We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2011
At about noon on Thursday, 2 March 1905, Charles Gore knocked on the south-west door of St Philip's Birmingham, and, having been admitted, proceeded to be enthroned as the first Anglican bishop of Birmingham. A commemorative booklet described those ceremonies minutely, but only briefly alluded to the prolonged agitation for the creation of the diocese. Apart from passing references and a perceptive analysis, in an earlier pamphlet, of the reasons for the initial failure of the scheme, no substantial secondary literature on the subject exists.
1 Birmingham Bishopric; brief history of the movement and report of the enthronement, Birmingham 1905, 7–12Google Scholar. The present author is greatly indebted to the owners of the unpublished papers referred to below and especially to the Church Commissioners and to Mr R. L. Ekin, Joint Registrar of the diocese of Birmingham, for access to their papers; also to the Rev. Prof. C. W. Dugmore who originally directed his studies more than a decade ago.
2 Shore, S. R., A Bishopric and a Cathedral for Birmingham, Birmingham 1902, 4–6Google Scholar. The history of the diocese of Worcester by I. G. Smith and P. Onslow, in the S.P.C.K. series of Diocesan Histories, published in 1883, takes the account only to the end of the eighteenth century; the companion volume on Lichfield, by W. Beresford, includes the early part of the nineteenth century, mentioning the transfer of the archdeaconry of Coventry in 1836.
3 Unless ambiguity would otherwise result, the Church of England will be referred to as ‘the Church’.
4 Morrish, P. S., ‘The Manchester Clause’, The Church Quarterly, i (1968-1969), 319–26.Google Scholar
5 John JafFray (1818–1901), a Scot, became the proprietor of three Birmingham newspapers; in the 1880s and 1890s he was reputedly a liberal-unionist supportingjoseph Chamberlain : Whates, H. R. G., The Birmingham Post 1857–1957, Birmingham 1957, 36ffGoogle Scholar.
6 Knox, E. A., Reminiscences of an Octogenarian, London 1935, 162Google Scholar and 181fF. ; Gill, C. and Briggs, Asa, History of Birmingham, London 1952, ii, 129Google Scholar.
7 In his enthronement sermon Gore paid a generous tribute to both Dale and Newman: Birmingham Bishopric, 23. Gore had lodged with Dale during the Church Congress held in Birmingham in 1893: Prestige, G. L., Life of Charles Gore, London 1935, 142Google Scholar.
8 The Anglican proportion of morning attendance at worship on the census Sunday in Birmingham was 47 per cent whilst in England and Wales as a whole it was 53–5 per cent.
9 Birmingham Bishopric, 7.
10 Henley, Lord, Plan for a New Arrangement of Dioceses, London 1834, 23Google Scholar. More boldly, Dr Arnold and E. B. Pusey both considered additional dioceses for the area, Pusey proposing to finance one for the Black Country from the endowments of St Katherine's, Wolverhampton: Arnold, T., Principles of Church Reform, London 1833, 48Google Scholar and Pusey, E. B., Remarks on Cathedrals, London 1833, 118Google Scholar.
11 Royal Commission on the Established , Church, First Report, London 1835, 3Google Scholar; cf. 6/7 Will. IV, c. 77 (1836).
12 Royal Commission on Cathedral Churches (hereafter cited as R.C.C.C), First Report; Appendix, London 1854, 596Google Scholar and Third Report, London 1855, xliiGoogle Scholar. In the interval between these two Royal Commissions Lord John Russell had attempted to settle some matters outstanding from the ecclesiastical legislation of 1836, but his informal advisory committee which met intermittently between February andjune 1847 appears to have had no discussion on the specific needs of the Birmingham area: P.R.O., H.O. 73/70.
13 The Lay Memorial was annexed to Wordsworth, C., On a Proposed Subdivision of Diocese, London 1860Google Scholar. The Birmingham area was mentioned subsequently and briefly in connection with the Commission's report, at Church Congress in 1865: Church Congress, Report (hereafter cited as CCR), London 1865, 155, 158–9 and 173.
14 This report was eventually printed in Church of England Year Book, London 1883, 304Google Scholar.
15 Church Quarterly Review, iii (1876), 219–20Google Scholar. The point that the Roman Catholics had pre-empted the title ‘Birmingham’ was made later in support of Coventry: cf. Guardian, 6 March 1889, 376 col. 2. The argument may be seen as an inverted development of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act 1851.
