not the produce of the places wherein they, were found, but were brought thither by the current of the river: nevertheless, their source has not hitherto been discovered. Sanguine hopes are however entertained on this subject, as in mining several mountains adjacent to the town, innumerable particles of a hard and beautiful species of crystal have lately been met with. The weight of the Brazil diamonds is, ordinarily, from a grain to six carats; there are some, however, of greater size, and one has been found which weighs no less than 46 carats. According to the author above named, in hue, solidity, and every other property the Brazil diamonds are equal to those of the east, but there are few jewellers who hold this opinion. It is observable, he adds, that the diamonds found nearest to the surface of the earth, being consequently exposed to the action of the air and the sun, are more strongly incrusted than the others, and, of course, lose more in the polishing. It is not absolutely certain, says Sarmento, that the diamonds of Brazil are brought down by the -torrents; and such too is the decided opinion of the author of "L'Histoire des deux Indes." From the moment that the Portuguese discovered diamonds in Brazil, they pursued their researches ; and with such success that one fleet from Rio Janiero brought home 1:46 ounces. This abundant supply lowered the price of the article by three fourths; but the Portuguese minister adopted measures which quickly restored it to its original standard. one contractor diamonds to the amount of 5,000,000 crusadas or £1,125,000 sterling, and no more, annually, in virtue of an express agreement to that effect, which has ever been held sacred: the price of the dia moud was rated advantageously to the contractor. These precious stones are bought in a raw state by us, or by the Dutch, and after being cut, are disseminated throughout Europe, but especially France, where this gemt was most eagerly bought up. They are less hard, pellucid, and brilliant, than those of the East Indies, but they are far whiter. Their value is about £10 per cent nader that of the former. The law, which insures to the king of Portugal the exclusive possession of the largest diamonds found in Brazil, ordains that the slaves who find them shall be granted their freedom, and that the king shall pay their master 400,000 reis. If a free-man be the finder, he is to have a similar sum. These promises are likewise held forth to such slave or free-man as shall discover those who conceal diamonds. If a slave discover his master, the king grants him 200,000 reis, besides his liberty. Those who act contrary to this law, not only lose the diamonds which they purloin, and their slaves, but often are put to death. The punishments inflicted on the slaves are, commonly, whipping, condemnation to the gallies for life, or immediate death. The diamond seekers are obliged to render an exact account to the king's commissary of all such diamonds as they or their slaves discover. The commissary deposits the diamonds in a case covered with iron, and secured by three locks: he has possession of one A company, with an exclusive privilege of the keys, the viceroy has another, and the to seek for, and to vend, the diamonds of Provado de Hazienda Real, has the third. Brazil, was instituted; and in order to limit This case is put into a second, on which are its cupidity, it was allowed to employ no placed the seals of the three personages already more than 600 slaves: afterwards, however, this restriction was annulled, and the com- in it. The Viceroy is not permitted to view the mentioned; the three keys being inclosed withpany was permitted to employ as many slaves contents of the cases, but merely consigns as it should think proper, on paying 600 the whole to the third strong box, upon the crusadas (about £75 sterling) for every lock of which he places his seal. The openminer. By the two contracts, the courting of the treasure takes place in the presence reserves for its own use every diamond which of the king, who makes choice of such diashall be found to exceed a certain weight. monds as he approves of, paying to the finders A law, which forbad, under pain of death. a price which is regulated by the law already. any infringement on this privilege, did not appear suflicient to insure compliance with it, but rather tended to depopulate the places adjacent to the spot, and to turn the surrounding country into a vast desert. Within the space of 100 leagues, there is only one village to be seen, and this is inhabited by the agents and slaves of the company! The agent of this privileged body in Europe, was no other than the government itself. Prior to the emigration of the court of Portugal to the Brazils, whatever the produce of the wines might be, government delivered to mentioned. "There never has been found a diamond,' says the Abbé Raynal," which could be put in competition with that sent front Brazil to the king of Portugal; its weight being 1680 of ascertaining its value, yet an English writer carats or 12 oz. Although there is no mode has been bold enough to compute it at the enormous sum of £224,000,000 sterling !!