neglect of this law. Had the clergy been always obliged to live in their own houses, they would, at leaft, have been duly repaired, and probably long before this much improved, and rendered convenient habitations. We fee, in places where this law has been observed, many houses improving daily, by additional conveniencies to them from time to time but we must never expect to fee any thing like this, where the glebe houses are deserted by the incumbents, and let to poor miserable tenants.

But it is in vain to look back, and to reflect what might have been done to prevent this mischief, which is now but too fenfibly felt by many. It is of more confequence to confider what may be reasonably attempted towards retrieving this evil.

:

In ftrictness of law, wherever there is a glebe house, the incumbent is obliged to live in it; the law has no respect to the goodness or badness of the house but in the condition things now are, it would be thought hard to drive a minifter and his family to live in a wretched cottage; or to put him under the neceffity of building a new house, to the ruin or impoverishment of himself and family. What then can be done? Ought the ordinary to fuffer things to go on in the prefent course from bad to worse? Ought the clergy to defire it? What reafon can any man give now to excufe himself from being put to charge in repairing his glebe houfe, that will not be as ftrong or stronger in the mouth of his fucceffor? The house perhaps has been long neglected, and you think it hard the expence fhould fall on you: but if you continue in the neglect, would not the cafe be ftill harder with thofe that come after

you?

So that the only question is, whether the present bad state of those houfes ought to be a reason why the ordinary should let them fall quite? If not, there feems to be no other equitable means left to remedy the prefent evil, but that prescribed by the injunctions of Edw. VI. 1547, and by those of Q. Eliz. 1559, to set aside a part of the revenue yearly for the repairing the glebe houfe. The portion allotted to this purpose, by these injunctions, is a fifth part, which may in many cafes perhaps be too great: but fomething of this fort, within the bounds of equity, fhould be done.

You may ask, perhaps, whether the ordinary can by law compel the incumbents to submit to this method? My answer is, that, I think, he cannot. An incumbent may say, that he is not obliged to alter the ftate of the glebe houfe, or to add any thing to it; if he repairs it, he does all the law obliges him to. But confider, on the other fide, what answer the law has furnished the ordinary with: he may say, if you like the house as it is, you must live in it. And this condition, if accepted, will answer all purposes; but in many cases, it would, I fear, be a greater hardship, than allotting a reasonable portion of the revenue towards making a habitable house in time.

I want not to be told, and I am forry it is fo evident a cafe, that many of the clergy have so poor a fubfiftence for themselves and families, that they have nothing to fpare from their daily maintenance, to be applied to the improvement of their livings. I wish it were in my power to increase the maintenance of fuch of the clergy; I am fure I never shall have the will to diminish it. But having mentioned.

this, give me leave to obferve to you, that probably the poorness of many livings is, in a great measure, owing to want of a convenient habitation for the incumbent within his parish; and that, being deftitute of conveniencies for gathering in his legal dues, he is often forced to compound for what he can get: and by this means modufes and prescriptions have grown upon the church; and where they have, it is well if the parfon, in lieu of the tithes of the parish, receives the tithe of his own dues. In many cases he receives much less.

All incumbents then, whether rectors or vicars, being thus obliged to continual refidence, the law has provided for fome extraordinary cafes; and ordinaries have a power to dispense with refidence in the cafes, and under the reftrictions, prescribed by the law. But such cases as the law has not specially provided for, must be left to the general reason of the thing, and the judgment of the ordinary.

But fuppofing all circumftances to meet that may make it reasonable and proper to grant a difpenfation for refidence, yet there are certain conditions annexed to the grant, which must be observed.

Every beneficed man, licenfed not to refide on his benefice, must have a fufficient curate to fupply his place. We need look no further than the canons of 1603, to fee that this is law; and I will suspect no man's judgment fo far, as to go about to prove it to be reason.

These curates must have fufficient ability to dif charge the duty; and

Sufficient maintenance to fupport them in it.

In both these cafes, the ordinary is made the judge.

And if it will be of any fervice to you to know my opinion in these cases, I will in general declare, that I can think no man fit to be admitted a curate, against whom there would be a proper objection, if he came for inftitution. The reafon is, because he is to perform the fame duty that a person instituted is to perform.

As to maintenance, it ought to be, what it is called, fuch an allowance as a man may live upon, without being driven to seek help from methods unbecoming his profeffion.

It fometimes happens that a curate is employed to ferve two parishes; a cafe never to be admitted but upon evident neceffity, as bringing great reproach upon the clergy, and neceffarily introducing a great neglect of religious fervice in the country. When a man, who has a good living, leaves it himself, and puts in one of these half curates to fupply his abfence, what can the people think, but that their minifter has no regard to any thing but the cheapness of his curate? And when churches are thus half attended, and are deprived either of the morning or evening service, the people of the parish, who are religioufly difpofed, will probably go to the meetinghouse, if there be one near; those who are not religiously disposed, will probably go to the ale-house. And with what face can we complain of the people for neglecting the fervice of the church, when the service itself is neglected by thofe whofe duty it is to fee it performed? This is an evil that muft be remedied.

The 48th canon of 1603 has decreed, that "no "man fhall ferve more than one church or chapel

66

upon one day, except that chapel be a member of "the parish church, or united thereunto; and unless "the faid church or chapel, where fuch a minifter "shall serve in two places, be not able, in the judg"ment of the bishop or ordinary, to maintain a cu"rate."

Here are two exceptions: of which the first speaks for itself; the second is referred to the judgment of the bishop. I do therefore expect to be confulted in this cafe, and that all who think themselves entitled to the benefit of this exception in the canon, do lay their reasons before me.

Where a refident minifter wants a curate for his affiftance, I fhould be lefs inquifitive in both refpects, relying upon the ability of an experienced incumbent to advise and inftruct his curate, and his hofpitality to fupport him.

All incumbents, whether refident or non-refident, are bound to uphold and maintain their houses; but there will be particular reafon to inquire into the condition of the houses that belong to thofe who are legally difpenfed with from refiding. I need give you no reason for this: common experience in the cafe calls for this care, and will justify it.

I have now gone through what I proposed to say on this head. I have been the more particular, that I might fhew you, not only the rule of your duty, but the rule of my own alfo. It will always be a pleasure to me to affift, with the utmost of my power, the meanest clergyman in the diocese in the discharge of his duty. Where it is reasonable to dispense with any man's conftant and perfonal at

Y