16 Lambeth Palace (hereafter cited as LP), Tait papers, Cross to Tait, 25 November 1976.
17 Ibid., Tait's endorsement.
18 Ibid., Cross to Tait, 30 January 1877.
19 , Shore, A Bishopric, 2–3.Google Scholar
20 Chronicle of Canterbury Convocation (hereafter cited as CCC), London 1877, 14 and 104ff.Google Scholar
21 R.C.C.C., First report, xl. The demographic statistics quoted here and elsewhere were taken by contemporaries from the latest available census reports and normally do not refer to the net active Anglican population and are therefore not wholly relevant to the problem of a bishop's pastoral responsibilities.
22 CCC, 1875, Appendix: Report of the Committee on Deficiencies, 31.
25 Census…1891, London 1893, i, p. xxiv.Google Scholar
24 Morrish, P. S., ‘County and urban dioceses’, in this Journal, xxvi (1975), 279–300.Google Scholar
25 LP, Benson papers, David Robertson to Benson, 21 June 1889; Knox, E. A., Reminiscences, 163.Google Scholar
26 Dale, A. A. W., Life of R. W. Dale, London 1898, 164ff.Google Scholar
27 Childe-Pemberton, W. S., Life of Lord Norton, London 1909, 266–7Google Scholar. Norton's principal seat was Hams Hall, Birmingham, and he owned a large part of Saltley where he took an active interest in social and Church affairs.
28 Canterbury House of Laymen, Report of the Committee on the increase of the episcopate, London 1888Google Scholar. After some changes in membership, the final reporting committee included C. H. Blagg and S. Leighton, MP, both from Lichfield diocese.
29 CCCi 1889, 92–7 and 152–4; also Appendix, ‘Report of the Committee on the increase of the episcopate’.
30 Philpott, H., A Charge delivered to the clergy and churchwardens of the diocese of Worcester, London 1889, 10–11.Google Scholar
31 LP, Benson papers, Robertson to Benson, 21 June 1889.
32 Ibid., Benson to Philpott, 22 June 1889 (file copy).
33 Ibid., Robertson to Benson, 28 June 1889.
34 The Times, 29 July 1889, 7, col. 4; Guardian, 31 July 1889, 1159, cols. 1–2. Walter N. Fisher (1844–1932) was a chartered accountant. The two preliminary meetings had taken place on 10 July and 17 July; a few days after the meeting on 27 July, Sir Charles Dalrymple, Robertson's father-in-law, wrote to Benson to testify to the groundwork which David had done.
35 In 1875, Winchester and Rochester had both been required to contribute £500 annually to St Alban's; in 1878 Chester was required to pay £300 annually to Liverpool, Ripon £300 to Wakefield, Lichfield the same to Southwell, and Lincoln £500 also to Southwell. Exeter contributed £800 annually to Truro and Durham £1,000 to Newcastle. The Bishoprics Act 1878 provided that new bishoprics eventually repay the contributory ones, but this impractical requirement was repealed in 1913.
36 LP, Benson papers, Philpott to Benson, 4 October 1889.
37 The Times, 28 September 1889, 12, col. 2; Guardian, 2 October 1889, 1463, col. 2.
38 See The Times, 31 October 1889, 9, col. 6 for lists of members of these committees.
39 See The Times, 18 December 1889, 9, col. 6.
40 The Times, 18 January 1890, 6, col. 1. The relative isolation of this southern part ol the diocese was explicitly stated by Gore to be why he delivered his primary charge in 1904 not only in the three archidiaconal centres (Worcester, Birmingham an d Coventry) but also at Stratford-on-Avon (cf. Gore, C., Spiritual Efficiency, London 1904, 66)Google Scholar; Perowne had don e likewise in 1895.
41 The Times, 8 February 1890, 9, col. 4.
42 Idem, 18 December 1889, 9, col. 6. The parishes at issue were Handsworth, Harborne and Smethwick and their deletion had been moved by W. M. Ellis an d the Rev. Dr Randall (Handsworth).
43 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 17 January 1890.
44 Ibid., Evans to Benson, 19 January 1890.
45 The Times, 22 January 1890, 10, col. 2; Guardian, 29 January 1890, 161–2.
46 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 22 January 1890.