— If, however, as some lapidaries assert, this reputed diamond be a topaz, the above com pulation must be egregiously erroneous." BELL RINGING. We are favoured with the following table by a correspondent who professes the pleasure. he has received from those articles on the same subject, that have already appeared in our work but he requests information on the origin and antiquity of the custom of Bell-Ringing in our island, which he supposes to be altogether indigenous., He inquires also, who adopted the names of majors, bob-m jors? &c.; how beginners learn, and whether there be any thing like a gamut of the art?-We should be glad of satisfactory information on the subject. There are 12 peals of 12 bells in England, viz. 7 peals of 12 in London, and 5 peals of 12 at the following places: Harwich, Birmingham, Shrewsbury, Cambridge, and Cirencester :- And in Great Britain and Ireland there are 50 peals of 10-300 peals of 8--600 peals of 6-and 500 of 5; beşides 700 peals of 4, 3, and 2 bells. The following table is the full extent of changes that can be produced upon each number of bells: Peal of 2 bells produces 2 changes ..6 24 .120 .720 .5,040 ... 40,320 362,880. .3,628,800 .39,916,800 ..479,001,600 To ring the whole peal on 12 bells, keeping the bells continually going, will take forty-four years, the tenor weighing 40 cwt. or upwards, at the speed of about 12 changes each minute. [Vide Panorama, Vol. I. p. 1077, 1233,-II. p. 1049,-III. p. 338.. STIPENDIARY CURATES. Substance of a Speech on the Second Reading of the Curate's Bill in the House of Lords, June 27, 1808. By the Right Rea. BEILBY PORTEUs, D.D. Bishop of London. MY LORDS In rising to support this bill, I must first make my acknowledgements to your lordships, for your indulgence to me in allowing it to take the precedence of other most important great accommodation to me, in my present very matters which were fixed for this day. This is a infirm state of health. Indeed, on that account, 1 should have spared your lordships the trouble of pressed with the great importance of this bill, not hearing me at all, had I not been so deeply imonly to a large and meritorious class of the English clergy, but to the general interests of religion ministers, and the spiritual welfare of the people, and the church of England, to the credit of its that I thought it my indispensable duty (even incompetent as I feel myself to address this house in the manner I ought, and to present my thoughts to your lordships with that correctness and in that lucid order I could wish) to add my feeble efforts to the more effectual exertions of other noble lords in favour of this bill. The first is, to enforce the residence of curates upon their cures. The second, to increase their stipends on livings exceeding 4001. a year; by giving them certain proportion of the clear yearly income. I. With respect to the first, there will, I am persuaded, be no diffetence of opinion among your lordships. You will, I am sure, all agree' with me, that the first and most important duty of a clergyman, whether curate or incumbent, is RESIDENCE. It is that on which all other duties rest as their foundation; for till he is AT HIS POST, at his proper station, he cannot act, he can do nothing. An idea indeed has of late prevailed, that the duties of a parish may be performed at a distance; at the distance of four or five miles or more ; and several clergymen satisfy themselves with this, which they are pleased to call virtual residence. But in this they are, I conceive, greatly mistaken. sist merely in preaching and reading prayers on The duty of a parochial clergyman does not conSundays, but in various other most important functions and branches of the pastoral care; in' personal conversation with his parishioners on religious subjects, in visiting the sick, in reform ing the vicious, in encouraging the virtuous, in catechising the children, in protecting the poor, in superintending parochial schools, and promoting peace, good will, and harmony among the people. These kind offices are not the work of a single Sunday, or of a day or two in the week, but they are performed occasionally and gradually, under a general system indeed, but at convenient seasons only and accidental opportunities; and therefore In addition to the letter of the right hon. Spencer Perceval, Chancellor of the Exchequer to Dr. Mansell Bishop of Bristol, (inserted at large in Panorama, Vol. IV. p. 209 et seq.) we present our readers with the following opinion of the venerable Bishop of London, just issued from the press, We presume these respectable documents will be thought sufficiently explanatory on the sub-ed ject: they will serve for reference when it again comes under the notice of the legislature in the approaching session of parliament. require constant residence and