Untitled - Electric Scotland

224 I-IFK 01 ARCHBISHOP TAIT [en. x.
specific statement of the particular charges on the
strength of which the licence was withdrawn, and
solemnly asserted that he had
"
never put any questions
of a nature, or in a manner, or in language calculated
to bring scandal on the Church,
or otherwise than was
calculated to assist the penitent, and to enable him or
her to receive more effectually the consolation or advice
which, as the minister of the Church, it was his duty to
impart."
But the Bishop declined to give way. He testified
strongly to his own belief that Mr. Poole was
scientious and upright man," for whom he had
"
"
a con
a most
sincere personal regard," and he showed that he was not
unwilling to license him afresh in some other parish
where party feeling did not run so high. But he deemed
it necessary, on public grounds, to give this emphatic
expression to his views about the teaching at St. Barnabas ,
and the licence was accordingly withdrawn. Mr. Poole,
with the Bishop s entire approval, and even encourage
ment, appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, by
whom, after a full hearing, it was formally decided l that
"
there was good and reasonable cause for the revocation
of this licence, and that the Bishop of London has exer
cised a sound discretion in revoking the same."
Mr. Poole then carried his appeal to the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council, who, after hearing the
fullest legal arguments upon either side, decided that
there was no such right of appeal from the Archbishop s
decision, and that they must therefore decline to enter
into the merits of the case. This decision, however, was
not given till March 13, 1861, three years after the com-
1 The Archbishop had at first given judgment upon the case in camerd,
but on Mr. Poole s request a mandamus issued from the Court of Queen s
Bench commanding the Archbishop to hear the appeal in Court. He did so,
and gave formal judgment as above.