FULHAM PALACE.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18673, 23 April 1926, Page 9

FULHAM PALACE.

TO LET, RENT FREE. (hiok obb oww cobrbspondint!) LONDON, March 4. In the London Diocesan Magazine the Bishop of London announces that he is desirous of "letting" Fulham Palace rent free for six months. Dr. Win-nington-Ingram has long protested that he cannot live on his salary of £IO,OOO a year. "I am very anxious," he says, "to keep together my excellent staff of ten servants, who help me so much in the manifold hospitalities of Fulham Palace, and I am willing, therefore, to lend the palace to any churchman or churchwoman who will pay the servants while I am a\vay, and also the rates and taxes of the house." The fortunate tenant, whether American millionaire or English friend of the bishop, can be assured of at least a six months' tenancy of tho historic palace. Whoever takes the Bishop at his word should bo able to move into the palace about the first week in August, for it is then that the bishop L to sail to America and the Far/East on a six months' tour. It is now twen-ty-five years since the bishop was enthroned. He had not been in office two years, however, before he first protested against the expenditure necessary to keep Fulham Palace and London House, his other official home. He let London House in 1919, and went to live at Fulham. The balance-sheet which the bishop produced when he made his protest, showed that he had an income of £IO,OOO a year, and an expenditure of £10,795. Only £294 of that expenditure was put down to "personal expenses," and he further stated that three years after he became bishop, he was £SOOO poorer than before his enthronement. "I would be prepared to live where, or how, or on what v scale the diocese decides," he stated. "A little house would be quite as comfortable as a big one. I am quite willing that the finance board of the diocese should take over the income and that a moiety should be given me by arrangement. I would never consent to the arrangement, however, if it meant that Fulham Palace would cease to be in the hands of the Church." The bishop once stated that the enormous upkeep of Fulhnm Palace was practically all waste, since he used only two rooms. He slept in one, and used the other as an office.