little improved in 
 the amended Bill*. In the same way an attempt was 
 
 * I perceive, that the Archbishop of Canterbury borrows 
 money for the improvement of his palace, and pays the principal
 
 46 
 
 made to try delinquent clergymen, by a jury of 
 clergymen, nominated by the Bi.shop_, but this was 
 too bad, and was not endured for an instant ; still it 
 showed the same love of power and the same 
 principle of impeccabilitj/, for the Bill is expressly 
 confined to all suits and complaints against persons 
 below the dignity and degree of Bishops. The 
 truth is^ that there are very few men in either House 
 of Parliament (ministers, or any one else), who ever 
 think of the happiness and comfort of the working 
 clergy, or bestow one thought upon guarding them 
 from the increased, and increasing power of their 
 encroaching masters. What is called taking care 
 of the Church is taking care of the Bishops ; and 
 all Bills for the management of the clergy are left 
 to the concoction of men who very naturally be- 
 lieve that they are improving the Church when they 
 are increasing their own power. There are many 
 Bishops too generous, too humane, and too christian, 
 
 off in forty years. This is quite as soon as a debt incurred for 
 such public purposes ought to be paid off, and the Archbishop 
 has done rightly to take that period. In process of time I think 
 it very likely that this indulgence will be extended to country 
 clergymen, who are compelled to pay off the debts for buildings, 
 (which they are compelled to undertake) in twenty years ; and 
 by the new Bill, not yet passed, this indulgence is extended to 
 thirty years. Why poor Clergymen have been compelled for the 
 last five years to pay off the incumbrances at the rate of one-twen- 
 tieth per annum, and are now compelled to pay them off, or will 
 when the Bill passes be so compelled, at the rate of one-thirtieth 
 per annum, when the Archbishop takes forty years to do the 
 same thing, and has made that bargain in the year 1831, I really 
 cannot tell. A Clergyman who does not reside, is forced to pay 
 off his building debt in ten years.
 
 47 
 
 to oppress a poor clergyman ; but I have seen (I am 
 sorry to say) many grievous instances of partiality, 
 rudeness, and oppression. 1 have seen clergymen 
 treated by Bishops with a violence, and contempt 
 which the lowest servant in the Bishop's establish- 
 ment would not have endured for a single moment ; 
 and if there is a helpless, friendless, wretched 
 being in the community, it is a poor clergyman in 
 the country with a large family. If there is an 
 object of compassion, he is one. If there is any 
 occasion in life where a great man should lay aside 
 his office, and put on those kind looks, and use 
 those kind words which raise the humble from the 
 dust, these are the occasions when those best 
 parts of the christian character ought to be dis- 
 played. 
 
 J would instance the unlimited power which 
 a Bishop possesses over a Curate, as a very 
 unfair degree of power for any man to possess. 
 Take the following dialogue which represents a 
 real event. 
 
 Bishop — Sir, I understand you frequent the 
 Meetings of the Bible Society. 
 Citrate — Yes, my Lord, I do. 
 Bishop— Sir, I tell yon plainly, if you continue 
 to do so, I shall silence you from preaching in my 
 
 diocese. 
 
 Curate — My Lord, I am very sorry to incur 
 your indignation, but I frequent that Society upon 
 principle, because I think it eminently serviceable 
 to the cause of the Gospel.
 
 48 
 
 Bishop — Sir, I do not enter into your reasons, 
 but tell you plainly, if you continue to go there you 
 shall be silenced. 
 
 The young man did go and was silenced — and 
 as Bishops have always a great deal of clever 
 machinery at work of testimonials and bene-de- 
 cessits, and always a Lawyer at their elbow, under 
 the name of a secretary, a Curate excluded from 
 one diocese is excluded from all. His remedy is 
 an appeal to tiie Archbishop from the Bishop ; his 
 worldly goods however amount to ten pounds ; he 
 never was in London ; he dreads such a tribunal 
 as an Archbishop — he thinks perhaps in time the 
 Bishop may be softened — if he is compelled to 
 restore him, the enmity will be immortal. It would 
 be just as rational to give to a frog or a rabbit, 
 upon which the Physician is about to experiment, 
 an appeal to the Zoological Society, as to give to 
 a country Curate an appeal to the Archbishop 
 against his purple oppressor. 
 
