The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-14 00:00:00

-•''..%.....a0.• ....op.-,

to be properly installed. The Act of Henry 1. 111. 1
was passed to take from the Pope all pow( r in the
election of l•ishops. That, he contended, was the
sole object which the Legislature feel in view, And it
was termed " the non-payment of first fruits to the
Bishop of Rome." It provided, if the Archbishop re-
fused to proceed to the business of confirmation, that
he should be subject to the pains and penalties of
prtemunire. It was, he contended, the business of
the Archbishop, or of his Vicar-General, if he acted
in accordance with the statute, to enter into tlyi whole
capabilities of the bishop elect. There was nothing in
the statute to prevent the adoption of such a course
by him. Proof of the capabilities of the bishop elect
being required, he was utterly at a loss to understand
what ground there was for the argument that the
authorities who considered it their duty to do all this,
yet refused to hear evidence on the most important
point of all. Unhappily the question of the fitness
of Dr. Hampden for the high office of bishop had
bren raised, but those who opposed the completeness
of his induction felt that the question W2S not only
important to the Church, but to the people, and
hence, however reluctant they might be to
place themselves in hostility to the Rev. Gentleman,
they felt that in doing s ) they were simply dis-
charging a great public duty. If a mistake had been
made—if the Dean and Chapter of Hereford and the
Minister of the Crown had been deceived—if one
unfit and grievously wrong in point of doctrine—
nay, he took an extreme case, and would assume
the case of an infidel returned by the Dean and
Chapter, and afterwards submitted to the tribunal
constituted by the Commissioners—surely, before his
confirmation was perfected—before he was declared a
fit and proper man—those who knew of his error
ought not be denied a right to appear and proclaim
it. Why, in other words, if no efficient ex-
amination took place, a man in error in point
of doctrime, or a confirmed infidel, might
become a bishop, and there was no power
given to those clergy placed under him—under
his spiritual teaching—to object to him. lie would
say nothing there about the opinions of the Rev.
Gentleman being orthodox or not; he would merely
say this, that those for whom he appeared contended
that the nature of his teaching unfitted him to fulfil
the office of a bishop Let them look at the
position in which parties would be placed if they,
were altogether denied the right of opposition. Un-
der the Church Discipline Act a bishop became an
ecclesiastical judge in various points of doctrine Ile
took the case of a deacon within such a bishop's
diocese. Ile might know of errors of doctrine in
the bishop's teaching, and be able satisfactorily to
prove them, and yet he was denied all remedy.
If, therefore, when they found that no bishops were
confirmed without this citation, and that several
solemn proceedings were gone through—that all
opponents were called upon to appear, and yet were
refused—told one moment that he shall be heard, and
the next that he shall not be heard—was he
not justified in saying that the proceedings
were a delusion and a mockery, and that
the most solemn proceedings in which men could
engage became an object of ridicule. The Learned
Gentleman then quoted several old authorities or text
writers, as he termed them, to show that non-com-
pliance with any one of the conditions prescribed by
the Act rendered the whole proceedings invalid. The
case of Evans v. Nasmvth will be found in
Palmer's Reports, p. 472, and the argument
of Sir William Jones were amongst these.
Sir William Jones argued that not only must the
citation he made, but that the tribnnal must examine
into the fitness of the person to be confirmed. One
of those conditions was his " piety," and it was
urged in the petition of the opposing parties, that
unless they inquired that the Commissioners would
not discharge their duties properly. All they
asked for was that the Archbishop or his
Vicar- General should be called upon to in-
quire into the soundness or unsoundness of
the Reverend Gentleman's doctrine. .1 he case
Was not unlike a quarter sessions refusing to
hear both parties to an appeal. He was also in-
structed to move for a writ of prohibition, to restrain
the proceedings of the Commissioners.
Lord DENMAN considered that the Learned Counsel
shoulti simply confine his application to the terms with
which he set out.
Sir F. Kluzr then, in conclusion, viewing the
importance of the matter, and the injustice of the
refusal of the Commissioners to hear opposing parties,
earnestly called upon the Court to accede to his ap-
plication.

LORDDENIII/11—Take a rule.
Rule granted.
The court was crowded during the speech of the
Learned Counsel; a great many clergymen were
present, and a few ladies occupied seats in the
galleries.