47 Ibid., J. R. Mills to Benson, 4 February 1890.
48 Ibid., Philpott to Benson, 17 March 1890. Th e memorandu m also noted the opposition led by Lord Leigh to any bishopric scheme.
49 The Times, 31 October 1889, 9, col. 6.
50 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 7 February and 13 February 1890. Evans feared that Lord Norton might express himself tactlessly on this subject, perhaps indicative of the high level at which feelings were running. The use of the revenues of St Peter's and St Philip's, both in Birmingham, and of Handsworth, was also considered.
51 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 27 January 1890.
52 Ibid., Commissioners to Benson, 29 January 1890.
53 The Times, 8 February 1890, 9, col. 4; Guardian, 12 February 1890, 243, col. 1
54 Copy of the appeal is in LP, Benson papers (bundle 1890/9A/B10).
55 Ibid., copy of printed subscription list. The highest individual subscription was £3,000 from Jaffray, which may have justified his stand over St Martin's. Other large subscriptions included £2,000 from C. A. S. Ryland, £1,500 from J. C. Holder and seven others (including Lord Norton, Lord Calthorpe and George Dixon) of £1,000 each. All the other subscriptions were smaller and the total, exclusive of any capitalisation of the annual contribution from the bishopric of Worcester, was £28,667.
56 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 23 May 1890; Evans may have had in mind the time which had elapsed between the authorisation of Southwell in 1878 and its actual creation in 1884.
57 The Times, 26 August 1890, 3, col. 5.
58 Idem, 18 September 1890, 4, col. 1, quoting a statement issued by Fisher.
59 Hatfield: Salisbury papers, Benson to Salisbury, 29 August 1890. These papers were consulted with the kind permission of Lord Salisbury and of the College Librarian, DrJ. F. A. Mason, whilst on deposit at Christ Church, Oxford. There were family connections, too, because Talbot had married Lavinia, third daughter of the 4th Lord Lyttelton, in 1870. Philpott recommended that his successor should be chosen quickly because of the need to avoid undue interruption of episcopal work: ibid., Philpott to Salisbury, 25 August 1890.
60 Ibid., Perowne to Salisbury, 12 March 1890 (refusal of Bangor) and Davidson to Salisbury, 14 October 1890 (choice of Rochester).
61 Guardian, 1 April 1891, 518, col. 2.
62 Salisbury papers, Perowne to Salisbury, 22 April 1891. A few days later, Lord Norton, one of the ‘conservative’ churchmen, himself wrote to Lord Salisbury, recommending the preferment of Canon Bowlby elsewhere: Norton to Salisbury, 27 April 1891.
63 Guardian, 3 June 1891, 873, cols. 2–3; 24 June 1891, 1018, cols. 1–2.
64 His revenues were charged with the pension of some £2.000 annually to his predecessor; cf. The Times, 12 August 1891, 6, col. 2, a statement by the Rev. Francis Gell, Perowne's chaplain, presumably issued to explain his apparent meanness. The bishopric was nominally worth £5,000.
65 Salisbury papers, Perowne to Salisbury, 10 July 1891. Following the correct procedure, Perowne offered two candidates for the post. Canon Bowlby and the archdeacon of Coventry.
66 Birmingham Diocesan Registry (hereafter cited as BDR), memorandum dated 13 July 1891, from C. E. Mathews, solicitor to the trustees.
67 The Times, 8 August 1891, 7, col. 6.
68 Salisbury papers, Perowne to Salisbury, 22 October 1891.
69 BDR, Dyson & Co., solicitors, to J. B. Clarke, 18 Octobe r i8gi, 11 February 1892 and 26 February 1892. A bill was drafted (copies in BDR and in Church Commissioners’ file 69513/i), conceived as an amendment to the Bishoprics Act 1878 and providing, inter alia, that upon the next voidance of the rectory of St Philip's the benefice would be united with St Martin's, and that St Martin's would pay £750 annually to the bishopric, that the rectory house of St Philip's would become the bishop's residence and its parish church, the cathedral, and that the diocese would comprise the archdeaconry of Coventry with the parishes of Yardley, King's Norton, Northfield, Handsworth and Harborne.