 The errors of the Bill are a public concern — the 
 injustice of the Bill is a private concern. Give us 
 our patronage for life. Treat the Cathedrals all 
 alike, with the same measure of justice. Don't 
 divide livings in the patronage of present Incum- 
 bents without their consent — or do the same with 
 all livings. If these points are attended to in the 
 forthcoming Bill, all complaint of nnfairness and 
 injustice will be at an end. I shall still think, that 
 the Commissioners have been very rash and in- 
 discreet, that they have evinced a contempt for 
 existing institutions, and a spirit of destruction
 
 4y 
 
 which will be copied to the life hereafter, by Coiii- 
 niissioners of a very different description. Bishops 
 live in high places with high people, or with little 
 people who depend upon them. They walk 
 delicately, hke Agag. They hear only one 
 sort of conversation, and avoid bold reckless 
 men, as a lady veils herself from rough breezes. 
 I am half inclined to think sometimes, that the 
 Bishop-Commissioners really think that they are 
 finally setthng the Church ; that the House of 
 Lords will be open to the Bench for ages ; and 
 that many Archbishops in succession will enjoy 
 their fifteen thousand pounds a year in Lambeth. 
 I wish I could do for the Bishop-Commissioners 
 what his mother did for JEneas, in the last days of 
 Troy : - 
 
 '* Oninem quae nunc obducta tuenti 
 Mortales hebetat visus tibi, et humida circum 
 Caligat, nubem eripiam. 
 Apparent dirae fades, &c. «&c. 
 
 It is ominous for liberty, when Sydney and 
 Russell cannot ag-ree : but when Lord John Russell, 
 in the House of Commons, said, that we showed 
 no disposition to make any sacrifices for the good 
 of the Church ; 1 took the liberty to remhid that 
 excellent person that he must first of all prove it 
 to be for the good of the Church that our patronage 
 should be taken away by the Bishops, and then he 
 might find fault with us, for not consenting to the 
 sacrifice. 
 
 I have little or no personal nor pecuniary interest 
 in these things, and have made all possible exertion 
 
 E
 
 50 
 
 (as two or three persons in power well know) that 
 they should not come before the public* I have no 
 son norson-in-law in the Church, for whom T want any 
 patronage. If I were young enough to survive any 
 incumbent of St. Paul's, my own preferment is too 
 agreeably circumstanced to make it at all probable 
 I should avail myself of the opportunity. I am a 
 sincere advocate for Church Reform ; but I think 
 it very possible, and even very easy, to have 
 removed all odium from the Establishment in a 
 much less violent, and revolutiouary manner, with- 
 out committing or attempting such flagrant acts of 
 injustice, and without leaving behind an odious 
 Court of Inquisition, which will inevitably fall into 
 the hands of a single individual, and will be an 
 eternal source of vexation, jealousy, and change. 
 I give sincere credit to the Commissioners for 
 good intentions — how can such men have intended 
 any thing but good? And I firmly believe that 
 they are hardly conscious of the extraordinary 
 predilection they have shown for Bishops in all 
 their proceedings ; it is like those errors in trades- 
 men's bills of which the retail arithmetician is really 
 unconscious, but which somehow or another always 
 happen to be in his o^^ n favour. Such men as the 
 Commissioners do not say this patronage belongs 
 justly to the Cathedrals, and we will take it away 
 unjustly for ourselves ; but after the manner of 
 human nature a thousand weak reasons prevail, 
 
 * I went on plaguing and remonstrating, till the great man 
 said to me, " You had far better leave us alone, and publish your 
 thoughts upon the subject."
 
 51 
 
 which would have no effect, if self-interest were 
 not concerned ; they are practising a deception on 
 themselves and sincerely believe they are doing 
 right. When I talk of spoil and plunder, I do not 
 speak of the intention, but of the effect, and the 
 precedent. 
 
 Still the Commissioners are on the eve of entail- 
 ing an immense evil upon the country, and unfor- 
 tunately they have gone so far, that it is necessary 
 they should ruin the Cathedrals, to preserve their 
 character for consistency. They themselves have 
 been frightened a great deal too much by the mob; 
 have overlooked the chances in their favour pro- 
 duced by delay; have been afraid of being suspected 
 (as Tories) of not doing enough; and have allowed 
 themselves to be hurried on by the constitutional 
 impetuosity of one man, who cannot be brought to 
 believe that wisdom often consists in leaving alone, 
 standing still, and doing nothing. From the joint 
 operation of all these causes, all the Cathedrals of 
 Enofland will in a few weeks be knocked about our 
 ears. You, Mr. Archdeacon Singleton, will sit like 
 Caius Marius on the ruins, and we shall lose for 
 ever the wisest scheme for securing a well educated 
 Clergy upon the most economical terms, and for 
 preventing that low fanaticism which is the greatest 
 curse upon human happiness, and the greatest 
 enemy of true religion. We shall have all the 
 evils of an establishment, and none of its good. 
 
 You tell me I shall be laughed at as a rich 
 and overgrown Churchman ; be it so. I have
 
 52 
 
 been laug-hed at a Imndred times in iny life, 
 and care little or nothing about it. If I am well 
 provided for now — 1 have had my full share of the 
 blanks in the lottery as well as the prizes. Till 
 thirty years of age T never received a farthing from 
 the Church, then £50 per annum for two years — 
 then nothing for ten years — then £500 per annum, 
 increased for two or three years to £800, till, in my 
 grand climacteric I was made Canon of St. Paul's ; 
 and before that period, I had built a Parsonage- 
 house with farm offices for a large farm, which cost 
 me £4,000, and had reclaimed another from ruins 
 at the expense of £2,000. A Lawyer, or a Physi- 
 cian in good practice would smile at this picture of 
 great Ecclesiastical wealth ; and yet I am consi- 
 dered as a perfect monster of ecclesiastical pros- 
 perity. 
 
