The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-02-08 00:00:00

LAW thTEINLIGENCE..

(*own' OF NANO'S BENCH, Fms. 7.
tna RING .0. TRZ lIISNOi op i.ONDON. AND AIS6II-
- ”4/
• BISHOP or CANTXRIIIIRY. •'
The ketORNEY-GEVERAL sheaved cause against
the Rule obtained in this case, calling on the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of London, Am.
either of them, to show cause why they, or either of
them, should not admit into their presence the Rev:
Dr. Richard Povah, hear him read the Thirty-nine
Articles, make 'declaratiott pf Ida. unfeigned assent
thereto, and perform all other things necessary to
entitle him to be licensed,as the Lecturer of St. Bar-
tholomew near the Exchange ; and, having done all
this, to show cause why he should not license the
said Richard Porch as Lecturer of that Church. By
this trotice, the Attorney-General contended, the
whole line of proceeding in such cases was com-
pletely inverted. It was never yet heard of, that a
Bishop could call before him a person, first to read
ever the-39 Articles, and then to examine him, and,
grant him a licence. This was the second applica-
tion made on this subject. The first application had
been disposed of, by refusing the rule, and a
second application had been made without wry new'
ground on whit+ the' Court was called to grant what
it had formerly.refwed. Before he stated to the
Court the reasons which had operated with the
Bishop of Londou to refuse to Dr. Povalt the licence
which it was now sought, by the present application,
to compel him to grant, he thought it Toper to call
the attention of the Court to the form of the licences
under the Act of Uniformity. In these licences the
Bishop was made to express his entire cotifidenoe in
the fidelity, learning, sound morals, and diligence,
of the person to whom he granted the licence. If
he did not feel this confidence in his fiddity, learn-
ing, sound morals, and diligence, what Court
could compel him to entertain such an opinion. This
was a duty which the Bishop had to perform ; the At-
torney-Gen. submitted, that the Legislature left it to
his judgment to exercise his opinion upon the sub-
ject; and having exercised it, the Court could not
order him to declare, that g man in whose fidelity,
terming, sound morals, and diligence, he had al-
ready declared that he had no confidence, was a man
in whom, in each of these several respects, ho had.
the highest confidence. On looking to the Canons?.
and also to the Statute of Conformity, the same rule
would he found to prevail. By the Canons, no per-
son could be admitted a reader, preacher, &c. ex-
cept he were licensed by the Archbishop of the pro-
vince, or Bishop of the diocese, or by one of the
Universities. And by the Statute of Uniformity it was
declared that no person should be admitted a
preacher, lecturer, &c. unless he had first approved,
and then licensed, and shall, in presence of the
Archbishop or Bishop, hive read the 39 Articles.--e
lie asked of the Coolly could they grant a Manda-
mus, enjoining the Bishop 14 approve of a person of
whom he disipproved ? He hid forted his judgment,
and according to that lodgment the .Rev. Dr. Povah
was not a person of whom he could approve, Could
the Come grant a Mindainus to rectify and amend
this judgsnent'? - Could it be required of him to grant
a licence In 'these terms s--" That, though duly sa. I
fiend that the liteed Dr. Penh was not a fit person
to be approved of and licensed, still, iii consequence'.
of a Mandamus directed to him from the Court
of King's Bench, he did approve of, and license
him i" He therefore submitted, that the Court ,
could not, in such circumstances as these, review'
. the opinion of the Bi,,bop, formed, as it had bean,
en the terms of the Statute, and of the Canons of the
Church. If the Court were desirous, however, of
knowing on what grounds the opinions of the Right
Reverend Bishop were formed, he had tiled affidavits
on this head also ; from which it would appear that 1
the Bishop had been grossly calumniated by Dr.
Povah in his Letter to the Bishop of Soder and
Man, in which the Doctor represented him as being
actuated by motives which were now admitted to be
unfounded; while the opinion of the Bishop, as to
the unfitness of Mr. Povah, was built on information
he had received, and on affidavits now fired, to a
rimilar effect, charging Dr. Perth with having in his
sermons enforced the inefficacy of Infant, Baptism.
Mr. Dimmest and Mr. Anaorr followed on the'
same tide. •
Mr. GARROW, Mr. WARREN, and Mr. CONLYNS,
for Dr. Povah, contended, that here there was no-
thing but an ex parse case : Dr. Povah had not at all
been heard, but had been condemned, and an inter-
dict had been passed on him, without allowing him
the opportunity of stating a word in his defence.
The labours of a long life, for a family oflsit chil-
dren, and his future usefa4ess in society, 'lli a line
of life to which he was devoted, and in which there
was much conturrent testimony as to the utility of
his labours hitherto, depended on the decision of the
Court oe.the present application. They were happy to
observe, that of the three charges originally alleged
against the 114endant, two had vanished, and one
only was built on to-day, of which, toe, thqtrost-
ed, the Court would by their decision declare Dr.
' Povah acquitted. Tbe first ground alleged for the re-
fusal of Dr. Povah, was, that he was not in Priest's Or-
ders. This was remedied by his receiviug Priest's
Orders from the Bishop of Sodor and Man. The
The second was, that he had preached in a Conven-
ticle ; but as to this it was shoed that Dr. Povah i
had so acted under the auspices of a Bishop of Lon-
don (Porteous), than whom, be his successor whom
he might, a superior could not be teend in Learning,
in Religion, or in any of the most estimable quali-
titWOf en English Prelate. The tSird charge against
Dr. 'Povah was one, which, *if it could be proved,.
marked him as the raest reefs, foolish, and unthink-•
ing man that ever existed, in snaking the present
application:—if true, be midst be unworthy of ever
sett* his foot• in a pulpit in an English church
again ; and, on the mini principle, the Right Reve.
rend Prelatebad eat done his Vuty, Innot long ago
silencing him._ Osithis charge, bilpe,esp they con-
tended, the Reverend Doctor had ,never been heard, ' 1
sittlesi,vindt'ed,,Brotatteldug him, Si der 'irate
tudiepce to hie *pin • 'oh .Re W 1.4 fy re-
it:oi
quested to be heard:. he had chalk` calumni-
skters-to meet him face to face. lie had imvortuned
tliellishop fe convene him and them before lilt,
ht. tile same tinter but this had been uniformly ii-
fusiel ' him. ' It iris not, the Learned Counsel
eeaterideds consistent with- 64 /practice or pin-