constant vigilance. For this reason, it is most devoutly to be wishthat there should be a RESIDENT CLERGYMAN, either incumbent or curate, in every parish throughout the kingdom. The good effects of it would be incalculable, and in one respect more particularly, in checking the growth of schism." any one contend, that on a living of 15001. a year. 2501. is too much for the curate, who does the whole duty of perhaps a very populous and laborious parish, but that 12501, is, not at all too much for the incumbent, who, does nothing, or next to nothing, during the whole year? Cau that be called an unjust and oppressive tax on such a non-resident and non-efficient incumbent? Great complaints are every day made of the in- | compulsory. But suppose a fifth is given ; will crease of sectaries, and I believe not without reason. And que great cause of it, I am persuaded, is the want of resident clergymen, to counferact their influence. They most commonly invade those panshes where the flock is without a shepherd living amongst them. They seldom intrude themselves on a parish where there is a resident minister performing all his sacred functions with zeal, with activity, with assiduity and per But, my lords, I have further to observe on this head, that one fifth of the income, which For all these reasons, your lordships will, I some noble lords think too much, is not near so think, be of opinion, that this part of the bill ¦ large a proportion of the income as you have alwhich requires and enforces the residence of cu-ready given to carates on livings not exceeding rates, is not only unobjectionable, but in the highest degree ne.essary and useful. 11. The other object of the bill is to augment the salaries of curates, on benefices which exceed 4001, a year by assigning to them one-fifth the clear annual income of the living. £400. a year, in the act called the Curate's Act, which passed in the year 1796. In that act, the bishop is empowered to assigu a salary of 751. a year to the curate of any beneoffice, wherever he judges it expedient and just so to do. Now, my lords, 751. is one fourth of a living of 3001. a year-it is more than one third of a living of 2001. a year, and it is one half of a living of 1501.. Now this, my lords, I confess, appears to me, after much consi-leration, a fair and impartial and equitable partition of the revenue between the incurobent and the curate. years ago this very house empowered the diseesdn to give a fourth, a third, and one half on livings of 3001. 2001. and 1501, a year respectively? I think I may safely rest the whole argument on the answer that will be given to this question, which I humbly beg to leave upon your lordships tuinds. 2. But it has been further said, that the bill is an unjust invasion of private property. Will now any one assert that it is an enormous At present, no curate is by law entitled to more thing to give the curate 250. a year on livings of than 751. a year, with the use of the parsonage-5001. 10001. and 20001. when only twelve hause land-premises, or 151. a year in lieu of them. Will any of your lordships say that in the present times, when the price of all the common necessaries of life is double and treble of what it was twenty years ago, that this is a sufficient maintenance for a man of a learned and honourable profession, who is expected to support a respectable appearance in his parish, to assist the poor, and to maintain (as it frequently happens) a wife and a large family of children? Your lordships must be sensible that the condition of such a man, with only 751. a year to maintain himself and his family with food, fuel, and cloth ing, is a state of absolute beggary. And the fact is, that great numbers of curates, even in this opulent diocese, are in a state of extreme penury and wretchedness, I have good reason to know this to be the case. I know, many that are at this moment struggling under the severest difficulties, and I could easily pourtray to your lordships such scenes of distress as would, I am confident, make an impression on your compassionate minds in favour of this suffering class of men, which you could not resist.. 1. That they stand in need of some relief, I believe all your lordships will allow, but it is contended at the same unie, that a fifth of the incumbent's income is too large a proportion to assign them. But can it be maintained, my lords, that when the value of the benefice is 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, 3000l. a year (for there are several benefices even of that value) that the curate shall have no more than 751, a year? Can your lordships think it a hard thing upon an incumbent enjoy ing a benefice of suppose 15001. a year, to pay his curate out of that sum 1591. a year (which is putting an extreme case) while he is enjoying at a distance the other four parts? For I beg yours lordship, o observe, and carry it in your minds, that this bill relates solely to non-resident incum bents of very large livings, and that