 I should be very sorry to give offence to the 
 dignified Ecclesiastics who are in the Commission ; 
 I hope they will allow for the provocation, if 1 have 
 been a little too warm in the defence of St. PauPs, 
 which I have taken a solemn oath to defend. I was 
 at school and college with the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury ; fifty-three years ago he knocked me 
 down with the chess-board for checkmating him — 
 and now he is attempting to take away my patron- 
 age. I believe these are the only two acts of 
 violence he ever committed in his life : the interval 
 has been one of gentleness, kindness, and the most 
 amiable and high-principled courtesy to his clergy. 
 For the Archbishop of York, I feel an affectionate re-
 
 53 
 
 spect — the result of tliat invariable kiiidness I liavc 
 received from him : and who can see the Bishop of 
 London without adminng his superior talents — being- 
 pleased with his society — without admitting tliat, 
 vpon the ichole, the public is benefited by his 
 ungovernable passion for business ; and without 
 receiving the constant workings of a really good 
 hearty as an atonement for the occasional excesses 
 of an impetuous disposition ? 1 am quite sure if 
 the tables had been turned, and if it had been his 
 lot, as a Canon, to fight against the encroach- 
 ments of Bishops, that he would have made as 
 stout a defence as I have done — the only difference 
 is, that he would have done it with much greater 
 talent. 
 
 As for my friends the Whigs, I neither wish to 
 offend them, nor any body else. I consider myself 
 to be as good a Whig as any amongst them. I 
 was a Whig before many of them were born — and 
 while some of them were Tories, and Waverers. 
 I have always turned out to fight their battles, and 
 when I saw no other Clergyman turn out but myself 
 — and this in times before liberality was well recom- 
 pensed, and therefore in fashion, and when the 
 smallest appearance of it seemed to condemn a 
 Churchman to the grossest obloquy, and the most 
 hopeless poverty. It may suit the purpose of the 
 Ministers to flatter the Bench : it does not suit 
 mine. I do not choose in my old age to be tossed 
 as a prey to the Bishops; I have not deserved this 
 of my Whig friends. I know very well there can
 
 54 
 
 be no justice for Deans and Chapters, and that 
 the momentary Lords of the earth will receive our 
 statement with derision and Persiflaije — the great 
 principle which is now called in for the govern- 
 ment of mankind. Nobody admires the general 
 conduct of the Whig Administration more than 
 1 do. They have conferred, in their domestic 
 policy, the most striking benefits on the country. 
 To say that there is no risk in what they have done 
 is mere nonsense — there is great risk ; and all 
 honest men must balance to counteract it — holding 
 back as firmly down hill as they pulled vigorously 
 up hill. Still, great as the risk is, it was worth 
 while to incur it in the Poor Law Bill, in the I ithe 
 Bill, in the Corporation Bill, and in the circum- 
 scription of the Irish Protestant Church. In all 
 these matters, the Whig Ministry, after the heat of 
 party is over, and when Joseph Hume, and Wilson 
 Croker are powdered into the dust of death, will 
 gain great, and deserved fame. In the question 
 of the Church Commission they have behaved 
 with the grossest injustice ; delighted to see this 
 temporary delirium of Archbishops, and Bishops, 
 scarcely believing their eyes, and carefully sup- 
 pressing their laughter, when they saw these emi- 
 nent Conservatives laying about them with the fury 
 of Mr. Tyler or Mr. Straw ; they have taken the 
 greatest care not to disturb them, and to give 
 them no offence : " Do as you like, my lords, with 
 the Chapters and the Parochial Clergy ; you will 
 find some pleasing morsels in the ruins of the
 
 O,) 
 
 Cathedrals. Keep lor yourselves any thing" vou 
 like — whatever is ag-reeable to you cannot be 
 unpleasant to us." In the mean time, the old 
 friends of, and the old sufferers for, liberty, do 
 not understand this new meanness, and are not a 
 little astonished to find their leaders prostrate on 
 their knees before the Lords of the Church, and 
 to receive no other answer from them than that, 
 if they are disturbed in their adulation, they will 
 immediately resign ! 
 
 I remain. 
 
 My dear Sir, 
 With sincere good will and respect, 
 
 Your's, 
 
 SYDNEY^ SMITH. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 J. W. Marriott, East Street, Taunton.
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-Series 4939
 
 i^lL^ AA 000 765 932 9
 
 mmw-i^m