70 Birmingham Univ. Library, Joseph Chamberlain papers, Dale to Chamberlain, 12 February 1892.
71 Birmingham Univ. Library, Joseph Chamberlain papers. Chamberlain to Dale, 13 February 1892 (file copy).
72 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 25 February 1892.
73 The Times, 1 March 1892, 5, col. 6.
74 LP, Benson papers, copy of agenda in bundle 1892/11A/B6: JafFray did not retire from his newspaper interests until 1894.
75 The Times, 11 Marc h 1892, 8, col. 5; Guardian, 16 Marc h 1892, 386, cols. 1–2. The report of the meeting which the Birmingham Daily Post had carried was reprinted as a pamphlet, Bishopric of Birmingham and Coventry; report of [the] meeting of the general committee, March 10th, Birmingham 1892. Shore (A Bishopric, 5) suggested that Benson had indicated that he would oppose the bill in the Lords, but no written evidence of this has been found in his papers on Birmingham. The meeting provoked three angry letters from Evans to Benson, on 10, 11 and 12 March.
76 BDR, Declaration of trust, 4 April 1893, which rehearsed the financial history of the funds in trust.
77 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 10 March 1892.
78 Documents on this case, which was not otherwise reported, in BDR. She died on 9 September 1891 and had bequeathed £2,000 to the then Bishopric Committee for its purposes. It was ruled in Chancery that the bequest was still valid. On her family, see The Edgbastonian, xi (1891), 145–9Google Scholar.
79 LP, Benson papers, Evans to Benson, 12 March 1892.
80 A Bishopric; 4–6.
81 The appeal to launch the University of Birmingham with a target of £250,000 was made in January 1898 and raised over £95,000 in about two weeks: Vincent, E. W. and Hinton, P., University of Birmingham, Birmingham 1947, 21–38Google Scholar. It is problematical how far Anglicans contributed to this appeal for Perowne later advised them that Oxford was sufficient for church needs (Guardian, 6 July 1898, 1036, col. 1), an attitude hardly encouraging reciprocity from local society if ever the Church wanted support for its bishopric scheme. In the previous year, 1897, and probably closer to all Anglicans' interests, the new Birmingham Infirmary had been opened, built at a cost of about £200,000 of which over £75,000 had been raised in the winter of 1890–1, including 22 individual donations of £1,000 each: The Times, 30 January 1891, 5, col. 6. Ironically, Fisher was secretary to the Hospital Appeal and one of the original governors of the University.
82 Birmingham Daily Post, 3 November 1892, 5, col. 4; 4 November 1892, 5, col. 5. Perowne's presidential address to the conference was reprinted as a pamphlet (Worcester 1892).
83 CCR, 1893, 42–59.
84 LP, Benson papers, A. M. Chance to Benson, 26 November 1893 and Canon Owen to Benson, same date.
85 Salisbury papers, Norton to Salisbury, 2 and 6 October 1897 and 8 January 1898; also LP, Frederick Temple papers, Norton toTemple, 15 and 28 January 1898, the former enclosing a copy of the scheme. In an autobiographical fragment Norton referred to no details but admitted his failure to move Lord Salisbury: , Childe-Pemberton, Lord Norton, 300Google Scholar. In the first letter to Lord Salisbury, Norton alluded to friction between Perowne and Knox, and in 1898 Perowne tried more than once to recommend Knox for a colonial see (LP, Temple papers, Perowne to Temple, 3 and 8 August and 7 September 1898).
86 Pearce, E. H., Hartlebury Castle, London 1926, 323Google Scholar and , Knox, Reminiscences, 176Google Scholar.
87 Perowne, J. S., Charge…1901, Birmingham 1901, 3–7.Google Scholar
88 , Prestige, Charles Gore, 227–8.Google Scholar
89 It is not irrelevant to note that Archbishop Davidson considered that possession of private means was still a relevant qualification for consecretion as a diocesan bishop, at least to a Welsh see; cf. Bodl. Lib., MS Eng. hist. c. 749, ff 38–9 (Davidson toj. S. Sandars, 6 February 1905).
90 Guardian, 13 November 1901, 1572, col. 3.
91 The Times, 4 April 1902, 8, col. 4.
92 , Prestige, op. cit., 251Google Scholar. The time-limit was extended to 30 April 1906 by a codicil to his will: Church Commissioners (hereafter cited as Ch. Comm.), file 69513/i, copies of will and codicil, received 17 August 1904.
