The Express.
London, England, 1859-04-14 00:00:00

(Stamped ld. Additional.) [T WOPEN

REFUSAL OP A o=JiLd2i TO BUSY A

The following correspondence baa taken place in
!elation to the burial of a child belonging to Mr. Elijah
Biwa respectable farmer residing at Rattbury:
TM Rae. L. Randolph having been applied to this day
to bury a child of Elijah Be,.'. on Friday nest, commented to
de to, supposing that the child bad been baptised as reseal,
but havmg since been informed that the child has sot bees
baptieed according to the due and prescribed order of the
church, he most decline to bury the child as requested, and
as RNA Bow is not a parialdoner of his, and be is unable
therefore to investigate the circumstances of the cam, be moat
refer him to the cbrgyeasit of his went perish with regard to
the burial of bin ebibt. .

"East iiii;7o; Viceroy, March 23rd 1869."
"Bastbury, Barth, 241 h 1869.
"Bibs. received your note this morning refusing to
buyiny child so you Itad, previously promterd to do, becomes
• Mod sot boss baptimed socordleg to the due snd premoribed
order of the churobt' It has been legally hapt.rd ; the
certificate of which las produce. I beg to know if you
will wry, or slow us to have it buried at ,mt. Gersten. As
yea
_recently buried s child for us, we wish to bare this
imartsd Mare also. As answer per bearer will oblige—Your
ojedlent smesat, tt ELIJAH law.
"Bev. L. liaattolph."
'Best Clanton Vicarage, Mach 24th, 1869.
"Bev. Lawson Ranlolpb Is very sorry to be obliged to re-
pout that la cansot cometeotioumly allow Elijah Bow's child
to ha buried in Root Gaston churchyard; under the

minuteness he awaking lt ha duty to robes his request,
palliful anis to him to do so."
"Heathery, March 25tb, 1869.
"Rev. have Wren advice cm your refusing to bury
toy child. I beg to enclose an extract eons the judgment of
Sir John Niche& If you still refuse, under the arctuestaeces
of its 'not being baptmed according to the due and preamble
leder, of the church,' I beg to inform you that I shall team
further proceedings ie the ace.—Yours respectfully,
"Rev. L. Randolph." " ELIJAH Raw.
The following extracts from the judgment of Sir John
Nicholl, 0111.141 Principal of the Arches Court of Canter-
bury, given In the year 1826, the substance of which was
foewerded with the above note, place the law of the case in •
char light.
" The character of the person who administered was of no
sag in the validity of baptism.
" The church itself at all times held baptism by water in
the risme of the Pother? and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost, to be valid bay.tam though admintatered by a layman
or sLimther porton ;if be so, if that Is the coestraction
of by the church of England, them the refusal of bu-
rial a perms =baptised; cannot mean that it should be
messed to wens who have not been baptised by a lawful
minister in the flans of the Bock of Common Prayer ; since
the deurch itasillholds persons to be validly baptised who
Mee been birthed with aster end the invocation by any
.t person said in any other form.
'The 68th canon directs 'that no mlrdater shall refsee to
buy any corpse' (baptised me above) ' that is brought
to any church or churchyard, in such matter end form as it
prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer; and if be shall
refuse, ho shall be sespende i by the t ishop of the diocese
from his mitten, for the "pace of three months.
" Upon the whole of this mooed for the reasons aseigned,
the court is of opinion that the minister in refusing to bury
this child has acted illegally." The child in question bad
teen beptired by edisseutingmlniater.
Mr. Randolph sant no reply.
" Rungerford, 28th March, 1859.
"My Lord,—lt I. with great reluctance I seed you the
encl.'s/di ocerespoodence, which bee taken pleat between the
Reversed I. Randolph, vicar of Feet Oaraton, and Elijah
Beer a Wes'eyee, in relation to the virar's retrial to inter
his child, which was baptised by me. In consequence of
this refusal, the child is still unburied. May I therefore re-
quest your lordship's immediate attention to this very pain-
ful case.—l have the honour to be, my lord, meet respect-
fully, yours, "TgoaAs Tuateak_Weeleyan Minister.
"'To the Eight Refereed the Lord Bishop of Oxford,
Pall-mall, Loudon."
"P. B.—Mr. Elijah Bew is a respectable farmer and a
very worthy men."
rs Btiekhill, March 74, 1859.
" Sir,—The Bishop of Oxford desires me to inform you
that the child of E ijah Bew not having been reddest in the
parish of East Games, it is entirely in the die:retie* of the
incumbent to refuse to have the child buried in his church-
yard, and the bishop has no power to interfere. Tbs right
to refuse is perfectly independent of any question se to the
child's having been baptised or not ; and depends entirely cm
its not having been a pariabiner. —I remain, sir, your ohs-
dient servant, "JAMES PiI&NDOLY,
" Chaplain to the Bishop of Oxford.
" The Rev. Thos. Turner."
The bishop's answer not having reached Mr. Bew, the
following letter was written :
" Eastbury, Hungeeford, Merck 30, 1869.
" My Lord Bishop,—Ort Saturday list the Rev. T. Turner,
of Hungerford, wrote to your lordship, enclosing tbe cone-
apondence between =pelf and the Rev. L. Randolph, re-
specting the banal of my Mien, child, and requesting you to
have the kindness to interpose in my behalf. I understand
that be has not yet heard from your lordship, and my anxiety
as • father to have my child interred must be my apology
for troubling you with this commualcatioe, especially as it
has te=n dead eight days.
" I beg to stare to yourlcrbhip that But Garatem church-
yard has been the buds! place of various members of my
family for mow than a century. In the brick grave in which
I desire to have my child buried the child's grandfather sad
aunt are interred, sad in the grave adjoining is hid one of
my children.
" Your lordebipwill haveobeerved from the conespoedeece
forwarded to you, that the only objection made by the Rev.
1.. Randolph to the burial of my child is founded on 'its not
having teen baptised according to the due end preen abed order
ot the church,' and he further states that' be cannot oniscien
dowdy allow my child to be boiled in Rest Geriton church-
yard.'
Now, your lordship will perceive that if Mr. Randolph
objects to bury my child on this ground, he meet on the same
ground object to inter shy of his own den seed parishioners
who may not 'weber n baptised by a clergyman of the church
of England. lam the more anxious, therefore„ that your
lordship should interfere in this case, becsuee the vicar
should persist in his refusal, it must lead in future to a great
deal of unpleseantness with his own parishioner', many of
whom have been baptised by Wesleyan or dissenting
ministate.
"Your loolehip's early reply and kind 'attention to this
Case will greatly oblige your lordship's humble end obedient
servant, " ELIJAH SEW."
" WorAtqa-bows, Aylesbury, April 4, 1859.
" Sir,-1 returned an an/wee...lse days ago to Mr. Turner's
letter, In which I stated, as I now Hate to you, that the
permission or refuel of burial in the churchyard to the non-
parishioner, is a matter entirely at the discretion of the la-
ciimbect, with which the bishop has so power to interfere—
Your obedient servant, " B. Oxoe."
" Mr. Elijah Bew."