The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-19 00:00:00

litritits, keepieg them in correspondence until ho had
sii his own measures for the institution of Mr. Ben-
-114,r"_ and that he at length hurried on the institution
;4_l dsleated their endeavours to lodge a caveat throrigh
u'cieeting them by half an hour. That was the most
,e2;t'lls part of his statement, because it showed the
't,tnes with which the Bishop acted. His Honourable
lust Learned Friend, the Solicitor-General, got up and
'acle a statement on that point which surprised him,
dad
~io doubt iefluenced the votes of many Members
' that House who gave credence to it; observing that
*bile they were asked to pass, by implication, a
rote of censure, the Right Rev. Prelate had in fact donel
liQt,hieg more than he was required to do by law. Now
he
(Ate Horsinan) would show the House that the case
duty
not as it was thus represented. He had felt it his
1Y to take the opinion of two authorities of Doctors'
p'l,°airnon3, and those opinions he would now read. The
l'
tatement made by his Hon, and Learned Friend was
tsderstood by the House to amount to a declaration that
the
Bishop of Bath and Wells was Inlaid to insthute
°r. Bennett within 28 days after his presentation. Now
;41 that point he had put this case to Dr. Twiss:—" The
late Vicar o!Frouie died on the 26th of November, 1851.
14,
rtre Bennett was presented (say) the 29th of December
ulleeing. Wee the Bishop bound to institute him so soon
j.4the canonical 28 days had run out; or, how long might
4._e have lawfully delayed institution?" The answer was
IS fellows:—" The bishop is not bound to institute a pre-
7ntee to a benefice as soon as the canonical 28 days have
Ta out. The canon is directory, and it was held by the
Arches' Court, in the case of Gorham v. the Bishop
°t Exeter' (2 Robertson's Reports, p. 28), that the
bishop is not bound to commence the examination of a
candidate for institution within the canonical 28 days,
bet that the meaning of the 28 days in the 95th canon
a, that after that interval the bishop may be called
:Pon to assign a reason, if he delays to institute. The
decisionl of Sir Herbert Jeuner Fast on this point was
d'ot impugned before the Judicial Committee of the Privy
It is also settled law (Robert's Reports, p,
nti) that a bishop may take competent time to examine
tt'e sufficiency and fitness of a presentee to a benefice,
he is not bound to institute him until he is satisfied
his fitness. Six months is the only limit mentioned
°Y canonists, within which the examination must be
concluded
so that the right of patronage may not lapse.
a the case of Gorham v. the Bishop of Exeter,' the
Presentation took place on Nov. 2, 1847, and Mr. Gorham
1;0ra:tally applied for institution on November 8, but the
bishop did not commence his examination of Mr. Gor-
i!an as a candidate for institution, until the 17th day
of
December, after the canonical 28 days had ex-
ltired.ra The Court of Arches held, overruling Mr.
rhe's protest, that such delay was not impro-
pero on the part of the bishop, although at-
:puled with inconvenience to Mr. Gorham.—(Signed)
~14.1.VEns TWlSS.—Doctors' ' -Commons June 16, 1852.
13t1Ch was the opinion of Dr. Twiss. He had taken se-
parately the opiuibn of Dr. Phillimore; but as it was
rather long he would only read the last paragraph
am of opinion, however, that it is competent to the
Bishop to institute the clerk at any time within the six
°onths after presentation so as to avoid a lapse; for the
Words of the 95th canon are directory only, and not
Prohibitory, and have so been adjudged to be. And I
conceive, in the event of a caveat having been entered,
!I bishop (although the common law takes no notice of
would not consider himself bound to institute within
the eighteen days, if the proceedings copsequent on the
caveat commenced during the twenty-eight days, ex-
tended beyond that period." He brought forward the
°pinion of these two eminent authorities because ho felt
that if it had really been the case, that the Bishop was
uound to institute within twenty-eight days, and that, as
Was represented by his Hon. and Learned Friend, so far
from using undue haste, he had shown extreme indul-
flenee by delaying institution for that period, he would
cud
been justly censurable, not only for his ignorance
4_lld carelessness about the law, but for want of
~,sution and consideration in making statements
ta that House.—(Hear.) One of the most remark-
able ecclesiastical cases of late years was that of Mr.
Gorham against the Bishop of Exeter. In that case
"tits very point was raised, and Sir Herbert Jenner Fast
decided that the Bishop had a right to commence an in-
quiry after the lapse of 28 days from the time of pre-
sentation. Considering how familiar all lawyers were
With that case, ho was certainly surprised that his Hon.
and Learned Friend the Member for Oxford should have
17,eitled the House; for there could not be the smallest
doubt that his opinion did mislead the House, and,
that, in consequence of hearing it, many who had
intended, to vote for the motion voted against it.—
Meer, hear.) Now, be repeated that he did not
think that in the present session he ought to endea-
vour to pursue the inquiry. But he could not sit down
Without expressing his sense, not merely of the imports
roe of the subject itself, but of the importance which had
,een givernto it by the proceedings in that House, and
°Y the vote to which the House had come. He could
only say for himself, as a member of that Church in which
along with the majority of that House he had been edu-
cated and brought up, and from which he had never
sWervecl for a moment either in allegience or attachment,
that he felt it to be impossible to overrate the importance
01 the vote which was come to the other evening. The
country had now been told in a manner which was not
to be mistaken, that in whatever quarter abuses might
exist in the Church, there was a Parliamentry tribunal
that would take cognizance of them.—(Hear,a hear.) It
bad been told that wherever the offence might be, how-
ever high and exalted the offender, there was a Parlia-
hentary jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence,
and to inquire into the circumstances attending its coin-
baission.—(llear, hear.) That was amongst the last, and
Was. in his opinion, by far the most important of the
ecisions of the present Parliament; it was a judgment
deliberately recorded as a legacy to future Parliaments.