though the biskup may, if he pleases, assign the curate a fifth part, he is not bound to do it. The clause which gives this power is only permissive, not No one can have a more sacred regard to private property than myself, and if I could be convinced that this bill was a violent and unexampled invasion of private property, I should be as great an enemy to it as any one of your lordships. But, my lords, it is my most decided and conscientious opinion, that this is not the case. For if an ecclesiastical benefice can with any. propriety be called a property at all, it is without doubt a peculiar species of property: It is not a ficehold estate liable to no deductions, but parochial and parliamentary taxes. It is, strictly speaking, an office having certain duties,, certain services, certain functions of religion annexed to it, which the incumbent is bound to perform as the very condition of his possessing that office. This condition is expressly prescribed at the very time when he is invested with that office: I mean at his institution to his benefice: The bishop then says to him-"I do by these presents commit unto you the cure and government of the souls of your parishioners, and do authorize you to preach the word of God in the said parish." These conditions, then, he is strictly bound to fulfil in his own person, for hot one word is here" said about a substitute. But if he is unavoidably prevented from so doing, then he is bound to pro-* curça competent substitute, with a salary sufficient not merely to keep him and his family from starving, but sufficient to take him above contempt, and enable him to support that respectability of character without which he will, lose all weight and influence with his parishioners. When noble lords say that this is an invasion of pritate property's unprecedented andhrót to be en dured, they quite forget that in the act of 12th Anne, and the 36th of George III. there is the very same invasion of private property: nay, in the latter much greater; for in this act, which your lordships passed in the year 1796, the bishop, as I have already observed, is empowered to grant a fourth, a third, and even an half of livings under 4001. a year; whereas in the present bill no more than a fifth is given, and that only on very large livings, exceeding 4001. a year yet your lordships agreed to that act with these powers, and no complaint was made at that time nor have any since. But my lords, there is no necessity for much argument on this subject. This house and the other house of parliament have by their authority sanctioned this very invasion of property, which is now so much complained of; and that not merely for the support of the curate, but for the support of the incumbent himself. Your lordships will recollect, that no longer ago than the year 1803, the two houses of parliament granted an augmentation of more than 1001. a year upon average to fifty rectors and vicars of the city of London. And how did they do this? Why, by an assessment on every individual in each of those parishes; that is, they took 50001. a year from the private property of the inhabitants of the city of London, and gave it to the clergy of London, and this without any consent signified by these inhabitants to parliament; a circumstance to which the noble lord on the woolsack made strong obsections at the time, but at length gave his assent to the bill; and in so doing the learned lord acted like himself, nobly and wisely, and so did the whole legislature. They gave a striking -proof of that regard for the interests of religion, and the decent support of its ministers, by which they have been uniformly distingushed. I trust, therefore, that your lordships will manifest the same spirit on the present occasion; that you will exercise the same equity, the same generosity, the same humanity towards the curates of this kingdom, that you have so recently shewn to that most respectable body of men the incumbents of the city of London.-So much, my lords, for the invasion of private property. 3. But it has been alleged further, that this bill gives an enormous discretionary power to the bishops, directly repugnant to the constitution; such as they never possessed before, and ought never to possess; having greatly abused even that inferior degree of power which they already enjoy. If this charge, my lords, could be made out, it would, I confess, be a solid objection to the bill. But they who have so vehemently urged this objection, have not, I think, looked very carefully into the constitution of the church, and the statutes of the realm; which, if they will have the goodness to examine with due attention, they will find have from the earliest times confidéd the management of all ecclesiastical matters, and especially the appointment of the curate's salary, to the discretion of the bishops. And this power the bishops have exercised without control, and (t,s far as I can learn) without blame, from the time of Edward III. to the present