In the “Englishman’s Brief for his National Church,” to which I have
before referred, it is asked (Q. 21), “Is it not hard on the cultivators
of land that they should have to pay tithes on its produce?” The answer
given is, that there is really no hardship in the matter. “If a person
rents land which in every respect is tithe-free, he pays so much more
rent for it; if it be subject to tithes, he pays so much less. In any
case he pays the same amount,” etc. This answer was written for the
purpose of misleading the reader. The landlord will try to get as high
a rent for his land which is not tithe-free as the landlord who has his
land tithe-free. But another important question arises. Why should the
whole burden of paying tithes fall upon land? There was a time when
personal tithes were also paid. Scripture was quoted in support of these
tithes. But they are all now abolished, and only land—and not all the
land—has to pay tithes.
The Earl of Selborne makes the following remarks in his pamphlet: “The
Endowment and Establishment of the Church of England.” “The rectorial
tithes of Selborne, which belong to a college at Oxford,[251] were in
1882, £447; the vicarial tithes, which alone belong of right to the Vicar
of Selborne, were £336. The rectorial or lay tithes of two parishes in
Basingstoke also belong Magdalen, Oxford, were in the same year £1,617.
A lady received the rectorial tithes of Bishop’s Sutton, amounting to
£1,431; and one of the London Companies, those of Chertsey, amounting to
£1,112.” I have placed in the Appendix a statement as to the recipients
of the clerical appropriations; also the impropriations of colleges,
schools, hospitals and charities, as they appear in the Tithe Commutation
Return of 1887.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account