[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:1
Sra,—In your article on "The Bournemouth Case," on the 14th inst., you remark that the patron was presumably prevented, by conscientious scruples, from presenting a clergyman who would consult the feelings of the 'congregation in the matter of their services. But this presumption is very inadequately supported bY actual facts, for when Sir George Meyrick was recently called on to appoint a clergyman for his own parish church, he nominated one well known in the neighbourhood for his Church views ; and it is equally reasonable to suppose that he made that appointment cdpiCientiously. This being the case, it seems hard to exciapate the patron on the ground of con- scienee ; nor can SirG. Meyrick be fairly said to be free from blame in the matter when he made the presentation to St. Peter's, in defiance ofthe Moral rights of the congregation and their clearly:expressed protest.=I am, Sir, drc., . „
Previous page