93 The Times, 24 April 1902, 6, col. 3.
94 BDR, copy of arbitration, dated 2 July 1902, and memorandum of agreement from Bishop Legg, 28 July 1902.
95 The Times, 25 February 1903, 11, cols. 4–5; Guardian, 4 March 1903,328, cols. 1–2, and Worcester Diocesan Magazine (1903), 70–1. Core had already consulted Knox, Norton and Fisher at the end of January, noting that the appeals for the Infirmary and University were practically concluded: cf. Guardian, 4 February 1903, 144, col. 3. A copy of the pamphlet describing the meeting is in Ch. Comm. 69513/i, originally enclosed with a letter from Fisher dated 18 November 1903.
96 Garvin, J. L. and Amery, L. S., Joseph Chamberlain, London 1969, v, 100Google Scholar. , Prestige (Charles Gore, 251)Google Scholaris misleading about this money which Gore had received from Lady Kerry; she died intestate and her estate was proved at only £2,599 gross (The Times, 29 December 1904, 8, col. 6). She disposed of the bulk, of her estate before her death. Gore applied a time-limit of three years to his offer.
97 Ch. Comm., 69513/i, copy of printed appeal, enclosed with letter from Fisher dated 18 November 1903. The officers of the reconstituted committee who signed the appeal were Core, E. A. Knox, Lord Cobham, Lord Norton, J. C. Holder, A. M. Chance, Rev. R. Hodgson, Rev. C. Strange, Rev. C. M. Owen, Rev. J. W. Diggle and W. N. Fisher. The subscription list, totalling £94,206 and dated 24 June 1903, was published in the Guardian, 1 July 1903, 928. cols. 1–2.
98 BDR, undated memorandum by Fisher fora meeting on 28 April 1903.
99 Ch. Comm., 69513/i, Fisher to Commissioners, 18 November 1903, and Commissioners to Fisher, 23 November 1903 (file copy). The reference to recognised trustee securities arose from the Commissioners' holding the endowment in trust under the provisions of the Trustee Act 1893, which specified what types of investment were permitted if any trust deed made no specific provision.
100 Birmingham bishopric, 11; Worcester Diocesan Magazine (1904), 59–62.
101 Ch. Comm., 69513/i, Fisher to Commissioners, 21 June 1904.
102 Ibid., Commissioners to Fisher, 24 June 1904 (file copy). Home rails were tending to yield better than Consols: cf. Flux, A. W., ‘Yield of high class investments’, Trans. Manchester Statistical Soc. (1910-1911), 103–37Google Scholar, and Cairncross, A. K., Home and Foreign Investment 1870–1911, Cambridge 1953, 140 and 227Google Scholar.
103 Based on data in Ch. Comm., 69513/ii, Fisher to Commissioners, 16 November and 23 November 1904.
104 Ibid., 69513/i, Freer's solicitors (Chatwin & Emerson) to Commissioners, 16 August 1904.
105 Ibid., 69513/ii, copy minute, 15 December 1904, confirmed 12 January 1905.
106 Ibid., 69513/vii, Freer's solicitors to Commissioners, 14 February, 4 April and 14 April 1914.
107 Ibid., undated internal memo., filed after correspondence of April 1914 from Freer's solicitors.
108 Salisbury papers, Norton to Salisbury, 2 October 1897.
109 LP, Davidson papers, Gore to Davidson, 21 March 1903 and Davidson to Gore, 27 March 1903 (shorthand draft).
110 BDR, Dyson & Co. toj. B. Clarke, 26 May 1903. At the abandonment meeting in 1892, Perowne had observed that a public bill for a number of new dioceses, including Birmingham, might have stood a better chance. This was the precedent of the Bishoprics Act 1878 though both Truro and St Alban's had been subjects of individual legislation.
111 Guardian, 3 June 1903, 810, col. 2; Worcester Diocesan Magazine (1903), 156Google Scholar. No trace of this contact with Chamberlain has been found in Chamberlain's papers and it might have been oral.
