Ecclesiastical patronage became part of the political system. Such methods had always been common, but under the Duke of Newcastle they were systematically exploited. However, the first proposal for a systematic use of patronage had been by Edmund Gibson, Bishop of London. He had suggested that the livings in the gift of the Crown should be bestowed upon clergy resident in the diocese to which the livings belonged. He hoped thus to furnish clergy with the expectation of a reward for hard work that would make them grateful to the government and encourage them to express loyalty, in the hope of further preferment. The scheme foundered because of the unwillingness of the Lord Chancellor, Peter King, to comply with it.
Nor was lay use of patronage for political ends a callous manipulation of the system. Newcastle was acutely aware of the Church's role as an independent society charged with the salvation of souls. He was anxious to be sensitive to the concerns and preoccupations of the Church and its leaders. His ecclesiastical policy was designed to ensure that the Church performed its functions as the provider and organiser of charity, as the educator of the nation's youth and as the inculcator of doctrines of loyalty to the divinely appointed Protestant succession provided by the house of Hanover. In particular, he nominated as bishops men of pastoral and administrative ability, whom he regarded as most capable of governing the clergy and providing leadership for the Church in its spiritual and civil responsibilities. Politics was not his sole standard in making appointments. He regarded scholarship, generosity of spirit and devotion to the Church as impressive recommendations for a candidate. However, he preferred that they should share his political views concerning what was best, under God, for the nation.
In exercising patronage, Newcastle made it a general rule to give priority to recommendations based on local knowledge, and he frequently inquired in detail about the merits of a candidate for preferment. Testimonies to the pastoral and administrative ability of clergy were sought as well as to their political reliability. He respected the judgement of men he appointed to senior positions and routinely asked for their opinions of candidates proposed by lay sponsors. Despite the complaints which bishops made about Newcastle, he consulted them in order to take advantage of their networks of information, and to be seen to have their approval. Newcastle saw himself as working for the benefit of the Church and put his extensive personal connections at the service of the Church. Nor was Newcastle alone among senior politicians in requiring acceptable standards of service from clergy receiving his patronage; Lord Hardwicke as Lord Chancellor frequently made residence a condition of presentation to a living. He was also unwilling to allow dispensations for holding livings in plurality at a distance from each other.
Newcastle saw placing capable men in important posts as the surest way of protecting Church and State, and thus had no qualms in asking bishops, deans and chapters and colleges to yield their patronage to him for a particular appointment. His constant requests for the use of patronage was not a sinister scheme to subjugate the Church of England. Often he was simply forwarding requests from others, both clergy and laity. He acted as the central clearing house for appointments. As Newcastle saw it, the Church of England was unable to coordinate its mission nationwide because its resources of patronage were, to a large extent, in lay hands; his role as Secretary of State to the head of the established Church was to coordinate the Church's patronage.
Systematic Management of Agricultural Surpluses: FAO's Initiative for Fighting Hunger
