Sin—I am surprised at a Resident M.A.'s broad assertion, that
the ad- vice given by the Bishop of Oxford to his friends to support Lord Derby "was in no way grounded on the expediency of supporting the Protectionist leader."
I heard at the time, on pretty good authority, that the Bishop did recom- mend his friends assembled at Oriel to support the Protectionist rather than the Free-trade candidate, not as a matter of principle but of policy, because the country clergy were, as he asserted, Protectionists. I have heard also that the Bishop cited the declining circulation of a certain Free-trade paper, otherwise most acceptable to the clergy and devoted to their interests, as a proof of the hostility of the clerical body to Free-trade.
That the Bishop had expressed himself favourable to the principle of Pro- tection, I never heard; and so far, no doubt, your correspondent is in the xight. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Q. [This, we believe, is strictly accurate. The Bishop recommended Lord Derby as a Protectionist, not because he himself approved of Protection, but because, he said, the country clergy did. The inconsistency was between this argument and the account which the Bishop had himself given of the feelings of the country clergy, in the debate on the Corn-laws.—En.]
Previous page