tse believed there had been few votes in that Howe
Which would give more satisfaction to the country; and he
Was sure that, the attention of Parliament having been at
tent roused by one great scandal of the Church, which
had been increased and aggravated by the impunity
Which it had hitherto met with, a promise had, in effect,
been given to the country that impunity should not con-
tinue and that wherever a case of grievance was al-
-I,eged, like that which it had been his duty to bring
oefore the House, Parliament would endeavour to pro-
ride redress.—(Cheers.)
Mr. GLADSTONE said the few words to which the
u‘ole. Gentleman had announced that he would limit his
chservations had expanded in his hands into a speech
of considerable length, containing as much of crimina-
tory matter as the Hon. Gentleman found it convenient
to introduce.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
referred that night to such portions of his charges against
the Bishop of Bath and Wells as he thought would bear
re petition. He had reminded the House that he charged
thet Bishop with undue haste in instituting Mr. Bennett;
cut he (Mr. Gladstone) must remind him of the full ex-
tent of his own charges. The Honourable Gentleman
did not say merely that there was undue haste, but he
Charged the Bishop with a deliberate violation of the
taw in not subjecting Mr. Bennett to due examination,
to receiving him without the usual certificate, and
instituting him with haste and precipitancy,
Contrary to the usual course, for the purpose
of defrauding the parishioners of their just
and lawful rights. On the other hand, it had been
Stated that if the Bishop had not examined Mr. Bennett
he would not have broken the law, but that ho exer-
cised his discretion wisely, and did examine him. [Mr.
Horsemen here made some observation which was in-
audible.] The statement of a Member of Parliament in
,place was evidence.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Glad-
stone) had made that statement, and he invited and
• challenged the lion. Gentleman to disprove it. He as-
sertee that, so far as the law was concerned, the Bishop
took precisely the usual course; that he was bound to
administer the law, and that he was not authorised to
!laity instituting on account of any informal and extra-
Judicial step which might have been taken. What
Would they say of a judge in Westminster Hall who, on
account of representations made to him privately, de-
clined to administer the law in any case which had come
before him?—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentle-
bean said that the Bishop entangled the parties by
entering into a correspondence with them. No such
thing. The parties sent to him a request that he
Would not institute Mr. Bennett; and ho told them
Plainly that he had satisfied his own mind on
the legal question involved, and that he was re-
solved to institute. He did not evade the point
in the least, but simply refused to accede to the petition.
--(Hear, bear.) Tao Hon. Gentleman had sought to
throw upon him (Mr. Gladstone) the responsibility of
having interfered with the nomination. He was sorry
the Hon. Gentleman had forced the House into a discus-
sion of that question; but, as be had charged him with
impeding the nomination of the Committee by an un-
usual and unprecedented proceeding, he would tell him,
in reply, that he regretted that he had not either ori-
ginated himself, or, having omitted to do so, adopted,
on the suggestion of another, a course which was in
conformity with the plainest dictates of justice. Let the
Bosse consider, for a moment, the position in which
they were placed. There were 658 gentlemen elected
by three or four hundred constituencies through the
country—a body containing. the greatest varieties of
character, capacity, and inclination, and there was
not one amongst them who was not authorised to
make any charge he pleased against any subject of
her Majesty, and to lay it on the table of the
Rouse without incurring any personal responsibility
Whatever. Now he asked the House to consider what a
officers, what
tremendous power it was that was
publicthuos_
(Hear, hear.) What a power over
t
a power for the destruction of riv chara'cter.—
fettered by
(Hear, hear.) This power, being totally
those legal checks and remedies which appulined in other
cases, and which influenced those who were
disposed to
vituperate others, what was there to restrain it? He
knew of no restraint except the invariable rule of the I
that
House—a rule which, even in the worst times, so far a.st
he was able to discover, had not been broken—
'would entertain no criminatory charges unless
they
Were placed on some definite basis, so that the party
!lonised, though he might have no remedy or redress for
It false accusation, might at least be able to say " That
it was with which I was charged, and that it was of
Which I have been acquitted." As to the statement of
the lion. Gentleman that be did not intend impeach
Silent, he (Mr. Gladstone) must tell him that in that
case be did not understand his own charges or his obliga-
tions as a Member of Parliament. If &Bishop and a Peer in
Parliament had been guilty of a deliberate violation of
the law, and had defrauded the parties
rights,subjetedifttohehis
spiritual oversight of their jest aud legal
could bs any case for impeachment, that was one.
gland would Tnohrwee
Ron. Gentlemen said the people of En
know that there was a tribunal to take up abuse
that s
the
in the
Church. He would tell the lion. Gentleman
People of England had not first learnt from his mouth
e fundamental principles of the constirtutionlt andwas jnotus-
tice of the House of Commons,—
(11ea.)
reserved for the year 1852 to teach the nation that
the
that
grievances of
People, and that it was ever ready to entertain complaints
against high functionaries and officers of State in the
Rays and modes which the coultitution pointed out.