On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
the Bishop of the J&ocmt to which the applicant belonged ; pbservmg , in his answer , ttmt it was always a rule with him not to accept the testijnonials unless they were so countersigned . In consequence of these refusals * the petitioner solicited , and haying obtained an Interview with his diocesan , requested that
Reverend Prelate to inform him of the reasons which induced him to withhold his signature from the testimonials . It is stated that the Reverend Prelate , while assuming , that he was not bound to give any explanation , still thought it more fair and manly to declare the reasons of his refusal . They did not apply to want
of competency in the petitioner to fulfil the duties of a clergyman , or to any immoral conduct , but to one single act connected with the exercise of his political rights . The objection was to words which the petitioner was said to have spoken at the meeting already referred to . The petitioner offered to shew that he had never uttered the words attributed
to him , and wished to know who his accusers were ; but their names were not communicated to him . At last he was obliged to surrender the presentations to the two livings to the patron from whom he received them . He thus sustained a loss of ^ 500 a-y ear , and all his professional prospects were destroyed , without his having been allowed an opportunity
of disproving the facts stated against him . Far this loss he has been assured , by the best advice he could obtain , there is no legal remedy , and he therefore came before their lordships with his petition . That petition contained statements and evidence which , in the present stage of the proceeding , must doubtless be considered as ear-parte , but he must say for the petitioner , that , in all the
commmunications he had had with him , he not only appeared most anxious to state nothing but facts , but also to suggest every thing which might serve to explain or to justify the conduct of his diocesan . He requested the Reverend Prelate to state to the other Bishops that he had no objection to ftfe moral character . This his djocesan not only did , but went a step farther , » o 4 at ^ ted the grounds of
his Mwa ^ l to : € o \ mt $ mgn the , testiraomals ^ TJie result , however , was , that tfcfg ; petitfcpefc < f | ow rero&inecl a marHed and ^ ifmatizedper ^ Qn , enjoying hw
cura / jy ) pn ; jr at tKQ wtU offcis cj ^ sjfcu atod h ^ reftfe Liortfsjnp coxM not help obaexv ¦ ft t » $ ^ p « ^^^
* teV * imwmtitftmit ¦ imrnve * Itmii fob thfe ^ l ^; ^^ M ^ te ^ mi < h ]^<> j&iiiit « yv . f W ; hi » concl ^ v att pw ?^
Untitled Article
him an improper pei ^ m one situation , it equally uflfitted hpn for ^ the other . That a clergyman should bg ^ a warm politician , might be an , pbiectipii with some , but it never was supposed that a clergyman should Ifce deprived of his rights , or subjected to a loss of
property , for exercising them . His conduct in his curacy had been most exemplary ; since he was appointed , he had never been absent a day from his duty . He had not long filled the situation when he received a letter from the wife of the
rector , her husband being unable to write , approving of his conduct ; and a petition , respectably signed , was presented to the patron ,, requesting that he might be presented to the living on the death of the incumbent . But it was
needless to dwell on these circumstances , as the bishop of the diocese had himself no objection to the petitioner's moral character . He now came to consider the justice of the right claimed by the Reverend Prelate . It could not out at first
sight appear most extraordinary to any person who looked at the question , that the bishop of * a diocese should have the power of preventing the preferment of a clergyman in another diocese , though he could not prevent preferment in his own .
Every bishop , it was true , had power to refuse institution to a living in his own diocese , but then he can be compelled by law to state his reasons for the refusal ; and if those reasons do not appear sufficient to the tribunal which has to decide
on the case , an otder will issue to compel the induction . This , however , did not apply to the case of a bishop refusing to sign the testimonials necessary for obtaining possession of a living in another diocese ; but such refusal appeared to him the exercise of a most enormous and
arbitrary discretionary power . It ^ nay be said , on the part of the bishop , Would you have me sign a certificate contrary to my conscience ? Would you have me record a good opinion of a person ,, when I entertain quite a contrary opinion ? His answer would be in the affirmative .
He would say that the bishop ought to sign , or that no disadvantage should be sustained by the applicant in consequence of his refusal , or at least that the reasons of the refusal should be stated before a tribunal comjjetent to decide on their validity . Their lordships would perceive the grtat kmirT to which a considerable the gr ^ t injury to which a considerable
portion of his fctfajeaty ' s subjects must be QXposedf af no ^ -redress could fee obtained m cases of this kjndi With regard to Mr * Jph ^ he ^ hadifcmnd it necessary to attyltodefc th ^ ^ ^ rea ^ nti ^ ioi | S > ih ^ had obtfttnefl fasfOSb ^ airon df the livings . Had he not xkr iw this * the appointment to the livings woiSJd have fallen to the diocesan ,
Untitled Article
376 iTtfelligence . ^ Parliarnetttaru *
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1820, page 376, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2489/page/52/
-