30 DECEMBER 1882, Page 2

But what disappoints us so deeply in the conduct of

Dr. Fraser is that, both Mr. Mackonochie and Mr. Suckling bavink been instituted in the Diocese of London into new livings, without any attempt to obtain from them pledges to dis- continue their high ritual, and this having been done at the dying wish of the Archbishop of Canterbury, solely for the purpose of gaining time till the Ecclesiastical Courts Commis- sion should 'have reported, Bishop Fraser should not have had the forbearance to follow Bishop Jackson iu a similar act of deference to the late Primate's suggestion, Indeed, we doubt his legal right to prevent, by exacting preliminary conditions, a ritual which he had never taken any proceeding against Mr. Cowgill for actually practising. Archbishop Tait took pains to prepare the very situation which Bishop Fraser now repudiates as a mockery of all ecclesiastical discipline,