JB/109/152/001

Click Here To Edit

as an individual, from calling their Lordships' attention
to the situation in which they were placed by the right
that was exercised by the Right Reverent Prelate in the exercise
of what he was placed call his principal duty.
But what did the Right Rev. Prelate mean? He had told
them that he felt himself authorised, perhaps he was so
legally, to receive the accounts of the character of an individual,
not from the parishioners among whom he resided,
and towards whom he had discharged the duties of his
sacred office, but to go to a distance in order to collect testimony
as to particular expressions, & on the ground of that
testimony, to inflict the most cruel punishment. Though
there were persons, who, like the Right Reverd. Prelate,
might feel indifferent to all views of promotion, still he
might find an apology in the weakness of human nature,
for an unfortunate Curate who might look forward to
some advancement in his humble and obscure situation
(hear, hear!). But the contrary was manifested by his
conduct. He had used his discretion to blast those prospects,
merely because he had exercised his free privilege
as a Briton, and without any allegations against his
moral conduct had refused him the means of contradicting
the fact for which he was to be ruined for life. But
mark the most extraordinary part of the Right Rev. Prelate's
conduct: he had felt himself justified in refusing
the means of defence; and yet out of pure good nature,
as a matter of feeling, he had permitted him to retain his
curacy. One of two things must follow, either the Petitioner
was most cruelly and barbarously used, or the Right Revd.
Prelate had neglected to perform his duty, which was to
have removed him altogether. He did not see that any
legal remedy could be obtained, and therefore felt indebted
to his Noble Friend for having brought the subject before
the House (hear!).

The Bishop of Landaff; in a low tone of voice, defended
the conduct of the Right Rev. Prelate, and complained
that little attention had been paid either to his feelings,
or to the painful nature of the duty he had to perform.

The Earl of Carnarvon spoke in explanation.

The Bishop of Exeter was about to comment on
the observations which the Earl of Carnarvon had explained
when Lord Holland called him to order.

The House then divided on the question as follows –
Contents, 18 – Not Contents, 35 – Majority, 17.
Adjourned.

Identifier: | JB/109/152/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 109.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	109	Main Headings
Folio number	152	Info in main headings field
Image	001	Titles
Category	Collectanea	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	C7
Penner		Watermarks	C WILMOTT 1819
Marginals		Paper Producer	Andreas Louriottis
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1819
Notes public		ID Number	35807
Box Contents