hour; that is, for near 500 years. To convince your lordships that this is not mere gratuitous assertion, unsupported by any evidence, I beg leave to refer you to the following constitutions and statutes. In a constitution of archbishop Islip, in 1350, it is ordered; that curates serving a cure shall be content with six marks a year. In 1362, so far was this constitution of an archbishop thought to be the assumption of an envrmous and unconstitutional power, that it was confirmed by a statute of the 36th of Edward III. c. 8. In 1378, the 2d of Richard II. by a constitution of archbishop Sudbury, the above salary of six marks is enlarged to eight marks, or their board and four marks, by reason (says the constitution) of the difference of the times. Your lordships here see that the bishops not only fixed the curate's salary at one particular period, but increased it from time to time in proportion to the increasing price of all the necessaries of life. This, my lords, is one principal object of the bill now before your lordships. In 1415, the last-mentioned constitution of archbishop Sudbury was enforced by a statute of the 2d of Henry V. stat. 1. ch. 2; and this expressly recognizes the authority of the bishop, within certain restrictions. In 1713, the statute of the 12th of Anne, ch. 12. enacts that the bishop shall, before he grants a license to the curate, assign a sufficient stipend, not less than 201. nor more that 501. a year. In 1796, by the statute of the 36th of George, III. c. 83. the bishop is empowered to augment the stipend of the curate from 501. to 751. a year and to add the house, garden, and stables, or 151. a year in lieu of them. But, my lords, there is still another proof of the discretionary power entrusted to the bishop by the constitution, to which I beg your particular attention; it is, the faculty or form of a dispensation for holding two livings; a copy of which I have in my hand, and will, with your permission, read the material parts of it to your lordships. It is as follows: "We, Thomas, by Divine Providence, archbishop of Canterbury, by these presents gracious ly dispense with you, that, together with the rectory of A. B. which you now possess, you may freely and lawfully accept the rectory of C. D. provided that the cure of the souls of that church from which you shall be most absent, be in the meantime in all respects laudably served by an able minister, capable to explain and interpret the principles of Christian religion, and to declare the word of God unto the people, in case the revenues of the said church can conveniently maintain such minister; and that a competent and sufficient salary be well and truly allowed and paid to the said minister, to be limited and allotted by the proper ordinary at his discretion; or by us or our successors, in case the diocesan bishop shall not take due care therein. Provided nevertheless, that these presents do not avail you any thing unless duly confirmed by the king's letters patent. Given under the seal of our Office of Faculties, this day of - &c." From these incontestible authorities and documents, it appears, beyond all doubt and all contradiction, that the power of fixing and regulating the salaries of curates from time to time has been vested in the bishops by the most ancient constitutions of the church, and by a regular succession of various acts of parliament, from the year 1350 to the present hour. 4. But it has been, moreover, broadly and positively asserted in this house, that the bishops have abused this power. This, my lords, is a very grave and severe charge against a whole body of men who have the honour of a seat in your lordships' house. It requires something more than mere assertion to support it; and I trust that those who have brought the accusation will produce their proofs. At the same time I must beg leave to say, that I shall not consider a few solitary instances picked up here and there throughout the kingdom, as a sufficient proof of so general, so indiscriminate, and so unqualified a crimination. It is possible that two or three errors of this kind may with great industry be brought to light. But can it be wondered at if, in a country containing near 12,000 parochial benefices, some few instances of apparent harshness may be found; which yet, when they come to be fairly examined, will probably appear to have arisen from the peculiar circumstances of the case, and to be founded on reasons which will perfectly justify the bishop's conduct. As to my own conduct in this respect, I cannot, on the rictest scrutiny, charge myself with any thing like rigour or severity toward the incumbents in this diocese in fixing the salaries of the curates; which is what I suppose noble lords mean by abuse of power. God forbid that I should ever knowingly take one shilling more than I think necessary from the pockets of the incumbents, to put it into the pockets of the curates. No, my lords, I beg to have it distinctly and clearly understood by this house, and by the whole diocese of London, that what ever zeal I may have shown on this occasion in behalf of the curates, I should show the very same zeal in behalf of the incumbents, if their circumstances required it. Of this good disposition towards them, I have, I hope, given some substantial proofs.