ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 



There was, however, no test until the degree was reached, and the test was 

 swept away in 1865. 



Bishop Van Mildert's last year was troubled by ill-health, and the 

 prospects of radical changes in the church at large, and in the diocese of 

 Durham in particular, which were due to the first report of the Ecclesiastical 

 Commission published in 1835. When the bishop died in February, 1836, 

 the dignities of the see, in the attenuated form which a second report now 

 proposed, were offered to the Whig Bishop Maltby of Chichester (1836-56). 

 The main idea of the second report, so far as Durham was concerned, was to 

 appropriate episcopal and capitular revenues estimated to be in excess of the 

 needs of the diocese itself, and to hand over the ^(^40,000 so accruing to the 

 work of the church in other dioceses. Seldom had the diocese been so much 

 moved. "^ Meetings were held, and petitions flowed in from every consider- 

 able town and village in the old bishopric. A vigorous correspondence in 

 the local journal pointed out that the proposal was radically unjust, since 

 there were in the county of Durham at least eleven benefices below ;^70 a 

 year, twenty-eight under jCioo> sixty under ^^200, and seventy-nine under 

 ^300, and this notwithstanding the effort of bishop, dean, and chapter to 

 improve the value of the poorer livings which had been in progress since the 

 passing of the Augmentation Act of 183 1."' Hard things were said in 

 Parliament of the vast wealth of the diocese compared with the backwardness 

 of the people in religion and in education. To such charges an effective 

 reply was made by producing statistics of what had actually been achieved."* 

 It was pointed out that the Diocesan Society, instituted in 18 12, maintained 

 in a population of 250,000 some 309 schools with an aggregate of 23,428 

 scholars, and that of the total funds provided by the society nine-tenths were 

 supplied by bishop, dean, and chapter, and the clergy generally. One writer 

 asserted on the strength of such figures compared with government statistics 

 that ' there are more children in proportion to the population under a course 

 of instruction than in any other part of England save Westmorland and 

 Rutland.' ^^° Lord Londonderry was the chief champion of the diocese and 

 its claims in the House of Lords, and strove hard to get a select committee 

 to inquire further into local claims. 



Whilst this storm was in progress the bill to separate the palatine juris- 

 diction from the bishopric was introduced into Parliament and was carried 

 without special difficulty.*" The diocese was lukewarm to this proposal, and 

 the flood of petitions do not seem to have had it in view. The palatinate 

 power had long ceased to be really popular, and found few defenders. 

 Nevertheless its transfer to the king marked the extinction of one of the most 

 interesting anomalies in English history. 



Thanks to the petitions, the Act which was passed in August, 1836, to 

 give effect to the reports of the commissioners recognized the intentions of 

 Bishop Van Mildert, and provided for the augmentation of certain benefices 



'" Tie Dur. Advertiier of 2 5 March, i § 3 6, contains the following extract quoted from the liberal Sunderland 

 Herald. 'We have to call the attention of our readers to the intended appropriation of a considerable pro- 

 portion of the revenues of the See of Durham for the benefit of the poor dioceses. We understand that 

 Dr. Maltby, the new Bishop of Durham, is to have _^8,oo3 per annum, and that the remainder of the large 

 revenue is to be diverted into a channel altogether foreign.' The reference is to the second report. 



"' See the Dur. Advertiser, I July, 1836. The Augmentation Act is I and 2 Will. IV, cap. 45. 



"' Ibid. 8 April. '"" Ibid. 6 May. '" See Lapsley, Palatinate of Dur. 204. 



2 73 10 



