GENERAL HISTORY. 



[125 



vincjal papers, and had written 

 circular letters to remind the cler- 

 gy of the necessity of renewing 

 their licences; affirmed that the ac- 

 tions he had commenced were 

 against clery;ymen of twenty dif- 

 ferent dioceses, and therefore his 

 researches had not been confined 

 to the dioceses in which he had 

 been secretary ; mentioned, that 

 since the commencement of his 

 actions, clubs and associations of 

 clergymen had been formed for 

 the purpose of defeating his 

 claims, and several of the clergy 

 had even caused friendly actions 

 to be commenced against them- 

 selves with the same intention ; 

 and he concluded with placing 

 himself under the protection of the 

 house, and praying that he might 

 be heard by himself or counsel, 

 and allowed to produce evidence. 



On April 20, the house having 

 resolved itself into a committee 

 on the bill, Mr. Wright's petition 

 was referred to it, and counsel 

 was heard on his part against the 

 bill. After the counsel had finish- 

 ed his speech, which was merely a 

 recapitulation of the allegations in 

 the petition, Mr. Brand rose, and 

 professing himself friendly to the 

 bill in general, said he had objec- 

 tions to some parts of it. In the 

 first place, he thought it did not 

 offer sufficient security to Mr. 

 Wright, who ought to be indem- 

 nified for all past and future ex- 

 penses. He further was of opi- 

 nion that the bill should define the 

 grounds on which licences for 

 non'residence should be given, in- 

 stead of leaving it to the discretion 

 of the bishops, who, he thought, 

 had not sufficiently attended to 

 the duty of enforcing residence, or 

 ascertaining who did reside, or 



under what circumstances the or- 

 der to reside had not been com- 

 plied with. He concluded with 

 moving, as an amendment, " That 

 it should be lawful for any person 

 against whom actions for penalties 

 might have been brought, to ad- 

 duce proofs as to whether they 

 had been entitled to licences for 

 non-residence or not ; and if they 

 were enabled so to do, that such 

 proof should be considered as an 

 adequate excuse for their con- 

 duct. 



Mr. Bathurst defended the bill, 

 and made various observations on 

 the statement given by Mr. Wright, 

 who, he said, had made it the 

 object of his inquiry where the 

 proofs of his case were the easi- 

 est, not what was or was not a 

 case of inadvertency. As to the 

 suggestion of depriving the bishops 

 of the powers vested in them by 

 the 43rd of the king, that power 

 had been given them for good 

 reasons, and a case should be made 

 out before it was changed. He de- 

 clared that he should give his nega- 

 tive to the proposed amendment. 



Mr. Whitbread, though still of 

 opinion that the bill ought to pass, 

 yet confessetl that he had been led 

 to entertain a more favourable opi- 

 nion of Ml-. Wright in the part he 

 had taken ; and instead of his re- 

 quiring the indulgence of the 

 house, they themselves ought to 

 ask indulgence from him, who was 

 to be prevented by an act from 

 getting possession of what an exist- 

 ing law assigned him. It had been 

 said that Mr. Wright might hav-e 

 admonished the bishops instead of 

 taking the course he had pursued ; 

 but was this the provision of the 

 act ? or, in framing it, was it con- 

 tem [dated that the bishops were 