112 Hansard, 1903, cxxiv, 31–6.Google Scholar
113 Birmingham Univ. Library, Joseph Chamberlain papers, Gore to Chamberlain, 1 August 1903; Hamard, 1903, cxxvi, 1452.
114 These inotions appeared on the Order Paper for 5 August. Brand's motion sought to delay the bill until satisfactory assurances were forthcoming that the bishops would enforce clerical conformity to the Book of Common Prayer and the Thirty-nine articles; cf. Hansard, 1902, cvii, 1281–1300.
115 Hansard, 1902, cvii, 1300.
116 Ibid., 1903, cxxvi, 335, 911,915, 1071 and 1160; alsocxxvii, 126.
117 Birmingham Post, 23 July 1903, 5, col. 6 (speech at a meeting in connection with Lichheld Theological College).
118 The Times, 6 August 1903, 7, cols. 5–6. It condemned as wanton the refusal to allow the Church to establish bishoprics for which it was willing to pay, and identified the opposition as ‘a theological animosity against the Bishop of Rochester, not on the part of the Welsh members, but on the part of those Protestant lobbyists whose interests the Welsh members serve’. Not all Low Churchmen had been opposed to the bill, a party of Evangelicals from south London having lobbied the Commons for it (The Times, 5 August 1903, 10, col. 6) and a self-confessed Evangelical, the Rev. Henry Lewis, vicar of Bermondsey, publicly condemned those of his party who had opposed it (ibid., 17 August 1903, 10, col. 2). Other letters appeared in The Times on 13 August and 18 August; cf. Mrs Heaton, E. J., Origins of the Diocese of Southwark 1877–1905, Southampton 1950, 52Google Scholar.
119 LP, Davidson papers, Robertson to Davidson, 4 August 1903. Knox received the oiler from Balfour on 20 September: , Knox. Reminiscences, 207.Google Scholar
120 Birmingham Univ. Library, Joseph Chamberlain papers, Gore to Chamberlain, 7 August 1903.
121 Worcester Diocesan Magazine (1903), 210.Google Scholar
122 Bodl. Lib., MS. Eng. hist. c. 742, Davidson to Sandars, 22 September 1903. Davidson had been invited in the previous March to address a bishopric meeting in Birmingham later that year: LP, Davidson papers, Gore to Davidson, 21 March 1903.
123 Bell, G. K. A., Randall Davidson, 3rd edn, London 1952, i, 427.Google Scholar
124 , Prestige, Charles Gore, 247Google Scholar. He went away on 21 December and returned to the diocese on 22 January.
125 Hansard, 1904, cxxxiii, 855.
126 Windsor, Royal Archives & P.R.O., Cab. 41/29/7, Balfour to Edward VII, 8 March 1904.
127 Hansard, 1904, cxxxiv, 397ff. Chamberlain was supported by F. A. Newdigate (Cons., Nuneaton), F. W. Lowe (Cons., Edgbaston), R. B. Martin (Lib.-U., Droitwich) and J. T. Middlemore (Lib.-U., Birmingham N.). Twenty members, together belonging to all three major parties, out of twenty-eight sitting for constituencies with a direct or close territorial interest in the scheme voted for the second reading.
128 , Prestige, Charles Gore, 252.Google Scholar
129 Hansard, 1903, cxxiv, 36.
130 BDR, Chamberlain to Gore, 9 December 1904; cf. , Garvin and , Amery, Joseph Chamberlain, v, 100Google Scholar. The Times also thought that Gore had made it clear that he wished to be translated to Birmingham (14 December 1904, 9, col. 5).
131 LP, Davidson papers, Robertson to Davidson, 4 August 1903; cf. Guardian, 4 March 1903, 328, col. 2.
132 Ch. Comm., 69513/ii, J. G. Deed to Commissioners, 25 January 1905 and 4 February 1905 (petition); cf. , Gore, Spiritual efficiency, 45.Google Scholar
133 Ch. Comm., 69513/ii, Town Clerk of Dudley to Commissioners, 11 January 1905 and Bishop Legg to Commissioners, 17 February 1905.
134 Ch. Comm., 69513/ii, Report…on patronage [and boundaries], 30 March 1905; also 6g513/iv, Commissioners to Gore, 7 April 1905 (file copy) and 69513/iv, Further report…on patronage and boundaries, 12 May 1905.
135 Ch. Comm., 69513/iv, petition dated 30 March 1905; Gore to Commissioners, 25 April 1905, and Further report. For the final extent of the diocese, see London Gaiette, 11 July 1905, 4776ff.