-I took a warm and active and zealous part in promoting the act above mentioned, which gave the incumbents of the city of London 50001. a year; and I have reason to think that my strenuous exertions in favour of that bill contributed not a little to the success of it. The clergy of London were fully sensible of this; and I received their unanimous thanks for what I had done. I must add, too, what nothing but selfdefence and the pressure of the present occasion should ever have induced me to mention here, that the fund which I lately established for the relief of the indigent clergy of this diocese comprehends incumbents as well as curates, and many of the former have been actually benefitted by it Indeed, on all occasions I have endeavoured, to the utmost of my power, to promote the interests, the welfare, the credit, both of the higher and lower classes of the clergy in this diocese. In every class of them, there are men of very distinguished abilities, of great erudition, of fervent piety, and exemplary attention to all their sacred functions, for whom I entertain the highest regard. With many of them, I have had the happiness to live in habits of intimacy and friendship for many years; and from the whole body of them in general I have had the satisfaction of receiving, on various occasions, VOL. V. [Lit. Pan. Dec. 1808.] the most unequivocal proofs of attachment and esteem. 5. There is still one more objection which I have lately heard made to the bill, viz. that it will tend to destroy all that harmony and good understanding which ought to subsist between the incumbent and curate, and to produce perpetual dissension, animosity, and hostility, between them. Now, my lords, as this is nothing more than mere assertion, and as one assertion is as good as another, I will venture to assert, on the contrary, that no such consequence is at all likely to follow from this bill. It will, I am persuaded, in the event, be found, that this is one of those conjectural and unfounded predictions that are so frequently opposed to solid and substantial benefits, which can no otherwise be controverted but by foretelling evils that will probably prove to be perfectly imaginary and visionary.-The ground on which these prophecies of the dissensions which this bill will create between the incumbent and curate are founded, is, the proposed augmentation of the curate's salary; which, it is said, will be the cause of everlasting contention. But if this be so, why did not these dissentions arise from the act of the 36th of the king, in which the salary of the curate (taking in the use of the house) was nearly double of that enacted by the 12th of Queen Anne? Yet I have never heard that any such terrible evils have been produced by that act, nor were any such objections urged against it at the time it passed.Indeed that act alone is in itself a complete answer not only to this, but to all the other material objections that have been made to this bill.-If you say that this bill gives too large a proportion of the incumbent's income to the curate, the act of 1796 gives a still larger proportion. It gives, (as I have frequently observed before, and must again and again repeat, as an argument which appears to me unanswerable) it gives a fourth, a third, and one half; and that on all livings under 4001. a year; whereas this bill gives only a fifth, and that on a few livings (comparatively speaking) of great value, where the incumbents can well afford it.-If you say that this bill is an unjust and unexampled invasion of private property, the act of 1796 is equally so, nay, more, for it takes away more, in proportion to the value of the living, from the property of the incumbent.-If you say that this bill gives an exorbitant discretional power to the bishops, the act of 1796 gives the same, nay, a still greater, for it gives them the power of fixing the salary of all the curates in the kingdom,If you say that this augmentation of the curate's stipend will create divisions, contentions, animosities, between the incumbents and curates, there is the very same ground for it in the act of 1796; namely, a great augmentation of income, which yet has never produced any such effects. And though that act was liable to all those objections, yet your lordships and the other house of parlia ment gave your entire assent to it, and no such objections ever presented themselves to your minds. But even if some dissensions should arise from this bill, is an act of such great importance and such extensive benevolence, as that of giving relief to two or three thousand deserving and indigent English clergymen, to be stopped because a few warm men on each side of the question chuse U |