ck on the constitution of the Commission. It was stuffed
with Bishops. Deans and Canons and Rectors and Vicars and Curates had no
place upon it. The result was that all interests, not episcopal, had been
completely overlooked, and that the reforms, though perhaps theoretically
sound, were practically unworkable. Further, the reforms had been far too
extensive. The plan of making a Central Fund from the proceeds of
confiscated Prebends,[120] and enriching the smaller livings with it, was
chimerical. The whole income of the Church, equally divided among all its
clergy, would only give each man the wages of a nobleman's butler. The true
method in all professions was the method of Blanks and Prizes. But for the
chance of those Prizes, men of good birth and education would not "go into
the Church"; and an uneducated clergy would inevitably become fanatical.--

"You will have a set of ranting, raving Pastors, who will wage-war
against all the innocent pleasures of life; vie with each other in
extravagance of zeal; and plague your heart out with their nonsense
and absurdity. Cribbage must be played in caverns, and sixpenny whist
take refuge in the howling wilderness. In this way low men, doomed to
hopeless poverty and galled by contempt, will endeavour to force
themselves into station and significance."

Then again there was the difficulty of oaths. The property of Cathedrals
could only be confiscated at the expense of violated vows.--

"The Archbishop of Canterbury, at his enthronement, takes a solemn
oath that he will maintain the rights and liberties of the Church of
Canterbury; as Chairman, however, of the New Commission, he seizes the
patronage of that Church, takes two thirds of its Revenues, and
abolishes two thirds of its Members. That there is an answer to this I
am very willing to believe, but I cannot at present find out what it
is; and this attack upon the Revenues and Members of Canterbury is not
obedience to an Act of Parliament, but the very Act of Parliament,
which takes away, is recommended, drawn up, and signed by the person
who has sworn he will never take away; and this little apparent
inconsistency is not confined to the Archbishop of Canterbury, but is
shared equally by all the Bishop-Commissioners, who have all (unless I
am grievously mistaken) taken similar oaths for the preservation of
their respective Chapters. It woul