136 P.R.O., H.O. 45/10224/36287, memo dated 1 July 1903. Bishop Percival put the matter to the Commissioners on 1 November 1904 (Ch. Comm., 69513/i).
137 Ch. Comm., 69513/i, Gore to Commissioners, 2 November 1904.
138 Ibid., 69513/ii, Commissioners to Percival, 24 November 1904 (file copy) and Percival to Commissioners, 21 December 1904, in which he suggested that of 19 livings to which bishops of Worcester currently presented in the diocese of Hereford, 13 should go to Hereford and 6 to Birmingham. Percival even tried to get support from the archbishop: LP, Davidson papers, Percival to Davidson, lojanuary 1905.
139 Ch. Comm., 69513/ii, Gore to Commissioners, 19 December 1904 and Legg to Commissioners, 21 December 1904, lojanuaryand 17 February 1905.
140 Ibid., 69513/ii, Report on patronage, 30 March 1905; 69513/iv, Gore's chaplain to Commissioners, 12 April 1905; Gore to Commissioners, 2 May 1905 and Percival to Commissioners, 3 May 1905.
141 Cf. Henson, H. H., Letters, London 1950, 69—a hostile witness.Google Scholar
142 Although parish churches immediately before becoming cathedrals, both St Alban's and Southwark Cathedrals had been originally monastic churches.
145 , Knox, Reminiscences, 160Google Scholar. There was an undercurrent in favour of eventually building a cathedral on a new site though it may be doubted whether there was any likelihood of funds being raised. Perowne had referred to the possibility in his presidential address to the diocesan conference in 1892; cf. Shore, A Bishopric, 19.
144 Worcester C.R.O., 2740/62, memorandum by J. A. Chatwin, architect, 19 December 1904, and Rev. W. H. Carnegie to Diocesan Registrar, 28 December 1904.
145 Cf. Royal Commission on Cathedral Churches, First Report: Appendix, 568Google Scholar; Burton, C. J., Increase of the episcopate, London 1867, 24Google Scholar.
146 BDR, Mathews to Fisher, 13 July 1891.
147 Ch. Comm., 69513/1, Fisher to Commissioners, 21 June 1904; BDR, Fisher to J. B. Clarke, 22 December 1904, and Ch. Comm., 69513/vii, Clarke to Commissioners, 7 April 1913 (when the balance was worth more than £9,000).
148 Birmingham Diocesan Magazine (June 1922); it is suggested, apparently erroneously, in Victoria County History: Warwickshire, London 1964, vii, 72Google Scholar, that the property was occupied ‘c. 1911’.
149 Ch. Comm., 69513/iv, Gore's chaplain to Commissioners, 12 April 1905. On the role of the capitular body, see especially Benson, E. W., The Cathedral, London 1878Google Scholar.
150 Ch. Comm., 69513/iv, Gore's chaplain to Commissioners, 12 April 1905; J. B. Clarke to Commissioners, 17 April 1905 and Commissioners to Clarke, 22 June 1905 (file copy). J. B. Clarke (1845–1924), solicitor of Sutton Coldfield and Birmingham, had been a member of the Bishopric Committee since 1889.
151 London Gazette, 11 August 1905, 5538ff.
152 Sir John Holder made the largest single addition to a previous offer (+ £3,500). The average increase was about £300 each and in total they increased their previous offering by about 200 per cent.
153 Fisher's case was supported by Lord Cobham, Joseph Chamberlain and Lord Alfred Lyttelton: BDR, Clarke to Cobham, not dated (file copy); Chamberlain to Gore, 9 December 1904 and 5 April 1905; A. M. Chance to Clarke, 12 April 1905 and Balfour's secretary to Sir John Holder, 17 October 1905.
154 Smith, I. G. and Onslow, P., Worcester, London 1883, 344.Google Scholar
155 Winton, E. S. de, in Gore, C. (ed.), Essays in Aid of the Reform of the Church, London 1902, 274–81Google Scholar and Bedwell, C. E. A., The Increase of the Episcopate, London 1906, 57–8Google Scholar and 63.
156 CCR, 1904,58–86.
157 Figures derived from Church of England Year Book, London 1886, 516–17Google Scholar and 1903, 595.
158 Birmingham Bishopric, 60.
