The Echo of last Saturday, in remarking on our refutation
of its ridiculous charge that Mr. Gladstone's ecclesiastical appoint- ments had been unduly favourable to the High-Church party, tries to attenuate the force of our statement by saying that it is notorious that Dean Connor and Dean Davidson owed their ap- pointments to the Queen, and that Dean Bradley was designated by his predecessor. We know nothing of the kind. It is quite certain that the Queen neither could nor would force her own judg- ment on a responsible Minister. As for Dean Stanley's designation of his successor—of which we know nothing—what in the world could compel a Prime Minister to wept it? Besides, the Echo con- veniently ignores much more than half the evidence we had pro- duced. Did the Queen force Dean Pltunptre, Dean Kitchin, Canon Barry, Canon Butler (of Winchester), Canon Melville, Canon Row- sell, Canon Holland, Canon Cadman, Canon Driver, Canon Boyd- Carpenter, on Mr. Gladstone ? Canon Driver's case is the most remarkable of all. As Regius Professor of Hebrew, be occupies a most influential position in the University of Oxford, which he has already begun to use with great effect. Is that influence described by anz one as an influence dedicated to the High- Church party ?
Previous page
