THE LARGEST AND SMALLEST INCOMES

Otago Witness, Issue 2272, 16 September 1897, Page 50

THE LARGEST AND SMALLEST INCOMES

OF VICABS IN 'J HE CHUKOH OF ENGLAND.

There are few things ia ■which more difficulty is experienced than in obtaining reliable statistics as to the exact income of the beoeficed clergy in the Church of England. • Even the acknowledged clerical authoritiep, such as Orcckford or the Diocesan Calendars, only give the particulars in a halfhearted way. And the reasons for the reticence of the clergy in not giving a fuller statement of their- incomes in their various benefices are not far to seek. , A great and utterly indefensible disparity exists in these incomes, whereby a man with a poor parish of 10,000 Bouts has often only L2OO a jear4ncome, whilst a pretty country .vicarage in a village whose population iff 100 may cany with it an iocome of LISOO. The clergy themselves, . knowing this as ■well as anyone, are therefore not unnaturally reticent. Those who are well off and getting much for doing -little don't want everybody to know about their state.; and those who are badly off, and hardly know how to make both ends meet, are both too proud and too ashamed to go parading their poverty before the eyes of the world. Ifc is impossible, in a short article like thh», to give anything like a full list of the various rich and poor benefices in the Church of England, but a few of the more striking ones may be pointed out. The richest benefice would appear to be that of Halsall, in Lancashire, which has an estimated gross income of L 3500, according to Crockford. The net income is not given, but it is probably not much less. Probably the next" are those of St. Deiniol's, HawardeD, the rector of which is the Rev. Stephen Gladstone, and whose neb income is .LlOls. whilst the gross is over L 2500; and Halifax Parish Church, whose benefice is of ' the value of L2OOO per annum; Close upon these come the llectory of Stsnhope, In Norlh Yorkshire, which is over L2OOO, and that of Hatfield, held by the Hey. W. Cecil, eon of Lord Salisbury, whose value is also into the second thousand, though its net last year's income is set down at LIOOB.

There- are many well known (or little knowD) towns and villages whose vicar receives annually over LIOOO from the income of the benefice. Of these the most notable we Leeds (St. Peter's) Parish Church, about L 1350; Lancaster (S>\ Mary's), L 130 0; Hodnet On Shropshire), L 1309 ; S*. John's at Hampstead, North LondoD, L 1280; Bradwell, in Essex, L 122 4; Edgmond, near Newport, L 1302; and Bradford, Yorkshire, L 1241. All these are practically net incomes. There are several others well over LIOOO in the gross given by the Church lists ; but the net is not stated, probably for the reasons mentioned above. Of these the moat striking are Booking, Essex, L 1407; St. Mary's, at Battersea, LI 200; Bfedon, in Worcestershire, and St. Giles, in Camberwell, both worth L 1600; Gedliner, in Nottinghamshire, L 107 5; Bolcon Percy, in Yorkshire, L 106 1; Bishop's Waltaam, in Hampshire, L 1062; and Sr. Philip's, Birmingham, LI2OO.

Some net incomes over 1/1000 also are those of Ford (Northumberland), L 104 5; St. Mary's, Gateshead, L 1000; Bradfield, in Berkshire, LI 100 ; Chorley (S r . Laurence's), Lancashire, L 1032 ; Claxby (St. Mary's), Lincolnshire, L 103 0; and Kettering, LIOSO. Bat what about the smallest incomes in the Church of EDgland ? Tbere can be no doubt that in the case of many places mentioned in Orockford without any income being stated the omission may be put down to the paucity of the clerical salary. Of those whose meagre income is given may be mentioned Oamnos, in Pembrokeshire, and Bramhope, in Yorkshire, each valued at L 49 net ; whilst Ewen'ny, in Glamorganshire, rejoices its parson by giving him L 44 1 Oawkwell, in Lincolnshire, and Bothamsall, in Herefordshire, do not quite come up to this, being

L 43 each. Bub what is to be said of Graveley, Huntingdonshire, which pays L 36;3 6; Baldon Toot, Oxfordshire, with L3o; or Darleigh, in Somerset, Ashampstead, Berkshire, and Betton Strange, Salop, which give L3O l Still, even this does not reach the worst. There is Bishopswood in Herefordshire pays its fortunate vicar L2B annually; and,

scarcely credible, Crosby, in Leicestershire, tries to do the thing even more economically for Lls. Goldsmith's parson was indeed " passing rich onL4O a year " compared with these.

The climax even yet is not come; Lll is the annual Bum which FartbiDgstone, in Northamptonshire, thinks might keep the vicar ; and not lone; ago the Bishop of Carlisle asked for a man with private means to take charge of a Lakeland village church where the income reached the princely stipend of L 5 1

Surely thafc is the worst in tbe church ! No, it is not — for in the parish of Grafham, in Huntingdonshire, the yearly income is nothing in the gross, and therefore also nothing net.

After this one may well ask, "Is not the labourer worthy of hia hire ? "